Michael Collins (Cork South West, Independent) | Oireachtas source

When you hear how many questions I have, you might be in shock.

I will go through as many as I can and maybe I will come back in later so as to give other members a chance. On the weighing crisis, the SFPA submitted a draft new control plan in December 2020 and again in 2021 further information was submitted. This was four or five months before any control plan was revoked. Was that the case? What was going on here? The SFPA did this without consulting the industry. It never told the industry why. In its evidence the last time it appeared before the committee, the SFPA said it consulted continuously with the industry. I can not understand why the SFPA did not give some indication that there was a problem and start working towards a solution.

Did the SFPA inform the Minister at this time? Did it share a copy of this plan with anybody, a group or a Department official? Did the SFPA inform the Department? Why did the SFPA consider it necessary to submit this draft control plan? There is no evidence that anyone asked it to do it. Has the SFPA shared this draft control plan with the industry, since it has become public knowledge just four weeks ago?

When did the SFPA get the initial reply back from the European Commission following it completing the 2019 administrative inquiry? Was any of that correspondence shared with the Minister or the Department? Why did the SFPA confirm the findings of the 2018 audit with the European Union to the administrative inquiry especially when, at that time and since then, the details or contents of these investigations have still not been shared with the industry? The Commissioner stated the SFPA confirmed the findings of the audit reference to the letter of 13 April, informing it that the control plan is revoked. It stated the SFPA confirmed the findings. Was that wise?

Does the SFPA think it is fair that sanctions are imposed on the entire fishing industry and yet not one fisherman has seen any evidence or any information that has been compiled by the 2018 audit or the 2019 administrative inquiry, which the SFPA carried out? Why withhold evidence and yet proceed to punish an entire sector? Has the SFPA written to the European Union seeking the information to be shared with the fishing industry? Did the SFPA share a copy of this 2018 audit with an NGO such as BirdWatch Ireland, or other such organisations? Where are the details regarding the contents of the 2018 audit coming from? Is there an internal discipline problem in the SFPA? Internal leaks are out of control.

The last time the SFPA was before the Oireachtas committee it stated that the decision to revoke the plan came as a shock to the SFPA. How credible is that statement now, if four months earlier it was submitting a draft control plan to the European Commission? Has the SFPA made a blunder on the basis of the information it shared with the European Union as part of the 2019 administrative inquiry?

Record-keeping in the SFPA, according to the 2020 PwC report, is poor, or non-existent. Did the SFPA make the Minister aware of any correspondence in the run-up to April 2021? Does the SFPA accept that this is sharp practice, first, not advising that it submitted a plan and, second, leading us to believe that the decision to revoke the control plan was a shock, while all the time the SFPA was exchanging plans and correspondence with the European Union for months in advance of that.

Does the SFPA accept that submitting a control plan is in fact a matter for the Minister? Does the SFPA accept that it is the Minister who submits the plan to the European Union as per statutory position? Since the revoking of the plan on 13 April 2021, the official at European Union level dealing with Irish queries was not available, being either on leave, or having left, or so the SFPA informed the industry last week. How long was the position vacant? While it was vacant, who was the SFPA liaising with, and since when? Why has it taken 77 days, or two months and 16 days, to get to a position where finally it is accepted that a control plan is being submitted for all fisheries, shellfish, whitefish and pelagic fish? When will this plan find its way to the European Commission?

Realistically, we need to be fair and open here. Ireland could be without a control plan for another six to 13 months. That has the potential to take in two landing seasons. Does the SFPA realise the chaos this will cause? Submitting the new control plan to Brussels does not fix it for fishermen, because they still have to operate the weighing piers until such time as the submitted control plan is accepted by the EU and every coastal state. That could take months. Has the SFPA submitted an interim plan to allow the weighing in factories? It was able to submit a draft plan earlier without advising anyone. Has the SFPA addressed the crisis of having no plan at European level? If not, this madness will continue for months, leading to the destruction of the Irish fishing industry.

We do not accept that the SFPA cannot do this. If the SFPA had appealed the original implementation decision on 13 April, it would have acted to save the industry. It would have negotiated the position for Irish fishermen. That decision, of 13 April 2021, should have been appealed. It was a savage attack on the Irish fishing industry by the EU. It was blunt and draconian. It nailed every sector of the Irish fishing industry.

The SFPA and the Government have an opportunity now, after all that has happened, to rebuild a relationship with the industry and put in place measures to allow the fishing industry to restore normality in fish processing, by making a case for restoring weighing in factories before the delay in getting the plan adopted by the EU. Reason needs to prevail. Weighing whitefish and shellfish in the open air is not practical or sensible.

On 4 June 2021, the SFPA lost a case in the High Court, taken by the industry for the right to use a weighing machine at the pier in Killybegs. The industry paid for this device. Costs were awarded against the SFPA. That has a potential cost to the State of about €500,000 to €600,000. Why was the case allowed to go ahead? Mr. Justice Simons found that the SFPA acted unlawfully. That is a damning judgment against the SFPA. Is the SFPA going to have an internal examination on this issue? Does the SFPA believe, that as Ireland's chosen, competent authority, responsible both for the implementation of the European Common Fisheries Policy and the regulation of sea fisheries and seafood production, it is able to carry out its duties as the competent authority to protect the quality of seafood and to ensure it is fit for human consumption by providing a health certificate for seafood? Would the SFPA agree that the current practice of weighing fish on the pier degrades the quality of fish?

Thank you, Chairman, for your patience.