Ræða Árna M. Mathiesen á aðalfundi Þýsk-íslenska verslunarráðsins í Bremen 15. febrúar 2002.

Liebe Gäste!
Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren!

Es ist mir ein großes Vergnügen, hier bei der Deutsch-Isländischen Wirtschaftsvereinigung einige Worte sagen zu dürfen.

Die Handelsbeziehungen zwischen Island und Deutschland waren für unsere Länder schon immer von großer Bedeutung. In den letzten Jahren war Deutschland entweder der zweit- oder der drittgrößte Exportpartner Islands, und auch bei den Importen stehen deutsche Waren in der Regel an der Spitze.


We are all aware of the importance of prosperous fisheries for our national economy, since well over half of our income from goods exports comes from the fisheries sector alone. Fisheries policy on a global scale is thus of prime importance for us.

A review of the EU Common Fisheries Policy is currently underway and is to be concluded this autumn. It cannot be denied that this Policy has not lived up to the original expectations of it. According to reports, many important stocks are in an extremely poor condition, the fishing fleet is too large and the implementation of supervision poorly co-ordinated. Proposals for a certain reduction to the fleet meet with little enthusiasm and basic questions concerning access to fishing banks and harvesting rights are still being discussed.

It will be interesting to follow the discussions as the year progresses, to see what the outcome will be and what objectives will be set for the common fisheries policy. I do not intend to express my opinion on that policy, nor on the measures likely to prove most advantageous for the EU; Iceland, of course, is not an EU Member State. You could say, however, that it is also to Iceland's advantage to have strong and dynamic fisheries in Europe, which will contribute to increased fish consumption and market stability.

In Iceland we have, for almost two decades, managed our fisheries through the utilisation of a quota system. There is no doubt that this arrangement of fisheries has proved its worth, and thus become a permanent institution, as it has been demonstrated that a system of individual transferable quotas, ITQs, is more effective than others which could be considered. Any methods which can be applied to fisheries management have their shortcomings - whether they involve an overall arrangement, such as a quota share system, or more specific measures under the heading of regulations, such as rules on vessel size limitations, maximum engine capacity, etc. The decisive difference between ITQs and other arrangements in this policy field is that they enable vessel operators to improve their business in accordance with the principles of the market economy. The ITQ systems thus have an economic advantage.

This is clearly evident in Iceland, since during the period in question fisheries performance has improved substantially. We anticipate that in coming years, fisheries will be in a position to pay higher levies to the public purse. Fisheries will thus provide an even greater portion of the costs which arise directly from their activities and the general public will receive a visible portion of the rent returned by the exploitation of the country's fishery resources. In this connection it must be borne in mind that government subsidy to the fisheries sector is completely unknown in Iceland and we are completely opposed to this practice. We have emphasised this in international fora and I would like to repeat it here.

I mentioned earlier the economic advantages which have resulted from the ITQ system in Iceland. This is not to suggest by any means, however, that the success has been so great that we do not feel there is a need for improvement. Discards are a consequence of all restrictions connected with fisheries, and are by no means a new arrival resulting from modern management practices. It has been extensively maintained in public debate, however, that the quota system increases discards. Although there is no research to indicate that this is in fact the case, we nonetheless view very seriously all indications of increased or persistent discards. As a result, I took the initiative in having amendments passed to legislation which will reduce discards, both by authorising vessels to land increased amounts of undersize fish, which will not be fully included in their quotas, and by limiting provisions allowing for the discarding of damaged fish or fish partly eaten by seals. This will of course simplify considerably all supervision of discard.
The great emphasis we Icelanders place on combating discard is based on our firm determination to improve our own treatment of what is by far the most valuable of our natural resources – the country's fishing banks. Icelanders have, in fact, made it a point of considerable emphasis to be in the forefront internationally, firstly with efforts to extend fisheries jurisdiction and in promoting the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Following up on this, we aimed at promoting conservation and responsible exploitation of fish stocks and now, most recently, we have adopted the aim of responsible harvesting of marine resources. The dominant aspect here is not only to prevent overexploitation but to ensure balanced harvesting. Thus some marine species should not be overexploited while others are protected at the cost of those already subject to overexploitation. Last October the UN Fisheries and Agricultural Organisation, FAO, held in cooperation with Icelandic government and with support from government of Norway, a very successful conference in Reykjavík on Responsible Fisheries in the Marine Ecosystem. The conference's closing statement, known as the Reykjavík Declaration, outlined this policy in very clear terms.

Despite all our efforts in Iceland to attempt to increase the biological conservation of fishing stocks and our own knowledge of the marine biosphere, we have become ever more aware of just how far we have yet to go in this respect. It caught us completely unawares when the Icelandic Marine Research Institute (MRI) published its results in the spring of 2000, indicating that the Institute had overestimated the size of our most important stock, Icelandic cod, and that catches would have to be cut back substantially. The same results were obtained this past spring, at which time it appeared to the Institute's scientists that their previous over-assessment was even more erroneous than they had previously thought. The total allowable catch was reduced in accordance with the current catch rule. This was followed by a very vocal and widespread debate as to the Institute's credibility and the knowledge base upon which it drew its conclusions. In consequence I had the Ministry enlist the services of a respected specialist in the area of stock size assessment, Dr. Andrew A. Rosenberg, Dean of the Faculty of Biology and Agriculture of the University of New Hampshire, to carry out an evaluation of the MRI's methods in this respect. Dr. Rosenberg and his colleagues are to deliver their conclusions this spring. At the same time, the scientific basis of the criticism which has been addressed to the MRI has been examined specifically, and a public hearing was arranged last November on the subject. The public hearing is regarded as having been a great success, and extremely useful in strengthening scientific discussion in this area.

I have great expectations for all of these measures in the ensuing months. There is, nonetheless, no denying that the ocean's commercial fish stocks are a limited resource for biological reasons, and that we have to create as much value as possible from the catch which is harvested. At the Ministry of Fisheries and the Icelandic Fisheries Laboratories, which is one of the institutions under the Ministry, special emphasis is now placed on promoting methods to increase the value of marine products.

This project covers a variety of areas, since "marine products" is a collective terms for a large number of different products produced from the renewable resources of the sea. They include very different and varied products: fresh fish and frozen, whole or in fillets, in steaks or in pieces, salted fish, canned, fast-food products, flavourings, pharmaceuticals, enzymes, and much more. The principal work in this area will naturally be done by the sector itself and it is very encouraging to see the creative vitality and initiative which characterises today's industry.

Health issues are directly and indirectly linked to the increasing value of marine products. Fish is healthy food, and you can hardly find a better meal than well-cooked fish. At the same time, fish is a delicate product, needing careful handling, and easily damaged if not treated properly. We have to demand that everyone involved in handling or processing fish do their utmost to deliver a choice and healthy product to the consumer. If they let down their guard, and sell products of poor quality, or cut corners in their production, they are not only undermining their own future, but ruining the reputation of everyone in the sector, to its great detriment.

In recent years there has been considerable discussion of dioxin in foods and this summer EU rules will come into effect setting maximum limits for dioxin in foods and animal feeds. Marine products have been extensively discussed in this connection, since they often have a rather high content of such substances. Here there is a great difference between species and not least between ocean areas. There is no way of reducing dioxin in pursuit fish other than by reducing substantially emissions into the environment. Such actions have certainly been undertaken and dioxin in the environment has decreased substantially in recent decades. But a considerable amount of dioxin is still being released into the environment and while this is the case the quantity of dioxin in the ocean decreases more slowly than it could. We thus have to direct concerted efforts at preventing dioxin emissions. In this respect the various fishermen's and fish processors' organisations can join in demanding that government take action. We know that fish consumption is good for us. In addition to the discussion that dioxin, PCB and other substances eventually end up in the ocean, and to some extent in marine products, these same organisations must inform consumers of the positive aspects of fish consumption, which more than balance out against the negative effects of dioxins. Which are only present in fish products to a varying extent, as was mentioned previously.

Before concluding, I would like to turn to the subject of the increased interest in aquaculture which we are experiencing everywhere. In some countries, aquaculture has a long tradition, but it is more commonly a relatively new commercial pursuit. As things now stand, there are signs of a considerable increase in interest in aquaculture in Iceland, which was not quite unknown previously. At that time the interest was primarily in raising salmonids, i.e. salmon, trout and arctic char. Today it is saltwater fish (whitefish) which is attracting the most interest, and cod farming in particular. Icelandic authorities are following this interest closely, and are presently strengthening the foundations of the industry by adopting new legislation. It is important to consider each step carefully, mindful of the unfortunate lessons of the past, where excessive investments were undertaken, generally involving public funds.


Liebe Gäste!

Ich bedanke mich für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit und hoffe, dass Sie durch diese kurzen Ausführungen etwas mehr über unsere Arbeit im isländischen Fischereiministerium erfahren haben.

Wir sind uns dessen wohl bewußt, dass die schöpferische Kraft in unserem Wirtschaftszweig bei den einzelnen Fischwirtschaftsunternehmen liegt. Es ist dagegen die Rolle des Staates, der Wirtschaft eine sichere Grundlage zu schaffen. Der Handel und die freundschaftlichen Beziehungen zwischen Island und Deutschland sind uns Isländern in der heutigen Zeit besonders wichtig. Unsere beiden Länder haben vieles gemeinsam, denn wir sind auf demselben Boden gewachsen.

Ich wünsche Ihnen alles Gutes!