Préparez votre dialogue

The chair of the RTMCFA, together with the CBF Dialogue convenor, report on the outcomes and recommendations of both the RTMCFA and the CBF Dialogue to the HoF meeting. HoF alone decides what is submitted to the ministers at the Regional Fisheries Ministers Meeting (RFMM). FAME does not control of what goes to either HoF or what HoF shares for the ministers to take forward to the Leaders meeting.

Currently, FAME’s mandate is to inform national level CSOs/NSAs that appropriate representatives are needed to participate in the CBF Dialogue, and ask that they identify their preferred representatives. FAME is assisted by the CBFD-AG and the convenor. The agreed-upon process promotes the involvement of relevant community groups and supports national selection processes that respect FPIC principles. 

Community representative’s internet costs for Zoom participation for the duration of the CBF Dialogue should be considered as part of the above process. FAME  has been able to provide some support to local representatives in accessing internet/better internet connections. Once PICTs select their representatives to the CBF Dialogue, then FAME can work with each of them to determine the best way to connect. For the first CBF Dialogue some participants joined from their fisheries office, but all needs are unique and are assessed on a case-by-case basis.
 

FAME is responsible to its member governments. SPC member countries and territories have oversight of FAME’s activities and work priorities. Coastal fisheries, and CBFM, are sovereign issues and FAME does not engage without the invitation of national governments. 

FAME’s Coastal Fisheries and Aquaculture Programme (CFAP) is very considerate of how and what it proposes and how it engages in coastal fisheries, especially with community-based fisheries. 

FAME supports a CSO/NSA-led process in-country/territory, but this is beyond FAME’s mandate, especially as CSO/NSA situations in many countries are not clear, and not without some internal difference of opinions. When requested, FAME can assist with process facilitatation, in partnership with member governments and, as appropriate, international or regional NGOs. FAME does not have dedicated funding for in-country processes. 

The Locally Managed Marine Area (LMMA) Network remains strongly committed to establishing genuinely committed processes which ensure that communities whose livelihoods depend on the ocean have a legitimate voice in the development, implementation and evaluation of coastal fisheries policies and action. LMMA continues to work on these matters and is open to discussion and collaboration to that end.
 

Refer to the answer of Q5. This is a decision for national processes. This issue may be partly addressed using regional criteria for the national selection process which the CBFD-AG have to endorse.

The convenor and vice-convenor attend the HoF meeting, and both the convenor and RTMCFA chair present to HoF. Neither the convenor or RTMCFA chair are present at the RFMM to provide clarification on any points raised on the RTMCFA or CBF Dialogue outcomes. Not all matters considered at HoF, including both the RTMCFA and CBF Dialogue reports, are sent to the RFMM by HoF. Note that the CBF Dialogue Outcomes Report would be provided as an information paper to RFMM as part of SPC’s coastal fisheries and aquaculture report to RFMM. 

If there is a specific or significant issue that needs to be raised at RFMM for a decision, SPC FAME, on CBF Dialogue agreement, can look at the opportunity of having the CBF Dialogue Convenor present it within the SPC briefing to RFMM. Note that all reports and presentations to RFMM go through the PIC fisheries officials meeting first, and is something SPC FAME have no control over, and frequently get asked to modify presentations/papers being put to the RFMM. 

If requested, SPC FAME, in its role as the CBF Dialogue secretariat, can work with the next CBF Dialogue Convenor to submit a paper to the next HoF and RFMM to seek endorsement from HoF and RFMM to allow future CBF Dialogue convenors to present CBF Dialogue outcomes to RFMM. This discussion could start at the upcoming CBF Dialogue (CBFD2).
 

Rather than having three co-chairs from the subregions, the CSO/NSA representative in the CBFD-AG is selected from the subregion to ensure that the convenor, vice-convenor, and the CBFD-AG chair, are from different subregions, so all three are represented.