Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the three members. It is no accident that they are all from Donegal and I appreciate their long-standing interest in this issue.

Senator Mac Lochlainn made reference to one company, as did the two previous speakers. I visited that facility a number of years ago, long before I was in this position. I appreciate the potential in the sector. It is a relatively new industry in the context of farming generally and globally. It is in its nascent stage in Ireland relative to global development.

I make absolutely no apology for running with the most critical element of the report to which my colleagues allude. Clearing the licence backlog is, by a country mile, ahead of any of the other recommendations. I make no apology whatsoever for that. That is the key to unleashing the potential and all of the rest are secondary considerations. In an ideal world, we would have flowcharts and indications, but I specifically asked the division within the Department and equipment is there.

The first step in the light of the report was that we prioritise the clearing of the licensing backlog, to the cost of every other recommendation, if necessary. That is what we will do. The Department is making progress and I make no apology for that. That is the key and critical issue because no one can work without a licence. I cannot operate outside the law. It is important to take into account the very clear judgment and finding against us by the European Court of Justice about our licensing agreements in the context of the habitats directive. To give credit to officials who have been unfairly maligned, they did negotiate permission for those who currently had licences to continue to operate under those licences while we did an enormous undertaking in gathering the data for the appropriate assessments in all of the bays. We were starting from scratch. That was a mammoth undertaking. The judgment was challenging but it would have been calamitous if the judgment was applied with its full rigour and intent. It would have closed down the industry. The Department negotiated an ability for the industry to continue to operate its existing licences.

Reference has been made to the tonnage and I am aware of the international comparisons but we need to be sure we are comparing like with like. Our production is generally in the organic sphere, so it is not as intensive an operation or production system as others in the international sphere that have been quoted. That said, the tonnage is lower than it was in the early 2000s. The history of the sector will show that, in the early 2000s, there was a collapse of the European market. Many of the early operators, by virtue of the economic consequences of that, got wiped out. There was an anti-dumping court case taken at European level but the consequences for the early operators in the industry here was they were wiped out. We were virtually starting from scratch again post 2003, when we produced 23,000 tonnes, which was the figure to which Deputy McConalogue alluded. The flexibility of the arrangements we have, albeit they are restricted arising from the European Court of Justice ruling, show that, in 2012, it was 12,000 tonnes. In 2016, it was 16,300 tonnes and, in 2017, we produced 19,305 tonnes. The trajectory has been in the right direction but we need to make more progress on finfish, which seems to be the area of primary concern for the Deputies, and I understand that. It is not 75% of the value. In fact, the figures I have for 2016 show the value of the finfish side was around €100 million and the value of the shellfish was just shy of €60 million. It is more in the region of 2:1 rather than 75%, but that is a moot point as both are extremely valuable sectors and provide valuable employment. Our endeavour is to get to a situation where the licensing regime enables the full potential of the sector to be realised.

In taking into account the licensing regime, we must be conscious that, in the context of that process, there are rights enjoyed by all parties, as Deputy Pringle alluded to. There are rights of third parties to register their views and there is an independent appeals process for any licence determinations that are issued. If one looks at comparable issues, the most obvious one is a routine planning application to a local authority. There is an appeals process to An Bord Pleanála. There is an appeals process for these licensing decisions and that can be exercised by either a third party or an applicant.