Marine Strategy Coordination Group (MSCG) / MSCG
Brussels
13thMeeting of the Marine Strategy Coordination Group (MSCG)
12th May 2014 11.00 – 18:00
13th May 2014 09.30 – 12.30
Document: / Minutes of the meeting (DRAFT)Date prepared: / 10-07-2014
Prepared by: / DG Environment & Milieu
DRAFT SUMMARY MINUTES
1Welcome and Introduction
The meeting was chaired by Joachim D’Eugenio and Aurore Maillet, European Commission, DG Environment, Marine Environment and Water Industry Unit. A list of participants is given in Annex 1. The papers and presentations for the meeting are listed in Annex 2, and are available on CIRCABC[1].
The Commission opened the meeting and welcomedall participants.
The Chair recalled that all MSCG participants were invited to the workshop on financing opportunities taking place on 13 May after the MSCG.
2Adoption of the agenda and of the Summary Minutes of the Meeting of 11/12February 2014
The Chair invitedany participant willing to provide information to warn the Commission in advance and provide a short summary ahead of the meeting.
The meeting approved the Draft Agenda (document MSCG13/2014/01/rev2)and the summary minutes of the meeting of 11 February 2014(documentMSCG12/2014/minutes).
3Preparation for Marine Directors’ Meeting
In the absence of Greece, the Chair briefly introduced this agenda item, noting that a draft agenda had been prepared for the marine part (document MSCG13/2014/03). He invited the MSCG members to provide commentswith a view to producing a revised version of the agenda.
One MS proposed to merge agenda items 5.1 and 5.3. The Chair agreed and added that the discussion on the programmes of measures should focus on potential synergies. The Commission will prepare a short information document to frame the discussion.
Building oninformation from one MS on the Nature Directors’ proposal to organise a meetingon linkages with the CFP, the Chair emphasised the importance of information exchange and noted that feedback from such discussions should be added to the agenda item 7. He recalled that the RSC secretariats and ICES are also invited and that this is another entry point to discuss these aspects. He concluded that if participants wish to make proposals for the agenda, they should inform the Presidency, copying in the Commission.
4Implementation of the Directive
a)Transposition, reporting on Articles 8, 9 and 10: state of affairs
Introduction
The Commission presented the current state of affairs on the conformity checks for transposition and the score board on reporting (document MSCG13/2014/04 and presentation MSCG13/2014/4).
Discussion
Several MS commented on the progress made in their countries. PT noted that the initial assessment for Madeira is ready and the one for Azores will be submitted shortly. PT informed one of its planned measures under the PoMwould include a ban on trawl fishing on their continental shelfin new protected areas. The ban applies only to the Portuguese fleet but Portugal intends to ask for such a measure at the EU level in the framework of NEAFC (NE Atlantic Fisheries Commission). HR informed the MSCG members that public participation is on-going on Articles 9 and 10, while UK noted that the consultation on monitoring programmes launched in January was finalised on 2nd April.PL informed that the initial assessment and GES have undergone public consultation in March 2013, but that both documents still need to be approved by their Council of Ministers.
The Commission invited MS to provide any information available on public consultation on Article 11 monitoring programmes which is ongoing in MS, in order to share it on theDG ENV website.
Conclusion
The Chair recalled that the Commission has sent a request to the MS for information on various issues of interest on Art.11 reporting process. This request will be presented to the MS via their Permanent Representation after the meeting and the Commission hopes to receive feedback before the summer.
b)Implementing Annex IV of the CIS work programme: "Specific elements of the work programme relevant for the different marine regions" – together with Art.12 report
The Chair recalled that regional follow-up meetings to the Commission's Article 12 report have started (document MSCG13/2014/09). The conclusions from the Black Sea region meeting were distributed. For the Mediterranean region, the report is still being commented upon by the MS. The Chair emphasised the need to reflect on lessons learnt as a way to start the discussion on how to continue the process. It could lead to an amendment to the work programme if at all needed. Timeline issues should be considered carefully. The Commission has no plans for further regional meetings at present. Concrete conclusions can be monitored using existing meetings on a regular pragmatic basis rather than calling for specific meetings between MS and the Commission.
The participants to the MSCG underlined the need for realism, the usefulness of reflecting on differences in RSC approaches and how extensive should be the role of RSC.
In response, the Chair underlined that the differences in the way RSCs are working and efficiency of implementation could be a topic to discuss in a wider perspective, focusing on what should be the common ‘landing zone’ (i.e. achieving GES) and taking cooperation seriously. This also relates to the issue of communication channels.
c)Update on the Commission report on the first phase of implementation of the MSFD (article 12 report) - state of play and follow up
The need to increase coherence in the definition of GES was discussed (Document MSCG13/2014/09). Some MS underlined that they are not ready to change GES definitions at a time when the Commission Decision is being reviewed and possibly revised, while others stated that they are planning to modify their definitions when inadequate or that modifications should take place only in relation to regional work.
The Chair recalled that the monitoring programmes will be assessed against the letters sent from the Director General to the Permanent Representations which asked the MS to take the recommendations from the Art.12 assessment into account. MS, when reporting on monitoring programmes, should specify whether they have changed or not their GES and targets. The Chair also emphasised the importance of considering how developments in RSC work will be factored into the MS measures.
In conclusion, the Chair recalled that the upcoming informal Environmental Council will discuss the sustainable basis for Blue Growth, including the results of the HOPE Conference and its conclusions, including on Art.12 assessment.
5Common Implementation Strategy
- Points for adoption (in accordance with Article 6 RoP)
a)Recommendation for Programme of Measures
Introduction
The Commission presented the main activities pursued since last MSCG, outstanding issues and proposed follow-up (document MSCG 13/2014/4 and presentation MSCG13/2014/5A).
The Chair thanked all people involved in the drafting, which had proved a consultative and reiterative process involving all WG. The meeting should aim at closing the discussion on mature parts of the recommendations and highlighting parts where work was still needed.
Discussion
Many participants expressed their appreciation of the work done and underlined that, given the fact that many MS have started to work on their programmes of measures (PoM), it is important to reach a finalised version with the exception of some elements such as the parts on exemption, reporting, cost-benefit analysis. The discussion focused on some editorial changes, and the inclusion of references to Ecologically and Biologically Significant Areas (EBSA) and Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP). All participants agreed that parts of the text could be finalised and a foreword highlighting the living status of the document similar to the one on monitoring programmes should be added. They also agreed to add wording on public participation.
Conclusion
The Chair thanked the MSCG members for the feedback and high level of support. As a result of the discussion, the MSCG agreed:
- To endorse the document v11 in principle (delete "towards" in the title and put the text of the reporting section under VIII) including most of the drafting suggestion from RO, SE, ES and IT,
- To add few points (foreword including "living document", MSP, specificity RSC in chap VI) -> the new version 12 will be issued by the end of the week,
- That no further discussion is foreseen at the next Marine Directors(MD) on substance, except if MD do not endorse the MSCG conclusion
- That further work should be restricted to the following issues :
- WG DIKE to develop and finalize the reporting part in a more structured way and in close collaboration with WG ESA -> a drafting group may be necessary before summer,
- WG ESA to:
- agree on a best practice document prepared by Arcadis, if appropriate align chap VII on Economic Analysis with the best practice doc,
- Following financing opportunity workshop (13 May), elaborate Annex 2 dealing with Art 22 implementation,
- Drafting group on Exceptions (see next point on MSCG agenda)
- Public participation (see next point on MSCG agenda)
At the end, it was agreed to endorse the completed version of the recommendation by next meeting (November) including work done under point 4.
- Other Points for Discussion and Information
The Chair pointed the participants to the uploaded information documents (document MSCG13/2014/05)
a)WG GES: Report from the working group and drafting group and Marine and Coastal Competence Centre for GES
The JRD representative Chair introduced the JRC presentation on the work done on the revision of the Commission Decision (presentation MSCG13/2014/5).
Several MS suggested involving RSC experts e.g.those participating in OSPAR working groups on common indicators/monitoring who could bring valuable experience. The participation of stakeholders was also raised.
The Chair recalled that the decision as to who to nominate is left to MS, as the call for experts will go to them (i.e. MSCG with copy to WG GES). In addition, the secretariats of the RSCs will be kept informed about the call and the progress of work with the view to assist in ensuring of coherence of work. The Chair pointed out that stakeholders will not be able to nominate experts in this call but can contribute in writing.Furthermore, the progress of work and the draft results will be discussed in WG GES and reported to the next MSCG, where stakeholders can contribute at both levels.
b)WG DIKE: Report from the working group
The Commission, replacing EEA who was excused,presented the progress of the Technical Group on Data (presentation MSCG13/2014/5i) and reported on the WG DIKE work, in particular on the reporting process for Article 11 for which information will be released shortly. The Commission noted the activities in the RSCs on monitoring programmes, including on the development of common reporting sheets. The opportunities for streamlining were also discussed in particular in terms of data.
In response to one MS’s query, the Chair confirmed that the preparation of the reporting sheet for the PoMs will start soon, although there was no decision yet on the next meeting of the drafting group. Progress and consultation are needed before deciding on WG DIKE meeting.
Addressing one MS’s remark on the need to keep the reporting simple and inform early on the content, the Chair further emphasised that the reporting will be based on the needs of the Directive and that it should be aligned with the new reporting format for the WFD which was expected to be agreed at the Water Directors' meeting in June.
c)WG ESA: Report from drafting group onPoM recommendationsand the workshop on cost effectiveness of measures, including financing issues
Arcadis presented the results of the workshop of 1st April on good practices in CEA/CBA (see presentation MSCG/13-2014/5c).
The way to take into account existing measures was discussed. The Chair noted that while existing measures are relevant, double-reporting or challenging measures undertaken under other legal framework should be avoided. For such measures, there is no need for a cost effectiveness assessment. The question is whether these measures are sufficient to reach GES.
d)Workshop on marine environment and fisheries
The Commission presented the results of the 3rd informal workshop on Descriptor 3.The workshop generated an active participation, with a focus on how to interpret and implement the new CFP. ICES presented theadvice on D3, in particular the assessment methodology and pointed out the need for more collaboration in the future, e.g. in sub-groups established by ICES. Later, parallel sessions addressed other associated descriptors, D1, D4 and D6, including discussions on the ongoing revision of the Data CollectionFramework and the technical measures regulation.
Some MSCG members praised the workshop and considered it as a useful forum for technical guidelines.One MS found that the advice delivered was not agreeable and stated that in particular for the Biomass criterion it was worrying that the ambitions to set target proxies for commercial fishstocks are now lower than in the COM decision or in the agreed CFP. The MS reminded the Commission that the minutes of the workshop had not yet been circulated and that the final conclusions were still open.
One stakeholder distributed a short paper on NGO’s concerns in relation to D3 GES and the objectives of the CFP, asking for feedback on how to work further with ICES.The Commission and ICES recalled that these issues were discussed during the workshop and that the continued use of proxies to calculate MSY was linked to the lack of data at present.
One MS noted the lack of harmonization between the CFP and the Commission Decision (in particular on biomass) and the lack of data to cover the criterion on size and age distribution. As expressed during the workshops, further technical discussions are needed in order to have reference points.
In response to several MSCG members’ concern as to the involvement of the General Fishery Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM), ICES noted that experts representing both the Bucharest and the Barcelona Conventions were present in the January workshop but GFCM could not attend.UNEP/MAP representative pointed out the memorandum of understanding between the GFCM and the Barcelona Convention and GFCM contribution to the development of common indicators under EcAP.The Chair noted that GFCM is an observer in the MSFD process and had participated in the D3 workshop.
The Commission concluded on the need for cost effective solutionsto address the lack of resources e.g. through the use of ongoing fisheries surveys to close the data gaps.
e)Towards a common understanding of article 14 exceptions: first considerations
The Commission introduced this agenda point (document MSCG13/2014/10), stressing that itis only a first analysis, based on existing practice in other legislation and case law. It will serve to reach a common understanding as a basis to develop a more concrete document.
The MSCG members welcomed these first considerations, although some questioned the late submission to the meeting as well as the short timing for comment. The Commission answered that the deadline should be maintained as the work on a common understanding document should start in June.
The Chair concluded by inviting MS to express interest in forming part of an informal drafting group and nominatea personby 1st June. The same deadline should apply to sending written comments or at least to indicate a date when such comments will be sent. In response to one stakeholder’s question, the Chair pointed out that the participation of stakeholders, who are member of the MSCG, is possible.
The MSCG agreed on the following steps to reach a common understanding on exceptions:
- June – November 2014: informal drafting group to help draft the common understanding
- November 2014: MSCG discusses a final draft
f)Report from the PCG
The Commission described the IMP work programme 2014 (presentation MSCG13/2014/5f). Commission informed MS that a grant to support the development and demonstration of (sub)regional action plans and best practices for integrated monitoring programmes, coordinated PoMs and filling of data gaps for coastal and marine waters should be launched this summer.
On points g) and h) of the agenda, TG Litter and TG Noise (presentation MSCG13/2014/5h), the Chair referred to the documents distributed and recalled that the next meeting for TG Noise is not planned yet while for TG Litter, it will take place in June.
i)TG Data
The Commission presented the progress of the Technical Group on Data (presentation MSCG13/2014/5i, underlying that the work has focused so far on Descriptors D5 and D8, looking at various dataflows in particular into the RSC.
In response to one MS’s question on future plans, the Commission noted that the discussion at the biodiversity workshop will be different as the data flows are less developed. It will rather take stock of what exists at the EU level and how to help RSC.The Chair underlined the need to ensure that common parameters are set at EU level e.g. list of substances or species.
UNEP/MAP added that the Barcelona Conventionexpects thatfurther elements of monitoring on eutrophication parameters will become compulsory.