Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I have experience of only two Council meetings, those of last year and the year before. It is true that the recommendations in advance of Council meetings are sometimes more stark than the actual results because the Commission takes a precautionary approach regarding some stocks. If there are insufficient data on which to draw a more accurate conclusion, it applies a cut of a certain percentage. We have to use all the available data to be as accurate as possible. If a stock is under significant pressure and is being overfished, we must reduce the level of fishing; otherwise we will use the stock. What will happen to other stocks if we do not take action is what happened to cod in the Irish Sea and other areas. We must not allow that to happen and must take the difficult decisions required by scientific analysis in order to conserve fish stocks and prevent them from being dramatically overfished and, therefore, subject to damage that may take years to undo.

Having said that, I believe there is a detailed analysis required. This is why the most important member of our team in the December discussions will be the Marine Institute.

We do not have sufficient data on the biomass of 58% of stocks in Irish waters to be able to draw significant conclusions. We cannot simply apply a 20% reduction because of lack of data. That is a principle that most Ministers in the Council would completely reject.

Maximum sustainable yield, or MSY, is a major part of the new Common Fisheries Policy. The policy has a number of big initiatives, including fishing to maximum sustainable yield. In normal language, that means catching as much fish as one can in order to return the maximum commercial benefit from fishing that stock, while at the same time not undermining the health of that stock. That is essentially what MSY is. We need a lot of data to make an accurate MSY figure or guesstimate. We will have an MSY fishing figure where possible by 2015 but for all stocks by 2020. In other words, this is an information gathering, scientific exercise to get as much data together, linked to the various stocks, as we can. We have enough data for some stocks to make an assessment of MSY. We are trying to move towards MSY by 2015 where possible.

There are other scientific arguments which cannot be ignored. As regards Nephrops, or prawns as most people would call them, we have multiple prawn fisheries in Irish waters, including the Porcupine Basin, off the south coast and in the Irish Sea. We treat Nephrops as one fishery, as opposed to dividing it into different geographical regions. In some of those fisheries, countries that have Nephrops quotas are simply not catching them at all, so a major portion of TACs are not filled. We need to factor such anomalies into the TAC and quota allocation decisions for next year.

In other words, we need to conserve stocks. However, we also need to look at the broader data to ensure that we are not unnecessarily reducing the level of fishing effort and quotas that will damage an industry by taking unnecessary steps to preserve or protect stocks. That is the kind of discussion that is ongoing between the industry and the Marine Institute. We have an industry-science partnership which involves a healthy and, at times, intense discussion. However, that relationship is probably better than it has ever been and the fishing industry understands the scientists' recommendations.

We also have industry observers at ISIS meetings, so these decisions are made in a transparent way. We might not agree with all the decisions but we can certainly see the process whereby they are made. The negotiations in December will be difficult for us. The numbers are harder and starker than in the preceding two years.

I am conscious of Deputy Harrington's point that the vast majority of fishermen in Ireland are not operating in large pelagic vessels - they are in medium-sized, white fish demersal vessels. That is how most fishing families derive their income, but we can only catch fish if they are there. That is the bottom line, so first and foremost we must protect stocks while at the same time trying to protect the incomes of fishermen and their families to the greatest extent without fundamentally undermining fish stocks. That is the basis of our preparations with the Marine Institute in advance of the December discussions, just as we did in 2011 and 2012 when we got pretty good outcomes given what was predicted going into those discussions. Sometimes people assume that the Minister will sort this out in December, as if we will have some sort of miracle solution. It is not as straightforward as that. We are facing difficult negotiations this time around and the outcomes for some in the fishing industry will be difficult. I will do the best I can, however, to try to make the scientific case for maximising the returns to a sector that needs to have somebody fighting for it. We will try to get the best outcome we can.