Costas Kadis

Policy topics Costas Kadis is active on

What Costas Kadis has said (80)

• 2026-06-09 “Ladies and gentlemen, dear colleagues, While I regret that I cannot be with you in person, I am honoured to address this Annual European Coast Guard Event. EMSA, EFCA, and Frontex are indispensable in supporting national authorities to safeguard our waters, as part of the EU's maritime security. The European Ocean Pact is clear: coast guard cooperation is central to protecting our oceans. Stronger inter-agency cooperation on coast guard functions is essential to tackle our shared challenges; from combating illegal fishing to pollution response, and from ensuring maritime safety to protecting our borders. Today's event highlights the progress achieved in your operational cooperation, whether on sharing information and capacity, surveillance, capacity building or risk analysis. Let me share with you the example of the Common Information Sharing Environment. It shows that by breaking down silos between civil and military operators, we can strengthen our Maritime Domain Awareness. The European Ocean Pact, of which maritime security is an important component, is not just a vision—it is a commitment to action. And you are at the very heart of delivering it. You bring the expertise, the operational strength, and the cross-border collaboration needed to turn its ambitions into reality. To reinforce this, we are now taking a landmark step: the Ocean Act. It will strengthen Europe's legal and policy framework for coherent, sustainable, and secure ocean governance. A key priority of our Ocean Pact is supporting coastal and island communities, especially our outermost regions. And there is no better example of Europe's maritime strength and resilience than the Azores. This archipelago is more than a strategic asset; it is a living testament to both the challenges and the opportunities facing our outermost regions, our islands and our coastal areas. We know these communities face unique pressures: climate vulnerability, economic strains, and the unsustainable burdens of overtourism. That is why the Commission is taking concrete actions. Tomorrow, the Commission will adopt the Islands Strategy and the Coastal Communities Strategy and in July we will adopt a package of measures on Outermost Regions. Together, these strategies and tools will empower local communities to shape their own futures. Last week, the Commission also unveiled OceanEye, a flagship initiative that will redefine global ocean monitoring. Reliable data is vital for climate action, maritime safety, and blue economy innovation. Through the International Alliance for Ocean Observation, we will bring together global partners to: • Expand our observing capacities, with drones, sensors, vessels. • Improve data sharing for better climate and ocean insights. • Strengthen the Digital Twin of the Ocean. The Azores, with their marine science expertise, are natural leaders in this effort. The challenges we face demand collective solutions. Our strength lies in partnership. To the staff of our agencies: your work is the bedrock of Europe's maritime safety and security. Let us use this event to deepen collaboration and forge a secure, sustainable future for our oceans. I wish you productive discussions.”
  Funding for OCTs and outermost regions
• 2026-05-22 “Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission 22.5.2026 Written question In 2025, the EU’s aquatic food self-sufficiency rose to 38.1%, the first increase since 2018 [1] . The Commission works to increase food security. First, with sound fisheries management in EU waters to boost biomass and healthy marine ecosystems, optimising domestic fisheries, though the resource is finite and improvements are fragile. Second, maintaining fishing rights in third countries via Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreements and participation in Regional Fisheries Management Organisations. Third, and most importantly, promoting the sustainable development of EU aquaculture through a framework based on the Commission’s strategic guidelines for a more sustainable and competitive EU aquaculture [2] and Member States’ multiannual national strategic plans for aquaculture. The Commission supports Member States in implementing these plans and in applying the Commission’s Strategic Guidelines, through guidance, funding and the exchange of good practices. Progress depends on effective implementation by Member States, in particular in areas such as licensing and access to space and water, which remain primarily under their competence [3] . Regarding imports, EU Free Trade Agreements typically include sustainability provisions, including on international labour standards, while the World Trade Organisation Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies curbs harmful subsidies. The Commission is also exploring sustainability criteria for the Autonomous Tariff Quota regime for fisheries products. Ongoing evaluations, including the regulation on the Common Fisheries Policy [4] , Vision 2040 for fisheries and aquaculture [5] , and the EU Strategy for Fisheries External Action, integrate these efforts. [1] https://eumofa.eu/-the-eu-fish-market-2025-edition-is-online. This excludes catch of EU long-distance fleets landed in third countries and exported to the EU. [2] https://oceans-and-fisheries.ec.europa.eu/ocean/blue-economy/aquaculture/aquaculture-guidelines_en. [3] See the Mid-term assessment of the implementation of the ‘Strategic guidelines for EU aquaculture’ and the ‘Multi-annual National Strategic Plans’ for aquaculture: https://aquaculture.ec.europa.eu/key-documents/mid-term-assessment-implementation-strategic-guidelines-eu-aquaculture-and-multi. [4] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2013/1380/oj. [5] https://oceans-and-fisheries.ec.europa.eu/news/commission-seeks-feedback-future-fisheries-and-aquaculture-sector-2026-02-24_en.”
  Import of agri-food products in the EU · Environmental regulation of fisheries · Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2026-05-13 “Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission 13.5.2026 Written question To facilitate implementation of the reporting obligations for recreational fisheries, and in line with Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 (the Control Regulation), as amended by Regulation (EU) 2023/2842 [1] , the Commission at the request of 13 Member States developed the digital system RecFishing. While the regulation requires daily reporting for certain species, Member States determine how the daily requirement is implemented and enforced nationally, including whether reporting is immediate or within 24 hours. The RecFishing mobile app accommodates these choices and allows reporting in line with Art. 55 of the Control Regulation, including offline, with data transmitted once connectivity is restored. While the Commission provides an electronic reporting system, it is the responsibility of Member States to define national rules on data collection and ensure the necessary enforcement, taking into account proportionality. During its meeting of 15 April 2026, the Working Group on Recreational Fisheries (WGRF) addressed possible challenges of a digital divide and discussed how to support fishers without mobile phone. The Commission develops, operates and maintains the RecFishing system to support data collection under Art. 55 of the Control Regulation. The current focus is to deploy core functionalities that can improve usability and acceptance, which will result in better data. It is a key objective of the Commission and Member States to develop tools to improve data quality to support future analysis. Finally, the roll-out of RecFishing was not postponed. As this is normal practice for large IT systems, it was launched progressively in the concerned Member States, following a pre-agreed schedule. Developments are discussed and agreed with Member States within the WGRF. [1] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/2842/oj/eng.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2026-04-30 “E-000700/2026 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission Several financial support options are available, both under the Portuguese European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) programme and State aid. EMFAF can be used for: (i) repair of destroyed maritime infrastructure, such as fishing ports, auction halls, landing sites and shelters, storage facilities; (ii) replacement of fishing, aquaculture, and seafood processing equipment, such as nets, refrigerated storage equipment, etc, and (iii) compensation for temporary cessation of activities for fishers, provided that Portugal officially recognises the storms as a natural disaster 1 . The purchase of new fishing vessels is not permitted under EMFAF, but where damage still allows for feasible repairs, EMFAF can support on-board investments aimed at improving working and safety conditions. Portugal may also consider granting State aid to support the fisheries sector: (i) under the "de minimis" Regulation 2 , aid of EUR 30 000/40 000 over three fiscal years per beneficiary may be granted to compensate for storm-related losses (e.g. repair costs) or, in the case of outermost regions, to finance new vessels under 12 meter; (ii) under a compensation regime pursuant to Art 49 of the FIBER Regulation 3 , without notification to the Commission: either to cover repair costs, or loss of revenue for fishers for six months if their production tools (i.e. their vessels) are destroyed, provided that Portugal officially recognises the storms as a natural disaster. The compensated costs must be directly linked to the storms damage and (iii) an exceptional compensation regime could also be notified to the Commission under the State aid Guidelines for fisheries 4 , following similar conditions and covering the same eligible costs as the FIBER aids. The aid must be notified to the Commission. 1 Within the meaning of Article 21.2.e of the Regulation (EU) 2021/1139 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2021 establishing the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund and amending Regulation (EU) 2017/1004. 2 Commission Regulation (EU) No 717/2014 of 27 June 2014 on the application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to de minimis aid in the fishery and aquaculture sector (OJ L 190, 28.6.2014, p. 45). 3 Commission Regulation (EU) 2022/2473 of 14 December 2022 declaring certain categories of aid to undertakings active in the production, processing and marketing of fishery and aquaculture products compatible with the internal market in application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (OJ L 327, 21.12.2022, p. 82). 4 OJ C 107, 23.3.2023, p. 1. (Part 2, Chapter 1, Section 1.1).”
  Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2026-04-29 “E-001057/2026 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The EU financial contribution under Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreements (SFPAs), in line with Article 32(1) of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) Regulation, has two components. The first covers access to fisheries resources and is paid directly to the partner country’s government. Its use falls under national sovereignty and the Commission doesn’t monitor it and doesn’t have information on final recipients. In contrast, the second component, the sectoral support, is subject to strict monitoring and reporting. Partner countries must provide annual reports on their implementation, activities and beneficiaries. Progress is regularly assessed, including in the annual Joint Committee meetings which govern the implementation of the SFPAs, and payments depend on satisfactory implementation. More details are available in the ex-ante and ex-post evaluations, published on the website of the EU’s publication office 1 . The Commission regularly assesses the impact of SFPAs, including their economic relevance for the EU fleet, through the above-mentioned evaluations carried out before each protocol is concluded or renewed. These consistently show that SFPAs support the competitiveness and viability of the EU fishing fleet, including those of Spain and Portugal. They provide access to key fishing zones and resources not available in EU waters, ensure predictable and secure operating conditions for EU vessels, support year-round continuity of fishing activities, and help sustain sectoral employment and economic activity. The Commission’s conclusion is that SFPAs remain an essential tool for supporting the external dimension of the CFP, contributing both to sustainable fisheries and the economic performance of the EU fleet. 1 https://op.europa.eu/fr.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries · Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2026-04-29 “E-001188/2026 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The European Union attaches great importance to the protection of Antarctic krill and to its critical role in the Antarctic ecosystem. The Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) has generally ensured that the krill fishery in Antarctica remains at sustainable levels 1 , in accordance with the precautionary principle and ecosystem approach. Following the lack of agreement during the 43 rd CCAMLR annual meeting to retain a catch limit distribution mechanism, catches are increasingly concentrated in specific areas of the Antarctic Peninsula region, thereby negatively affecting these marine ecosystems, including krill-dependent predators such as penguins, seals, and whales. For this reason, the EU has strongly advocated during the 44 th CCAMLR annual meeting for the reintroduction, as a matter of urgency, of a distribution of the krill catch limit in the Antarctic Peninsula region on smaller spatial and temporal scales. At the same time the EU promotes improvements to the krill fishery management approach including via regular biomass surveys, better data collection and enhanced ecosystem monitoring. The EU also supports the harmonisation of the revised krill management approach with spatial management measures through proposals to create marine protected areas, which would contribute to safeguarding key krill habitats and foraging grounds. 1 CCAMLR decided that the catch will be regulated within a 620 000 tonne ‘trigger’ level, which represents approximately 1% of the estimated 60 million tonnes of the unexploited biomass, or virgin size, of the krill population across four regions in the southwest Atlantic.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries · Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2026-04-28 “E-000797/2026 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The Commission has not been notified about the incidents mentioned by the Honourable Member and does not dispose of sufficient information to assess their impact on fishing operations around Lampedusa Island. The European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) 1 can support measures that contribute to the protection and restoration of aquatic biodiversity and ecosystems, including actions to achieve a good environmental status as set out in Article 1(1) of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) 2 . Under specific conditions, the EMFAF can also provide for compensation to fishers for the temporary cessation of fishing activities. It remains within the competence of the Italian authorities to assess and, where appropriate, mobilise the relevant EMFAF resources in line with the objectives of Italy’s EMFAF programme. The Commission remains available to support Italy in the implementation of its EMFAF programme. In implementing their marine strategies, Member States are already obliged to protect the marine environment to achieve good environmental status. No further programmes are therefore envisaged. 1 Regulation (EU) 2021/1139 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2021 establishing the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund and amending Regulation (EU) 2017/1004. 2 Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 establishing a framework for community action in the field of marine environmental policy (Marine Strategy Framework Directive).”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries · Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2026-04-27 “E-000673/2026 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission Fishery products imported into the EU are subject to official controls to verify compliance with EU food safety and animal health legislation, and controls to prevent the import of illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing products. The outcome of both controls must be satisfactory to allow entry into the EU. The EU catch certification scheme established by the IUU Regulation 1 aims to prevent the importation of IUU fishery products. Member States check catch certificates submitted for importation 2 and, where necessary, carry out verifications to ensure the legality of the products 3 . Third countries need to send to the Commission their flag State notification 4 , certifying they have in place national rules for the implementation, control and enforcement of conservation and management measures that their fishing vessels must comply with. From a sanitary perspective, third countries can export to the EU only from vessels that are listed as compliant with EU food safety legislation. Accordingly, the list of establishments in TRACES (IMSOC 5 ) is not a fisheries control tool, but a list of the establishments that can export to the EU on sanitary grounds. The Ghanaian fishing vessels were listed in TRACES before the suspension of their fishing licence by the responsible fisheries authorities. However, the listing in TRACES does not mean that the vessels have a valid fishing licence, that is included in the catch certificate. In case of concerns as to the legality of the catch, Member States can request a verification to confirm that the fishery products were legally caught. If Member States are not satisfied with the replies provided by the concerned third country, they must reject the fishery products, preventing them from entering the EU market. 1 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2008/1005/2026-01-10. 2 Under Article 12 of the IUU Regulation. 3 Under Article 17 of the IUU Regulation. 4 Under Article 20 of the IUU Regulation. 5 IMSOC: Information management system for official controls to ensure compliance with agri-food chain rules.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2026-04-23 “E-000583/2026 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission 1. Under the Common Fisheries Policy, conservation measures must be based on the best available scientific advice and comply with the principle of proportionality. Where justified by conservation objectives, Member States may apply restrictions, including seasonal bans in marine protected areas (MPAs), even to low-intensity activities such as fishing tourism which may have cumulative impacts, particularly in sensitive areas or periods. Restrictions must be appropriate, non-discriminatory and proportionate, while taking into account relevant scientific evidence and socio-economic considerations. 2. Union law requires that measures with socio-economic implications be prepared in a transparent manner and, where appropriate, involve stakeholder consultation. The Commission supports the use of data collected under the Data Collection Framework and encourages Member States to ensure that decision-making is evidence-based and transparent. 3. Recreational fisheries play an important role from a biological, economic and social perspective. Considering the significant impacts of recreational fisheries on certain fish stocks, Member States shall exercise effective control of recreational fisheries, including an appropriate system of sanctions. EU legislation distinguishes between commercial and recreational fishing. The marketing or sale of catches from recreational fisheries is prohibited. Member States are responsible for ensuring effective control. The revised EU Fisheries Control Regulation 1 further strengthens monitoring through electronic catch reporting, improving transparency, and also supporting enforcement and helping prevent illegal practices. 1 Regulation (EU) 2023/2842.”
  Funding for fisheries and aquaculture · Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2026-04-20 “E-000770/2026 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The Commission shares the concerns raised. However, Russian vessels are allowed to fish in the exclusive economic zone of West African countries based on bilateral fisheries agreements, as illustrated by the article mentioned by the Honourable Member. If such activities are authorised by the respective coastal States, they cannot be considered illegal. The EU, through its policy of zero-tolerance towards illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing, its sustainable fisheries partnership agreements and its strong presence in regional fisheries management organisations (RFMOs), works with several of these coastal States to help them increase their capabilities in fighting IUU fishing and boost their monitoring and surveillance activities in their own waters. As an example, thanks to the EU’s insistence, the 2023 and 2024 compliance reports highlighting several infringements involving Russian fishing vessels were endorsed in November 2025 by the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC). Regarding Russia’s unsustainable fishing, the EU proposed control measures in certain RFMOs such as NEAFC and the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organisation that were adopted to help prevent unsustainable practices on depleted stocks, such as pelagic redfish. The Commission will continue to work with Member States on similar measures for other stocks like mackerel. Constraining revenues funding Russia’s illegal war of aggression is a key goal of the EU’s sanctions imposed since February 2022. The selection of products subject to trade sanctions, such as import bans, depends on a case-by-case assessment, addressing notably their actual economic contribution to Russia’s budget and the impact on the EU supply. The adoption of EU sanctions ultimately lies with the Council of the EU.”
  EU-Russia relations (from March 2022) · Fisheries access for developing countries
• 2026-04-14 “E-000589/2026 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission To strengthen the effectiveness of the Union fisheries control system, the co-legislators introduced via Regulation (EU) 2023/2842 1 dedicated rules on the mandatory use of remote electronic monitoring (REM) systems on board certain catching vessels of 18 metres length or more posing a high risk of non-compliance with the landing obligation. To safeguard the right to privacy, recording will be limited to actively operated gear and parts of the vessels where fishery products are visible. These rules are distinct from a fully documented fisheries approach 2 as the scope is limited to monitoring compliance with the landing obligation. REM has been proven in several trials and studies by Member States to be an effective tool to ensure control and enforcement of the main risks associated with the landing obligation 3 . The REM provisions will start applying in January 2028, as provided in Article 7(7) of Regulation (EU) 2023/2842 and the Commission is actively preparing for it, including through the gradual development of secondary legislation. Going forward, the Commission considers important to take account of technological development for the monitoring and control of fisheries in the EU. While Regulation (EU) 2023/2842 does not task the Commission with conducting pilot projects on fully documented fisheries based on REM systems, the European Fisheries Control Agency maintains a working group on REM that ensures monitoring, coordination and technical guidance for voluntary REM pilot projects carried out by Member States to inform potential future deployment. 1 OJ L, 2023/2842, 20.12.2023, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/2842/oj. 2 Fully documented fishery is not a concept defined in the EU fisheries control framework. 3 The Danish Electronic monitoring in the Danish Kattegat (3AS) Nephrops fishery report stated: ‘Overall, the experience after three years of camera documented fisheries in Kattegat and the Baltic Sea is that camera documentation is an effective form of control, especially for documenting catches and thus compliance with the landing obligation. The assessment is also that there are no alternative control methods that can effectively control the landing obligation. From the perspective of the authorities, EM with cameras is therefore a very effective control tool’. Source: https://lfst.dk/Media/638597361463094390/Evaluation__Electronic_Monitoring_in_Kattegat__2021-2023_.pdf.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2026-04-14 “E-000723/2026 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission In 2025, the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM) provided scientific advice for up to 120 stocks. Based on this, the GFCM adopted fishing days and catch limits –in line with the GFCM multiannual management plans (MAP) requirements– and established fishing days only for the demersal fisheries in the Adriatic Sea and the Strait of Sicily. As regards the Western Mediterranean, the Commission proposed fishing opportunities (FO) based on the advice provided by the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries. However, the Council adopted FO without consideration for this advice. The Greek European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) programme offers support 1 for sector resilience and competitiveness through diverse income-supporting activities like fleet modernisation, climate change impact mitigation, and training to enhance skills and income. The Commission works with the Greek EMFAF Managing Authority to ensure the programme aligns with the sector needs. The Commission deploys efforts to strengthen effectively the fisheries monitoring, control, and surveillance mechanisms of Regional Fisheries Management Organisations in the Mediterranean Sea and to improve the culture of compliance with the relevant regional rules, such as via International Joint Inspection Schemes. EU Free Trade Agreements include sustainability provisions related to labour rights and environmental protection, which apply also to the fisheries sector. Within the Pact for the Mediterranean 2 , the Commission will work to increase the control and inspection capabilities of coastal states in order to enhance regional fisheries governance and combat illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing. 1 Projects on small-scale fishing may receive up to 100% aid. 2 JOIN(2025) 26 final.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries · Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2026-04-01 “P-000846/2026 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The conservation and management of critically endangered European eel must be based on fisheries and environmental considerations to tackle all human-induced mortalities. Member States take various measures through their eel management plans (EMP) under the Eel Regulation 1 and other legal instruments, such as the Fishing Opportunities Regulation 2 , Water Framework Directive 3 , Wildlife Trade Regulation 4 . The implementation of the EMPs is variable and the targets of the Eel Regulation have mostly not been met, as confirmed by the evaluation of the Eel Regulation 5 and by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) 6 . There are no signs of eel recovery. Further ambition is needed to address environmental mortalities, while continuing taking fisheries measures. Temporary fishing closures are set at the EU level and promoted by the EU at international level. Member States do not allow trade from and to the EU, whereas marketing in the EU is allowed. Some Member States took more stringent measures by listing European eel as strictly protected or prohibiting eel fishing all year. Under the Marine Action Plan 7 , the Commission called on Member States to improve the protection of eels and revise their EMPs or adopt the new plans in light of new knowledge and scientific advice 8 , and to strengthen a transboundary cooperation. The Nature Restoration 1 Council Regulation (EC) No 1100/2007 of 18 September 2007 establishing measures for the recovery of the stock of European eel, OJ L 248, 22.9.2007, pp. 17–23. 2 Council Regulation (EU) 2026/249 of 26 January 2026 fixing for 2026, 2027 and 2028 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks, applicable in Union waters and, for Union fishing vessels, in certain non-Union waters, and amending Regulation (EU) 2025/202,OJ L, 2026/249, Council Regulation (EU) 2026/266 of 26 January 2026 fixing for 2026 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks applicable in the Mediterranean and Black Seas, OJ L, 2026/266, 30.1.2026. 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32000L0060. 4 Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 of 9 December 1996 on the protection of species of wild fauna and flora by regulating trade therein. 5 Commission’s evaluation report (SWD/2020/0035 final) https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52020SC0035 and external study in support of this evaluation https://op.europa.eu/fr/publication-detail/-/publication/afe6ca55-5f58-11ea-b735-01aa75ed71a1. 6 Details about a most recent progress of Member States in implementing their EMPs and measures under the Eel Regulation are provided in the ICES advice in subject published in 2025 https://iceslibrary.figshare.com/articles/report/EU_request_for_technical_evaluation_of_the_Eel_Management_Plan_progre ss_reports/28381268?file=54121004 and in the ICES report from the Workshop in support of this advice https://iceslibrary.figshare.com/articles/report/Workshop_for_the_Technical_Evaluation_of_EU_Member_States_Eel_Reg ulation_Progress_Reports_for_Submission_in_2024_2025_WKEMP4_/28788749?file=54098411. 7 EU Action Plan: Protecting and restoring marine ecosystems for sustainable and resilient fisheries, COM/2023/102 final, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52023DC0102. 8 Most recent ICES advice published in November 2025: https://iceslibrary.figshare.com/articles/report/European_eel_i_Anguilla_anguilla_i_throughout_its_natural_range/2720302 8?file=59290940 and ICES report from the Workshop in support of this advice, where country reports are annexed https://ices-”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2026-03-31 “E-000686/2026 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission Non-Indigenous Species (NIS) are of increasing concern, particularly in the Mediterranean Sea, a hotspot for invasions. The Commission collaborates with the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM) on these challenges. Several pilot projects and research programmes were launched for data collection and mitigation. The EU-funded GFCM pilot on NIS in the Eastern Mediterranean is gathering fisheries-dependent and independent data, for example on species’ abundance, helping close the knowledge gap. Establishing a NIS observatory will enhance data, knowledge and best practices, addressing the spread of these species in the region. The species referenced in the question are not on the list of Invasive Alien Species (IAS) of EU concern under the IAS Regulation 1 and therefore do not fit within its scope. Under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive, Member States must address NIS to ensure good environmental status of the 11 descriptors. The commercial exploitation of NIS is a solution. If listed under the IAS Regulation, commercialisation could also be authorised, under certain conditions. In the Black Sea, managing Rapa Whelk’s spread and exploitation has controlled the species’ expansion, benefitting the fisheries-based economy. The GFCM adopted measures for sustainable fishing of this species 2 . The European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) national programmes may support the monitoring, surveillance and mitigation of NIS. The EU encourages the use of EMFAF, which may be of benefit when species have less commercial value (e.g. Cyprus compensates fishers to target pufferfish intensively, aiming to regulate the population). 1 Regulation (EU) No 1143/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2014 on the prevention and management of the introduction and spread of invasive alien species, OJ L 317, 4.11.2014, p. 35– 55. 2 Recommendation GFCM/47/2024/9 on management measures for the sustainable exploitation of rapa whelk in the Black Sea (geographical subarea 29).”
  Funding for fisheries and aquaculture · Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2026-03-30 “E-000539/2026 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) advises zero catches of the critically endangered European eel in all habitats, reducing non-fisheries mortalities to zero and restoring the eel habitats 1 . The conservation and management of European eel must be based on fisheries and environmental considerations to tackle all human-induced mortalities. Closing eel fisheries in isolation will not be sufficient to recover eels. Further ambition is needed to address environmental mortalities, while continuing to take fisheries measures. Member States take various measures through their eel management plans (EMP) under the Eel Regulation 2 and other legal instruments: - Temporary fishing closures are set at EU level under the Fishing Opportunities Regulation; - The Water Framework Directive requires a good status of waters, including river continuity 3 ; - The Nature Restoration Regulation requires restoring rivers to free-flowing 4 ; - In line with the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), the trade of European eel from and to the EU remains strictly prohibited 5 . Regarding Spain, it has established one national EMP with several specific regional plans and one transboundary plan together with Portugal. Those plans contain various measures, such as reducing or closing fisheries, predator control, eel trap and transport, removing migration barriers, improving water quality, restocking 6 . 1 Most recent ICES advice published in November 2025: https://iceslibrary.figshare.com/articles/report/European_eel_i_Anguilla_anguilla_i_throughout_its_natural_range/2720302 8?file=59290940 and ICES report from the Workshop in support of this advice, where country reports including for Spain are annexed https://iceslibrary.figshare.com/articles/report/Joint_EIFAAC_ICES_GFCM_Working_Group_on_Eels_WGEEL_/304881 20. ICES Eel Stock Annex provides for a comprehensive assessment of the stock and the impacts on the stock: https://iceslibrary.figshare.com/articles/report/Stock_Annex_European_eel_i_Anguilla_anguilla_i_throughout_its_natural_r ange/24517486?file=43077457 2 Council Regulation (EC) No 1100/2007 of 18 September 2007 establishing measures for the recovery of the stock of European eel, OJ L 248, 22.9.2007, pp. 17–23. 3 The Water Framework Directive requires Member States, to implement measures to ensure that the status of water bodies, including as regards river continuity and fish communities, does not deviate, or only slightly, from undisturbed conditions. 4 The Nature Restoration Regulation requires Member States to make inventories of their artificial barriers to the connectivity of surface waters, and to plan for removals of barriers, primarily addressing obsolete ones, in order to reach the EU-wide objective of restoring 25000 km of rivers to free-flowing rivers between 2020 and 2030. 5 The competent scientific authorities of the EU Member States agreed unanimously that they would not be able to issue a non-detriment finding for the export of European eel specimens, as it is critically endangered, as required under Article IV(2)(a) of CITES. Therefore, since 2010, a zero-export quota has been issued and published on the CITES website. Regarding imports into the EU on European eel, the scientific review group decided on a general negative opinion for all range states since 2010. 6 EMP implementation is variable. Details about a most recent progress of Member States in implementing their EMPs and measures under the Eel Regulation, including by Spain, are provided in the ICES advice in subject”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2026-03-25 “E-000538/2026 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission 1. CATCH is a major step forward in the European Union’s fight against illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing. It is operational as of 10 January 2026 and aligned to the legal requirements in the revised IUU Regulation 1 . On 23 February 2026 more than 12 500 importer declarations had been validated in CATCH, and no major disruption of trade has occurred. CATCH is a game changer as it harmonises import controls across Member States and levels the playing field between EU and non-EU fishers on the legality of products placed on our market. Developed in cooperation with Member States, CATCH is continuously adapted and updated based on experiences reported by all users. The Commission supports the mandatory use of CATCH decided by the co-legislators and does not plan to defer its full implementation. It is critical to maintain EU leadership in fighting IUU fishing. The Commission will continue to engage constructively with the Member States within the existing legal framework to find workable and effective technical solutions. 2. To ensure uniform implementation of CATCH and advise on timely solutions to confirmed general issues, the Commission has issued regular guidance to Member States, including ways to reduce workload. CATCH has multiple functionalities to reuse data that expands as the system is progressively used. 30% of the importer declarations are already based on digital interconnections of CATCH and non-EU systems. The Commission continues to encourage more countries to interconnect or use CATCH directly for free. Certifying catches from EU vessels in CATCH is compulsory only in limited cases under the IUU Regulation (Art. 14, 15), and Member States continue to use their existing systems in all other cases. 1 Council Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008 of 29 September 2008 establishing a Union system to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, amending Regulations (EEC) No 2847/93, (EC) No 1936/2001 and (EC) No 601/2004 and repealing Regulations (EC) No 1093/94 and (EC) No 1447/1999, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A02008R1005-20260110.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2026-03-17 “E-000320/2026 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission Non-Indigenous Species (NIS) are of increasing concern and the Mediterranean Sea has become a hotspot for these invasions. The Commission works closely with the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean to address the related challenges. Several pilot projects and research programmes have been launched and will be paramount in collecting data and establishing mitigation measures. The European Ocean Pact 1 announced a dedicated policy initiative addressing the issue of NIS and the preparation of a document mapping good practices and recommendations on the management of conflicts with predators in aquaculture. The EU Aquaculture Assistance Mechanism is working on this document, expected to be completed by the end of 2026. The European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) helps achieve sustainable fishing and aquaculture and strengthen the competitiveness and resilience of the sector and coastal communities. EMFAF national programmes can support the monitoring, surveillance and mitigation of invasive alien species. Under specific conditions, EMFAF can provide for compensation to fishers for the temporary cessation of fishing activities. The Italian authorities may mobilise resources in line with the specific objectives of its EMFAF Programme. The Commission does not plan to propose adding Mnemiopsis leidiy on the list under the Invasive Alien Species Regulation 2 . A risk assessment under Article 5(1) is a required first step. None has yet been carried out. Based on biological characteristics, it is unlikely that its inclusion on the Union list would effectively prevent its impact. The Marine Strategy Framework Directive 3 and the Ballast Water Management Convention are also relevant frameworks to address NIS. 1 https://oceans-and-fisheries.ec.europa.eu/european-ocean-pact_en. 2 Regulation (EU) No 1143/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2014 on the prevention and management of the introduction and spread of invasive alien species, OJ L 317, 4.11.2014, p. 35–55. 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32008L0056.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries · Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2026-03-11 “E-000041/20c26 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission Pursuant to Article 32(1)(a) of the Common Fisheries Policy Regulation (CFP 1 ), a part of the Union’s financial contribution under Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreements (SFPAs) is intended to support the cost of access to fisheries resources in third-country waters. This part of the contribution is not earmarked for specific policy objectives and its use falls under the sovereign discretion of the partner country. In addition, as per Article 32(1)(b) of the CFP Regulation, financial assistance is provided to partner countries aiming at the development of a sustainable fisheries policy driven by the third country (the so-called ‘sectoral support’). As such financial assistance is conditional upon the achievement of specific results, programming and implementation of activities funded by sectoral support are subject to strict monitoring by the Joint Committee of SFPAs, through the regular monitoring by the Commission both in headquarters and in EU delegations. Furthermore, SFPAs define requirements for the administrations of partner countries to ensure transparency, accountability and control of these funds, including a mandatory annual report. Further details and examples can be found in the evaluation and analysis of the SFPAs between the EU and third countries published in 2023 2 which includes an in-depth analysis of the sectoral support component of the SFPAs, including beneficiaries, as well as in the evaluations conducted before the expiry of each protocol 3 . These evaluations also show that active SFPAs provide access to important fishing zones for the EU fleet, as part of a network of SFPAs concluded by the EU, enabling the vessels concerned to maintain their activities throughout the year. 1 Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy, amending Council Regulations (EC) No 1954/2003 and (EC) No 1224/2009 and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 2371/2002 and (EC) No 639/2004 and Council Decision 2004/585/EC, OJ L 354, 28.12.2013, pp. 22. 2 Commission: Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, Fisheries Maritime Affairs F&S, Megapesca Lda and POSEIDON, Evaluation and analysis of the Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreements (SFPAs) between the EU and third countries including an in-depth analysis of the sectoral support component of the SFPAs – Final report, Publications Office of the European Union, 2023, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2771/52188. 3 For Morocco: Commission: Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, F&S and POSEIDON, Évaluation rétrospective et prospective du Protocole à l’accord de partenariat dans le domaine de la pêche durable entre l’Union européenne et le Royaume du Maroc – Rapport final, Publications Office of the European Union, 2023, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2771/785958. For Mauritania: European Commission: Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, Poseidon, Fisheries Maritime Affairs, Caillart, B., Guerin, B. et al., Évaluation rétrospective et prospective du Protocole 2021-2026 à l’accord de partenariat dans le domaine de la pêche durable entre l’Union européenne et la République Islamique de Mauritanie – Rapport final, Publications Office of the European Union, 2025, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2771/6618550.”
  Funding for fisheries and aquaculture · Fisheries access for developing countries
• 2026-03-02 “E-000277/2026 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The EU has a strategic interest in a stable and secure environment in the Eastern Mediterranean. All countries need to respect the jurisdiction, sovereignty and sovereign rights of all Member States, in accordance with international law, in particular the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Also, according to UNCLOS and customary international law, coastal States have sovereignty over their territorial sea, including for the adoption of laws and regulations related to fishing, innocent passage, as well as to take the necessary steps to prevent non-innocent passage. The Commission supports Member States in the implementation of fisheries control rules and compliance with the Common Fisheries Policy. In particular, the European Fisheries Control Agency (EFCA) coordinates Member States’ inspection activities through the Mediterranean Joint Deployment Plan. EFCA deploys a patrol vessel on a permanent basis in the Mediterranean. Its activities may be complemented with tools such as aircraft and satellite monitoring, and support may be provided to national authorities’ activities if requested. Furthermore, EFCA in cooperation with the European Border and Coast Guard Agency and the European Maritime Safety Agency, each within its mandate, supports the national authorities carrying out coast guard functions. The international cooperation on fisheries of the EU with neighbouring third countries is achieved through regional fisheries management organisations such as the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean and the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas, including the establishment of common regional rules and the exchange of best practices for fisheries sustainability.”
  Funding for fisheries and aquaculture · Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2026-02-27 “E-000186/2026 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission Prior to the revision of Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 1 (the Control Regulation), the obligation to notify a return to port in advance already applied to vessels of 12 meters or more targeting stocks covered by multiannual plans. The revision of the Control Regulation extended the scope of this requirement to additional stocks, while maintaining the same vessel-length threshold. The obligation serves fisheries control and enforcement objectives, ensuring authorities have sufficient time to organise inspections, regardless of distance travelled or trip duration. The revised framework already allows noticeable flexibility: Member States may apply shorter notification periods for certain vessels, and the Commission may grant derogations in duly justified cases. Concerns regarding implementation should therefore be raised with the competent national authorities, which are best placed to assess any necessary adjustments or follow-up within the legal framework. As regards catch recording, the legislation does not require all catches to be weighed on board before landing, but only “estimated” quantities, as under the previous system. These requirements aim to improve the accuracy and reliability of catch data in support of sustainable fisheries management and the objectives of the Common Fisheries Policy. The Spanish authorities have asked the Commission to explore possible solutions, including a regulatory amendment. Solutions can and should be pursued within the existing control framework, making full use of the existing flexibilities and implementing powers provided by the revised Control Regulation. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2009/1224/oj/eng.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2026-01-28 “E-003831/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is actively involved in the ongoing North East Atlantic coastal States’ negotiations, engaging in both multilateral and bilateral discussions with counterparts to reduce fishing pressure on pelagic stocks, particularly mackerel. The Commission is concerned with the prospect of continued overfishing and arrangements based on unilaterally inflated quotas by some parties. Sustainable fisheries management is indeed not optional – it is vital for protecting the resource, the EU seafood sector, and communities that depend on it. The Commission will carefully assess any measures by third countries against the legal thresholds under Regulation 1026/2012, as amended by Regulation (EU) 2077/2025 on nonsustainable fishing by third countries 1 , while ensuring full respect for international law. The Regulation applies to the fisheries-related activities and policies of third countries in order to ensure the long-term conservation of stocks of common interest to the Union and those third countries. The EU also has trade defence tools to ensure fair competition, such as anti-dumping or safeguard measures, that the Commission could trigger if conditions for their application are met. The competitiveness of the EU industries, and sustainable fishing are key priorities for the Commission. 1 OJ L, 2025/2077, 14.10.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2025/2077/oj.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2026-01-26 “E-004457/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission 1. Under the Commission proposal for the EU budget 2028-2034, a new single Fund will finance the Member States’ National and Regional Partnership Plans (NRP Plans), covering different policy areas, including fisheries and aquaculture. In the future, there is a clear shift in the delivery model of the funding. Payments will be made conditional on the achievement of milestones and targets. The legal framework will no longer include detailed eligibility rules. Instead, it will be up to the Member States and regions to implement measures according to their needs and priorities. This should help maximise support for the sector across different funds. 2. The proposal for the new budget includes the principle of ‘do-no-significant-harm’ (DNSH) which will apply to the entire EU budget, in line with the EU Financial Regulation 1 . This principle mandates that all programmes and activities must fulfil their intended goals and set objectives according to sector-specific guidelines, ensuring they do not fund any activities that could cause considerable harm and hinder environmental objectives. 3. The EU strategic aquaculture guidelines 2 recommend that the Commission and Member States support diversification of EU aquaculture to types of aquacultures with better environmental performance and promote the use of sustainably sourced feed ingredients for fed aquaculture. The EU Reference Centre for the welfare of aquatic animals plays an important role to fulfil gaps in scientific knowledge. 1 https://commission.europa.eu/publications/eu-financial-regulation_en. 2 The strategic guidelines for a more sustainable and competitive EU aquaculture for the period 2021 to 2030 COM(2021)236 final.”
  GMOs
• 2026-01-22 “E-004654/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission 1. The Commission views Thailand’s recent adoption of their revised Royal Ordinance on Fisheries, as potentially introducing new risks related to illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing. Should these risks lead to a resurgence of IUU fishing activities, the EU retains the right to consider adopting similar measures to those adopted in 2015 in the framework of EU Council Regulation N° 1005/2008 1 (IUU Regulation), if deemed necessary. On social conditions, under the Forced Labour Regulation 2 , fishery products that are proven to be made with forced labour will be banned from the internal market. The directive on corporate sustainability due diligence 3 will require large companies to identify and address adverse impacts on human rights, labour rights, and environmental issues within their value chains, both in Europe and globally. 2. A comprehensive free trade agreement is being negotiated with Thailand based on the joint objective of reaching a modern, high-standard deal, with sustainability at its core. The trade and sustainable development chapter has already been closed in principle and includes commitments on the sustainable management of natural resources – also with respect to fisheries and on combating IUU fishing, as well as on the effective implementation of the fundamental principles and rights at work and continued and sustained efforts to ratify relevant Conventions of the International Labour Organisation (ILO). With respect to future market access conditions, the Commission will duly consider specific sensitivities during the negotiations. Economically sensitive sectors, such as tuna, will be subject to carefully designed specific modalities for market access that aim at preventing any market disturbances. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2008/1005/oj/eng. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/3015/oj/eng. 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj.”
  EU policy on labour exploitation in global supply chains · Due diligence in supply chains (environmental and human rights)
• 2026-01-19 “E-004550/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission Informal targeted consultations of stakeholders have already started and will be followed by a public consultation, planned for the first half of 2026. A technical meeting with Member States experts is scheduled for the first quarter of 2026. The Commission underlines that compliance with Article 58(6) of Regulation (EU) 2023/2842 1 operates independently of the adoption of any supplementing legislation. Moreover, the co-legislators did not envisage any mandatory use of the empowerment under Article 58(12) of Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 2 . The obligation to make information available ‘in a digital way’ is formulated broadly, allowing compliance through a range of means that enable digital data transmission. Finally, the Commission does not have the power, through delegated legislation, to postpone the 2026 implementation deadline established by the co-legislators in Regulation (EU) 2023/2842. The Commission will continue working with stakeholders and Member States to develop supplementary rules that can support them and further harmonise and simplify the traceability framework, without undermining the policy objectives of the revised fisheries control regulation. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/2842/oj/eng. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2009/1224/oj/eng.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2026-01-19 “E-004712/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission Since 2011 1 , EU rules have required that fishery and aquaculture products be traced and be accompanied by a minimum set of information. They also required operators to maintain systems and procedures to identify any operator from whom they have been supplied and to whom these products have been supplied. The Commission does not have the power, through delegated legislation, to postpone the 2026 implementation deadline established by the co-legislators in Regulation (EU) 2023/2842 2 . The co-legislators did not envisage any mandatory use of the empowerment under Article 58(12) of Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 3 . Compliance with Article 58(6) operates independently of the adoption of any supplementing legislation. The obligation to make information available ‘in a digital way’ is formulated broadly, allowing compliance through a range of means that enable digital data transmission. The Commission will continue working with stakeholders and Member States to develop supplementary rules that can support them and further harmonise and simplify the traceability framework, while fostering the policy objectives of Regulation (EU) 2023/2842. 1 Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 (pre-revision), Article 58(1) to (5). Article 124(a) of the Control Regulation, which deferred the application of Article 58 until 1 January 2011. http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2009/1224/oj. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/2842/oj/eng. 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2009/1224/oj/eng.”
  Digitalization of public governance & administration
• 2026-01-19 “E-004607/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission 1. The European Ocean Pact recognises the support to small-scale fisheries as a priority. As announced in the Pact, the Commission adopted a Communication on the allocation of fishing opportunities 1 , which encourages Member States to further look into the allocation of fishing opportunities for small-scale fisheries. It is however important to recall that such allocation is decided by the Member States and Italy’s decision is outlined in Directorial Decree No 0582398/2025. The Commission understands that the additional closure period, adopted for November 2025, was to ensure that the fleet in the western Mediterranean could meet the conditions of Article 8.1(h) of Council Regulation (EU) 2025/219 2 . 2. The European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) 3 helps achieving sustainable fishing activities and strengthening the competitiveness and resilience of the fisheries sector. In the context of the implementation of the Western Mediterranean multiannual plan 4 and under specific conditions, the EMFAF can provide for compensation to fishers for the temporary cessation of fishing activities. The Italian authorities can consider mobilising resources from the Italian EMFAF Programme to provide support to the affected operators. The activation of EMFAF financial support must be in line with the specific objectives of the Italian EMFAF Programme, as agreed between the Commission and Italy. 1 Communication on transparency and good governance in quota allocation encourages Member States to use Article 17 of the Common Fisheries Policy to promote sustainable fishing practices and better support smallscale and coastal fishers (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/6227/oj/eng/pdf). 2 Council Regulation (EU) 2025/219 of 30 January 2025 fixing for 2025 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks applicable in the Mediterranean and Black Seas. 3 Regulation (EU) 2021/1139 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2021 establishing the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund and amending Regulation (EU) 2017/1004. 4 Regulation (EU) 2019/1022 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 establishing a multiannual plan for the fisheries exploiting demersal stocks in the western Mediterranean Sea and amending Regulation (EU) No 508/2014.”
  Funding for fisheries and aquaculture · Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2026-01-14 “E-004676/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission 1. The Commission negotiates and aims to secure the best possible quotas for the EU in the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT). Based on the best available scientific evidence, and defending the EU's interests, the Commission has strongly advocated – and obtained – a substantial increase in fishing opportunities for bluefin tuna (BFT). 2. The decision on how quotas are allocated internally, including for the fleet that catches BFT as by-catch, is a prerogative of the Member States. According to the EU legislation, they must use transparent and objective criteria, including those of an environmental, social and economic nature when taking such decisions. The Commission considers that the Member States are best placed to determine the most effective ways to allocate fishing opportunities. The Commission recently published guidelines 1 seeking to help Member States in supporting small-scale fishers and enhancing transparency and good governance in the allocation of fishing opportunities by Member States. 3. The Commission is fully committed to combating illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing. It supports the annual deployment of numerous inspection and control means under the Joint International Inspection Scheme for BFT, coordinated by the European Fisheries Control Agency. The Commission ensures the implementation and continuous improvement of the ICCAT electronic Bluefin Catch Document as a tool to guarantee the traceability of traded BFT. For other species, the Member States also have the EU catch certification scheme to prevent entry of fishery products stemming from illegal activities, and can use the mutual assistance system to target consignments at risk. 1 Communication from the Commission for enhanced transparency and good governance in the allocation of fishing opportunities by Member States: A vade mecum on the application of Articles 16 and 17 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy, OJ C, C/2025/6227, 17.11.2025.”
  Funding for fisheries and aquaculture · Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2026-01-14 “E-004578/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The western Mediterranean management plan 1 (MAP) aims to secure a sustainable and profitable future for the sector relying on healthy fish stocks. The Commission recognises the efforts made by the sector and has worked with all stakeholders to implement the MAP since its adoption. While the fishing opportunities regulations have gradually reduced trawling effort since 2020, flexibilities have alleviated the reduction, such as recovering fishing days granted by the compensation mechanism which was enhanced in 2025. Moreover, measures under this mechanism are eligible for financing with public funding, including from the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund, to those fishers who opt in. For 2026, the scientific advice provided by the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries shows, for many stocks, an increase in biomass and decrease in fishing mortality. However, the majority of stocks remains overfished, and several remain below healthy biological levels. The Commission cannot ignore the bad state of most stocks and only focus on the positive trend: improvement of biomass does not mean healthy stocks. The scientific advice did not revise its 2024 stock assessments for the MAP and confirmed the same stock assessment model and parameters used to set the 2025 fishing opportunities. In this context, the Commission has no ground to propose an in-year amendment of Regulation (EU) 2025/219 2 . 1 Regulation (EU) 2019/1022 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 establishing a multiannual plan for the fisheries exploiting demersal stocks in the western Mediterranean Sea and amending Regulation (EU) No 508/2014. OJ L 172, 26.6.2019, p. 1–17. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2025/219/oj/eng.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2026-01-13 “E-004341/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission 1. Import controls are essential to prevent products stemming from illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing entering the EU market. This is why the Commission has reinforced the work with the Member States on this, including by developing CATCH (IT system for the management of EU catch certificates and related documents under the catch certification scheme), which became mandatory for EU importers and Member States as of 10 January 2026. 2. The Commission was aware of the situation reported by Faro de Vigo. The North Pacific Fisheries Commission’s (NPFC) Technical and Compliance Committee (TCC) noted in 2017 1 ‘that there are seven cases of two vessels with the same name and number, and recommended the automatic inclusion of the seven illegal vessels once the authorised vessels have been reregistered under new names’. After that, vessels using those names (LU RONG YUAN YU 101/102/103/105/106/108/109) without authorisation were included in the NPFC IUU list. Therefore, the LU RONG YUAN YU 101-109 authorised by China, which changed their names to LU RONG YUAN YU 810/811/812/813/815/816/817, were authorised to operate in NPFC under the new names – with their former names clearly mentioned in the NPFC Record of Authorised vessels. In 2024, the TCC stated 2 that ‘the United States of America noted that they met on the margins of TCC with China regarding vessels 17-23 on the IUU vessel list’. No update or modification of the information in the IUU list was made further to that meeting. 3. As indicated in the response to the joint advice by the Long Distance and the Market Advisory Councils on the urgent need for effective implementation of EU import control rules across Member States, the Commission has taken into account a number of recommendations in its ongoing work. 1 North Pacific Fisheries Commission’s (NPFC) report of the Second Meeting of the Technical and Compliance Committee (reference NPFC-2017-TCC02-Final Report): https://www.npfc.int/sites/default/files/201808/NPFC-2017-TCC02-Final%20Report.pdf. 2 NPFC report Seventh Technical and Compliance Committee Meeting (NPFC-2024-TCC07-Final Report): https://www.npfc.int/sites/default/files/2024-06/NPFC-2024-TCC07-Final%20Report.pdf.”
  Import of agri-food products in the EU · Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2026-01-09 “E-003929/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The Commission shares the deep concern about the state of key North-East Atlantic pelagic stocks, particularly mackerel, and the serious threats this poses not only to the sustainability of these fisheries but also to the livelihoods of thousands of fishers and coastal communities across the EU. Unilateral quota increases by certain coastal States continue to push mackerel catches above scientifically advised levels in a situation where the EU maintains a responsible and stable fishing level in compliance with its international obligations. The arrangement signed on 15 December 2025 by the United Kingdom, Norway, Iceland, and the Faroe Islands risks exacerbating the state of the stock, considering that it sets a total allowable catch which is 72% higher than the headline advice issued by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) for 2026. The Commission remains committed to work towards the objective of agreeing on the total allowable catch for 2026, a comprehensive sharing arrangement and other long term management measures while assessing the compatibility of recent developments with international law. The Commission will continue to address this matter with the other Parties, while working closely with Member States and the sector to identify constructive and sustainable approaches protecting the stocks and supporting their long-term rebuilding. The Commission is committed to direct engagement with all stakeholders, and the recent visit of the Commissioner for Fisheries and Oceans to Irish coastal communities is but one example of that commitment.”
  Funding for fisheries and aquaculture · Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2026-01-08 “E-004223/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission Some Mediterranean stakeholders advocated that a tailored 1 management approach, informed by robust and detailed disaggregated datasets, can enhance precision in decision-making and the alignment of management with conservation, social and economic objectives. The Commission explored a more disaggregated approach for the implementation of the Western Mediterranean Multi-Annual Management Plan (MAP), following the repartition of the Geographical sub-Areas (GSAs) 2 . In 2025, the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries indicated 3 differences in the status of each stock group and therefore considered that the fishing mortality needs to be reduced differently between the stock groups and GSAs. Considering that the most vulnerable stock in each Effort Management Unit is not present in all GSAs, the Commission proposed to compensate, in the respective GSAs, fishing vessels not fishing the most vulnerable stock. This was meant to ensure a level-playing field between the fleets of different GSAs, as reflected in the Commission non paper on the Western Mediterranean Fishing Opportunities 4 , complementing the original Commission proposal. Τhe European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) can support a wide range of actions for Member States to implement with their national EMFAF programmes, including temporary and permanent cessation measures in order to achieve the objectives of the Western Mediterranean MAP, insurance schemes, actions for selectivity improvement, reduction of undersize catches and efficient closure areas as well as actions to support the resilience of the sector and advancing on its innovation and energy transition. 1 https://www.en.medac.eu/files/documentazione_pareri_lettere/2025/02/33_2025_medac_advice_disaggregated_data_tailored_manag ement.pdf. 2 As defined by the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean. 3 STECF 25-09 pages 14-19; https://stecf.ec.europa.eu/document/download/5a91e273-626f-4468-858b-72a875da211d_en. 4 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52025PC0509.”
  Funding for fisheries and aquaculture · Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2026-01-08 “P-004705/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission Tracing all lots of fishery and aquaculture products at all stages of production, processing and distribution, from catching or harvesting to the retail stage, ensuring that such lots are accompanied by a minimum set of information, and requiring operators to maintain ‘systems and procedures to identify any operator from whom they have been supplied with lots of fishery and aquaculture products and to whom these products have been supplied’, are obligations that have been in force in the Union since 2011 1 . The revision of the fisheries control system, culminating in Regulation (EU) 2023/2842 2 , builds on these rules while strengthening the recording and transmission of traceability data. Article 58(6) of Regulation (EU) 2023/2842 requires such data to be recorded and made available ‘in a digital way’, a technologically neutral formulation that allows various means of digital transmission without mandating any specific systems or tools across the supply chain. This minimum technological standard does not prevent stakeholders from using more advanced solutions, as already done by several operators, including through interoperable standards and systems. The 2026 implementation deadline established by the co-legislators in Regulation (EU) 2023/2842 cannot be modified through secondary legislation. The Commission will keep working with stakeholders and Member States to develop supplementary rules supporting their work and further harmonise and simplify the traceability framework, without undermining the objectives of the fisheries control revision. 1 Council Regulation (EC) 1224/2009 (the ‘Control Regulation’), Article 58(1) to (5). Please, note that Article 124(a) of the original Control Regulation deferred the application of Article 58 until 1 January 2011. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/2842/oj/eng.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2025-12-18 “E-004044/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission Based on an exclusive competence of the European Union (Art. 3 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union), the Commission pursues conservation of marine biological resources under the Common Fisheries Policy Regulation (1380/2013) 1 (CFP). Decisions to prohibit or limit certain fishing techniques in marine protected areas must be taken in that context and consider the type of fisheries, the characteristics of the area and the impact on marine ecosystems. Case-by-case assessments are needed to determine where and how less harmful techniques are needed to achieve the conservation objectives of marine protected areas. This allows to address the issue without disproportionately impacting fishing communities and is in line with the European Ocean Pact 2 . Under both the Birds Directive (2009/147/EC) 3 and Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC) 4 , Member States must protect ecosystems via the designation and management of protected sites. If the conservation of these sites necessitates regulating fishing activity, fisheries conservation measures in marine protected areas can be adopted by Member States in waters under their sovereignty or jurisdiction and so long as other Member States with a direct management interest in the fishery concerned are not affected. If other Member States are affected, Art. 11 and 18 of the CFP Regulation requires them to submit joint recommendation on measures to be adopted by the Commission. Finally, the Commission has recently published guidance 5 on the application of the Habitats Directive and the Birds Directive in relation to marine fishing activities. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2013/1380/oj/eng. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52025DC0281. 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2009/147/oj/eng. 4 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/1992/43/oj?eliuri=eli%3Adir%3A1992%3A43%3Aoj&locale=en. 5 https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/7557c784-9f37-11f0-97c8-01aa75ed71a1/language-en.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries · Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2025-12-18 “E-003411/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The EU has a strategic interest in a stable and secure environment in Eastern Mediterranean. All countries need to respect the jurisdiction, sovereignty and sovereign rights of Member States, in accordance with international law, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) the provisions of which reflect customary international law. In this regard, coastal States have sovereignty over their territorial sea, including for adopting laws and regulations related to innocent passage and taking necessary steps to prevent passage that is not innocent. The EU consistently promotes regional cooperation within Regional Fisheries Management Organisations, such as the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean, aiming to achieve a level playing field. While the primary responsibility for the safety and security conditions of the fish workers and for the control of fishing activities lays with the Member States in their waters and falls on their authorities, the European Fisheries Control Agency (EFCA) assists operationally Member States and coordinates their fisheries inspection activities in the Mediterranean through a dedicated Joint Deployment Plan, to which the EFCA patrol vessels participates. Alleged illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing by Turkish vessels is monitored by Greece and the Commission. Under Regulation (EC) 1005/2008 1 , any unauthorised entry of third-country fishing vessel in a Member State's territorial sea constitutes IUU fishing. The Member State concerned is primarily responsible for monitoring waters, inspecting suspicious vessels, and applying proportionate sanctions. Türkiye’s ratification of the UNCLOS would improve cooperation with the EU in fisheries. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2008/1005/2011-03-09/eng.”
  EU-Turkey relations · Asylum & border control
• 2025-12-18 “E-4294/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The Commission recognises the importance of providing consumers with clear and transparent information on the species, production method and origin of fishery and aquaculture products. This is reflected in the mandatory consumer information requirements set out in Regulation (EU) No 1379/2013 1 on the common organisation of the markets in fishery and aquaculture products (CMO). These rules apply to the majority of fishery and aquaculture products but exempt prepared and preserved products. Consequently, mandatory consumer information under the CMO does not cover most items sold by the hospitality sector (e.g. hotels, restaurants, catering). The revised Fisheries Control Regulation 2 sets out rules to ensure traceability throughout the supply chain. As of 10 January 2026, all lots of fishery and aquaculture products must be traceable from the point of catch or harvest to retail, with each lot requiring proper labelling with minimum information and digital transmission of traceability data. For prepared and preserved products, and as agreed by the co-legislators, new traceability requirements will apply from 2029. As part of the ongoing evaluation of the Common Fisheries Policy Regulation, the Commission is assessing the CMO provisions to identify areas for improvement. A dedicated study 3 informing this evaluation has recently been completed. The study examined, among other issues, the scope of mandatory labelling, the implementation of the CMO labelling rules by Member States, and the situation in the hospitality sector. While the outcome of the evaluation cannot be prejudged, the Commission remains committed to ensuring that the labelling framework is fit for purpose and delivers effective consumer information. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2013/1379/oj/eng. 2 Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A02009R1224-20241011. 3 https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/b8deded9-a010-11f0-97c8-01aa75ed71a1.”
  EU policy on country of origin food labelling · Food labelling harmonisation at EU level
• 2025-12-17 “E-004214/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The Commission consistently promotes the fight against illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing at regional level, as well as the improvement of compliance with the regional fisheries management rules to promote effectively the level playing field amongst all operators. In 2024, Recommendation 46/2023/17 1 of the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM), establishing an international joint inspection and surveillance (JIS) scheme for common dolphinfish fisheries, entered into force. The European Fisheries Control Agency (EFCA) is coordinating the participation of the EU in the scheme as regards the deployment of means. As presented during the annual session of the GFCM Compliance Committee (CoC) (3-4 November 2025) 2 , the implementation of the JIS scheme in 2025 delivered 39 inspection reports. Among these, eight inspections involved Tunisian-flagged vessels, six of which revealed infringements such as missing catch records, fishing without a license, or misreporting. Five of these cases led to follow-up measures including sanctions against captains, seizure of non-compliant equipment and fishery products, and vessel detention. The Commission sent a follow-up letter to Tunisia, as flag State, regarding the enforcement actions. At the GFCM annual session (4-9 November 2025), upon a proposal made by the EU, the GFCM listed the vessel ‘Sonia’ of unknown flag, previously flying the flag of Tunisia, on its IUU vessel list. This listing is the result of the consistent efforts for the reinforcement of the CoC and the establishment of the instruments to effectively fight IUU fishing in the Mediterranean, together with the increased presence of the EFCA’s patrol vessel. 1 GFCM Recommendation 46/2023/17 https://www.fao.org/gfcm/decisions/en/. 2 https://www.fao.org/gfcm/statutory-meetings/detail/en/c/1755049/.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2025-12-17 “E-003713/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The EU has a strategic interest in a stable and secure environment in the Mediterranean and expects that all countries respect the jurisdiction, sovereignty and sovereign rights of Member States, in accordance with international law, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the provisions of which reflect customary international law. In this regard, coastal States have sovereignty over their territorial sea, including for adopting laws and regulations related to innocent passage and taking necessary steps to prevent passage which is not innocent. Such incidents undermine the regional cooperation, which the EU consistently promotes within Regional Fisheries Management Organisations, such as the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean, aiming to achieve a level playing field. While the primary responsibility for the control of fishing activities in Member States’ waters fall on their authorities, the European Fisheries Control Agency (EFCA) coordinates Member States’ fisheries inspection activities in the Mediterranean through a dedicated Joint Deployment Plan, to which the EFCA patrol vessels participate. The Commission also provides technical support to interested Member States through satellite monitoring and other support activities. The involvement of Frontex in such activities would go beyond the Agency’s mandate which is linked to the support to Member States in managing their external borders and return.”
  EU relations with the Southern Neighbourhood
• 2025-12-17 “P-003901/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The precautionary principle under Article 191(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) remains a cornerstone of EU environmental policy and guides the Union’s gradual approach to innovation. The Commission assesses risks and issues guidance to Member States to ensure compliance with EU law. However, imposing moratoria or halting projects falls mainly within national competence. Implementing rulings of the European Court of Justice requiring suspension of projects posing serious risks equally lies with Member States. The Renewable Energy Directive (EU) 2018/2001 1 promotes innovative renewables, such as floating solar, wave and tidal energy while ensuring respect for the EU environmental acquis. The Commission has issued recommendations 2 and guidance 3 to Member States, among other actions, to promote continued research on their potential environmental impacts. The European Ocean Pact 4 announces a proposal for an ‘Ocean Act’ that will build on a revision of the Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP) Directive 5 and aim at strengthening and modernising maritime spatial planning as a strategic tool. The Commission is currently working on an impact assessment and a call for evidence will be published in 2026. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2018/2001/oj/eng. 2 https://energy.ec.europa.eu/document/download/fd9542e8-6eae-423a-a0edcc710a600473_en?filename=C_2025_4024_1_EN_ACT_part1_v7.pdf. 3 https://energy.ec.europa.eu/publications/communication-innovative-technologies-and-forms-renewableenergy-deployment_en. 4 https://oceans-and-fisheries.ec.europa.eu/european-ocean-pact_en. 5 https://maritime-spatial-planning.ec.europa.eu/.”
  EU policy on permitting for renewable energy projects · Off-shore renewables
• 2025-12-16 “E-004192/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission Both the European Union (EU) and the United Kingdom (UK) are bound by international commitments, including the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, which sets a target to protect at least 30 % of coastal and marine areas by 2030. Under the European Ocean Pact 1 , the Commission encourages Member States to implement actions to achieve these targets. While the Commission closely monitors UK measures to ensure compliance with the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) and to assess their potential socio-economic impacts on the EU fishing sector, the TCA does not prevent the UK from implementing conservation measures in its waters provided TCA obligations are respected. The specific situation described does not appear to fall within the scope of support provided under the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF), therefore no compensation can be provided in this context. The Commission supports Member States in preparing evidence-based responses to consultations launched by the UK, including those concerning the designation and management of Scottish Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) and the assessment of potential economic impacts on fisheries. It has also convened meetings between Member States and the Scottish Government to specifically discuss the proposed fisheries management measures within Scottish MPAs, both during the consultation phase and prior to their implementation. The Commission maintains a regular dialogue with the UK authorities on measures that may affect EU vessels, in order to ensure transparency, predictability and consistency with the provisions of the TCA. 1 The European Ocean Pact (COM/2025/281 final): https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=comnat:COM_2025_0281_FIN.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries · Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2025-12-08 “E-003830/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The European Parliament and the Council decided during the last Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) reform in 2013 that Member States should keep the prerogative of distributing or allocating fishing opportunities available to them and leave Member States certain discretion in choosing and designing systems and allocation methods and to adapt them to their specific needs. At the same time, the co-legislators decided to require Member States to include criteria of environmental, social and economic nature (Article 17 of the CFP Regulation). The Commission recently published a vade mecum 1 , which addresses certain challenges related to the systems and methods Member States are currently using for allocating fishing opportunities and the need to better align those systems with the requirements. The Commission is currently evaluating the CFP Regulation, looking at its functioning and impact and providing answers to the five key evaluation criteria: efficiency, effectiveness, relevance, coherence and EU added value. The evaluation will provide a good basis to make informed decisions on how best to continue implementing the policy and to develop the EU’s long-term vision for a resilient, competitive and sustainable fisheries and aquaculture sector with a 2040 perspective. Based on the ‘evaluation first principle’, the Commission is committed to always evaluate an existing legal basis before deciding on a possible revision. 1 Communication from the Commission for enhanced transparency and good governance in the allocation of fishing opportunities by Member States: A vade mecum on the application of Articles 16 and 17 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/6227/oj.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2025-12-05 “E-004186/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The European Ocean Observation Initiative will take the form of a Communication from the Commission, which aims to address i.a. the strategic autonomy of the European Union regarding the Global Ocean Observing System, development of innovative Ocean Observation technologies and market opportunities, the better coordination of the European marine knowledge assets and the operationalisation of the European Digital Twin Ocean. Additionally, through the Ocean Act, the Commission aims to address issues relevant to the coordination and governance of Ocean Observation in the Member States, through the creation of a governing structure for the European Ocean Observing System. These actions do not have a geographical dimension, and the Member States will be able to determine what areas they are observing. Member States also have to consider radionuclides in their marine strategies under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive 1 . While this issue mentioned by the Honourable Members will not be covered specifically under the Ocean Observation Initiative, radionuclide monitoring can already be conducted by Member States. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A02008L0056-20170607.”
  EU ocean policy
• 2025-11-28 “E-004069/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is aware of the difficulties faced by the fisheries sector and has ensured that the needs are covered in its proposals for the three main Funds under the new Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF). Activities that are currently covered under the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) can also be covered under the future National and Regional Partnership Plans of the Member States. EUR 2 billion is reserved as a minimum allocation for implementing some areas of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). These activities include support for sustainable fisheries and aquaculture, marine conservation and restoration, and the compensation of operators in crisis or exceptional circumstances, including cessation of fishing. This is just a minimum amount and Member States can top it up under their overall financial envelope to support additional needs, such as measures in favour of their fishery and aquaculture sectors and of their coastal communities. Additional investments could cover data collection, control, generational renewal, small scale fisheries, etc. Additional funds could be available from the proposed European Competitiveness Fund (EUR 451 billion) that aims to foster the competitiveness, sustainability and resilience of the fishery and aquaculture sector, and from the Global Europe Instrument (EUR 200 billion) that aims to strengthen partnerships with non-EU countries to support sustainable fisheries and the fight against illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing. The support available under the next MFF has the potential to go beyond the current EMFAF budget. It will be largely up to the Member States to make strategic choices to use at their best the funds available.”
  Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2025-11-24 “E-003932/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM) is a regional fisheries management organisation (RFMO) founded on principles of collaboration and solidarity, aimed to achieve the objectives of sustainable management and exploitation of shared marine living resources. The Commission's approach to ensuring compliance within the framework of the GFCM focuses on the promotion of sustainable practices, aligned with EU standards. This strategy seeks to balance enforcement with capacity-building support to enhance the effectiveness of this RFMO and the ownership and successful implementation of measures. In general, trade restrictive measures should represent a last resort. In 2025, the Commission's primary focus in the GFCM is on strengthening the compliance framework towards fully implementing agreed-upon measures for level playing field for all operators. Following the EU position endorsed by the Council for the upcoming annual session, the Commission will propose measures to consolidate the legal framework on compliance, including a proposal to adopt follow-up actions to deter non-compliance on reporting and control issues. It will, furthermore, bring forward cases of possible non-compliance with the GFCM rules, resulting from GFCM Joint Inspection Schemes.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2025-11-21 “P-004032/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The Commission acknowledges the importance of improving safety and energy efficiency on fishing vessels and encourages the exchange of best practices on this matter between Member States’ managing authorities. While Global Positioning System (GPS) and radar technology are on the one hand navigation tools that improve safety and navigation at sea, on the other hand they serve to improve operational efficiency in fishing vessels by enhancing, among others, the ability to locate and exploit fishery resources. These technologies can function as fishing effort-enhancing technologies, for example, by allowing the precise return to productive fishing grounds, detecting seabird aggregations linked to pelagic fisheries or allow to fish in adverse condition. For this reason, investments in GPS and radar on fishing vessels are considered ineligible pursuant to Article 13(b) of the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) Regulation 1 , as it is equipment that increases the ability of a fishing vessel to find fish. The EMFAF Regulation does not provide an exhaustive list of measures that can be supported. The type of actions that can be supported are described in the respective programmes available online 2 . Based on Article 63(1) of the Common Provisions Regulation 3 , it is primarily the responsibility of the national Managing Authority to evaluate and establish which type of investments to improve safety and energy efficiency on board fishing vessels fulfils eligibility requirements. The Commission remains at the disposal of the national managing authorities to provide further guidance and clarifications while ensuring a consistent and aligned approach to the interpretation of the EMFAF Regulation. 1 Regulation (EU) 2021/1139 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2021 establishing the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund and amending Regulation (EU) 2017/1004, OJ L 247, 13.7.2021, pp. 1–49. 2 https://oceans-and-fisheries.ec.europa.eu/funding/emfaf/emfaf-programmes-2021-2027_en. 3 Regulation (EU) 2021/1060 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2021 laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund Plus, the Cohesion Fund, the Just Transition Fund and the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund and financial rules for those and for the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund, the Internal Security Fund and the Instrument for Financial Support for Border Management and Visa Policy, OJ L 231, 30.6.2021, pp. 159–706.”
  Funding for fisheries and aquaculture · Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2025-11-17 “E-003931/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The permanent compliance assessment mechanism of the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM) is currently in pilot phase. The GFCM Commission will decide on the transition to the permanent phase. Therefore, no contracting parties, including the EU, are enabled to raise non-compliance issues falling under Category A in 2025. The Commission informs the European Parliament in line with the provisions of the Framework Agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the Commission. As per the current practice, the Commission sent the proposed EU position for the 2025 Annual Session of the GFCM on 15 September 2025 to the European Parliament’s Committee on Fisheries (PECH). It also provided an update on the ongoing preparations during the PECH Committee meeting on 16 October 2025.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2025-11-14 “P-004228/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The Commission bases its proposals on the scientific advice provided by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES). The Commission asked ICES about the data from the May 2025 survey in mid-October 2025. ICES informed that the data was being processed by the experts and that no compiled results were available. The quality-assured ICES survey will be available after the ICES internal review process, which is expected to take place in spring 2026. On 28 October 2025, the Council reached a political agreement on the fishing opportunities for the Baltic Sea for 2026. The Council agreed to set the total allowable catches for sprat at the fishing mortality consistent with achieving Maximum Sustainable Yield (F MSY ) point value indicated in the ICES advice of 28 May 2025.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2025-11-13 “P-004136/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The Commission understands the socio-economic importance of the Lampuki fisheries in Malta and is determined to ensure a level-playing field in the region. The EU participation to the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean international joint inspection scheme (IJIS) is delivering important results in identifying and deterring potential infringements at sea. In 2025, three suspected infringements from Tunisian flagged fishing vessels were detected in the Fishing Aggregating Device (FAD) common dolphinfish fishery, including one case of a vessel catching fish attracted by a FAD set by another Contracting Party vessel. The Commission sent a letter to Tunisia to follow-up on these cases, their reply is under analysis. The IJIS allow for the collaboration of EU and non-EU inspectors. The Commission notes that the Maltese administration was formally invited to deploy their patrol means in 2026 in international waters to join the efforts alongside the European Fisheries Control Agency (EFCA). This will allow for a more complete coverage, increasing the likelihood of stopping potential poachers on Maltese FADs. Moreover, the Pact for the Mediterranean 1 , adopted by the Commission on 16 October 2025, highlights the EU’s intention to work with non-EU countries to promote and implement international governance standards and develop a project to increase control and inspection capabilities of coastal States to fight against illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing. 1 The Pact for the Mediterranean One Sea, One Pact, One Future, Joint Communication to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, https://north-africa-middle-east-gulf.ec.europa.eu/joint-communication-pact-mediterranean_en.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries · Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2025-11-11 “E-002353/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The Commission recognises the importance of fisheries for the economies of the outermost regions, including La Réunion 1 . State aid is one potential tool to help renew and modernise the fleets in the outermost regions, a tool which is not available to other fleets in the Union, on condition that there is balance between the fishing capacity of the fleet and the available fishing opportunities 2 . In recognition of the unique circumstances of small vessels in the outermost regions, in 2024, the Commission adopted specific guidelines to assess the balance for the fleet segments in the outermost regions composed of vessels under 12 meters 3 . These guidelines introduce a number of temporary flexibilities in how these segments can demonstrate balance while still ensuring the sustainability of fishing activities. These temporary flexibilities apply in 2024 and 2025. As announced in the Ocean Pact, the Commission is currently undertaking a review of these temporary guidelines on the basis of the best available science, in the summer of 2025, to deliver a longer-term solution. These actions ensure that the maximum flexibility is provided to the relevant Member State authorities to draw on available data and demonstrate balance between fishing capacity and fishing opportunities to ensure sustainable fishing for the fleets concerned. 1 In line with Article 349 TFEU. 2 See Guidelines for State aid in the fishery and aquaculture sector (OJ 23.3.2023, C 107/1) and Article 22(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013. 3 (COM(2024) 223 final).”
  Funding for OCTs and outermost regions
• 2025-11-05 “E-003385/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The EU has a strategic interest in a stable and secure environment in the Mediterranean and is firmly committed to ensuring that all countries respect the jurisdiction, sovereignty and sovereign rights of EU Member States, in accordance with international law, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and customary international law. In this regard, coastal States have sovereignty over their territorial sea, including for taking necessary steps to prevent non-innocent passage. They may adopt laws and regulations related to innocent passage as per Article 21 UNCLOS. While the primary responsibility for the control of fishing activities in Member States’ waters falls on their authorities, the European Fisheries Control Agency (EFCA) coordinates Member States’ fisheries inspection activities in the Mediterranean through a dedicated Joint Deployment Plan, where the EFCA patrol vessel participates. It provides technical support to interested Member States through satellite monitoring and other activities.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2025-10-29 “E-003489/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is committed to good-neighbourly relations, expecting the avoidance of unilateral acts contrary to EU interests, international law and Member States’ sovereign rights. The Commission implements Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008 1 as and when applicable. Identifying a non-EU country as non-cooperating in the fight against illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing rests on examining the information foreseen in the Regulation in relation to that country’s international obligations (Article 31 et seq.). The information received by Member States does not substantiate the fulfilment of the relevant conditions to identify Türkiye as a non-cooperating country. Sightings trigger examinations by the Commission but become documented IUU cases only when complemented by Member State investigations. The Regulation applies without prejudice to provisions adopted by regional fisheries management organisations (RFMO) (Article 48.6). The General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM) and the International Commission on Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) are the relevant RFMOs which established a comprehensive framework to fight against IUU fishing and improve compliance with the established rules. Imports of fisheries products into the EU, including from Türkiye, are controlled by Member States under the EU catch certification scheme (Article 17 et seq.), to prevent products from IUU fishing from entering the EU market. This system will become fully digital on 10 January 2026 through IT CATCH, further harmonising import controls. The Commission works closely with the Member States to ensure the traceability of fishery products. Operational decisions and enforcement powers on imports remain with national authorities. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2008/1005/oj/eng.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2025-10-07 “E-003210/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission 1. The EU has a strategic interest in a stable and secure environment in the Mediterranean and continues to expect that all countries respect the jurisdiction, sovereignty and sovereign rights of all Member States, in accordance with international law, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Additionally, according to UNCLOS and customary international law, coastal States have sovereignty over their territorial sea, including for the adoption of laws and regulations related to fishing, innocent passage as well as to take the necessary steps to prevent non-innocent passage. 2. The European Fisheries Control Agency deploys a patrol vessel on a permanent basis in the Mediterranean. Its activities may be complemented by aircraft and satellite monitoring and support activities to national authorities if requested. 3. The Greek European Maritime Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) programme provides key support for the resilience and competitiveness of the fisheries sector and coastal communities. It supports modernisation and innovation to boost market competitiveness, training related to sustainable and innovative practices and projects aimed at diversifying income. A significant portion of the funds is allocated to fisheries control and enforcement, including enhancing surveillance of fishing activity and traceability, as well as addressing illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing. The Member States’ Managing Authorities may select for support operations under the scope, priorities and specific objectives of their national EMFAF programme and in line with applicable Union and national law. The Commission works with Greece to ensure its EMFAF programme meets sector-specific needs.”
  EU-Turkey relations · Asylum & border control
• 2025-09-16 “E-003052/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission 1. The proposed global funding structure of the new Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) is fundamentally different from the current one. It will be more streamlined, flexible and impactful. To this end, it has three main headings: (i) National and Regional Partnership Plans, (ii) Competitiveness Fund, and (iii) Global Europe Fund. In this new architecture, fisheries and aquaculture producers remain the lifeblood of Europe’s coastal communities and economies. Fisheries and ocean related policies are well reflected in all three major building blocks of the new MFF. Under the National and Regional Plans, EU fishers and aquaculture producers can have access to the big pot, through the national plans submitted by Member States. A ringfenced amount of EUR 2 billion has been specifically earmarked for support to the Common Fisheries Policy. In addition, there will be access to the EU Facility for data collection, fisheries control and digital solutions. Furthermore, the European Competitiveness Fund will support investments in sustainable blue economy, including fisheries, and Horizon Europe will support ocean observation, research and innovation. In addition, Global Europe will support EU Ocean diplomacy and strengthen EU’s capacity to fight against Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated (IUU) fishing. All these combined ensure a robust financial support for EU fishers, aquaculture producers and ocean related policies, with the potential to go significantly beyond the amounts foreseen under the current MFF. 2. Productive investments, fleet modernisation as well as support to energy transition of the European fleet, as well as compensation for cessation of fishing, can all be financed under the new MFF 1 . 1 As in the previous programming periods, this type of public support is subject to compliance with the Common fisheries policy and World Trade Organisation rules.”
  Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2025-09-05 “E-002679/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission Under the principle of subsidiarity and shared management, the Commission has a supervisory role to monitor the implementation of the European funds in support of fisheries and aquaculture 1 , and the national authorities of Member States manage them. Member States, including Portugal, have set up a management and control system (MCS) that must comply with EU rules and regulations. Member States must ensure that their MCS functions effectively for the implementation of programmes. The selection and control of supported projects also fall under the responsibility of the national authorities, which decide on the selection criteria and specific conditions for support in line with their national programmes under the EU funds. For specific information on the implementation of aquaculture projects in Algarve, the Portuguese Managing Authority should be contacted 2 . The performance of the European Maritime Fisheries and Aquaculture fund in Member States is assessed based on indicators. Member States report on progress towards established milestones and targets in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2021/1060 3 . The Commission established a monitoring and evaluation framework for this purpose. The Commission carries out audits of Member States’ management and control systems in accordance with its audit strategy and audit plan based on a risk-assessment 4 . If an irregularity, including bankruptcy, leads to the misuse or loss of EU funds, Member States are required to take corrective action, recover the funds, and adjust their accounts accordingly. If the Member States fail to take corrective actions, the Commission may apply financial corrections by reducing support from the Funds 5 . 1 European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (2014-2020) and the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (2021-2027). 2 https://mar2030.pt/#contacts. 3 Regulation (EU) 2021/1060 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2021 laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund Plus, the Cohesion Fund, the Just Transition Fund and the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund and financial rules for those and for the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund, the Internal Security Fund and the Instrument for Financial Support for Border Management and Visa Policy, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/1060/oj/eng. 4 Article 70 of Regulation (EU) 2021/1060. 5 Article 104 of Regulation (EU) 2021/1060.”
  Funding for fisheries and aquaculture · Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2025-09-03 “E-002840/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission 1. While the Commission represents the EU in the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) negotiations, it is the prerogative of the Member States to distribute domestically its share of the EU quota. In accordance with Article 17 of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) Regulation 1 , when allocating fishing opportunities, Member States must use transparent and objective criteria, including those of an environmental, social and economic nature. Moreover, Regulation (EU) 2023/2053 2 provides for additional flexibility for quota allocation to small-scale vessels. The Commission therefore considers that Member States’ administrations are best placed to assess the benefits of domestic fishing opportunities’ allocation. 2. Sustainability is pursued under economic, social as well as environmental pillars. As such, protecting the livelihoods, tradition, culture, and community associated with small-scale fisheries is of vital importance. Member States have the responsibility to tailor the appropriate support for their small-scale fisheries, depending on their needs. This includes the allocation of quota, and the tailored support offered in the national European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) 3 programme. EMFAF regulation allows Member States to offer support up to 100% of costs for small-scale fisheries. 3. Member States are best placed to identify how traditional fishing fits into their national sustainable blue economy model. EMFAF provides opportunities to support and develop traditional fisheries under the Sustainable Blue Economy objective of the fund, in particular through Community Lead Local Development (CLLD). 1 Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy, amending Council Regulations (EC) No 1954/2003 and (EC) No 1224/2009 and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 2371/2002 and (EC) No 639/2004 and Council Decision 2004/585/EC (OJ L 354, 28.12.2013, pp. 22–61). 2 Regulation (EU) 2023/2053 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 September 2023 establishing a multiannual management plan for bluefin tuna in the eastern Atlantic and the Mediterranean, amending Regulations (EC) No 1936/2001, (EU) 2017/2107, and (EU) 2019/833 and repealing Regulation (EU) 2016/1627 (OJ L 238, 27.9.2023, pp. 1–64). 3 Regulation (EU) 2021/1139 of 7 July 2021 establishing the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund and amending Regulation (EU) 2017/1004.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries · Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2025-08-25 “E-002721/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission 1. As recalled in the advice from the Long Distance Fisheries Advisory Council and Market Advisory Council on the urgent need for effective implementation of import control rules across Member States, the European Court of Auditors (ECA) recommended in 2022 that the Commission needs to a) monitor that import checks by Member States are sufficient to address risks and b) take the necessary actions to remedy any shortcomings - both by 2026. This Commission accepted the recommendation. Over the past years, the Commission intensified its work with Member States to improve the tools available to them when performing checks and verifications on the EU border, to reinforce and harmonise import controls. Moreover, the Commission is currently finalising the process of CATCH implementation, the EU IT system for submission of catch certificates and related documents, for its obligatory use by EU operators and EU authorities by 10 January 2026. CATCH will be a key tool to ensure that no fishery products stemming from illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing (IUU) enter the EU market. The Commission will analyse the situation, after the use of CATCH becomes compulsory, and assess if other actions are needed. 2. The Commission does not hesitate to launch an infringement procedure, as recently done in the case of Portugal 1 , when a Member State fails to properly implement and enforce EU fisheries laws. However, infringement procedures are only one of the Commission’s tools to ensure Member States comply with EU rules. The Commission closely monitors the implementation of the obligation on minimum legal inspection standards by Member States and is in dialogue with them to identify the reasons for the low number of inspections reported. 1 (INFR(2025)2072), https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/inf_25_1241.”
  Import of agri-food products in the EU · Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2025-08-25 “E-002737/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The European Ocean Pact 1 , adopted in June 2025, announced for 2026 a Commission communication on EU fisheries external action to strengthen international ocean governance. Among its key actions is a new generation of Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreements (SFPAs) that aligns with the EU’s regional strategies and priorities. The purpose of this initiative is to rethink the existing framework of SFPAs, including a reassessment of regional approaches and the criteria for the establishment of any new SFPAs. Until 2026, the Commission will focus on developing the new generation of SFPAs and concluding already planned negotiations. The Commission does not plan to engage in negotiations for new SFPAs with new partners for the time being. On 7 July 2025, the Commission published a call for evidence seeking views on how EU external action can strengthen the sustainability of EU external fisheries and promote enhanced governance. It is available on the Commission ‘Have Your Say’ 2 website. The deadline for submissions is 15 September 2025. The feedback received in the call for evidence and through targeted consultations of stakeholders in the Fisheries and Ocean Dialogues will complement the input received in the public consultation on the evaluation of the common fisheries policy (January to April 2025) and will inform the development of the new generation of SFPAs. Since this work is ongoing, the Commission cannot yet offer more information on the exact specifications. The Commission commissioned an evaluation study of the SFPAs covering data from 20152020. This study 3 is available on the Publications Office website of the EU and will inform the development of a new generation of SFPAs. The Commission will not conduct an additional study for this purpose. 1 https://oceans-and-fisheries.ec.europa.eu/european-ocean-pact_en. 2 https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/14633-EU-strategy-for-fisheriesexternal-action_en. 3 https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/21927e4c-2f4d-11ee-9e98-01aa75ed71a1.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries · Fisheries access for developing countries
• 2025-08-20 “E-002403/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission Under Regulation (EC) 1005/2008 1 , any unauthorised fishing activity of third-country fishing vessels into a Member State's territorial sea constitutes illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing. The Member State concerned is primarily responsible for monitoring waters, inspecting suspicious vessels, and applying effective, proportionate sanctions. Rigorous verification of Turkish catch certificates and targeted port inspections further prevent IUU products from entering the EU market. The Commission remains closely engaged with the Greek authorities. Greek data shows a notable peak in vessel sightings in late summer 2024, with significantly fewer incidents in early 2025. The EU supports national efforts. The European Fisheries Control Agency (EFCA) coordinates joint deployment plans in the Eastern Mediterranean including using the patrol vessel ‘Ocean Sentinel’, aerial surveillance, and satellite imagery. Collaboration among EFCA, the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA), and Frontex ensures swift information exchange. The European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) supports advanced monitoring equipment and inspector training. The EU seeks a stable Eastern Mediterranean and cooperative relations with Türkiye, emphasising good neighbourliness, respect for international law, and sovereignty under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The Commission continuously urges Türkiye to align its fisheries control with EU standards and cooperate constructively in investigations. The Commission has also emphasised to Türkiye the importance of ratifying UNCLOS. 1 Council Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008 of 29 September 2008 establishing a Community system to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, amending Regulations (EEC) No 2847/93, (EC) No 1936/2001 and (EC) No 601/2004 and repealing Regulations (EC) No 1093/94 and (EC) No 1447/1999, OJ L 286, 29.10.2008.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries · Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2025-08-18 “P-002982/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission In light of the provisions of the revised Fisheries Control Regulation (Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 1 as amended by Regulation (EU) 2023/2842 2 ), the Commission decided on 25 July 2024 to close the five infringement procedures concerning control and enforcement of the landing obligation. Regulation (EU) 2023/2842 introduced new rules aimed at strengthening the effective control and enforcement of the landing obligation. These include enhanced and digitalised systems for catch recording and reporting, a reinforced sanctioning regime for cases of noncompliance, as well as mandatory installation by 10 January 2028 of operating remote electronic monitoring (REM) systems on board, including closed-circuit television (CCTV), and may include other instruments and/or equipment, for catching vessels of 18 metres in length overall or more which pose a high risk of non-compliance with the landing obligation. The amendment of the EU fisheries control framework warranted a reassessment of the five infringement cases ensuring consistency between the Commission’s enforcement actions and the amended EU legislative framework. The European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund helps to implement the fisheries control system and supports investments in digital tools such as REM and CCTV. The Commission will follow up with all Member States on the implementation of the amended Fisheries Control Regulation and of the Common Fisheries Policy Regulation (Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 3 ), as it is vital to adopt the necessary effective control means for monitoring compliance and implementing the landing obligation. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2009/1224/oj/eng. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/2842/oj/eng. 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2013/1380/oj/eng.”
  Funding for fisheries and aquaculture · Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2025-08-14 “E-002568/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP) Directive requires Member States to plan their seas sustainably, utilising an ecosystem-based approach 1 and promoting the coexistence of various activities, including fisheries. It promotes the coexistence of different activities, like fisheries and wind energy projects. As part of this framework, the Commission encourages Member States to consider interactions between various marine uses and to engage local stakeholders early when developing or revising maritime plans. The Commission actively supports studies, projects and regional cooperation on co-existence and mitigation measures of offshore renewable energy developments: - since 2023, Horizon Europe has funded projects related to social and environmental interactions of wind energy 2 ; - the European Blue Forum, launched in 2023 3 , promotes a balance between economic growth, social well-being, and environmental sustainability; - the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) recently delivered an advice on the interactions between fisheries and offshore renewable energy production 4 ; - following a recommendation from the European Court of Auditors Special Report 22/2023 on Offshore renewable energy in the EU 5 , the Commission is carrying out a study on employment, skills and social implications of offshore renewable energy in the EU, expected by the end of 2026. On 1 July 2025, the Commissioner for Fisheries and Oceans hosted an Implementation Dialogue on the MSP Directive 6 . The Commission’s reply to the advice from the North Western Waters Advisory Council will be publicly available in due time on their website 7 . 1 according to the Marine Strategy Framework Directive, it means that the collective pressure of all human activities does not prevent good environmental status and sustainable use of marine goods and services by present and future generations. 2 https://cordis.europa.eu/programme/id/HORIZON_HORIZON-CL5-2024-D3-02-08. 3 https://maritime-spatial-planning.ec.europa.eu/european-blue-forum. 4 https://iceslibrary.figshare.com/articles/report/EU_request_on_economic_social_and_ecological_impacts_of_offshore_win d_farms_OWFs_and_floating_offshore_wind_farms_FLOWs_on_fisheries_in_the_Baltic_Sea_Celtic_Seas_and _Greater_North_Sea/28759328?file=53600990. 5 https://www.eca.europa.eu/en/publications?ref=SR-2023-22. 6 https://oceans-and-fisheries.ec.europa.eu/events/implementation-dialogue-implementation-maritime-spatialplanning-directive-2025-07-01_en. 7 https://www.nwwac.org/publications.26.html.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries · Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2025-08-07 “E-002536/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission 1. Total allowable catches are based on the best scientific advice. However, quota disputes, including unilateral increases by certain third countries, are leading to overfishing and negatively affecting mackerel stocks. The EU is actively engaged in consultations with other coastal States to conclude comprehensive and balanced sharing arrangements, and contrary to other partners it has kept its quota stable. Moreover, the Commission advocates coherence across policies, including trade. The review of Regulation (EU) No 1026/2012 1 on measures against unsustainable fishing by third countries, on which the European Parliament and the Council have reached a political agreement in May 2025, is a key step. 2. The Commission fully recognises mackerel’s ecological and socio-economic importance. Member States can use their programmes under the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) to support affected fishers and strengthen sector resilience. 3. Under EMFAF, small-scale fisheries benefit from exceptional support, with almost all related projects eligible for 100% public funding. The Commission supports their resilience through decarbonisation, sustainable practices, and by promoting local value chains. Under Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 2 , Member States can grant preferential access to waters up to 12 nautical miles and determine national quota allocations. Efforts to support small-scale fisheries also focus on improved safety and accident data, social indicators, and strengthening Producer Organisations. Small-scale fisheries will also be the focus of the next implementation dialogue the Commissioner for Fisheries and Oceans will host on 24 November 2025. 1 OJ L 316, 14.11.2012, p. 34. 2 OJ L 354, 28.12.2013, p. 22–61.”
  Funding for fisheries and aquaculture · Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2025-07-23 “E-001788/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission 1. The European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) 1 supports the fisheries sector, notably by fostering sustainable fishing in the long term, enhancing the sector’s competitiveness and supporting diversification initiatives to further strengthen the sector’s resilience. In specific cases, EMFAF can also compensate fishers for the temporary cessation of fishing activities. The Italian authorities can consider mobilising resources from the Italian EMFAF Programme to support the fisheries sector. 2. The General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM) provides scientific advice for shared stocks in the Strait of Sicily. Its latest evaluations, including data up to 2023, note the improved status of the European hake and deep water rose shrimp stocks 2 , both sustainably exploited with increasing biomass. The improved status of the giant red shrimp in the Strait of Sicily 3 was also noted, although its fishing mortality remains above the target value despite increased biomass. On the other hand, the small pelagic stocks in the Strait of Sicily lack recent evaluations and are unlikely at Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY). The Commission recalls that the Fisheries Restricted Areas (FRA) in the North of Strait of Sicily, in place since 2019 and established in the nursery areas, contribute to the sustainable exploitation of the deep water rose shrimp and of the Mediterranean hake stock 4 . The monitoring of the FRAs falls also under the Joint Inspection Scheme in the Strait of Sicily, supported by the European Fisheries Control Agency 5 . Further benefits to the demersal stocks could derive from the establishment of FRAs in the Southern part of the Strait of Sicily in line with Resolution 6 GFCM/47/2024/1. 1 Regulation (EU) 2021/1139 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2021 establishing the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund and amending Regulation (EU) 2017/1004. 2 Geographical Subareas (GSAs) 12-16. 3 Geographical Subareas (GSAs) 12-16, 21w. 4 This is the only hake stock having reached MSY in the Mediterranean. 5 Recommendation GFCM/45/2022/15 on an international joint inspection and surveillance scheme outside the waters under national jurisdiction in the Strait of Sicily (geographical subareas 12 to 16), amending Recommendation GFCM/41/2017/8 and repealing Recommendation GFCM/42/2018/6. 6 Resolution GFCM/47/2024/1 on a roadmap for a joint project to collect all required and identified scientific evidence to provide a basis for the discussion of potential additional measures for the long-term portion of the management plan for demersal fisheries in the Strait of Sicily, in response to Recommendation GFCM/45/2022/4.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries · Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2025-07-18 “E-002194/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) 1 can support compensation for the temporary cessation of fishing activities caused by the implementation of certain conservation measures, or in case of exceptional events causing a significant disruption of markets. Regarding energy transition, EMFAF can support the development of new solutions for the fleet through innovation and testing of new technology as well as investments in technology to modernise the fleet. The issue of energy transition in the fisheries and aquaculture sectors will remain central in the future. The Commission strongly encourages Member States to set up financial instruments through their EMFAF programmes as they offer a business-friendly approach for productive investments. Moreover, following the Communication from the Commission on the Energy Transition of the EU Fisheries and Aquaculture sector 2 , the Commission is continuously exploring with other institutions, including the European Investment Fund and European Investment Bank, possible ways to mobilise and leverage private financing for the development and adaptation of new clean-energy technology in vessels and aquaculture sites. At the same time, the Commission continues to work in direct collaboration with the Energy Transition Partnership in EU fisheries and aquaculture, that is currently developing recommendations for the energy transition in the sector. The outcome of this work, including the forthcoming recommendations, will be used for shaping the Commission’s roadmap on the energy transition for EU fisheries and aquaculture to be published by the Commission in the first half of 2026. 1 Regulation (EU) 2021/1139 of 7 July 2021 establishing the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund and amending Regulation (EU) 2017/1004. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52023DC0100.”
  Funding for fisheries and aquaculture · Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2025-07-18 “E-002263/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission 1. The roadmaps are a suggestion on how the Commission envisages that Member States could plan their activities with the objectives of the Marine Action Plan (MAP) in mind. Their submission by the Member States is not a legal requirement. Nevertheless, progress has been made by both Member States and Commission towards the objectives of the MAP. The Commission is in constant dialogue with the Member States to plan and adopt the most appropriate fisheries management measures for the sustainable use of marine resources, even in the absence of a national roadmap. 2. The Commission continuously works with Member States via the implementation of their European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) national programmes, where EUR 50 million has been committed to support gear innovation and bycatch reduction, promote energy efficiency and marine protected areas designation and management. In 2023, the Commission delivered a workshop on funding, and since then has made available over EUR 7.5 million under EMFAF for the development of blue economy skills and sustainable maritime careers. The Commission has also been supporting multi-stakeholder partnerships under the Smart Specialisation Sustainable Blue Economy Platform, developing innovative solutions and future careers in sectors such as the blue bio-economy and smart circular aquaculture. 3. The aim of the Ocean Pact is to bring together all ocean related policies, including the MAP. The implementation of the MAP continues notably through joint dialogue with Member States environment and fisheries ministries, as well as stakeholders, under the specifically established Joint Special Group.”
  EU ocean policy · Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2025-07-18 “E-002328/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission 1. The Commission is working to address the issue of non-indigenous species (NIS) in the Mediterranean within the framework of the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM) and the Invasive Alien Species Regulation 1 . The GFCM’s 2030 Strategy recognises the priority of addressing NIS. Several pilot projects and research programmes have been developed to collect data and establish mitigation measures. Due to the regional nature of the expansion of NIS, the GFCM established a regional NIS observatory in the Eastern Mediterranean to push forward data collection and information sharing with the intent to expand its activity to the entire region. Also, Member States under the Marine strategy framework directive (MSFD) set up monitoring programs and take appropriate measures to reach a good environmental status for NIS. 2. The European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) can be used to finance campaigns and aid in raising awareness among fishers, and the public about the risks and commercial possibilities associated with NIS. Additionally, the GFCM observatory aims to contribute to promoting awareness and help share best practices. 3. The EMFAF is already being used for actions related to mitigating populations of NIS. The Commission cooperates with national authorities that are responsible to include such actions in their national EMFAF programmes. Various Mediterranean Member States have put in place measures and solutions to deal with NIS. This includes potential compensation to fishers, as exemplified by Cyprus, where a scheme has been put in place to compensate fishers for their pufferfish catches 2 . Similarly, Greece has funded innovative projects which help turn this threat into economic opportunity 3 . 1 Regulation (EU) No 1143/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2014 on the prevention and management of the introduction and spread of invasive alien species, OJ L 317, 4.11.2014, p. 35. 2 www.moa.gov.cy/emfaf. 3 This Greek example of turning pufferfish into fishmeal is particularly relevant here: https://oceans-andfisheries.ec.europa.eu/news/turning-toxic-pufferfish-invader-aquaculture-feed-2023-1222_en#:~:text=The%20pufferfish%2C%20originating%20from%20the,to%20have%20no%20commercial%20v alue.https://oceans-and-fisheries.ec.europa.eu/news/turning-toxic-pufferfish-invader-aquaculture-feed-2023-1222_en.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries · Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2025-07-17 “E-002022/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission 1. The EU Aquaculture campaign is supported by both the European Parliament 1 and the Council of the European Union 2 . It is financed through the general budget of the EU 3 , and namely the European Maritime Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund). The campaign has been developed in collaboration with Member States and the Aquaculture Advisory Council. Its material has been made available to all Member States in view of its use for national campaigns. Member States have taken co-ownership for dissemination at national level. 2. The total budget allocated for the campaign is approximately EUR 910 000, which encompasses all contracts signed for the various components of the campaign. However, it is possible that the final cost may be lower. The Commission will be able to provide an update on the campaign's total expenditure once all final reports and budgets have been submitted. 3. As it stands, the budget is broken down as follows: Strategic and creative concepts & development of promotional assets: EUR 116 383; Production of social media assets, video testimonials of aquaculture producers, adaptation of visuals of the campaign to the needs of Member States and translation: EUR 497 303; Influencers’ campaign, media dissemination (social media) and outreach strategy EUR 201 921; Campaign website, launch event of the campaign in Brussels on 25 March 2025 and monitoring of results: EUR 94 362. 1 See paragraph 28 of European Parliament resolution of 4 October 2022 on striving for a sustainable and competitive EU aquaculture: the way forward (2021/2189(INI)): https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52022IP0334. 2 See paragraph 18 of the Council Conclusions of 18 July 2022 on the EU's new aquaculture strategic guidelines: https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-11496-2022-INIT/en/pdf. 3 European Maritime Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund - Operational expenditure under direct and indirect management Budget line 08 04 02.”
  Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2025-07-03 “E-2004/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission 1. The Commission is aware of the concerns raised by several EU producers, including aquaculture farmers in Galicia, regarding the exemption of prepared and preserved fishery and aquaculture products from mandatory origin labelling. It is also aware that these local producers see the exemption as a potential challenge for the competitiveness of their products. 2. The Commission is committed to ensuring transparency and fairness in the market for fishery and aquaculture products and these objectives are reflected in the ongoing evaluation of the Common Market Organisation (CMO) Regulation 1 . Among others, the aim is to assess whether the existing labelling rules provide consumers with adequate information and whether additional requirements are needed. The Commission will continue to engage with stakeholders, including Member States and industry representatives, to assess the need for changes to the existing labelling requirements and will consider the concerns of EU producers as part of the ongoing evaluation. While it cannot prejudge the outcome of the evaluation of the CMO Regulation, the Commission remains committed to ensuring that the labelling rules are effective and fit for purpose. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2013/1308/oj/eng.”
  Food labelling harmonisation at EU level · EU policy on country of origin food labelling
• 2025-07-02 “E-001732/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The communication on the marine action plan (AP) seeks enhanced cooperation amongst all the stakeholders involved to achieve the most sustainable use of fishery resources while minimising the impact of activities in the framework of existing legislation. The roadmaps are a suggestion on how the Commission envisages that Member States could plan their activities with the objectives of the AP in mind. As identified in the in the mid-term review of the 8th Environment action programme 1 , few Member States delivered roadmaps. Their submission by the Member States is not a legal requirement. The Commission is directly involved in constant dialogue with the Member States to adopt the most appropriate fisheries management measures for the sustainable use of marine resources. Progress has been made on both the Commission and Member State sides. The absence of roadmaps for some Member States should not detract from the progress towards the objectives proposed by the AP. The Commission will continue to engage in constructive dialogue with Member States to adopt robust measures that are fit for purpose, with or without a national roadmap in place. Dialogues include Member States through several Commission expert groups 2 , as well as other stakeholders in the framework of the Joint Special Group established under the AP. Following the outcomes of these groups, and taking into account other relevant policy developments, the Commission will continue to monitor the situation in the context of whether further measures or proposals are necessary to work towards the objectives of the AP. In addition, the Commission now counts on the Nature Restoration Regulation 3 , with clear targets and objectives, to complement the ambition of the Action Plan. 1 https://environment.ec.europa.eu/strategy/environment-action-programme-2030_en. 2 Such as the Member States’ Fisheries Regional Groups, the Marine Expert Group and the Marine Strategy Coordination Group. 3 Regulation (EU) 2024/1991 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2024 on nature restoration and amending Regulation (EU) 2022/869, OJ, 29.7.2024.”
  Nature protection and restoration in the EU · Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2025-07-02 “E-001824/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission 1. The EU illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing Regulation’s 1 main pillars (IUU catch certification and dialogues) serve to prevent IUU fish from entering the EU market, thus contributing to implement a level playing field for legitimate operators within the EU and outside. Also, the revised Control Regulation 2 enhances the control of the supply chain and traceability requirements of fishery and aquaculture products, including imports. The catch certificate ensures legality of imported fish. The revised IUU Regulation obliges EU importers and authorities, as of 10 January 2026, to use CATCH, an EU IT system digitising the paper-based system, to stop fraudulent use of catch certificates, ease controls and risk identification, and harmonise import controls, enhancing the level playing field for EU operators and defending our market from unfair competition. The EU also promotes its standards, including on fisheries control, in international fora such as the Regional Fisheries Management Organisations or in its relations with neighbouring fishing nations. 2. The EU has strict controls on imported food to ensure high consumer protection and food safety. In other areas, consumer awareness of the higher standards of EU production can give a competitive edge to EU aquaculture over products from third countries not complying with similar standards 3 . The level playing field regarding imported fisheries and aquaculture products is also part of the evaluation 4 of the CFP Regulation 5 . As regards imports of aquaculture products, the Commission can use trade defence instruments, among other things targeting subsidies, to protect the EU single market from trade distortions 6 . Anti-subsidy measures are already in place on imports of trout from Türkiye. 1 Council Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008 of 29 September 2008 establishing a Community system to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, amending Regulations (EEC) No 2847/93, (EC) No 1936/2001 and (EC) No 601/2004 and repealing Regulations (EC) No 1093/94 and (EC) No 1447/1999: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2008/1005/oj/eng. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:L_202302842. 3 This is one of the key objectives of the ongoing communication campaign on EU aquaculture. 4 https://oceans-and-fisheries.ec.europa.eu/news/commission-opens-public-consultation-common-fisheriespolicy-regulation-2025-01-27_en. 5 Including the Common Market Organisation. 6 In line with the World Trade Organization’s rules on subsidies.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries · Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2025-07-01 “E-001621/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The report 1 in question originates from a working group (WG) acting under the facilities of the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF), which gathers national experts and cannot be considered as endorsed by the STECF. A disclaimer states that ‘this report does not necessarily reflect the view of the STECF and the European Commission and in no way anticipates the Commission’s future policy in this area’. Such a report has to undergo the scientific peer-review process conducted by STECF, which then leads to the actual STECF opinion 2 . STECF reviewed the WG report’s conclusions and validated certain but not all figures provided by the national experts. STECF presented figures on the loss of fishing days (-16%) and landings (-20%) as a total for the fleets of Germany, Ireland, Spain and France but stated that ‘the reduction in effort and landings cannot be considered as a final outcome of the analysis’, as they can result from ‘other effects that could have an effect on the socio-economic impact of the closures (e.g. fleet size, costs, markets or fishing opportunities).’ The statement ‘any long-term solution will need to safeguard vulnerable ecosystems and the communities that have sustainably fished these waters’ comes from the WG’s report and has not been validated by STECF. The STECF opinion remains inconclusive on the quantification of the socio-economic impacts of the vulnerable marine ecosystem closures on the fleets at local level. More work is therefore necessary to quantify these impacts and the Commission is reflecting on the best way forward. 1 VMEs socio-economic impact assessment (EWG 24-09): https://stecf.jrc.ec.europa.eu/documents/d/stecf/stecf_24-09. 2 Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF), 78th Plenary report (STECF-PLEN-2501): https://stecf.jrc.ec.europa.eu/documents/d/stecf/stecf_plen_25-01.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2025-06-20 “E-001507/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission 1. The European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) supports the smallscale fleet by offering support at up to 100% of their investment costs. This includes diversifying activities to support income, like fishing tourism, modernising vessels, mitigating impacts from climate change, invasive species and costs due to exceptional events, or enhancing fishers' skills and income possibilities through training. The Commission works with Greece to ensure the Greek EMFAF programme meets sector-specific needs, with the Greek Managing Authority being responsible for allocating funding to projects that align with national priorities, including those in the context of the question. 2. The Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) allows measures to be adapted to regional needs with the involvement of stakeholders within Advisory Councils such as the Mediterranean Advisory Council. Multiannual Plans adopted through the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM) provide targeted measures to fisheries in the region and the Mediterranean Regulation 1 addresses the unique characteristics and requirements of the small traditional fishing fleets. The Commission works at GFCM level to ensure that the specificities of small-scale fisheries, as outlined in the Regional Plan of Action for SmallScale Fisheries in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea, are taken into consideration. The Commission is currently evaluating the CFP Regulation 2 . The results, expected in early 2026, will be instrumental in the future development of the policy and regulatory framework, including of small-scale fisheries. In this context, the Commission plans organising an implementation dialogue on small-scale coastal fisheries in November. 1 Council Regulation (EC) No 1967/2006 of 21 December 2006 concerning management measures for the sustainable exploitation of fishery resources in the Mediterranean Sea, amending Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1626/94. 2 Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy, amending Council Regulations (EC) No 1954/2003 and (EC) No 1224/2009 and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 2371/2002 and (EC) No 639/2004 and Council Decision 2004/585/EC.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries · Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2025-06-18 “E-0001559/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission In 2024, the Commission received, also in the context of parliamentary question E-000814/2024, information on possible widespread illegal fishing and commercialisation of juvenile species in Italy, including sardina pilchardus. Consequently, the Commission contacted the Italian authorities to obtain information on the control and enforcement of such non-compliances, including on seizures. The Commission also received recently a complaint on the same issue, which is being analysed. The application of the European and national rules on sanctioning, including administrative actions or criminal proceedings, is an important contribution to sustainable fishing. Article 89 of Regulation (EC) 1224/2009 1 requires Member States, inter alia, to ensure that sanctions are ‘capable of producing results proportionate to the seriousness of such infringements, thereby effectively discouraging further offences […].’ The Commission considers as serious issue any failure to implement the Common Fisheries Policy and would act fittingly upon evidence that sanctions do not meet the requirements set out in the legislation. This includes ensuring the application of the new and strengthened sanctioning rules recently introduced by Regulation (EU) 2023/2842 2 that will apply from January 2026. 1 OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv%3AOJ.L_.2009.343.01.0001.01.ENG&toc=OJ%3AL%3A2009%3A343%3ATO C. 2 Regulation (EU) 2023/2842 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 November 2023 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009, and amending Council Regulations (EC) No 1967/2006 and (EC) No 1005/2008 and Regulations (EU) 2016/1139, (EU) 2017/2403 and (EU) 2019/473 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards fisheries control.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2025-06-16 “E-001301/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission 1. Greece has taken steps towards ensuring compliance, i.e. towards finalising, adopting and communicating to the Commission its maritime spatial plan, but these are still to be finalised. The Commission is currently in a dialogue with Greece to support and ensure compliance with the judgment. 2. Pursuant to Article 260(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Greece is required to take the necessary measures to comply with the above-mentioned Court judgment. Concretely, Greece is required to establish its maritime spatial plan and to send copies of that plan to the Commission and any other Member States concerned. The Commission will continue to closely monitor the situation.”
  Decarbonisation of maritime transport · EU ocean policy
• 2025-06-12 “P-001602/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission On 27 February 2025, the Court of Justice ruled that, by not having drawn up a maritime spatial plan by 31 March 2021 and by not having sent copies of that plan to the Commission and the other Member States concerned, Greece has failed to comply with its obligations under Directive 2014/89/EU 1 to adopt and communicate to the Commission its maritime spatial plan (Court judgment in Case C-128/24). Greece has taken steps towards ensuring compliance, i.e. towards finalising, adopting and communicating to the Commission its maritime spatial plan, but these are still to be finalised. The Commission is currently in a dialogue with Greece to support and ensure compliance with the judgment and will continue to closely monitor the situation. It is to be noted that no fine is currently running against Greece following the Court judgment. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2014/89/oj/eng.”
  EU ocean policy · Environmental crimes and justice
• 2025-06-11 “E-001562/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission One of the main pillars of Council Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008 (the IUU Regulation) 1 is action against EU nationals who have engaged in or supported illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing. The provisions regarding EU nationals cover both the prevention and sanction of support or engagement in IUU fishing by EU nationals. More specifically, Article 39(1) of the IUU Regulation prohibits EU nationals from supporting and engaging in IUU fishing. It further provides a non-exhaustive list of examples of such engagement and support, mentioning in particular engagement on board or as operators or beneficial owners of fishing vessels included in the EU IUU vessel list. However, the general prohibition to EU nationals from engaging in or supporting IUU fishing is not limited to involvement of IUU-listed vessels but IUU fishing activities in general. In addition, the obligation of Member States under Article 39(3) of the IUU Regulation to take action against EU nationals relates to those that have been identified as supporting or engaged in IUU fishing in general, not only to those that are involved with IUU-listed vessels. The Commission is working with Member States to provide support in the implementation of Article 40(1) of the IUU Regulation regarding the identification of information of EU nationals pertaining to legal, beneficial or financial interests in, or control of, fishing vessels flagged to a third country which they hold and the names of the vessels concerned. 1 Council Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008 of 29 September 2008 establishing a Community system to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, amending Regulations (EEC) No 2847/93, (EC) No 1936/2001 and (EC) No 601/2004 and repealing Regulations (EC) No 1093/94 and (EC) No 1447/1999 (OJ L 286, 29.10.2008, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2008/1005/oj).”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2025-05-27 “E-001307/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission 1. The Commission is currently not considering a revision of the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund 1 (EMFAF). The EMFAF can already support the development and testing of new and innovative solutions for the fleet 2 , as well as certain investments to modernise the fleet 3 . Investments in the fleet are subject to strict conditionality, to ensure that there are no resulting harmful subsidies. Given its small budget, the EMFAF can achieve better collective benefits by incentivising, facilitating testing and development, and bringing technology to market, rather than investing in the renewal of a small number of privately owned vessels. 2. The Marine Action Plan 4 promotes sustainable fishing practices with less environmental impact, in accordance with current legislation 5 and policy objectives. It is a component of the European Green Deal and focuses on the implementation of existing legislation 6 . 3. The Invasive Alien Species (IAS) Regulation 7 establishes a coordinated EU-wide framework for action to address the adverse impacts of IAS. The marine dimension of IAS can be complemented with more specific EU laws 8 . In the Mediterranean, the EU works closely with the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM), developing pilot projects and research programmes to address IAS. The GFCM is setting-up a non-indigenous species (NIS) observatory, aimed at data collection and information sharing. Member States can use their EMFAF programme to support monitoring, mitigation and surveillance of NIS. 1 Regulation (EU) 2021/1139 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2021 establishing the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund and amending Regulation (EU) 2017/1004. 2 E.g. prototype vessels and gears. 3 Improving gear selectivity, safety on board, energy efficiency. 4 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, The European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions ‘EU Action Plan: Protecting and restoring marine ecosystems for sustainable and resilient fisheries’, COM(2023) 102 final. 5 Such as Regulation (EU) 2024/1991 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2024 on nature restoration and amending Regulation (EU) 2022/869; and Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy. 6 In this respect, work is expected to continue on implementing the marine action plan. 7 Regulation (EU) No 1143/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2014 on the prevention and management of the introduction and spread of invasive alien species, OJ L 317, 4.11.2014, p. 35–55. 8 Such as the Regulation (EC) No 708/2007 of 11 June 2007 concerning use of alien and locally absent species in aquaculture; or the Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 establishing a framework for community action in the field of marine environmental policy (Marine Strategy Framework Directive).”
  Funding for fisheries and aquaculture · Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2025-05-26 “E-001224/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The closure 1 is based on the scientific advice from the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) of 29 June 2023 2 . According to ICES, six of the scenarios proposed in the advice are likely to reduce incidental catches of dolphins below the potential biological removal (PBR) limit, but only for data from at-sea sampling. Also, according to ICES none of the scenarios would result in a reduction in annual dolphin mortality below the PBR for data from both at-sea sampling and strandings. It also advised that closures are likely to be the most effective short-term measure for reducing bycatches. The closure was adopted through regionalisation based on a joint recommendation submitted by the relevant Member States 3 and following consultations with the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) and the Expert Group on Fisheries and Aquaculture. According to a report on the closure implemented in winter period 2023-2024 4 , bycatches decreased from an annual average of 6100 dolphins between 2017 and 2023 to 1450 in the winter period 2023/2024. This is the lowest bycatch estimate since 2015. Ongoing research efforts on long-term mitigation measures should soon deliver results. These measures may include acoustic deterrent devices, modifications on the fishing gears, reduction of fishing effort and different types of closures. Any different approach has to be supported with scientific evidence. The fishing activity in the Bay of Biscay is regulated by other measures such as fishing opportunities. Member States have adopted strategies to gradually consume their quota throughout the year and to adjust it to market prices and needs. The Commission is not aware of changes in the fishing pattern of the type suggested. 1 Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2024/3089 of 30 September 2024 amending Regulation (EU) 2019/1241 as regards measures to reduce incidental catches of common dolphin (Delphinus delphis) and other small cetaceans in the Bay of Biscay: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2024/3089/oj/eng. 2 ICES(2023). EU request on mitigation measures to reduce bycatches of common dolphin (Delphinus delphis) in the Bay of Biscay (ICES Subarea 8). ICES Advice: Special Requests: https://iceslibrary.figshare.com/articles/report/EU_request_on_mitigation_measures_to_reduce_bycatches_of_common_dol phin_Delphinus_delphis_in_the_Bay_of_Biscay_ICES_Subarea_8_/23515176/1. 3 France, Spain, Portugal, The Netherlands and Belgium. 4 Bilan des mortalités par capture : hiver 2024 - https://www.observatoire-pelagis.cnrs.fr/wpcontent/uploads/2025/01/2b-Bilan-des-mortalites_hiver2024_20241115_PeltieretAl.pdf.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2025-05-20 “E-001255/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission 1. The threat posed by unexploded ordnance (UXO) and chemical munitions dumped in EU waters is addressed in the revised EU Maritime Security Strategy 1 , which includes actions on mapping, risk assessment and cross-border cooperation. At the 2023 ‘Our Baltic’ Conference, Member States committed to mitigating UXO threats in the Baltic Sea. The Commission encourages Member States to collaborate with regional organisations, research institutes, and private entities to address this issue effectively. 2. Currently, the EU supports three major projects: Muni-risk 2 , Mine-sweeper 3 and Munimap 4 - focused on risk analysis, mapping, and technology development for UXO clearance 5 . In June 2024, the Commission launched a EUR 5.6 million pilot project 6 to develop new UXO removal technologies and enhance coordination among authorities, researchers and industry in the Baltic Sea. The lessons learnt from these projects will be transferable to all sea basins around Europe facing similar threats. In total, the EU has invested over EUR 24 million in UXOrelated actions. 3. Authorising wind farm projects is the competence of Member States and must be in full compliance with applicable EU law, including the Birds and Habitats Directives 7 and the Directive on the Resilience of Critical Entities 8 . The Commission provided guidance to Member States on how to implement wind energy projects in accordance with EU nature legislation 9 . The impact on Natura 2000 sites will have to be duly assessed by Member States. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52023JC0008 2 https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/portal/screen/opportunities/projectsdetails/43392145/101173075/EMFAF 3 https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101167839 4 https://interreg-baltic.eu/project/munimap/ 5 In addition, in June 2024, the Commission launched a EUR 5.6 million pilot project to develop new UXO removal technologies and enhance coordination among authorities, researchers and industry in the Baltic Sea. 6 https://cinea.ec.europa.eu/news-events/news/new-pilot-project-call-proposals-reduce-danger-munitionseuropean-seas-opened-today-2024-06-25_en 7 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A01992L0043-20130701 8 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2022/2557/oj/eng 9 European Commission: Directorate-General for Environment, Guidance document on wind energy developments and EU nature legislation, Publications Office of the European Union, 2020, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2779/457035”
  EU ocean policy · Water pollution
• 2025-05-13 “E-000455/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission 1. Member States can offer support to EU aquaculture companies, including on productive investments or innovation under their European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) programmes. EU aquaculture companies can also benefit from funding opportunities under other EU programmes 1 . 2. Strict controls ensure that imported food adheres to high EU standards for consumer protection and safety. The high standards on environmental sustainability applicable to EU aquaculture, as well as its capacity to provide food closer to the consumer, can provide EU aquaculture products a competitive edge over products from third countries. To this end, consumers need to be informed of the origin of aquaculture products, as well as the advantages of EU aquaculture production. The Regulation on the Common Market Organisation in fishery and aquaculture products (CMO Regulation) 2 ensures that consumers receive clear mandatory information on the origin of aquaculture products. This allows consumers to differentiate between EU aquaculture products and imported ones. In the context of the evaluation of the CMO Regulation, the Commission will assess whether the existing labelling rules provide consumers with adequate information, and whether additional requirements are needed. Under the revised Fisheries Control Regulation 3 , the control of the supply chain and traceability requirements of fishery and aquaculture products is enhanced, including imported products from third countries 4 . The Commission has recently launched an EU-wide communication campaign on EU aquaculture, to increase EU citizens and consumer awareness on the benefits of EU aquaculture 5 . 1 see EU funding opportunities available for aquaculture : https://aquaculture.ec.europa.eu/system/files/202403/AAM_WP4_EU%20Funding%20Opportunities_Background%20Paper.pdf 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2013/1379/oj/eng 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/2842/oj/eng 4 Operators will be obliged to digitally record and transmit traceability data for fresh and frozen fisheries and aquaculture products by 10 January 2026. By 2029, this obligation will extend to prepared and preserved products. 5 EU Aquaculture - We work for you with passion - European Union: https://euaquaculture.campaign.europa.eu/index_en”
  EU policy on country of origin food labelling · Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2025-05-08 “P-001394/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The Commission takes its obligations under international fisheries law, including Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC) resolutions seriously. On the alleged non-compliance with fish aggregating devices (FADs) design rules by EU vessels in 2022 and 2023, the Commission formally requested further information (i.e. buoy identifiers) from the IOTC Contracting Party that made the claim in order to verify the origin of the FADs. Unfortunately, no response was received. In 2024, the IOTC adopted Resolution 24/02 1 , which significantly improves FAD traceability, assigns responsibility for deployment and strengthens marking requirements. These requirements will allow for the follow up on potential future allegations of noncompliance. On the issue of FAD closures, the EU is, in principle, not opposed to closures, provided they are based on robust scientific evidence. In the IOTC region, only about one-third of tropical tuna catches are made by purse seine vessels using FADs, with the remainder being caught by other gears. As such, a closure limited to FADs would have limited impact. The IOTC Scientific Committee has instead recommended broader closures across all gear types as more effective. Moreover, most other tuna regional fisheries management organisations (RFMOs) have scaled back their FAD closures due to limited effectiveness. At present, there is no conclusive scientific basis for imposing a FAD-specific closure in the IOTC area. 1 https://iotc.org/cmm/resolution-2402-management-drifting-fish-aggregating-devices-fads-iotc-area-competence”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2025-05-07 “E-001034/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is dedicated to strengthening EU competitiveness and growth while upholding high standards and achieving economic, social, and environmental goals. For this, it aims to streamline rules and reduce the administrative burdens for businesses by 25%, and by 35% for small and medium-sized enterprises by the end of this mandate. The Commission will continue to systematically evaluate EU legislation, including opportunities to simplify and reduce administrative burden, without undermining its policy objectives. Dialogue with stakeholders is key. As indicated in their mission letters and the 2025 Communication on implementation and simplification 1 , each Commissioner will host at least two Implementation Dialogues a year. Regular exchanges between the Commission and the advisory councils 2 also provide an opportunity to jointly explore ways to simplify EU legislation and reduce administrative burden that stems from it. The Nature Restoration Regulation 3 (NRR) does not impose direct obligations on companies or stakeholders. It leaves wide flexibility to national authorities to identify in their national restoration plans 4 the measures needed to achieve the different restoration objectives. The implementation of the NRR is still at an initial stage. It would be premature to draw conclusions regarding its impact on stakeholders. The Fisheries Control Regulation was revised only recently, and the focus should now be on its implementation. On the basis of the empowerments granted by the co-legislators in the revised Fisheries Control Regulation, the Commission is currently preparing the relevant delegated and implementing acts. Simplification and limiting red tape are guiding principles in this process. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52025DC0047 2 https://oceans-and-fisheries.ec.europa.eu/fisheries/scientific-input/advisory-councils_en 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1991/oj/eng 4 The national planning efforts will be supported by a digital tool, currently being development by the European Environment Agency, that will reduce administrative burden for Member States to the strictly necessary, notably by reusing existing information ('report once' approach) and allowing for a bottom-up approach, where feasible.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries