Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

As the Minister knows, we sought to annul SI 318 of 2020, which he introduced. We debated the proposal in the Dáil and I have to accept that it was voted through. I remind the Minister that when he was Fianna Fáil spokesperson on agriculture, food and the marine, he had a very different view on this matter. His colleague and former Deputy, Pat the Cope Gallagher, when he was spokesperson on the marine, introduced an annulment motion.

There are a number of points I want to reintroduce today in regard to the heads of this Bill. Specifically, I want to raise again the four key and reasonable bones of contention the industry has with these proposals. I have read the Minister's opening statement and, remarkably, what is missing in his assessment is an acknowledgment that the draft penalty points have been challenged in the courts and the Supreme Court has ruled on the matter previously. Everybody recognises that the European Commission is demanding that Ireland introduce a scheme. It is agreed that there needs to be a penalty points system, and oversight of that system, and that we must ensure our fisheries are operated sustainably. Unfortunately, the schemes that have been introduced on a number of occasions have not been fair and just. I will go through the correspondence that was issued to the Minister by the various fishing organisations in September 2020.

Point 9 in the draft general scheme, which is on page 10 of the document, shows that the Minister has not addressed the four main areas of concern for the industry, and I am sure that will continue through the scheme. The four major producer organisations in the State, namely, the Irish South and West Fish Producers Organisation, the Irish Fish Producers Organisation, the Irish South and East Fish Producers Organisation and the Killybegs Fishermen's Organisation, have written to the Minister to raise the four key issues. The first of these concerns the decision to be made by the determination panel on the balance of probabilities. This is very serious stuff because we are talking about potentially taking away somebody's livelihood.

The threshold for conviction for all Irish citizens and, indeed, European citizens is beyond a reasonable doubt. That is the threshold a director of public prosecutions and a jury looks at - beyond a reasonable doubt. That is the accepted threshold yet we are going with a threshold of "on the balance of probabilities", which I think is very dangerous. I reiterate that this type of approach has been rejected by the courts and it is the reason that it has taken so long for us to bring in legislation. With all due respect to the senior officials in the Department, they keep getting things wrong when drafting this legislation and, unfortunately, they have been turned around in the courts, which is what has delayed this process.

Having spoken to people across the industry I want to take this opportunity to say the following. There is an attempt to present the fishing industry as some kind of a mass illegality or an industry that does not like to follow laws, is up to skullduggery and so on. We only have to see that the funding and number of staff for the Sea-Fisheries Protection Authority have multiplied tenfold since it was brought into place so one has an organisation or regulator that has been seriously resourced. Any fisherman with whom I have spoken talked about how determined these officials are in terms of doing their job so I do not think anybody doubts the determination of the SFPA to implement the law. If some mass illegality did take place then how come we have not had a mass number of people convicted in the courts? It is very dangerous for the State to allow a narrative to go out that mass illegality is happening in the fishing industry.

Let us remember that the fishing industry is being squeezed out of its rightful access to the fish in our seas. We had 12% of the seas in the European Union yet we only get 4% of the quota across the European Union. We get one third of what should be our natural right so we should stand up for fishermen rather than allow a narrative of criminality and illegality to be placed on our fishing industry. Of course there should be oversight, and people should fish sustainably, not over fish and where over fishing is found to happen then people should be taken to task but there must be due process and it has to be fair. Every citizen is entitled to that fundamental pillar of our democracy and I find it astonishing that we allow legislation to again be presented to us that accepts a ban that removes any reference to "the balance of probabilities" and replaces it with "beyond a reasonable doubt". I appeal to the Minister to do that today and I draw his attention to the language again used in section 9, page 10 of the general scheme.

As the Minister will recall from correspondence he received from the four producer organisations, POs, last September, it states: "Where points remain on a licence even in the event of an appellant being exonerated of any offence." This provision is very objectionable. This is where a person has the right to take his or her case to a court of law if he or she feels that he or she has done no wrong yet, even if successful in that court of law, those penalty points remain on the licence. Can one imagine a situation where a person pulled over by the Garda for speeding is adamant there was no speeding and goes to a court of law where the case is won yet the points remain on the licence? Such a situation would not be tolerated by citizens yet we expect fishermen to find it acceptable.

The third point of contention is that fisherman are only allowed to apply to the High Court on a point of law. Again, the fishing community finds that objectionable.

The final point of contention, and I have no doubt that it is replicated in this legislation, is "where points attached to capacity multiply in the event of that capacity being subdivided". In other words, those points flow throughout even if one sells and subdivides one's capacity.

The Minister must agree that these are four reasonable grounds of concern for the fishing industry. As he knows, with all legislation that is presented to the Oireachtas one would expect that he would consult the stakeholders and invite them to make submissions. I know that he has rejected these grounds. I cannot see how any Minister can stand over the balance of probabilities being a threshold for conviction, having to go to court yet still be unable to remove points and being only able to apply "on a point of law".

Finally, I am pretty sure that every Deputy and Senator on this call today, and every fisherman I know that is worth their salt, understands that there needs to be a penalty points system. We all understand that we must have oversight and laws and that we must protect the precious amenity and natural resources in our seas but there is a plethora of staff in the SFPA, and there is the Naval Service and An Garda Síochána. There is a wide range of people to enforce the law but citizens have a right to due process and to be considered. Most important, a citizen has the right under law to be considered innocent until proven guilty. In my opinion, one must prove one's innocence as one is presumed guilty under too many of these processes. I put all of that to the Minister and look forward to his engagement.