Mr. Fintan Kelly:

Having sat with the Minister and representatives from the industry in Clonakilty, and having sat on advisory councils with the industry, I have found that the general approach is to maintain or increase our level of catch. All stakeholders would agree that getting to MSY is beneficial to everyone. While we would say that over the past few years we needed to make progressive incremental gains, when it comes to the accounts being done at the end of the year in November or December, there is a tendency to slip back into that short-termism. The BIM sustainability impact assessment was mentioned. That reflects the predominant approach where BIM will look at the Commission's proposal. The Commission will reflect on the scientific advice that ICES has supplied, which might recommend a decrease in the amount of fish that can be caught for some stocks, depending on the health of the stock, and for others an increase, depending on fluctuations in the population. The Commission will bring forward a proposal which BIM and the Government will consider. The cost of the reductions for the year ahead will then be presented to the Oireachtas committee. There is not a calculation, therefore, of what the benefits will be over a two, five or ten year period if we were to follow the scientific advice.

We have raised this matter with BIM and the Department for a number of years. It is a major oversight and it severely hinders the narrative of the discussion. In my presentation, I tried to steer away from birds or some of the more ecological arguments one might expect from an organisation such as BirdWatch Ireland. I focused on the economics because this should not be a negative outlook. Rather, it is an overwhelmingly positive opportunity for us to grow our blue economy. At this year's SeaFest, I noted the Minister presented the Government's objectives, which, like Food Wise 2025, were focused on increasing the profitability of Ireland's aquaculture sector. We would like to see that kind of approach taken to improving the sustainability of our fisheries or wild fish populations. Based on some of the figures we put forward, there is a potential for an increase of 2,200 jobs in our coastal communities, many of which are in marginal areas without many other opportunities, unfortunately. We feel that perspective should definitely be taken but, unfortunately, it has not been taken.

Some other points were made about the legal obligations and whether I was implying that Ireland is failing to live up to them, which is a serious issue. My point was that based on what we can see from the decisions that are being made, Ireland seems to be playing a particularly negative role. It consistently performs worse than the EU average in the number of stocks with which we are involved that are above scientific advice. Looking at the trajectory of where that leaves us heading towards 2020, it appears we are heading for a situation where, collectively, the member states will not reach the 2020 target. Given Ireland's major role in this development, we should be accountable and that is what I am asking of the Oireachtas joint committee. It should be highlighted with the Minister that the November Council is the 2020 deadline because there will not be another negotiation before 2020. If the Minister suggests we should not follow scientific advice, he should make clear what are the long-term economic arguments for taking that position and what are the political implications for Ireland of coming to the table with the attitude that we will not be legally compliant.

Similarly, in the case of the December Council, the negotiations that will take place in December of this year and again in December 2019 will bring us up to the 2020 deadline. While the deadline may seem to be some time away, there will be only two meetings in Brussels beforehand and considerable progress remains to be made. In recent years, we have met departmental officials and have always made clear that we are sympathetic to the position in which the Minister finds himself. We are not asking for a guillotine approach such as was taken in 2015 when all the stocks were in MSY. We have always argued for a clear plan that makes clear we are heading in the direction of having all stocks in MSY by 2020.

I focused a good deal on setting the fishing limits at the maximum sustainable yield, MSY, but also on being more cautious or even on being more positive at setting them below the MSY. In doing that effectively we would leave more fish in the population and our stocks should increase over time. If our stocks are increasing over time and getting back to historical levels that would have massive positive impacts not only on the ecosystem but on our fisheries.