Brexit and fisheries Plain sailing or stormy waters?
2
Access to resources vs access to markets
UK s Exclusive Economic Zone Source: House of Lords
Estimated landings from UK waters Annual average landings of all fish between 2012-2014 All North Sea Channel, Celtic West of and Irish Scotland Seas Other Tonnes ('000) 1,127 672 254 195 7 UK (%) 42 39 54 40 23 EU(%) 58 61 46 60 77 Source: NAFC Marine Centre-University of the Highlands and Islands
Exports of fish, crustaceans and molluscs to the EU (2016, % of total value) Source: International Trade Centre Denmark 71 France 75 Netherlands 72 Spain 75 UK 71
European parliament s Committee on fisheries Provisions to be included in the Exit Agreement Reciprocal access for the EU and UK fleets to the fishing grounds in the UK and EU waters No increase to the UK s share of fishing opportunities for jointly fished stocks Granting access to the EU domestic market to the UK only on the conditions mentioned under above points and granting reciprocal access to the UK market Ensuring the maintenance of the same legal conditions for UK registered vessels, without requiring stronger economic links Source: EU parliament, Committee on fisheries, Preliminary assessments on the UK withdrawal from the EU
UK exports and imports of fish Exports Volume Total 499,148 tonnes EU 67% Non-EU 33% Value Total 1,560m EU 65% Non-EU 25% Imports Volume Total 720,605 tonnes EU 32% Non-EU 68% Value Total 2,736m EU 31% Non-EU 69% Source: Defra
Ownership of UK quotas Number of quotas Share of total Controlling party Nationality 457,525 23 Andrew Marr English 457,166 23 Cornelis Volijk Dutch 242,135 12 Samherji Icelandic 186,823 9 Dutch companies Dutch 108,152 5 Spanish companies Spanish Source:New Under Ten Fishermen s Association
Economic link requirements for UK quota holders (One of the following is required) Land at least 50% of the vessel s catch in the UK Employ a crew, of whom at least half are resident in a UK coastal area Incur a certain level of expenditure on goods and services, provided in the UK coastal areas Source: New Economics Foundation
UK government Brexit priority sectors High - banking, pharmaceuticals, aerospace, automotive, insurance, food and drink Medium - fisheries, electronics, chemicals, furniture Low - steel, telecoms Not mentioned - construction, defence and technology. Source: FT.com
You have to be able to catch it before you can sell it. - Fishing for Leave Everybody needs access to us, which is why more than half the fish coming from our waters is not fished by us. We have a fine hand of cards if there is the political backbone to chase this grand prize. - Scottish Fisheries Federation
It is good fishing in troubled waters. - French, Spanish and Dutch proverb -
UK leaves an established legal order and the consequences are unpredictable What we do not know yet: Will Scotland seek independence and re-join EU? If so, will Northern Ireland remain with England and Wales? Will UK at the end of the day choose an EEA-similar relationship to EU? Or decide to trust a WTO-platform? What seems to be certain: The «Hague-compromise» and its relative stability will no longer be binding for UK. We must assume that UK will insist upon complete ownership and full biological control of all fish-resources within its EEZ.
Consequences of leaving the European Union (Continued) Historic precedencies? The Brexit resembles the legal situation when Norway was forced to leave Denmark and the Double Monarchy in 1814. This separation may give guidance to other difficult questions, but probably not to sharing of fishing rights. Greenland departure from EU in 1985? The Zonal attachment criteria. Used for the sharing of North Sea recourses in the 1980-ties between EU and Norway.
Quotas are set based on the ICES areas EU EEZ British and Danish EEZ
Mackerel-catches 2012-14 as registered in ICES-statistical areas. The fish is however known to adjust its migration pattern over time Mackerel average 12-14 most 400,000 important areas 300,000 200,000 4.a 100,000 6.a '- 2.a 4.a 6.a 5.a 14.b 7 8 Areas 4.a and 6.a are the key mackerel fishing areas.
Area 4.a is divided between the Norwegian and British EEZ. However, a large part of the catch is fished by other nations Average 12-14: 285 000 TLW (2014: 384 000) If zonal attachment is to be employed unconditionally, Brexit will potentially double current catch volumes for UK EEZ- owners «Leakage to rest-eu
An unconditional Brexit will provide a potential for a considerable increase in UK mackerel catch Area Change in 4.a Post Brexit estimate (based on 2012-2014 averages) ~80 000 tonnes Change in 6.a: ~20 000 tonnes Other areas ~20 000 tonnes Total 80 000 tonnes (equivalent of 40 % of current catch) When evaluated in isolation and only on the basis of Zonal attachment, Brexit will provide a massive increase in the UK mackerel fishing industry (assuming Scotland remains a part of UK)
Consequences from Brexit on herring A major part of UK herring catch currently in British areas (4a, 4b and 6a) and is thus almost unaffected by post Brexit resource allocation Ireland currently catches a major part of total herring volumes in Irish areas (6a and 7), and the associated negative consequences of Brexit are thus limited However, Denmark, Germany and The Netherlands are currently catching large volumes in British areas, which may be defined as British resources by the post Brexit resource allocation The UK catches little herring in Irish areas, thus the positive post Brexit consequences for Ireland are also limited When evaluated in isolation Brexit will provide a positive contribution to the UK herring industry (assuming Scotland remains a part of UK) When evaluated in isolation Brexit will not affect the Irish herring industry significantly (assuming Scotland remains a part of UK) Assuming Ireland will not have to cover a proportional part of the total EU-loss.
Consequences from Brexit on blue whiting UK is currently catching 50% of blue whiting volumes in British areas (6a and 6b) and 50% in Irish areas (7) Ireland catches 50% of blue whiting volumes in an Irish-British area (6a) and 50% of volumes in its own area On the other hand, EU catches significantly more in British areas (6a) UK catches small volumes in Irish areas When evaluated in isolation Brexit will provide a positive contribution to the UK blue whiting industry When evaluated in isolation the post Brexit consequences will be neutral for the Irish blue whiting industry Assuming Ireland will not have to cover a proportional part of the total EU-loss
Denmark is currently catching large volumes of industrial fish in British areas - faces significant post Brexit risk Species Avg. catch 12-14 Major areas Share at risk Comment Norwegian pout (NOP) 30 790 4.A (~90 %) Up to 90 % 4.A is divided between GB and NO and it is assumed that DK currently gets its quotas from the EU (GB) areas 4.a Sprat (SPR) 132 815 4.B (66 %) 3.D (16 %) 3.A (9 %) Depending of internal allocation in area 4b UK doesn t catch sandeel in the 4.b area DK catches 90 % of area volumes 6.a Blue Whiting (WHB) 12 439 6.A (56 %) 7.C (27 %) 7.K (6 %) > 50 % 6.A is mostly British and a small part is Irish 4.b Sandeel (SAN) 141 691 4.B (90 %) 3.a (6 %) Depending of internal allocation in area 4b DK catches 60 % of area volumes and NO 30 % of area volumes in the 4.b area UK catches almost nothing UK is currently catching small volumes of (traditionally)industrial fish (28 000 blue whiting and 5000 sprat), despite the fact that other EU countries catches large volumes in British areas one opportunity is that they want to exchange these rights for other species
Freedom of establishment. Today the Four freedoms are applicable to the seafood-sector in the EU, only limited by the doctrine of «Real economic link» As a point of departure, UK will no longer be obliged to respect the Four freedoms in relation to the remaining member EU-states. If not part of a Brexit deal, UK has the right to introduce legislation aimed at reserving natural resources to own citizens or to persons domiciled in UK. The EEA agreement gives EFTA-citizens full freedom of establishment in the EU fishing industry. The Brexit may potentially be disagreeable for EFTA-citizens who owns salmon-farms and fishing vessels in the EU.
A broader picture? The obvious; a fishing operation is without purpose if the fish is not consumed by humans. Access to resources for access to markets is a principle with a debatable international status, but historically accepted by both EU and UK. Time for reflection? Will the to-day s fishermen on both sides take the moral responsibility of starting an all out war against each other? How big is really the problem? The Hull & Grimsby distantwater-trawler fleet will forever remain a proud memory. According to a study done by the University of the Highlands and Islands, the surplus that non-uk, EU fishermen take out of the UK-EEZ is valued at 300 mill. GBP. DEFRA has calculated that the WTO - custom bill for UK fish exported to Europe is 100 mill. GBP.
How to approach this?
Final observation In spite of the enormous British openness to people pursued because of race, religion or conviction, a majority of Brits - in 2016 - disliked to be in the receiving end of human mobility. This is not in line with British historical attitude and there are a couple of paradoxes along the road. One is..
Brexit and the Scottish Fishing Industry
SWFPA The largest Association in the UK representing fishermen s interests. Lobby institutions and governments Liaise with environmental bodies Focus on maintaining market share Representing 220 vessels and 14OO fishers Combined revenue circa 250M Internal committee structure delivers system of good governance operate internationally through the various ACs and Europeche
Agreed Headlines within UK Fairer shares of catching opportunity for UK vessels. Full control over access to the UK EEZ by fishing fleets. Creation of a fit-for-purpose management and regulation system, including a grass roots revision of fisheries management based on sustainable harvesting and sound science. Establishment of mutually beneficially trading relationships with the EU and other countries
Sea of Opportunity A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty Winston Churchill
Market Shares
Fleet Operations Quantity of landings by Scottish vessels by area of capture Quantity of landings into Scottish vessels by all vessels by district
We think we know Article 50 will be triggered very soon Negotiations will be concluded within two years But! The Great Repeal Bill will instantly annul the 1972 European Communities Act (ECA), which gives EU law instant effect in the UK UK Parliament will absorb parts of EU legislation into UK law and scrap elements it does not want to keep. UK will become a Coastal state in its own right Immediate engagement in coastal state negotiations where access aligned to opportunities are set
We are clear on The benefits of reaching agreement with our neighbours The underlying demand that Scottish vessels require a fairer share of opportunity aligned to zonal attachment of the stocks The need to develop incorporating fisheries management policies Our continued commitment to maintaining sustainable harvesting and protection of biodiversity The market will be a challenge
Analyses Scottish Danish Less than Part fishing half of the of boats the UK fish EEZ caught and shellfish one-third landed of all from the the fish UK and EEZ shellfish by EU fishing landed boats from (43% the by UK weight) EEZ by was EU caught boats by (including UK boats. one-third of the pelagic fish and three-quarters of the More If landings industrial than half by non-eu fish) (51%) of the fish and shellfish landed from the Scottish part of the (Faroese and Norwegian) fishing boats are included, UK boats share United Kingdom s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) by European Union fishing boats French of the total landings from the UK EEZ falls to less than one-third of the total (32% by was caught boats by accounted non-uk boats. for more than half of the demersal fish and almost half of weight). the shellfish landed from the UK EEZ. Non-UK Non-UK European European Union fishing fishing boats boats landed landed 386,000 about tonnes 700,000 of tonnes fish and of fish shellfish and shellfish, from The the worth Scottish fish and almost part shellfish 530 of million, the caught UK from EEZ, in the the worth UK UK EEZ 210 EEZ by each million, non-uk year on each EU fishing average. year. boats represented about 15% of the total (global) landings by the EU fishing fleet. One-third UK fishing boats of the landed demersal 92,000 fish, tonnes more of than fish and half shellfish, of the pelagic worth about fish and 110 almost million, all from of The other industrial Belgian areas of fishing the EU landed fleet EEZ each caught from year the the on Scottish highest average. part proportion of the UK of its EEZ total by European landings of Union fish and fishing Non-UK shellfish boats EU fishing were almost caught boats half by therefore within non-uk landed the boats. UK almost EEZ eight times more fish and shellfish (by weight) from the UK EEZ than UK boats did from other areas of the EU EEZ, or almost five The More Netherlands, than half of Ireland, the hake Denmark and saithe, and almost Germany three-quarters all caught about of the one-third herring, or 86% of times more by value. more the horse of their mackerel total landings 94% in of the the UK blue EEZ whiting landed from the Scottish part of the UK EEZ by European Union fishing boats were caught by non-uk boats.
Zonal attachment of stocks Analysis of spatial distribution of 17 stocks of interest to Scotland. Fishery Independent ICES Coordinated Trawl Surveys (2011-2015) Comparisons made between percentage of fish stocks within the UK s EEZ (spatial percentage), and the percentage TAC allocated to the UK. For most stocks, the percentage of TAC allocated to the UK is much lower than the average percentage of the spatial distribution in the UK.
Summary Table Comparison of the UK s quota allocation (%TAC) of stocks of importance to Scotland with the spatial percentage, expressed as the average percentage of the stock in UK waters over 5 years.
Potential additional value Demersal Increase in domestic demersal landings of 165M Direct, indirect and induced output of all sectors of the UK Economy 1.188 Bn Direct, indirect and induced employment all sectors 13,530 jobs Direct, indirect and induced GDP (or value added) of 380M Pelagic Increase in domestic demersal landings of 211M Direct, indirect and induced output of all sectors of the UK Economy 1.47 Bn Direct, indirect and induced employment all sectors 17k jobs Direct, indirect and induced GDP (or value added) of 711M
The law as we see it Under the law as it currently stands, EU vessels will no longer have any rights to fish in UK waters once the UK has left the EU. Nor will the EU be able to claim access for its vessels to the UK s EEZ under Article 70 of UNCLOS as the EU is not geographically disadvantaged. The situation will apply, mutatis mutandis, to fishing by UK vessels in the EEZs of other EU Member States. The British Government could decide to permit EU vessels to fish in its EEZ for policy reasons, such as being in exchange for the access of British vessels to the waters of other EU Member States or as part of a regime for the management of stocks that the UK and the EU will share. That is quite different from the current legal position, where EU vessels will have no access rights post Brexit.
The Markets Post Brexit the UK industry seeks the best possible trade deal with both the EU and other fish importing and exporting nations around the world. Continued tariff-free access to the European single market is our preferred outcome, however in the event that this is no longer possible due to Brexit, we strongly suggest that it will be in both the UK s and the EU s best interests to establish a mutually beneficial trading relationship for fisheries products featuring sensible low impact tariffs and tariff free quotas. We do not believe that UK access to the EU single market for fisheries products should be conditional upon or negotiated against access by EU fishing vessels to fishing opportunity within the UK EEZ.
Other Considerations Freedom of movement under the current EU arrangement provides workers for some parts of the fishery supply chain. However, immigration is another area where realistically the needs of the fishing industry will not set the pace. We are encouraged by the thought that no government would insist on self-harm in the matter of control of movement of required labour. EU grants, in our case the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF), delivers some support to the seafood sector. While this is welcomed and enthusiastically used, ours is not an industry where success turns on the existence of this funding. We observe that the UK in a net contributor to the EU and suggest that projects worthy of support under the present arrangements could favourably compete in a more direct (and less administratively constrained) national system.
In conclusion Under International Law, on Brexit there will be a fundamental change to Maritime governance in our waters. The UK will become a Coastal State with rights and responsibilities for harvesting the seafood resource in our Exclusive Economic Zone An appropriate rebalancing of catching opportunity in favour of the UK and in accordance with zonal attachment must follow. This will not be an act of aggression, rather it will reflect custom and practice in Coastal States. The CFP is a remote and flawed system characterised by unacceptable compromises. On Brexit the CFP will no longer apply to the UK, creating the opportunity to put in place a reactive, effective fisheries management system tailored for our own needs.
In conclusion The industry looks forward to a new era of close and meaningful cooperation and collaboration with Government in developing and executing the new management and decision-making arrangements Considerable additional resource, supported by a competent management system will result in increased economic activity in the fishing fleets, the communities that support them and the downstream supply chains. These fundamentally beneficial changes, if handled well, have the potential to put the UK once again at the centre of world sustainable seafood production.
Thank You