Mr. Micheál O'Mahony:

One of the recurring themes has been that of subjectivity and analogies with the road traffic points with which we might have greater familiarity. In our view, analogies with the road traffic points system are generally unhelpful in this context and are generally misleading. The road traffic points are for minor infringements with decision making power at the roadside, frequently in lieu of prosecution and with concepts such as double or quit, or double or nothing, if one appeals. None of those things apply here.

These points are for serious infringements. They have no impact whatsoever on the likelihood of a prosecution. We do not envisage any pier-side decision making ability. We have been given one number of points to apply for a serious infringement - we cannot double or quits that. It is a fixed obligation in the EU regulation. We are happy to answer questions but some of the questions appear to be drawing analogies from the road traffic points system which is possibly not the best way of looking at these points. These points are for serious infringement, they are for a different spectrum of infringements. We have talked about the administrative sanctions, concepts which should apply at that lower order infringement. This is for the serious infringements. As a member state, Ireland is specifically obliged to have a dissuasive system of sanctioning that should explicitly include a points system for licence holders.

The subject of appeals and natural justice was raised frequently. The decision in writing the SI, taking direct advice from the Attorney General's office, particularly around the wherewithal of an individual fisher to challenge the bureaucracy of the State, was to have an accessible appeals system. The decision was to have a specific appeals officer provided for within with the SI. That appeals officer is designed around accessibility as opposed to invoking the machinery of the courts and the expense of that machinery, to provide an accessible and natural justice recourse for the fishermen. No points will be applied until the fisherman has had recourse to that natural justice. There will be notification with intent to apply and then a right to appeal that intent. That is what is envisaged. There is a specific mention of the potential of going to the High Court. However, we do not see that as being realistic for individual fishers but it is in place should they remain dissatisfied.

The policy decision has been to put in place this accessible appeals officer. The provision certainly gives recourse to natural justice. This appears to be the case at the outset, at least, but it has not yet been tested.

The independence of the points procedures from the criminal court proceedings, if they arise, represents a policy decision made on the best advice from the Office of the Attorney General. It is not something that comes from the SFPA. It is a considered decision. The points stand alone. The skipper and licence holder are regarded as separate and there are obligations within EU regulations that are being implemented separately in regard to them. They have not yet been tested or challenged.