Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Wednesday, 1 July 2015

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine

National Strategic Plan for Sustainable Aquaculture Development: Discussion

4:30 pm

Mr. Lorcán Ó Cinnéide:

I am here on behalf of the Irish Fish Processors and Exporters Association, IFPEA. In that context, we welcome the publication - and the initiative behind that publication - of the draft national strategic plan the Minister has issued for consultation. It was obligatory on the Minister to produce such a document under EU regulation but he is to be commended for it nonetheless. Aquaculture, by its nature and in the context of both the shellfish and finfish aspects, is processing intensive. There is a great deal of handling involved. The industry has significant potential in the context of employment, provided it operates on a sustainable basis and with the consent of the communities in which its activities are located. In addition, it must add to the quality of the portfolio of products already produced in and exported from Ireland.

That said, the IFPEA will be making a submission to the Minister and the Department in respect of the draft national strategic plan by the relevant due date. What I am about to say probably represent a rehearsal of some of the comments we will include in our submission. Although welcome, the draft national strategic plan is flawed in a number of very important respects and I hope the position in this regard will be corrected before it is published in its final form. Some of the analysis it contains is barely intelligible. I will provide some examples whereby I just could not understand what is meant, which, I am sure, has proven to be the case for others. Despite the fact that it is a very good recital of most, if not all, the issues which need to be addressed in terms of licensing, research, coastal zone management, etc., the draft national strategic plan's central failure is that it does not contain adequate timelines or measureables in the context of what is envisaged. This means that if it were to be implemented in its current form, it would prove to be largely aspirational in nature. There are enough aspirational documents emanating from the State without adding this to the overall number. I am of the view that it needs to be beefed up, with specific milestones set down in respect of the various initiatives outlined. If, for example, a research project is to be carried out, we must know what will be the timeframe involved, how it will proceed and who will have responsibility for it. Such considerations must be covered in a document such as that under consideration in order for it to be credible.

The draft national strategic plan suggests that the development of aquaculture has been stagnant. It has not been stagnant; rather it has been regressing, and quite significantly so, for a long period. We have halved our production of farmed salmon and reduced our production in respect of a number of other species over the years. We are not at the races in terms of what needs to be done. The strategy document should include further information on the key mechanisms relating to the siting of aquaculture operations - be they in respect of finfish or shellfish or even if they are located on land - and that such mechanisms must take into account competing uses, the concept of consent and consensus among communities and a clear understanding of the concept of environmental monitoring. That in itself would provide credibility. We are of the view that the strategy requires considerable improvement in terms of how it deals with these issues.

As stated, there are parts of the strategy document which I did not understand. On page 19 it is stated, "The impact of the improved profitability has been increasing income with a less than proportionate increase in operating costs". What does that actually mean? It gives the impression that the industry is becoming more profitable, despite the fact that it has been shrinking in terms of scale. On page 26, the document states, "Since 2000, there have been both increases and decreases in salmon output". I do not think that adds greatly to our store of knowledge about the sector. On page 38 it states,"Notwithstanding declines in salmon production output [which is superfluous in itself], the Irish salmon farming industry maintains extremely positive market trends by delivering a product that is viewed as distinct and desirable". It is distinct and desirable but statements of this nature are far too woolly and hyperbolic to be useful.

We are of the view that this is a very useful process in a very contentious area. There is a great deal that needs to be done. Aquaculture is not automatically a good, although it is good if it works in terms of investors, exports, employment and communities.

The processing sector would be very supportive of its continued development and even of efforts to exceed some of the targets in this document, provided some of the deficiencies to which I have referred are addressed.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.