Noel Harrington (Cork South West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I am not a member of the committee so I thank the Chairman for giving me the opportunity to speak. I have an interest in the progress being made with the Common Fisheries Policy. Regrettably, picking up an analogy used last night in a television current affairs programme, the hairdressing sector in this country probably has more political clout in terms of votes than the fishing sector. We do not face problems because of a lack of political commitment by the Minister and his officials, we face problems as a result of a general lack of understanding of what is involved nationally.

There are twin processes in a European context - the Common Agricultural Policy, being dealt with by the same Minister, and the Common Fisheries Policy. We would be hard pressed to find any media coverage, support or comment good, bad or indifferent on the Common Fisheries Policy while thousands of people would protest over the CAP. For some communities on the coast the progress with the Common Fisheries Policy is of greater interest than with the Common Agricultural Policy, important as that is for the State. It would be ridiculous to add to the confusion by engaging into Don Quixote type battles on a Common Fisheries Policy when trying to sustain an industry that is rightly challenged internationally, with visiting fleets going after fish stocks that in some cases we do not have full scientific information on. Dr. Beamish and Ms Kelly have outlined some of the key issues in the Common Fisheries Policy. The ban on discards, maximum sustainable yield proposals, internationally transferable quotas and the Hague preferences are key to the sustainability of the industry.

We can debate what happened in 1973 but I could go back to the 1600s, when the Spanish were landing fish in this country. Many Irish people made great money at the time from imposing tariffs on Spanish fleets so we can talk about the international context going back centuries. We can talk about how Iceland and the Faroe Isles have handled their mackerel fisheries and say we should do the same but it is more complicated than that.

I live in Castletownbere, which is now one of the designated fishery harbour centres. There was a time, however, when fish were being exported to Billingsgate and we got nothing for it. The fisherman of the town were treated like dirt. Billingsgate was the only outlet but thankfully times have moved on. In some respects the fishing industry has consolidated into a few ports, which is regrettable because some of the traditional ports have lost out. We tried to address that but we must fight the battle in front of us at present. It was alluded to by Deputy Ó Cuív and Deputy Ferris, where the European Parliament and media almost have a consensus view there should be no fishing because we are killing fish and that view is gathering momentum. There is huge European political pressure to introduce the discard ban. I agree with the introduction of a discard ban on a phased basis, although I am concerned about how it will work for fishermen on the ground. I would urge the industry to engage with the Department. Supports are needed to help the industry with technical measures and to look at proposals the industry would bring forward to reduce the amount of discards. This is a complex problem. It is not as easy as people think - that we should just avoid catching fish a boat does not have a quota for. For some mixed fisheries, everything is in one basin and it is not practical to suggest separating haddock from pollock or plaice. I agree with the approach taken on targeting the pelagic fishery first, which is a cleaner fishery.

There will still be difficulties. We are trying to impose a ban on discards on a pelagic industry while visiting fleets are fishing almost for the entire year and it is not credible they are doing so within their own total allowable catches. For many of the main pelagic fisheries, there should be a complete suspension of effort for the summer months. When the Irish fleet is tied up, there is no reason anyone else should be fishing there. Other fleets do not have astronomical total allowable catches and would be able to catch the permitted amount in the same season as the Irish fleet. A complete summer time ban should be discussed as part of this.

The MSY is a hugely difficult proposal but ultimately it will ensure the growth of some of our more valuable species that lend economic support through onshore processing. Explaining the concept of maximum sustainable yield is difficult in many of these communities. There is a huge job of work to be done by the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union to ensure those on the deck of a vessel understand what this means. It will require enormous effort but I hope the industry will see the potential benefit of this. It will be painful but Irish fishermen have taken the lead in the Celtic Sea herring management. Irish fishermen are willing to make sacrifices when they can see better results that will lead to more sustainable fisheries for them and the generations to come after them. It is in that context that we can achieve the maximum sustainable yield proposals.

I missed the start of presentation so I might have missed proposals on ITQ concessions. It is disappointing the Hague preferences have not been given permanency. It is interesting that every year we fight and achieve the Hague preferences and it is right that we must surrender some political capital to achieve that because it is better if we focus on the battles we can win. I accept this is a challenging time for the Irish fishing industry in the white and pelagic sectors. The Commission's proposals on discards are universally popular but, equally, they are difficult to enforce.

I look forward to ongoing briefings on the CFP and wish the officials well in their work.