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

The points made on the mackerel fishery are important. Depending on where one comes from, different fisheries are important. In value terms, the mackerel fishery is significantly important, particularly to the north west and the south west.

We are in the process of negotiating on the north-east Atlantic waters, a mackerel fishery shared by the EU, Norway, Iceland and the Faroe Islands. There has been a dispute for nearly five years about these waters. In our view, Iceland and the Faroe Islands have ignored all scientific advice and have been catching as much mackerel as they can catch and process. The EU has been trying to get back to a place where there was an agreed share-out of quotas between the stakeholders in that fishery, recognising where the fish spawn, grow and breed and that the mackerel stock has expanded into the north west. The proposed outcome is very different whether one comes from Ireland, Scotland, Norway, Iceland, the Faroe Islands or whether one is on the Commission. We had discussions last week in Clonakilty on this issue but there is still no resolution. It is in everyone’s interests to get an outcome that is fair and does not reward dramatic overfishing.

I met the European Commissioner for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, Maria Damanaki, recently and made clear to her the Irish position that the Commission’s current proposals are not acceptable and we strongly oppose them. This is an unfortunate position. I want to support the Commission in trying to find a conclusion to this matter but what is on offer is not the basis for a fair conclusion. Norway also shares our concerns. We cannot simply allow countries outside of the European Union to do what they want in terms of the amount of mackerel they catch. We will continue to be as constructive as we can be. We do, however, have to recognise the legal mandate of the Commission to be the negotiator on the European side.

Ireland only offers an opinion, but one that is strongly held. We have the second largest mackerel quota allocation in the European Union after the UK. We stand to lose a significant percentage of our access to stocks if the offer to Iceland and the Faroe Islands is too large.

I would rather not comment of the detention of the trawler, Annelies Ilena. That is in the hands of the Sea Fisheries Protection Authority, SFPA, and will be resolved in court. The SFPA and the Navy are doing their best to be fair in the tough job of ensuring people respect the rules. We saw an example of that in Kilmore Quay last week which was a difficult process for the industry to deal with but it was necessary. We are seeing it now with a non-Irish registered trawler in the north west. I hope the outcome will send a strong signal that people need to keep to the rules regardless of boat size or fishery.

The Council process is that the Commission makes a proposal based on advice from ICES, the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea, and other organisations. We go through a process of assessing this. Both Bord Iascaigh Mhara, and the Marine Institute have been helpful in this. We prepare a scientific argument whether to agree with, oppose or amend the Commission’s proposal. That happens at an intense Council meeting on 16 and 17 December. The outcome will probably be seen at 7 a.m. after 48 hours of non-stop discussions and negotiations.

As regards alliances at this meeting, member states tend to share scientific evidence. For example, we are working with the UK on nephrops in the Irish Sea, with Spain on megrim and with France on Celtic Sea white fish. We have agreed with France to change fishing gear to reduce juvenile fish catches, an effective way of reducing discards in that fishery.