Response to interpellation 2022/23:420 on fishing quotas in the Baltic Sea
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns the EU Commission's proposal on fishing quotas in the Baltic Sea, particularly regarding the ban on targeted fishing of cod, herring, and sprat. KD argues that management should be environmentally sustainable and balance economic, social, and employment goals 1. The Government analyzes the consequences of the proposal and emphasizes the importance of scientific evidence and the precautionary approach 1 2. SD considers that the proposal on zero quotas lacks a scientific basis and risks harming small-scale coastal fishing, family businesses, and coastal communities 3 4. SD demands how the Government will ensure that the fishermen's concerns are taken seriously and calls for a balanced solution that protects both stocks and economic stability 3 4 5.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Mr. Speaker! I have been asked what measures I intend to take to ensure that the proposal, which guarantees the preservation of the herring stock in the Baltic Sea, is implemented in a well-founded manner without imposing unnecessarily large consequences on the Swedish fishing industry.
The Commission presented on 28 August 2023 a proposal for the regulation of fishing opportunities for 2024 for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks in the Baltic Sea and in certain other waters. The determination and allocation of fishing opportunities in the Baltic Sea is carried out by establishing maximum allowable catch and quotas as well as conditions linked thereto. The proposal regulates the species cod, herring, sprat, salmon and plaice in the Baltic Sea. The Commission's proposal includes a ban on targeted fishing of cod and herring in the western Baltic Sea, herring in the central Baltic Sea and herring in the Gulf of Bothnia. If the stocks do not recover, the situation risks continuing to create negative effects for the marine environment, the stocks and the fisheries.
The government's overall objective is that management measures shall be decided in line with the common fisheries policy's goals and principles. When it comes to fishing opportunities, the government therefore considers it important to reach the goals of stock size above the level that can provide maximum sustainable yield, that the common fisheries policy's goal of landing obligation is enabled, that scientific advice and the precautionary approach form the basis for the decisions, and that the multi-annual Baltic Sea plan for cod, herring, and sprat shall be applied for the stocks covered by the plan.
The Government considers that fishing and aquaculture activities shall be environmentally sustainable in the long term and managed in a manner that is consistent with the goals of achieving economic, social, and employment benefits. In addition, they shall contribute to securing the food supply as part of a sustainable food system, while at the same time the competitiveness of sustainable small-scale fishing is protected. Special measures are also being taken to move the boundary for large-scale trawling in order to create better management tools for herring in the Baltic Sea.
The Commission's proposal is not complete, and the Commission will supplement the proposal regarding herring in the western Baltic Sea, herring in the central Baltic Sea, herring in the Gulf of Bothnia, sprat, plaice and cod in the western Baltic Sea, and cod in the eastern Baltic Sea. That the Commission's proposal lacks these parts is primarily due to the fact that the Commission has ordered additional scientific advice from ICES for certain species. These advices have not yet been delivered.
The government is still analyzing the details of the Commission's proposal, and that includes a deeper analysis regarding the proposal's effects on the stocks and the Swedish fisheries. I will therefore return with information on how the government intends to act in relation to the proposal.
Beatrice Timgren (SD)
Mr. Speaker! I would like to thank Minister Peter Kullgren for the answer. I think it is very pleasing to hear that the government strives for sustainable yields that are also based on scientific grounds, that there is a clear commitment to employment and that there is a desire to protect small-scale fishing. In that regard, the Sweden Democrats and the government are in complete agreement.
There is a certain uncertainty regarding where the government positions itself on the question of the EU Commission's proposal. It appears highly remarkable that the EU Commission's position varies so significantly from year to year. Last year, they proposed increased quotas, something that has been questioned both from research and within the fishing sector. Now, the Commission has finally noticed that there is a shortage of herring in the Baltic Sea, and then they suddenly propose zero quotas - this without clear research support or any clear basis in science, which is confusing to say the least. In my eyes, this is a sign of the EU's lack of understanding of Swedish conditions.
Mr. Speaker! Let me focus on what concerns me most, namely the proposal to abolish the exemption for small-scale coastal fishing. This is a hasty proposal which, if it becomes reality, will have major negative consequences both for the fishing industry and for society as a whole. In the worst case, family businesses that have existed for generations risk having to be shut down at a faster rate than what is happening today.
I have had a dialogue with coastal fishers and have heard that the commission's proposal is described as "completely insane." They point out that the proposal, paradoxically, would prevent them from fishing adult and spawning-ready herring that have had the opportunity to reproduce, in favor of those who catch mostly small herring that have not reproduced. This also risks that the number of individuals of herring caught increases, as the quotas are measured in weight units.
I share the fishermen's concern. The proposal is ill-considered and symbolic in nature and risks hitting the fishing industry harder than necessary without actually benefiting the herring stocks in the Baltic Sea. It is an inconsistent policy that punishes sustainable fishing, while less sustainable methods are rewarded.
Another consequence of a total ban on targeted fishing is lost jobs, not only within the fishing industry but also in neighboring businesses, which threatens coastal communities. It is important that we protect sustainable fishing methods used by coastal fishing today. To avoid economic instability, we need a policy that supports stable economic foundations and takes into account the coastal fishers' efforts and concerns regarding the Commission's proposal.
I therefore want to ask the Minister: How does the government intend to ensure that these voices are not only heard but truly taken seriously in the discussion moving forward? What concrete assurances can the government give to the professional fishers who are worried today and who work daily so that we have living coastal communities?
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Mr. Speaker! On August 28, the Commission presented the proposal for the regulation of fishing opportunities for certain stocks and groups of fish stocks in the Baltic Sea. As I mentioned earlier, this proposal is still being analyzed, but as we see it now, it entails a ban on targeted fishing of herring in the western Baltic Sea, herring and sprat in the central Baltic Sea, herring and sprat in the Gulf of Bothnia and cod in the entire Baltic Sea, and that only unavoidable by-catches are permitted of these stocks.
The government's overall objective is that management measures shall be decided in line with the common fisheries policy's goals and principles. When it comes to fishing opportunities, the government considers it important to reach goals for stock size above the level that can provide maximum sustainable yield.
It is also important that the common fisheries policy's objective of landing obligation is enabled, that the scientific advice and the precautionary approach form the basis for the decisions, and that the multi-annual Baltic Sea plan for cod, herring, and sprat shall be applied for the stocks covered by this plan.
Given that the Commission has proposed a ban on targeted fishing of cod and herring in all waters, with the exception of herring in the Gulf of Riga, the proposal will however lead to potentially large negative economic effects for both the fishing and processing industries and the coastal communities in all member states around the Baltic Sea.
We must also be aware that the herring issue is complicated and that there is still a lack of great knowledge. It is only during the recent years that an increased proportion of small-sized herring is reported, while the large-sized herring has decreased in the sample fisheries recently conducted in certain areas of the Baltic Sea. There are many factors that can affect the stock and the coastal fisheries' catches, while the same development is not reported from our neighboring countries.
Given the stock situation for herring, Sweden has clarified that we wish to see cautiously set fishing opportunities for cod and herring. The Government wishes to find appropriate and scientifically well-founded management tools that can restore the stocks of cod and herring in the Baltic Sea. The Government has previously announced that it stands ready to take measures based on the premise that management must be based on well-founded scientific evidence.
Beatrice Timgren (SD)
Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the answer!
I can start by saying that I agree that this issue with the fish in the Baltic Sea is a very complex issue, that more science is needed and that the herring is incredibly important for the Baltic Sea, like for other fish and the marine wildlife.
I understand that the Commission's proposal is currently under development and that there are plans to supplement it with further scientific advice from ICES, for example regarding certain fish species. However, I am deeply concerned that the initial proposal does not appear to be based on science. ICES has not recommended any zero quotas, which makes the current proposal difficult to explain, especially considering the negative consequences that this could have.
I also want to emphasize the importance of the government acting proactively in its engagement in the Council of Ministers so that such an ill-considered proposal does not become a reality. It is therefore encouraging that we now have a government in place that prioritizes well-considered and research-based proposals over symbolic politics, something that we have seen far too much of previously.
I look forward to the government also acting wisely and thoughtfully in this matter. Ahead of the upcoming discussion in the Council of Ministers, I wonder if the Minister sees opportunities to argue for a more balanced solution that both preserves the fish stocks and ensures economic stability for the Swedish fishing sector, which is absolutely necessary to maintain welfare and employment in our coastal communities.
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Mr. Speaker! We have come a bit into the negotiation process leading to next year's fishing opportunities. ICES's scientific advice for fishing in the Baltic Sea for 2024 was published on May 31 this year, and on August 28, the proposal for regulation arrived, as mentioned.
The presentation and exchange of views regarding the Commission's proposal takes place, as every year, in the council working group on fisheries policy. The Commission's proposal is not only analyzed in Sweden; analysis is being conducted in parallel in all member states around the Baltic Sea.
It is also important to point out that the Commission's proposal is not complete, and the Commission will supplement the proposal in large parts – which in itself is an unusual circumstance. This applies to all herring and cod stocks in the Baltic Sea, sprat, and plaice.
The Commission's incomplete proposal is primarily due to the fact that the Commission has ordered additional scientific advice from Ices for certain species, which have not yet been delivered. What we know so far is still being analyzed by the government. Therefore, it is difficult to reach an exact position on the Commission's proposal already, as we do not consider it to be complete.
A final discussion on the position and political agreement will be held at the Agriculture and Fisheries Council on 23-24 October 2023. Before that, Member Timgren will have the opportunity to discuss the issue in the Committee on Environment and Agriculture, and later also in the EU Committee, before the final Swedish position is adopted.
Beatrice Timgren (SD)
Mr. Speaker! I thank Minister Peter Kullgren for the answer.
I admit that the proposal is not completely finished. Therefore, it is incredibly important, as the minister says, that the advice coming from Ices is analyzed while a consequence analysis is being conducted. What will it mean to set zero quotas, which we hope will not happen? Can another solution be found that benefits both the spawning stock and the fishing industry?
The cod has not recovered, and a zero quota has been set there. That is why it is important to look at and learn from the measures. Just as I said earlier, the sprat is incredibly important for the Baltic Sea. It is the basis for larger predatory fish, marine mammals, and also the fishing industry. Therefore, I look forward to hearing the government's position in the Committee on Environment and Agriculture and in the EU Committee.
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Mr. Speaker! I believe that fishing and aquaculture activities should be environmentally sustainable in the long term and managed in a way that is compatible with the goals of achieving economic, social, and employment benefits. This is the prerequisite for them to be able to contribute to and secure the food supply as part of a sustainable food system, while at the same time the competitiveness of sustainable, small-scale fishing is protected.
I say again that the Commission's proposal is still being analyzed in Sweden and in other member states around the Baltic Sea. But it can only be stated that as we know so far, it is a question of a ban on targeted fishing of cod, herring and sprat. If it were to become a reality, it would probably entail major negative consequences for the Swedish fishing industry.
The Baltic Sea's ecosystem is affected by a number of other different factors besides fishing, for example eutrophication, salinity, the presence of competing species to herring, and not least the presence of predators such as seals, cormorants, and other fish. A holistic approach is required in the matter, and therefore the government also carries out parallel and complementary measures.
I will return with how the government intends to act in relation to the proposal after a deeper analysis regarding the proposal's effects on the stocks and the Swedish fisheries has been conducted.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.