The OSPAR Convention was held in London at the North East Atlantic Fisheries Commission’s headquarters from 20th to 24th June 2011. The secretary of OSPAR paid the bill as no Contracting Party was prepared to bear the added expense of hosting the meeting. The economic crisis seemed to be the flavour of the week. The constant debate over searching for Contracting Parties to take on the responsibility to lead work programme tasks for subcommittees seemed to overshadow the more important debate concerning the protection of the North East Atlantic.

In the welcoming speech of the plenary session, Richard Benyon from the British Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) presented the press headlines of the day and quoted the International Programme on State of the Oceans (IPSO) “many of the negative impacts previously identified were greater than the worst predictions”. Despite this item of news and the overall positive outcome from the OSPAR Commission and Bergen Statement in 2010, OSPAR seems to have put on the breaks following the recession and related economic constraints.

Despite the Bergen Statement to look at possible actions following lessons learnt from the Deepwater Horizon disaster no conclusions have yet been made. Therefore no precautionary measures will be put in place for at least another 12 months. Robin des Bois expressed their concern over this issue particularly as Norway has recently stated that they will conduct exploration activities in the Barents Sea this summer. Robin des Bois does not feel that current measures and recommendations set out for offshore activities in the North East Atlantic are adequate and specific enough for OSPAR’s Region I in the Arctic. Robin des Bois took the occasion to express concerns over the potential impacts of seismic mapping activities in this sensitive area and underlined that scientists have constantly warned that the current state of technology can in no way provide solutions to clean up a major oil spill in Arctic ice covered waters.

An important decision was taken by OSPAR to become observers at the Arctic Council as the respective geographical scopes overlap and as OSPAR is the only environmental regional Convention with a legal mandate over any stretch of the icy waters. The only other regional agreements which are binding for Arctic States are the 1973 agreement acting on the protection of polar bears and the recent Search and Rescue agreement within the Arctic Council the latter does not address environmental concerns.

Robin des Bois welcomed the mentioning by the OSPAR secretariat of possible future work for the Radioactive Substances Committee on potential implications linked to the Fuskushima disaster. Robin des Bois stressed the need for a task force pointing out that it is important to include all risks and natural disasters relevant to OSPAR’s area.

In the next few years, migrating routes of small birds might prove to be less chaotic. In London it was agreed to implement a working group to study the effects of offshore platform lighting on migrating birds. Through the working group the major disturbing effects of illumination from offshore installations could be better known and properly documented.

On OSPAR’s list of threatened and/or declining Species and Habitats the majority do not have recommendations or actual measures on how to be protected, they have been identified and agreed on but no major work has been carried out to improve their status. Germany has taken the lead in this field but will probably not produce any documents before 2013. The good news is that Birdlife International led the way with a series of proposed Recommendations to further protect and conserve seven species of seabirds. The Commission adopted these Recommendations with unamity; however Denmark on behalf of the Faroe Islands and Greenland did express concern about overlapping work with the Arctic Council’s working group on the Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF). Although not officially stated there were some issues over hunting restrictions as species such as the Thick-billed murre and Black-legged kittiwake are actually consumed in the Faeroe Islands and Greenland.

The Charlie Gibbs fracture zone topic is not advancing either as it looks as though the only sphere that Iceland would possibly be prepared to protect in the area overlapping their outer continental shelf claim would be the water column. No other Marine Protected Areas have been proposed for the moment and the only OSPAR Contracting Party which seems active on the subject is the United Kingdom with possible areas up for proposal in coming years.

Finally, the Commission felt that they had something to celebrate as following the adopted amendments to allow for Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS), in the OSPAR maritime area in 2007, the ratification of the annexes can enter into force this year as at least seven Contracting Parties have ratified them. However, according to Robin des Bois CCS is indeed an activity with important overall risks which have not so far been properly researched and documented. Robin des Bois once again expressed to the Commission their concern on the long-term risks and potential adverse effects linked to the problem of stability overtime.

OSPAR’s collaborating work with the Abidjan Convention is also good news. This combined effort is fundamental for exchanging information between developing countries and emphasises the importance for European countries to be following the same environmental standards in developing countries as they would in the OSPAR Maritime Area.