Ladies and Gentlemen

I would like to thank Seafish and the North Atlantic Seafood Forum for giving me the opportunity to address you today here in beautiful Bergen.

In your letter of invitation you ask me to talk about Icelandic fisheries and my role as a newly appointed Minster of Fisheries.

First, I would like to say that the fact cannot be ignored that I am the first woman in my country to fill this important post in the Government. And it goes without saying that fishing has always been as much of a male affair  as anything in the culture of my country. Fishermen are our heroes of the sea. These rugged individualists, these strong quiet males. In the old days captains of the shark boats in Iceland were on the “top of the hill” as Frank Sinatra put it. You can just imagine: Going out in the cold dark winter months on open rowing boats to pull in these fighting monsters with their sharp teeth. To manage such an operation was just for “the very best of men”.

So, yes, I admit it, I am flattered to be personally involved in turning this page in my country´s history.  

To talk about fish has always come naturally to Icelanders, be it fish to capture, fish to export or fish to enjoy as food. Our story , right from the settlement of Iceland in the 9th century has been interwoven with fish and other living marine resources usually in the form of how we could catch a bit more.

In recent decades, our economy has diversified very significantly and new sectors have evolved. Even so, fisheries are still economically very important. Fishing and fish processing have become integrated into the economy as never before.

In this talk I will try to give you a brief account of the Icelandic fisheries management system, how it came about and the current political debates about its future.

The present individual transferable quota (ITQ) system was not developed without a reason. In the mid 1970's, around the time when we finally got full control over a 200 miles exclusive economic zone (EEZ) after considerable battle, it was evident that some of the fish stocks were still being over-exploited, even after the exclusion of foreign fleets. Measures were introduced to restrain the fishing effort, mainly by limiting days at sea, and other measures that today we generally know as “input controls”.

It was soon found out that these measures were ineffective biologically and gave very poor economic results. In 1984, Parliament passed a law introducing a quota system allocating fishing rights to individual vessels based on the average catches in the three preceding years. This transformation of the system was not, however, complete until 2006 as, until then, a “days at sea system” was partially in place for the smaller boats.

Soon, fishing quotas began to acquire a price through the trading of vessels with quota allocation as trading quotas alone was illegal. In 1990, however, Parliament changed the law and allowed the trading of quotas between vessels, thus introducing an ITQ system.  There are two quota categories, one for big vessels and the other  for small vessels, less than 15 metres in length, the latter being protected in the sense that trading of quotas from the smaller boats to the larger vessels is not allowed 

A fundamental pillar to the management system is the scientific aspect and the firm policy to conduct only sustainable and responsible fisheries. Every year the fisheries minister sets a total allowance catch (TAC) for each fish species that is subject to limited catches, but these fish stocks now account for some 97% of all catches. The TAC decisions are based on scientific advice by the Icelandic Marine Research Institute which has been scrutinized by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES). In the past, ministers have followed the advice quite closely, while not always completely, but for the last four years, I am proud to say, the TAC's for all species have followed the scientific advice to the point.

Iceland now has in place binding “catch rules“ for some of the main commercial fish stocks, which greatly reduces the temptation to disregard caution and scientific advice in face of economic hardship – a well-known political problem around the world-, and more such catch rules are presently under way.

Moreover, despite the fact that our ITQ based system is not perfect in every way and is constantly under revision, we have data to show that it basically works in this respect: Landing figures reflect pretty well the quota decisions, and available evidence suggests that cheating in the system is not a big problem. We also have a reason to believe that a culture of self-policing is taking roots in the Icelandic fisheries management system.

While, as I said, our ITQ system is not perfect, there is no question that it has created an efficient, economically strong and competitive fishing industry in Iceland. Fishery products constitute 8-10% of our GDP and over 40% of exported goods.  But the incentives created by the fisheries management system  aided by technology and automation, have reduced the workforce directly involved in fishing and fish processing to only around 4% of the total. With techological developments already on the horizon this figure is likely to go down further still.

The system has led to another transformation of the industry: From quantity mentality to that of quality and  value.  To me, the renewal of the fleet that is now taking place after a period of stagnation strongly reflects these values. I was amazed last Saturday when I had the opportunity to explore a new icefish trawler in the town of Akureyri in North-Iceland, representing a new generation of such vessels.  Fish handling and storing systems on board are designed to ensure optimum quality of every fish coming on board as well as ensuring full use of all parts of the fish previously called by-products or even “waste“. This we consider to be an important component of responsible fisheries policy. I should add that recent development of high value products, some through high tech biology for medical use, has raised the utilization rate for cod close to 95%.

But I said the system is not perfect and you may want to hear about the shortcomings.

First let me say this: From the beginning and particularly since trading of quotas increased and some vessel owners could leave the sector with handsome sums of money, there has never been full agreement among the general public or politicians about the system. In fact, it has been very much disputed most of the time.

Nevertheless, it is important to bear in mind that when the quota system was introduced the sector was in a poor state, actually in a very poor state both biologically and economically. Then the discussion was about what system could reverse that bad situation: Would the fish stocks recover?  Would the companies survive or even make profits? Would jobs be maintained?

As the quota system developed, many of the regions around the country clearly benefited and became stronger. But then many smaller communities lost their quotas leaving them with few options. And fingers were pointed at the system. This led the Parliament to apply some special measures of assistance such as distributing a small share of the total quota as “community quotas” to those worst affected as well as various other measures, one of them being so called coastal fisheries which are open for boats outside the quota system and are operated during the summer months mainly in small fishing villages.

Then there is the consolidation of quotas. The law says that no single company can hold more than 12% share of the total quota. Yet, the fact is that quota holdings have concentrated into ever bigger companies that are “vertically integrated” , i.e. they control the whole value chain for the fish:  The catching, processing and marketing. The industry says that vertical integration is necessary to minimize cost, secure steady supply to the market and thus maximize the value. The critics say that these companies have become far too powerful in the land.

And finally on this issue, it is constantly debated how much the fisheries sector should pay into common funds for the use of the rich resource which, by law, belongs to the nation.

The industry maintains that they are already paying their dues to society even to the point that many smaller companies are at a breaking point. Some critics say that the sector is making so much money that they should be paying much more for the public goods. What is the RIGHT, the BEARABLE or the FAIR amount  in that debate is of course a delicate political question, but it is a top priority for me as Minister of Fisheries to develop a market-related method that reflects the financial standing of the companies from year to year to base on the tax or resource fee and then of course to find “the fair share” that can create reasonable acceptance among the sector and the public. I say “reasonable”, knowing that perfect peace is not an option when such great interests are at stake.

Despite all these debates Icelanders seem to agree on one thing regarding the fisheries management system: That the system works very effectively in restraining the fisheries to sustainable levels and thereby keeping the fish stocks in a healthy state, and that it is providing very good economic results.  These qualities we shall not sacrifice.

Dear guests,

While it is not my intention to spoil the delicious lunch and good atmosphere we are enjoying, I cannot but mention the very sad state of affairs with respect to the dispute over the pelagic fish stocks in the North-east Atlantic, namely mackerel, Atlanto-Scandian herring and blue whiting. This situation is totally unacceptable, no matter how we look at it. Firstly and most importantly, as long as we fail to agree on the sharing of these important stocks, overfishing is bound to take place which can have serious consequences for the stocks in question and is contrary to our common aim of sustainable management. Secondly,  we are compromising our reputation as responsible fishing nations. Generally speaking, the countries involved in this pelagic complex conflict are among the most highly developed ones in the fisheries sector in the world. What can we demand from other countries and regions if this is the best we can do? I know that a lot has been tried, but we simply must do better and I am determined to do my utmost to try to find a solution and rely on my colleagues in the other countries for good cooperation.

Well, ladies and gentlemen

I started this talk by saying that I was the first female minister of fisheries in Iceland. I have touched upon a few challenges that I shall have to deal with. Now you might ask the question if a female minister is more likely to bring peace and trust into the sector than my male predecessors.

I don't know and only time will tell, but this is my plan:

I will work hard for truly sustainable fisheries that are profitable and fair. I want it to continue to be truly science based, apply the Precautionary Approach, be transparent in a way for all to see how we do things and why. I want to clarify and strengthen the social contract between those that own the marine resources around Iceland, the people of Iceland, and those to whom we have given the right to make value out of these resources.  In that way I hope that all Icelanders feel that they have a stake in the resources. And I will work for good relations with our neighbours.

That might be my “woman touch” to our fisheries in the years to come.

Yet, I hope that the legacy of my work in the history books will be on achievement rather than a view through an old fashioned gender prism.

But as I said, only time will tell.

Thank you for your kind attention.