THE MODEL OF DISPOSAL OF STATE ASSETS WILL RETURN TO THE FISHERY REFORM

“In this distressing process, the Argentines were not in defense of this activity, because “they live with their backs to the sea”, despite the fact that the maritime territory is much larger than the continental one”; warns the South Atlantic and Fisheries expert, César Lerena.

8 de February de 2024 13:47

"It is the model in which it is at stake.

Fish is a good of the State. Some representatives related to the government stated that the fishing sector was left for a few coins with a resource of all Argentines. To contrast with these statements, the sector and different opinion members stated that businessmen contributed 35% of sales. A distracting discussion that hides the true objective of reforming the fishing law which, judging by its original content and, even after the first correction, had the objective of carrying out a program of releasing the sea to the highest bidder, the same thing that justified the government's attempt to repeal the Land Law.

When the author or authors nor the Undersecretary of the branch cannot defend the reform, it leads us to think that the project to be discussed in Deputies was technically indefensible. It was based on issues that cannot be founded and/or on fundamentalist ideological reasons that could lead to place, even to carry them forward, to destroy an industrial sector that competes internationally despite the erratic and inconsistent Argentine economic policy. Like the eventual privatization of some companies (YPF, INVAP, etc.) it does not matter whether or not they generate a surplus or if they are strategic for the Nation; It does not matter if the fishing companies or the naval industry are national or foreign, nor if the exploitation is sustainable and sustainable.

It is the model in which it is at stake. The auction to the highest bidder, there are no foundations related to the national strategy, population and industrial development or the generation of Argentine employment.

Businessmen, do not be distracted, the government will insist through Decrees, many of the issues raised in the failed reform could have been a response from the executive or, well, Decrees of Necessity and Urgent (DNU) or through a new law in the Ordinary Sessions and, therefore, it would be desirable for the fishing sector and the naval industry to have a project, not for makeup, but for a true modern, profound, sustainable and sustainable reform.

There are changes to be made in fishing activity and we cannot continue crying over spilled milk. It will always be preferable for the changes to result from internal discussion in the sector. We have concluded this project and we will debate it in the business or public sphere.

For those who have not been able to receive our latest opinion article ( César Lerena, “One day after the attempt to alienate the national fishing and naval industry”, 1/2/2024 ) we transcribe it:

« The articles modifying the Fisheries Law were annulled and there was a breath of relief in the fishing, naval industrial and related industries; but, even if it seems, nothing will return to zero.

Before analyzing what the draft reform of the Fisheries Law leaves behind, it would be good to know who was the author of this initiative? Since, contrary to any bill put before Congress for consideration, it lacked foundations that could justify the 180 degree change that was proposed. On the other hand, it has been very striking that the Secretary of Bioeconomy Vilella or the Undersecretary of Fisheries López Cazorla have not come out to explain the PEN project. Much less, any president would have asked them to resign. .      

Even so, this reform revealed, more than the quality of its texts, the weakness of the fishing sector, whose activity is little known in society, in the spheres of power themselves and even in the Ministry of the area, where it is the poor and ugly cousin of Agriculture and Livestock. And the worst thing is that, in some cases, a bad image promoted by some of its actors is even aired, despite being an undivided part of what is questioned. This It will require a necessary change in the rules of the game.  

There are those who claimed that the designers of this reform were unaware of the activity and the project's objective was a mere fundraising issue. We believe that it is neither one nor the other.On the one hand, to develop this project it was necessary to have the indispensable contribution of someone linked to fishing, capable of analyzing the current fishing law, since changes were made aimed at producing an important design, which would have involved the destruction of the existing national fishing industry, to allow access by vessels from third countries, whether or not they are currently fishing Argentine migratory resources beyond 200 miles of the Argentine Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) or in the Malvinas with an illegal license from the islanders British.

 

There was knowledge, perversity, audacity and contempt for the national industry.

 

 

Significantly increase the fee through the entry of foreign vessels into the ZEEA; not requiring any age of the vessels or that they disembark in Argentine ports and not requiring Argentine crew, would not have increased the State's revenue since, as we have seen in the statistical report of the companies, "fishing does not contribute 0.2% but 35% of sales” ( Karina Fernández, Revista Puerto, 1/30/2024 ). Even so, it is a faculty of the Federal Fisheries Council, which is made up of national and provincial officials who can decide on the increase in rights. of capture, etc. which, in any case, cannot be arbitrary, but rather take into account all internal variables and those derived from foreign trade.   

Having eliminated - as was done in response to the first complaints - some of these exceptions to the law, an activity cannot be expected to develop and generate more resources if the tools used are not intended to produce more and better; To this end, far from dismissing the requirements provided for in articles 26 and 27 of Fisheries Law 24,922, they must be deepened to reward those who invest; They add value and generate quality products destined directly for the shelves of consumer markets; They allocate part of their production to the domestic market and promote national consumption, which is among the lowest in Latin America; incorporate cutting-edge technology; they capture and process sustainably; They do not fish illegally and do not carry out prohibited practices, especially they do not discard raw materials suitable for consumption; they train and generate qualified and registered labor; They manufacture their ships in public or private national shipyards and put younger and safer ships at the service of their exploitation ; Their companies are located in strategic places with low population density; They work with social responsibility in relation to their communities, etc.

Whoever promoted this reform was not unaware of these requirements, on the contrary, he eliminated them to facilitate the access of foreign vessels to the Argentine EEZ. Nor could he be unaware that the public bidding system was discarded in the developed world for being ineffective in promoting fishing activity. sustainable and sustainable in the coastal States. And this is very important, because companies and workers depend on them. There should be no project approved by the Application Authority without sustainability. 

This reform could have had as its object a direct foreign exploitation project that would have required ad-hoc offices in Argentina to carry out the pertinent “business” or aimed at facilitating the use of Argentine ports for foreign vessels that fish illegally outside of Argentina. the Argentine EEZ; like the one we denounced, when the construction of the port of Río Grande was promoted...Both objectives would have also been supported by the repeal of Article 27 bis of Law 24,922, which would have allowed ships with illegal licenses in the Malvinas to do so in the Argentine EEZ. and vice versa.      

This project was not a mere increase in the fishing fee; that, if that were the case, it would have been enough - as we said - with a mere well-founded resolution of the Federal Fisheries Council; Or, although it is not said, this Council could be part of the problem, where the current Undersecretary was its member for 13 years.

It could be worse in the future, and, I don't want to fuel giles, that's why I will give just one example, where the reform maintained a paragraph of article 27: “The catch quotas will be temporary concessions that cannot be exceeded by any company or business group. “percentage to be set by the Federal Fisheries Council on the Maximum Allowable Catch per species in order to avoid unwanted monopolistic concentrations”; a mechanism that could lead to a small number of people saying when a concentration “is undesirable” and, with this justification or another biological one without the respective foundation, not the quotas but the fishing days are reduced, making the fishing activity unviable. , in favor of new permits and/or quotas (see background on cuts in the European Union) or, on the contrary, for a few to keep all the quotas.    

None of this was taken into account by the fishing sector. HE He drove on pure instinct, like when he went fishing in the middle of the last century with the little yellow boats, appealing to pure abundance. And it is notable, because we all know that we are talking about a resource that must be treated “jointly and comprehensively,” as he says. to FAO and the Maritime Convention (UNCLOS) ... which is why it is truly notable that there is such a number and diversity of Chambers and Guilds, atomizing the sectoral strategy that makes an agreed policy difficult.

In this distressing process, the Argentines were not in defense of this activity, because " they live with their backs to the sea ", despite the fact that the maritime territory is much larger than the continental one and that is, " you don't want what you don't want. " know ” and the governments in power and the entire activity have a great debt in this regard. Consumers did not speak either, because Argentina has a very low per capita consumption of 4.8 kg per year, below the average for Latin America and Africa.

The Mayors of the city-ports were not present - with the exception of Montenegro in Mar del Plata - who should understand that this activity is the formation of towns, the establishment of industry and the generator of jobs.And, the governors of the maritime coast opposed the reform; But who are, as in the agricultural sector, the national and provincial deputies and senators, regardless of their political affiliation, who represent and know the virtues of this activity? »

“One more victory like this and we are lost” James Joyce, Ulysses

Dr.

By Agenda Malvinas

Tags

Other news about National

Might interest you

COMMENTS

foto de perfil
Fer 2 months ago

En todas éstas décadas alguien se hizo rico dando la espalda al país, no sólo a nuestro mar... que paguen!!!

Log in or sign up to comment.