Written question asked by Austin Mitchell (Labour) on Wednesday, 24 November 2004, in the House of Commons. It was due for an answer on Thursday, 2 December 2004. It was answered by Ben Bradshaw (Labour) on Thursday, 2 December 2004 on behalf of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

Dept for Environment Food and Rural Affairs

Question: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, for what reasons the term "common policy in the sphere of operation of fisheries", specified in the Maastricht Treaty, was replaced by the term "exclusive competence to manage marine life" in the proposed constitutional treaty for the European Union; and what assessment she has made of the consequences for the UK of the change.

Answer: Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs for what reasons the term "common policy in the sphere of operation of fisheries", specified in the Maastricht Treaty, was replaced by the term "exclusive competence to manage marine life" in the proposed constitutional treaty for the European Union; and what assessment she has made of the consequences for the UK of the change. [200259] Mr. Bradshaw: The conservation of marine biological resources under the common fisheries policy has been an exclusive competence of the Community since 1979. This competence is derived from a combination of the EC Treaty and the language negotiated in 1973 in the UK Act of Accession and endorsed by all the then member states. This has been confirmed by the European Court of Justice. The new Constitutional Treaty has been drafted to reflect this position and does not extend competence in fisheries.

Secondary information

Type: Written question
Reference: 200259; 428 c188W
Session: 2004-05
Subjects: Common fisheries policy Constitutions Fisheries EU law European Union European Constitution Treaty Treaties Terminology
Link: View this Written question on www.publications.parliament.uk