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

Mr. Doherty's testimony was very damning. I have specific questions for each organisation. The first is for Mr. O'Donoghue and Mr. Doherty from the Killybegs Fishermen’s Organisation. On page 3 of their submission, they state, and rightly so: "The proposals disregard those other objectives of the CFP dealing with economic, social and employment benefits, and contributing to the availability of food supplies as stated in Article 2.1 of the CFP." That ties in with what Mr. Doherty said, that if one looks at the approach regarding mackerel, it is shocking that Norway and the Faroe Islands have not been held to account about what they have done in their own waters by just unilaterally increasing quota with no reference to science. In the case of the Faroe Islands, it is part of Denmark, and in the case of Norway, it is a major trading partner with the European Union, yet there have been no repercussions. Then, in the case of Norway, it comes back and want access to the Irish Box; that is astonishing. When the Minster was here earlier, I appealed to him not just to meet the organisations represented here, as he did in September, but also for there to be constant communication with them about the critical negotiations taking place. There are the negotiations at the Agriculture and Fisheries Council and those with the Norwegians and Faroe Islanders in respect of mackerel. I will get to blue whiting in a moment - the question in that regard will for Mr. O'Domhnaill. Do the witnesses accept that this approach is not in line with the best principles of the European Union?

Mr. O'Domhnaill's submission was really sobering. On the third page, there is a table containing Eurostat data. It indicates that the total value of fish processing in Ireland in 2015 was €627 million. By 2020 - before the conclusion of the TCA - it was down to €325 million. In other words, it had halved. In response to me raising this shocking matter, the Minister spoke about MSYs, fishing practices having changed across Europe and so on. Looking at this table, I also see that Belgium and Finland increased the value of their processing sectors by 40% and 70%, respectively, in that five-year period. Spain is up 20%, Poland is up 50%, France is up around 4% and Britain, before Brexit, was around the same. The only country that experienced a huge decline was Ireland. Is that the entirety of the value of the processing sector for the country, as Mr. O'Domhnaill understands it? If it is, that is utterly depressing.

The next question I have is also for Mr. O'Domhnaill. It relates to blue whiting and is similar to the question I put to Mr. O'Donoghue and Mr. Doherty. I am not going to rehearse what I said to the Minister earlier, when I outlined the serious concerns of the industry to the effect that what is proposed in this regard could sound the death knell for the industry if those involved in the negotiations do not get the quotas relating to blue whiting, horse mackerel and mackerel right. In terms of blue whiting, is Mr. O'Domhnaill happy that there is constant dialogue with the Minister and senior officials as we approach these critical negotiations? Will Mr. O'Domhnaill elaborate on his request that they be deferred?

My third question is for Mr. Early from Irish Islands Marine Resource Organisation. He mentioned spurdog and talked about the quota; this is a publicly-owned quota in Ireland. Will Mr. Early speak about the island and inshore fishermen and his organisation's vision for how they can get a sustainable share the?

My final question is for Mr. O'Sullivan and Mr. Murphy from Irish South & East Fish Producers Organisation. Mr. O'Sullivan spoke about the Hague preferences. Again, his submission is very sobering. He spoke about deploying the Hague preferences, if need be, in respect of some of the species. Mr. Murphy indicated that what is being offered is not in line with the science and is far too conservative.

These are critical issues for the industry. What is the level of dialogue between the organisation and the Department and the Minister? Are the Department and the Minister listening? Do the witnesses get a sense that the specific matters they raised are being dealt with?

Will Mr. Lynch and Mr. Murphy comment on the issue relating to fuel? I am in despair at this stage. I do not know how many times we have begged for an intervention in respect of fuel, but not from the Brexit adjustment reserve fund, the purpose of which is to compensate people for the impact of Brexit. I agree with Mr. O'Donoghue's point on the pelagic sector not getting appropriate assistance, particularly when we consider the scale of the impact. We do not want this to come from the Brexit adjustment reserve fund or to be based on tie-ups. We want Exchequer funding. There was a huge package in the recent budget for a range of sectors within the economy. How in God's earth is there not some intervention for the fishing industry? Earlier, the Minister referred to the fact that the price of fuel has come down again. My point is that if you are an inshore fisher, you did not have a tie-up scheme anyway. There is an impact throughout the year. What are Mr. Lynch's and Mr. Murphy's views in that regard? I want to direct the questions rather than having everybody speak on the same points.