Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Mac Lochlainn for his questions. First, on the size of our fishing or processing industry, as I outlined to Deputy Michael Collins earlier on, the percentages of each of the stocks were set in the Common Fisheries Policy and the allocation key back in the early 1980s. That position had remained constant since then until the impact of Brexit. If one looks at what we catch in our waters, in value terms, we catch €128 million of the fish caught in our waters. Non-Irish boats catch €254 million value of fish in our waters. We then catch €122 million worth of fish in non-Irish waters, that is, outside of Irish waters altogether. If one looks at what we catch between what we catch in Irish waters and what we catch outside of Irish waters, that is €250 million in total value in respect of what our fleet caught last year. Non-Irish boats caught €254 million worth of fish in Irish waters last year. That is €254 million versus our fleet total catch value of €250 million.

When one looks at it from a tonnage volume point of view as opposed to value, value-wise we catch approximately half the value of our waters. If one then looks at it in respect of the volume of tonnage, it is much more disjointed and imbalanced, primarily because of the impact of blue whiting, because 70% of the total volume of fish caught in our waters is blue whiting, that is, not looking at it from a value point of view.

Again, the challenge here goes back to the early 1980s and to what various countries were catching at that time. That percentage of the pie was set then. If one then looks at how that has evolved and if one takes Greencastle, for example, my own and the Deputy’s own port, this port will still catch as much fish now as it would have 20 or 30 plus years ago but there is a much smaller number of boats catching this fish. If one had walked the pier in Greencastle 20 to 30 years ago it would have been very busy with a great many smaller boats with many more people fishing from it, whereas now it is a smaller number of larger boats that are making the catch but a similar level of fish to what was being caught, compared to whenever the pier seemed a great deal busier because of the number of people who had been employed then and the size of the boats. The overall catch allocation and value has remained consistent, Brexit aside, and we in government and I have been consistently trying to ensure that the impact of Brexit, and in particular the fact that we are the country that is most impacted by that event, should be addressed at European level.

On the issue of the Hague preferences not being certain, that has been the case ever since the Hague preferences were put in place. These have to be agreed at each EU December meeting of the Council. This is often resisted but has always been applied and, likewise, it is something that I will seek to ensure happens again.

On the question of Ireland being an outlier in respect of an emergency fuel subsidy, as I explained in detail earlier on, the sea-fisheries task force report recommended a one-month tie-up for every boat for this year. As the Deputy knows, the seafood task force I put together had all of the fishing representatives involved. That is what their report asked for, that is, one month for 2022.

After the invasion of Ukraine and the impact on fuel, the fishing representatives sought to meet with me again and asked for a second month’s tie-up scheme specifically to address the fuel challenges there because of that new impact. That second month has delivered €12 million into the sector and is similar to the investment that would have been made by France or Spain into its fuel subsidies. I have never ruled out the fact that I would step in to take further action and I have been monitoring the situation very closely.

The funding in the EMFF is still there. It is earmarked for other purposes but I can still step in and spend that now. It is an investment into the sector and will be for other things within the sector. However, Europe has allowed for the facility to spend that now as a cash payment to support the fleet.

We had hoped that the fuel situation would be more short lived and that it would dissipate. Over the last few weeks, it had come down somewhat, but it has spiked again. We have seen that. I am reassessing the situation and I am also very much bearing in mind that the tie-up scheme, which has been in place since June, is due to run out at the end of November. I am considering that and I am looking at it afresh.

We have responded to it, to be fair. That has been clear. It was a response that was sought from me by the fishing representatives, and I responded to that promptly. That often does not get mentioned in the discussion. Deputy Mac Lochlainn never mentions it and he disputes it as well, but that is the position. The funding that was invested through that has been similar to what France and Spain have done, for example.

In terms of the 20 mile review, at the moment, under the Common Fisheries Policy, which was established in the early 1980s, we have exclusive access to our 10 mile zone. Other countries, depending on historical fishing activity, have had some access in some parts to our 10 mile to 20 mile zone. I saw it as part of the Common Fisheries Policy review access arrangements to gain complete access and control of our 20 mile zone. That is something that I pushed hard for at European level. I travelled specifically to Paris to meet with the French Minister for the marine, Annick Girardin, to press this. I met with many other member states at EU level as well. However, I was the only fishing Minister in Europe who was seeking to change that. There was not support from any other Minister who was seeking to access arrangements anywhere. I was seeking to change that. As with most things at European Council level, it requires a qualified majority vote to bring about change. That was not achieved, and I voted against the proposal to move on without delivering that. That then went to the EU Parliament, where it was discussed because all three of the Council of Ministers, the European Commission and the European Parliament have to agree on the approach. The renewal of the access arrangements under the Common Fisheries Policy has to be completed by the end of this year because if it is not agreed by the end of this year, the default position would be that every member state would have access to the shoreline of every other member state. Therefore, it had to be dealt with by the end of the year. I sought as part of that to try to push ours out a bit further, but that was not successful. At a European Parliament level, there was not the support to qualify for majority support there for it, either. The outcome of that is that it will be reviewed in three or four years’ time, but it is to be renewed now before the end of this year.

In relation to Rockall, as the Deputy knows, Rockall has always been in British waters, but we dispute the right of Britain to an exclusive 10 mile zone around Rockall. The right to a zone is defined under international law, but we have recognised their right to any 10 mile zone around it or their right to any sovereignty of the rock of Rockall. However, it has always been in British waters. That agreement to which the Deputy referred in 2013 did not change that. Rockall was always in British waters even prior to that. The dispute that we have with them, and what we have totally dispute, is that they have any right to that exclusive, 10 mile access zone around Rockall. We have never agreed to that, and we still hold that position strongly.

What happened when Britain left the European Union is that Rockall is now part of British waters and not part of European waters, while it was all part of European waters previously. British waters, our waters and all other waters were European waters. Now there are European waters and British waters. Because Rockall is and always was located in British waters, it is now within its water. There is now a licencing arrangement under the Brexit agreement for European boats, including Irish boats, to be able to access British waters. That has made the situation more challenging, but we continue to hold a position that there should not be any 10 mile zone. We are continuing to engage to try to achieve diplomatic progress in relation to that and to assert our historical fishing rights in that area, which is an important fishing ground for boats from Greencastle and from Donegal in particular. Boats from the south-west coast go to fish there too.