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 that is submitted to 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 Fernando Vilella or the Undersecretary of Fisheries Juan Antonio López Cazorla have not come out to explain the PEN project. Much less, any President I 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 said that the designers of this reform were unaware of the activity and the project had as its objective a mere collection issue. We believe that it is neither one nor the other. On the one hand, to develop this project 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 for vessels from third countries, whether or not currently fishing for Argentine migratory resources beyond 200 miles of the Argentine Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) or in the Malvinas with an illegal license from the British islanders. 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 power of the Federal Fisheries Council, which is made up of national and provincial officials - not companies or unions - who can decide on the increase in capture rights, etc.
