Reykjavík Grapevine - 14.08.2009, Blaðsíða 8

Reykjavík Grapevine - 14.08.2009, Blaðsíða 8
8 The Reykjavík Grapevine Issue 12 — 2009 The 1957 Treaty of Rome, the rock on which the EU is built, states that there should be a common policy for fisheries. That’s fundamental, so don’t kid yourselves that there are any exceptions to the rule. In the 1990s when Norway was jockeying for position on EU membership, there were no meaningful concessions from Europe on fisheries, not even to one of the wealthiest countries in the world with its waters rich in oil as well as fish. Iceland can’t realistically expect any kind of permanent exemption— for no other reason than that every other member state with an interest in fisheries would immediately attempt to block this on the grounds that they don’t get special treatment, so why should a newcomer? The concept of the European Union’s Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) is that there should be a single umbrella policy on fisheries as there is on agriculture. In essence, Brussels is the benevolent uncle who keeps a friendly eye on how a member state manages its fisheries on European lines. If only it were that simple. What happens in Greece or Portugal isn’t the same as what goes on in Holland or Denmark. The primary premise that there should be a level playing field across the Union just isn’t the case. Over a decade and more of writing about commercial fisheries, I have yet to hear a positive opinion about the CFP. Good ol’ TACs are in the CFP There’s actually plenty in the CFP that Iceland would find familiar, such as the concept of everything being managed using the blunt instrument of Total Allowable Catches (TACs). Quotas, quota trading, discards, high-grading and misreporting are all things that Icelanders would find familiar about fisheries in Europe, along with the same triangle of distrust with fishermen, scientists and administrators at each corner—and a widening gulf between them. Across Europe, fisheries have been struggling badly for years and the CFP is then pilloried as the source of all the fishing industry’s problems. But to be fair, fishermen in Europe face many of the same problems as those outside the Union, although the CFP is undoubtedly part of the mix. There is mighty little that’s positive about it. Fishermen regard the CFP as a disaster on legs. The official line from Brussels has been—of course—that everything is just fine, but the noises from the centre of things recently indicate that even Brussels privately views its own CFP as a failure. Innocence and ignorance in Brussels The CFP has been with us since the early 1980s and in the intervening years we have seen cod, hake, sole and a handful of other stocks supposedly teetering on the brink of extinction. It begs the question of where all that cash, manpower and effort have gone if the results aren’t better than that. The reality is that the fisheries is a marginal industry in European terms. DG Fish, which administers fisheries, is a small department in a bloated bureaucracy of Byzantine complexity, stiff with back- door deals and horse-trading, based in an ivory tower far removed from the practicalities of the industry it purports to administer. After all these years, I should be used to it, but I still shudder when presented with some of the innocence and ignorance that stems from Brussels. Earlier this year, EU Fisheries Commissioner Joe Borg announced that more cutbacks are needed as 80% of stocks are overexploited. On the other hand, a year ago, an EU policy document (COM(2008) 331) stated that: "the state of some 57% of stocks is unknown." Did I miss something here? Was a stack of European cash injected into marine research over the last year? Did Brussels suddenly come up with definitive figures so that the 80% claim can be considered credible? The heavy-handed, one-size-fits-all measures handed down by Brussels are alarming, especially taking into account that these people are dealing with the livelihoods and businesses of predominantly hard-working, honest individuals and their families across Europe. What has also become apparent is that DG Fish is increasingly overshadowed by the more powerful DG Environment. There is even speculation that DG Fish could be swallowed by its bigger brother with its very different and far from fisherman- friendly agenda. Turning a supertanker The sheer size of the bureaucracy and the entrenched attitudes mean that altering the course of policy is akin to trying to turn a supertanker. We have had cod, hake and sole in particular on the list of threatened fish stocks for years. Cod in particular has been used as the rationale for some dramatic cuts in fishing effort and fishing f leet size, even though fishermen have been reporting for some years that cod are increasingly abundant. This year, finally, there’s a cod quota increase. Hake is up and sole looks to have increased as well. All well and good, and we can argue endlessly over whether cutting fishing effort has achieved this or if these are natural cycles that would have occurred anyway. But the damage has been done; jobs have gone, communities have been devastated and businesses have disappeared. I can predict that within a year or three, the f leet that’s left will not be able to catch its quotas on some species, but will still be subject to ludicrous outdated restrictions on both quotas and days-at-sea. So what’s in it for Iceland? Much of what you’ve gotten used to already is a TAC based system, in which discards and incorrect reporting are an inevitable by-product. On the other hand, ownership of fishing companies would become open to anyone and there would undoubtedly be foreign investors with healthy chequebooks doing the rounds. I say "would be," but I know for a fact that they’ve already been spying out the land. Who knows? Deals may already have been struck. Sooner or later a proportion of Iceland’s seafood industry would be in foreign hands. Quota hopping, the use of different f lags and brass-plate companies, would become a reality. This is certainly not new to some Icelandic operators who already run vessels under foreign f lags, primarily to obtain quotas or fishing rights in particular areas, but there would be the prospect of Iceland being on the receiving end of this process instead. As an EU member, Iceland would no longer be in charge of its own resources and would be overridden by Brussels. The Icelandic Ministry of Fisheries and the Marine Research Institute could be in full agreement that a 200,000 tonne cod quota is what’s justified, but if Brussels says it should be half that amount, that’s what it would be—and no arguments. Some would argue that it’s too high a price to pay to have a country’s primary industry under the ultimate control of what can be seen as a faceless, distant bureaucracy that can also be seen as neither sympathetic nor competent. On the positive side, while the 2002 CFP review largely rubber-stamped a further ten years of pain, another review is now in progress for 2012. We can’t expect miracles, but hopefully someone will see the light and a little common sense can be used to bring the CFP into line with reality—as it would be too much to hope that it could simply be scrapped and control handed back to member states. But for Iceland, the contents of that 2012 review should be a vital factor in the larger debate. Quentin Bates worked as a fisherman on a variety of Icelandic and British fishing vessels before turning to journalism 15 years ago. He currently writes mostly technical material for Fishing News International. Current Affairs | The European Union Art | And then some... Faceless Bureaucracy Or Benevolent Uncle? By joining the EU, Iceland would lose much of its decision making powers over its own resources, notably the fisheries. Let’s face it: there aren’t any exceptions here. Dance with Us! Laugavegi 21 - 101 Reykjavik - 551 6464 Kl ap pa r st íg ur Laugarvegur We are here: Fun facts: Mr. Bates speaks perfect Icelandic, picked up during his stint as an Icelandic fi sherman. He will soon be releasing his fi rst novel. Rafskinna four will reportedly have a Japan- theme QUENTIN BATES The good people behind Rafskinna have been hard at work over the past year aggregating stuff for the third issue of everyone’s favourite DVD magazine. Bearing the theme ‘Reflections,’ Rafskinna MK 3 hit stores last month and one can tell at a glance that all the hard work has paid off, as the gold encrusted ten-inch sleeve that houses it is brimming with curious content. We called up Sigurður Magnús Finnsson from the Rafskinna team and got him to tell us a little bit about the latest edition, where it comes from, what it means and what’s in it. “Rafskinna,” says Finnsson when asked to elaborate, “is a DVD magazine that contains short films, documentaries, music videos, interviews, performance art, and the like, as well as some printed materials. The latest issue also contains an audio CD – Rafsprengi – that we made in cooperation with radio show Hlaupanótan. It features four Icelandic musicians of the younger generation, Hildur Guðnadóttir and Kippi Kanínus, for instance, recreating compositions by four older masters, among them Atli Heimir Sveinsson and Jórunn Viðar. “We aim at presenting a broad spectrum of work and ideas; Icelandic, foreign, large, small, every possible aspect of the visual arts, while maintaining a red thread by keeping focus on things that are grassroots oriented. And of course we have a running theme for each issue. Aside from the DVD, we try and fit extras in with each issue, there’s always some bonus materials. This time around there’s the Rafsprengi CD, as well as a poster by Hrafnhildur Arnardóttir (Shoplifter), who is this issue’s featured artist.” -Tell us about issue three's featured content. “Well, to name a few things, we take Emiliana Torrini on a ride around Kópavogur, get Dälek to recycle old Icelandic pancake recipes, there’s two video pieces by the aforementioned Hrafnhildur Arnardóttir, videos of Ólöf Arnalds and Retro Stefson. We got Nico Muhly to compose a piece for us, it’s performed by Helgi Hrafn Jónsson on the construction site of the forthcoming music hall." -You guys seem really ambitious. Has everything been working out financially? Making a magazine like this can’t be cheap. "It’s rough. We work hard at selling them, just so we can afford to make the next one. It’s a struggle, like a lot of these things are in this country. But we are distributing abroad now, this issue is being sold in stores in Europe and the US." Any more cool things coming from you guys? “Yes, lots of stuff. More on that later.” Expect a full review of Rafskinna three in a forthcoming issue of the Grapevine. Get it at cool bookstores and other stores that are cool. -HAUKUR S MAGNÚSSON The New Rafskinna Is Out! 1. Fishermen regard the Common Fisheries Policy unreservedly as a disaster. This Danish fisherman’s boat demonstrates just how he feels about Europe and the CFP.

x

Reykjavík Grapevine

Beinir tenglar

Ef þú vilt tengja á þennan titil, vinsamlegast notaðu þessa tengla:

Tengja á þennan titil: Reykjavík Grapevine
https://timarit.is/publication/943

Tengja á þetta tölublað:

Tengja á þessa síðu:

Tengja á þessa grein:

Vinsamlegast ekki tengja beint á myndir eða PDF skjöl á Tímarit.is þar sem slíkar slóðir geta breyst án fyrirvara. Notið slóðirnar hér fyrir ofan til að tengja á vefinn.