The meeting was convened in conformity with the Venice Declaration, adopted in November 1996, which provided for the setting up of a working party of experts mandated to submit a contribution to the GFCM, in view of its 22nd session (Morocco, October 1997).

The meeting was attended by legal and technical experts. The list of participants is given in Appendix A.

A document prepared by representatives of Greenpeace and WWF was presented.

The working party discussed the items of the Agenda shown in Appendix B. Discussions took into consideration the documentation provided for in Appendix C.

All participants reiterated, in the framework of GFCM competencies, their preference for direct effort control, as opposed to a catch quota system. However, effort control should be complemented by technical measures such as closed areas and seasons and fishing gear specifications. Due account should be taken of sport and part time fisheries. The parameters defining fishing effort are still to be defined, but should include at least an element of fleet size and an element of fishing time.

There was consensus on the need to implement the recommendations adopted by GFCM at its 21st session in Alicante, May 1995.

It was indicated that management units could in principle be based on the existing GFCM statistical divisions, but may be refined in some cases where the relevant information is available.

Participants discussed the criteria and the justification for a possible subregional approach for management. In this regard, discrepancies persist that make further work necessary.

All participants agreed that any management system should take due account of its socio-economic consequences. The suggestion was made to constitute an advisory body in the framework of GFCM, allowing the fishing sector to convey its views.

Two documents on eventual amendments of the GFCM Agreement and of its rules of procedure regarding the budget, administration, the constitution of committees, the dispute settlement and the inclusion of principles from the recently adopted international instruments, were taken into consideration.

Reference was made to the consensus already registered regarding the amendments of the GFCM Agreement to allow for participation of regional economic integration organisations and in particular of the European Community in conformity with the conclusions of the 21st session of the GFCM.

The working party took note of the decision to include aquaculture among the objectives of the organisation.

As far as the possibility for GFCM to adopt its autonomous budget is concerned, the FAO and the GFCM were asked to present for the forthcoming meetings of the organisation a draft programme of work, including proposals for the necessary modifications of the legal text in view of its implementation, precise budgetary estimates and scenarios regarding the amount of financial contributions of each member.

Reference was made to the fact that GFCM needs to obtain the necessary financial means that will enable it to act in an efficient manner despite the budgetary restrictions in the FAO.

Certain experts underlined however the need to associate the coastal states of the Black Sea, that are members of the GFCM before taking any definitive decision.

For the nomination of the secretary, the IOTC precedent could be useful for achieving the greatest possible autonomy for GFCM.

The establishment of a permanent scientific committee open to all members and having the necessary means to accomplish its mission, has been widely supported. However, the existing discrepancies on this question make further discussion necessary.

Attention was drawn to the Euro-Mediterranean cooperation process and to the available means in this context to allow all states to fully contribute to the scientific work of GFCM.

The need to strengthen dispute settlement mechanisms through reference to dispute settlement means provided for by UNCLOS, was also mentioned. Objections were raised for such reference given that certain states, members of GFCM, have not ratified UNCLOS.

Amendments of the GFCM Agreement must take into account the position of the GFCM members towards the international instruments to be reflected in the Agreement.

The working party also concluded that a timely presentation of documents will be of great importance to allow the GFCM to adopt the appropriate decisions in its 22nd session. To that end, it will be necessary to take advantage of the meeting of the fisheries management committee, which will take place in Rome in June 1997. Moreover, it is necessary that member states participate in the 22nd session of the GFCM to ensure the necessary quorum for the adoption of decisions.

The need to ensure compliance with conservation and management measures taken by the GFCM was also put forward. In this context the following elements should be taken into account:

The minimum information requirements for any management system would include reliable statistics of landings and fleet data. In this context, all participants underlined the need to implement Resolution No.95/2 on the constitution of a data base of the characteristics of vessels over 15 m overall length, as well as the little progress made on catch statistics and the need to improve the existing data gathering, processing and reporting systems.

Collection of fishery-independent data (surveys) can provide useful information but cannot replace the basic information on landings and effort necessary for evaluation and management.

The role and structure of a permanent scientific advisory committee within GFCM, as suggested in the 21st session of the Council, was discussed. A number of participants suggested that its main role should be to organise the assessment work through ad hoc working groups, to review the conclusions of these groups, and to provide advice to GFCM on possible management measures. However, other possibilities were also suggested, such as an ad hoc committee that would meet upon request, or a committee merely devoted to coordination of research work. Some participants suggested the involvement of experts in economic sciences in this committee.

Given the important scientific work currently being carried out by a number of institutions and organisations in the Mediterranean, it was underlined that GFCM should take full advantage of this situation by means of a strengthened coordination with these bodies.

In this context, CIESM and CIHEAM have a very important role to play in the harmonisation of methodologies. COPEMED could be very useful for data collection, but similar approaches should be also taken for the eastern Mediterranean. The need for contacts with institutions participating in the follow-up to the Barcelona Convention and the UN Mediterranean Action Plan was also underlined.

The need to continue and strengthen the existing cooperation with ICCAT, in particular through the joint ICCAT/GFCM group was underlined so as to avoid duplication of work and contradictions.

In this context reference was also made to the meeting that took place in Rome on 20 March 1997 between the European Commission, GFCM, FAO, CIESM, ICCAT, ICES and COPEMED.

Emphasis was put on the exchange of information between states and on the updating of FAO's data base regarding national legislations on fisheries.

The usefulness of the FAO data base depends on the regular flow of information by Member States to FAO.