Page 37 - IB MAR 2019
P. 37

Indepth

          (MCS) strategy, establishing clear monitoring frameworks and   Subsequent effort to forge an agreed allocation of fishing catch
          benchmarks against which progress in the effectiveness of MCS   amongst the parties has been extremely challenging as single national
          measures and the fight against IUU can be effectively measured   interests have too often trumped collective regional consensus.
          in the future
        •  International recognition and emulation of FFA’s Monitoring,   IB:  Another  major  challenge  during  your  time  was
          Control  &  Surveillance   “I have urged that the US broaden its relationship with PICs   the  US  Multilateral
          platforms  and  frame-                                                           Treaty.  What’s  your
          works  and  zone  rights  across a range of sectors and modalities rather than be so   thoughts  on  this,
          based management legal   heavily dependent on and susceptible to the [US Multilateral   now that you have
                                                                                           left the FFA? Is this
          framework                                                                        the kind of arrange-
        •  Integration  of  fisheries  fisheries] treaty. There is even strong doubt as to whether the   ment FFA members
          and political groupings of   bulk of the US fleet will see continued advantage in the treaty.”  should  continue  to
          sub-regional interest into                                                       pursue  collectively
          the work programme and                                                           you  think?  Or  be-
          culture of FFA secretariat and governing councils  cause of the Vessel Day Scheme (VDS), is such multilat-
        •  Establishing a close and positive working relationship with other   eral arrangements on fisheries is no longer relevant?
          Council of Regional Organisations (CROP) CEOs, regional ministers
          and leaders                                       JM: The future of the US treaty in its current form is still not en-
        •  Adoption by Leaders of fisheries as a standing Pacific Islands   tirely clear. As you know changes were made in the last US treaty
          Forum Leaders agenda item.                        amendment to make the Treaty more flexible to take better account
                                                            of difference in condition and interests of both the PICs as well the
        IB: Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) fishing   US fleet. The PNA VDS has certainly changed the dynamic between
        was a big issue even before you joined. You were quite   and within the two parties, and PNA member and PNA Office support
        vocal during your time at FFA about addressing IUU.   was critical to concluding this last treaty negotiation.
        Now that you’ve completed your term as DG, are you    With the revised treaty we are seeing changes in the operations
        satisfied with the progress of work done?           of US boats which has resulted in a reduction in the uptake of days
                                                            by the US fleet. Whether that is a trend is not yet clear. It is also still
        JM: The fight against IUU fishing is a never-ending one. I am satis-  premature to reach any conclusions on the prospects for growth in
        fied with what we did during my term. This includes adoption of the   US fishing in the non PNA member EEZs apart from Cook Islands. On
        regional MCS strategy, commencement of the regional information   the other hand, even some of the PNA member countries may face
        management framework for fisheries information integration and   diminished leverage and benefits if there is no collective US treaty.
        sharing, new regional air surveillance, enhanced support from the   What is clear is that there is a wide range of interests in the treaty
        Regional Fisheries Surveillance Centre and regional MCS frameworks,   amongst the PICs, and those interests can be quite sharp given the
        and introduction of academically-certified professional training for   widely diverse financial implications for all members. On top of that,
        fisheries enforcement officers. Very importantly, with the MRAG study   because the US Treaty is the principal modality of US government
        on regional IUU and the adoption of the regional MCS strategy, we have   engagement with many of the PICs, its negotiation and renewal could
        established clear monitoring frameworks and benchmarks against   be expected to result in diplomatic pressure being applied on the
        which progress in the effectiveness of MCS measures and the fight   PICs by the US and its supporters, which may not be appreciated. In
        against IUU can be effectively measured in the future. This is very   that regard, in my meetings with US diplomats I have urged that the
        important at both national and regional level to ensure accountability   US broaden its relationship with PICs across a range of sectors and
        that we are actually making progress in the fight against IUU.
                                                            modalities rather than be so heavily dependent on and susceptible
                                                            to the treaty. There is even strong doubt as to whether the bulk of
        IB: What about the Tokelau Arrangement? Am I right
        in thinking that this would be one of your legacies as   the US fleet will see continued advantage in the treaty.
        DG of FFA, a real, significant attempt to save the South
        Pacific albacore tuna? What has this achieved, what   IB:  Can  I  seek  your  views  on  the  relationships  and
        are the obstacles, and what needs to happen in order   dynamics between the FFA and partner organisations
        to make this Arrangement effective?                 like:
                                                            a. Parties of the Nauru Agreement
        JM: Since at least 2004, when I was the founding and first Chair
        of the Pacific Islands Tuna Industry Association (PITIA), I have been   JM: The fact is that from that outset in 2010 the FFA secretariat
        encouraging the countries who share the southern albacore longline   has remained committed to our role to support and supplement the
        fishery to adopt a collective approach, similar to the Parties to the   capability of our PNA members to secure improved benefits within
        Nauru Agreement (PNA) for the purse seine fishery, in order to assert   their particular fishery. The establishment of the PNA Office as well
        their collective coastal states rights under the United Nations Law   as other sub-regional fisheries-of-common- interest (such as the
        of the Sea (UNCLOS) and Fish Stocks Agreements and gain better   Tokelau Agreement parties and VDS sub-pooling arrangements), are
        leverage to manage their shared highly migratory resource including   a natural evolution of the fundamental PIC legal framework of zone
        on the adjacent high seas.  During my tenure I was able to work with   rights based management that firmly underpins the establishment
        those FFA members to establish the Tokelau Agreement in 2012/13.   of the FFA.

                                                                                           Islands Business, March 2019  37
   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40