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

I will address Deputy Ó Cuív's questions first. He asked about the advertising for new applicants for the scheme. That is either happening today or it is about to happen and, therefore, it is rather difficult to give an assessment of the take-up.

Reference was made to mackerel allocation. There has been a significant increase in the mackerel quota this year, largely linked to a political negotiation with Iceland and the Faroe Islands with a view to getting the political deal across the line. This is the basis of it as opposed to relying on any scientific data, although some scientific data from ISIS has facilitated the process. To secure agreement, everyone will get more mackerel in the short term. In my view that is only for the short term and within a short number of years we will be back to where we were last year in terms of mackerel quota in Ireland. As a result of the increasing quota, everyone gets a greater percentage. The split is 87:13 between the pelagic fleet and the polyvalent fleet. Everyone benefits from an increase in the overall amount because everyone gets a percentage.

I believe we would have gone through a very difficult process of negotiation - one must do so when one wishes to change allocation criteria and percentages - and had we done so I believe it would have been legally challenged. In any event we will be back to where we started in terms of the overall quota available for the fleet. I have decided not to do that for the moment. We have enough to deal with in terms of the implementation of the CFP, the decisions on how we spend the new fisheries fund - we will get news on it this week - and the negotiation with the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform on the associated co-funding element, without having on top of that a renegotiation of the percentage split of mackerel, which would turn into a long, difficult and drawn-out process. I have decided not to do that this year.

The possibility of an extension of the six mile limit to 12 miles was raised. If I could do that, I would. We tried to secure that as part of the CFP. We looked for support for such an initiative but did not get any. If we could increase the exclusive zone from six miles to 12 such that only our boats were allowed in, I would do so in a shot. We are always looking for such opportunities at a European level. However, as the Deputy is aware, we need support from many other countries to secure something like that and it was simply not available.

Lobster size regulations are based on recommendations from the industry and the science of the Marine Institute. It is simply a fact that a very large male lobster and larger female lobsters produce more offspring than smaller lobsters. Often large lobsters are not valued according to their size and weight. Ideally, we want older larger lobsters producing many offspring in areas that are protected, where possible. Certainly, we want female lobsters being put back and V-notched and we compensate people for that. We also want large male lobsters being put back as well. I am referring to large lobsters over 127 mm.

There is an issue for parts of the west where lobsters are considerably bigger, particularly around the Aran Islands. Concerns have been expressed to me specifically on this issue. This is the type of issue I am happy to discuss and negotiate with regional forums. If we have larger average lobster sizes in one part of the country versus another, we can consider applying different maximum sizes to different areas, depending on what suits the stock in those areas. However, we must get the feedback and data before we can do it. At the moment, the perceived scientific wisdom is that the cut-off point should be 127 mm and that is what we are going for. Of course people are getting compensated for putting them back.

I am keen for V-notching to be compulsory. However, I would prefer this to come from the industry because otherwise it will be an enforcement nightmare. I would love to see the regional forums feeding into a national forum and for the national forum to make a recommendation that V-notching would be compulsory in the lobster industry. We would gladly implement it then and support that approach. It makes sense on every level. However, we do not have full buy-in for that. Without such full buy-in we could announce a law but we would spend an absolute fortune enforcing it.

I would much rather self-enforcement within the industry where possible, through the regional fora and the structures set up as part of those. Hopefully everyone will buy into that and soon it will become mandatory for everybody, particularly now that there is a 75% compensation for putting V-notched females back. I would like it to develop but the industry must make it happen.

I would rather not comment on the seaweed rights argument because I have not spoken to the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government about it. I do not want to step into the area for which the Minister of State at that Department, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, is responsible. I will talk to her about it.

In respect of the replacement of pots and the 60% that fishermen must pay, we did a deal with Bank of Ireland. It said if we provided 40%, it would match that and provide 40% of the capital required by people looking for that funding, which leaves fishermen to find the remaining 20%. That was a recognition that a banking provision was required to finance this area. I expect AIB or Ulster Bank would do the same. This is a matter of investing in the industry and creating good faith around it. In relative terms this does not involve huge sums of money, although it is significant for many who fish in this category because many would not have overdraft or loan facilities in place. I have an assurance that Bank of Ireland, particularly, and I suspect the other banks, will at least match what we are doing by making loan or overdraft facilities available to enable people to avail of grant aid. It is important for people to know that.

In response to Deputy Harrington, I hope we will get some recommendations on the scallops. I hope we have started the ball rolling on that issue. That was the idea behind hatcheries for lobster. People could see the Department was willing to support initiatives of that kind. Let us see some more initiatives coming from the sector that can work in suitable regions. If that means seeding scallops, we will by all means consider that, if it makes sense to put public money into it.

As for heritage licences, salmon fishing is not my area but we should consider ways to create new income opportunities for inshore fishermen. In the UK, for example, a significant line fishery has developed for mackerel which is labelled and marketed differently from mackerel caught in large trawls. Many restaurants in the UK will buy only line-caught mackerel and will pay more for it because it is sustainable and because of the quality of the fish brought in. We have a big enough quota allocation to support a growing line fishery in different parts of the coastline, where through working with organisations such as Bord Bia, we could create a strong market in Irish restaurants. I would like to see more work on that, and if I am around long enough, we will do work in that area. For better or worse, this Department does not make decisions on salmon.

The training centres are an issue and I would like to see more links with the National Maritime College in Cork, which has a fantastic infrastructure, particularly on safety in navigation. The resources there are second to none anywhere in the world, and there is no reason fishermen should not access that. That does not mean we should take them out of Greencastle or Castletownbere. We should not. There should be investment there but that training could be supplemented by time in a National Maritime College that has the infrastructure to improve training in that area. The inshore forum is not a PO, it is a consultative forum. It is there to bring forward policy ideas and hopefully I will give it some ideas and get feedback. It may develop into a PO.

If there are only 12 seals at the entrance to any harbour, one is doing well.