Canada appreciates the opportunity to contribute to the discussion of balancing international fishing capacity with global fisheries resources.

We believe that just as the problems facing fisheries resources are well known, so too are the solutions. Our challenge is to use the tools at our disposal and put existing solutions into effect.

We know, for example, that global fisheries resources are under severe pressure. Nature is sending out clear warning signals that unsustainable fishing practices cannot continue. In total, eleven of the world�s fifteen major fishing areas are in serious decline. As the FAO has pointed out, $74 billion in annual subsidies have created an international fleet that is twice as large as fish stocks can support.

We also know that the longer we wait to deal with the unsustainable fishing, the more intractable the problem becomes. Fish are the lifeblood of many coastal regions and fishing traditions tend to be deeply entrenched. As a result, commercial fishing interests often have a voice at the policy table that is often out of proportion to their numbers, and often out of proportion to their economic weight. Everyone agrees that conservation is a good thing, but there is always political pressure to find more fishing opportunities � more ways to exploit ever-dwindling resources. But every year governments put off difficult choices, more young people enter fisheries that are already over-exploited. Every year problems are ignored, dependency on a diminishing resource becomes more entrenched, and harder to address.

Governments working with industry must address unsustainable fishing to ensure that the fish resource is conserved and allowed to rebuild. And, like it or not, reducing fishing capacity must be a part of that, whether through sponsoring active retirement programs or by promoting industry self-rationalization.

There is no question that capacity reduction is hard to carry out. But the difficulty of the challenge is no reason to delay in taking action. In Canada we have learned � especially with Atlantic groundfish stocks � that you cannot put off the tough decisions forever. If fishing continues to exceed the productive capacity of the resource, the resource will decline or collapse. When that happens, individuals and communities who depend on the resource suddenly find themselves with few prospects and little hope for the future � reality hits hard and can no longer be ignored.

If fishing nations are prepared to address over-capacity in a meaningful way � before it is too late � there can be bright future for commercial fishing. To do this, we must accept that responsible fishing means putting the needs of fish stocks ahead of the immediate needs of the fishermen. This is common sense. Without fish, there can be no fishing and, hence, no livelihood for fishermen, their families and communities.

Our challenge, as custodian of the resource, is to help balance the harvesting capacity of the fishing industry with the health and abundance of fish stocks.

We have many tools to do this.

The FAO held a successful Consultation in October 1998 to formulate the International Plan of Action for the Management of Fishing Capacity. Many of the states who are present here today, including Canada, agreed to endorse the plan of action at last month�s COFI meeting. This plan calls on all of us to adopt measures for dealing effectively with the issues of capacity, flags of convenience, vessel registry and government subsidies.

We must maintain and strengthen our efforts to put this plan into motion.

Canada has already made inroads in these areas. Over the past decade we put in place tough but needed initiatives such as:

• fisheries closures,
• income support programs,
• worker adjustment and retraining,
• active measures to influence fleet capacity, such as area licensing and fishing licence buy-backs, and
• early retirement for fishery workers who lost their traditional livelihoods due to restructuring in the industry.

In addition, we implemented community adjustment and regional economic development measures, to help restructure the economy of affected coastal areas. All this came at significant political and economic cost, during a time of severe budgetary restraint in Canada.

We are now seeing an overall reduction in the number of registered vessels in Canada � from over 36,000 vessels in 1986 to less than 29,000 vessels in 1996. This amounts to a 20 per cent reduction in fleet size.

Canada can still do more. That is why we are committed to completing our National Plan of Action, as agreed here at the FAO. And, we intend to be among the first country to do so. Once we have had an opportunity to work on technical guidelines on the measurement of fishing capacity here at the FAO, we will be able to match this with scientific data on stock size and health. This will help us establish an appropriate long-term balance between our domestic fleet capacity and the availability of the fish resource.

Of course, this is what we can do within our own exclusive economic zone, but several key fish stocks straddle borders with other states or move into the high seas or are highly migratory species. We must, therefore, work cooperatively to devise international plans of action.

Looking beyond Canada, there are many actions we can and must take as group to give the FAO�s Plan of Action real strength. Canada sees the challenges as falling in seven general topics.

1. How do we ensure there is a practical and commonly understood method for measuring and assessing harvesting capacity? This is a key first step, especially when it comes to Regional Fisheries Management Organizations and fishing in international waters. We can never reach our goal unless capacity is measured, tracked, and assessed against a target.
2. Where we establish that excess harvesting capacity does exit in a given fishery, how do we adjust capacity to balance it with the resource and sustain this balance over time? Should we start with establishing a cap on existing capacity? Should we develop self-correcting mechanisms to be used by the fleets themselves, such as transferable quotas?
3. When surplus capacity is removed from an area, how do we ensure that it is not merely transferred elsewhere, with the consequence of zero net capacity reduction and the destablization of other fisheries?
4. In what practical ways can we recognize the unique needs of developing countries in reducing capacity, particularly where small scale or artisanal fisheries are concerned?
5. What practical methods are there to put the Code of Conduct into effect in the management of harvesting capacity on an ongoing basis? In other words, how do we translate the Code�s values and ethics into practical realities to be incorporated into each and every fishery�s management plan? This, with a view to ensuring that, once the balance is restored, fishing capacity would never be allowed to severely outpace the resource?
6. As many speakers have recognized, subsidies are major part of overcapacity. How can national and international institutions work in a coordinated way to eliminate progressively subsidies that contribute to overcapacity? Is it correct, from an economic and fair trade point of view, for us to only consider subsidies that compound the overcapacity problem? Or, are there acceptable forms of assistance that, for conservation and social objectives, ultimately work in support of restoring balance in the fleet capacity?
7. How do we ensure effective monitoring of fishing capacity to ensure flagged states meet their responsibilities? How do we ensure national and international efforts to restore the balance in global fishing capacity are not undone by states that do not play by the rules?

These are difficult questions. As we seek answers to them, through the development of our respective national or regional plans of action, we will be able to make full use of the tools that we have developed and to make real reductions in capacity.

And, we must remember to address these questions in full consultation with industry and stakeholders at the table. No plan or solution will work without their support.

Canada believes that, to maximize the chances of success in our collective efforts to reduce global fishing capacity, we must give the FAO International Plan of Action a sound legal basis in international law.

This means that states must accept and fully implement:

• The UN Agreement on Straddling and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks, preferably by the end of 2000,
• The FAO Code of Conduct, and
• The FAO Agreement to Promote Compliance with International Conservation and Management Measures by Fishing Vessels on the High Seas.

Furthermore, we must give force and effect to these laws through regional or subregional fisheries management organizations. Through these organizations we can deal effectively with issues such as straddling or highly migratory stocks and the growing problem of flags of convenience, pirate fishing and wasteful and destructive fishing practices. Unchecked, these irresponsible activities undermine progress on conservation and fleet reduction. Moreover, if non-contracting parties are allowed to continue, domestic and international support could disintegrate for the measures that we wish to implement. Governments will come under tremendous pressure, if they restrict their own fishermen only to see fish stocks being exploited by rogue elements.

In short, we need all the pieces in place for effective solutions.

As we progress, issues and more questions will inevitably arise. The challenges faced by developing nations are undoubtedly different from those of developed nations. Nations must be willing to share their experiences and cooperate with one another in implementing the International Plan of Action to address over-capacity. Countries who find that their interests and actions intersect must find economies of scale and use every opportunity to pool their efforts to move the implementation agenda forward.

To conclude, Canada fully supports the objectives of the International Plan of Action for the Management of Fishing Capacity while further recognizing:

• The need for a technical consultation at the earliest possible date to establish the guidelines for the definition and measurement of fishing capacity and the subsequent preparation of technical guidelines for data collection and analysis.

• The need to take urgent action to curb the growing problem of flags of convenience and pirate fishing as well as the need to bring this to the attention of all States and the international community.

• That priority be given by FAO members governments in accepting and fully implementing the UN Agreement on Straddling and Highly Migratory Stocks and the FAO Compliance Agreement, by the end of 2000.

Thank you.