Ms Siobhán Egan:

BirdWatch Ireland works with other environmental NGOs and we are in contact with our bird life partners and a wide range of NGOs in other countries. We try to talk to each other as much as we can and to share information as access to the people who do the number crunching on stocks is very useful for us. There is a joint effort and people are working in the UK and other countries to influence their Minister with similar messages. The point of the sections which were written into the CFP, as shown on the slide, was to protect small-scale fisheries and those fisheries which have the least environmental impacts and can benefit society more. Just because it is written into the legislation, however, does not mean it automatically happens and that is why we are still involved in fisheries policy. It would be nice to think that once something is written down it happens but implementing the policy is proving to be a battle. It should not be as big a battle as it is and it needs the concerted effort, not just of NGOs but also of small-scale fisheries and others to be part of the movement to make sure that Ministers do what they ought to do and what they have committed to do.

A lot of the implementation is at national level and allocating resources at national level is in the Minister's gift. There is only so much that can happen at EU level.

However, he can put pressure on other Ministers to show the socioeconomic justification for their positions. They can do the same for him. As such, two things need to happen. At national level, he needs to show how he is allocating the resource and his justification for that. What is the sustainability impact assessment? When he comes to present that impact assessment, where is the rest of it? If I was looking at last year's one, I would be looking for the rest of it. It cannot just be what this year's or next year's revenue will be for particular stocks. It should be a question of the consequences for local communities and the rationale for allocating the resource to these smaller communities. Where is the justification and how has he come to that decision? I would be looking for that information when he comes to present the sustainability impact to the committee. That is at national level. He needs to make the decisions around that available.

At EU level, when the Minister is negotiating in December, he can ask the Dutch and others their sustainability criteria for allowing this vessel to catch its quota in Irish waters or waters that are also of interest to Ireland. When we have raised this with the European Commission, it has said there is a need for better guidance for member states to make it clear what the Commission might expect when it comes to making socioeconomic arguments. That is as far as we have managed to get with the Commission. To me, it is not a very firm commitment about what the Commission is going to look for from member states, but it is clearly acknowledging that there is a weakness there which member states are not addressing adequately. We will certainly be pushing for clearer guidance as to what might be expected by way of a justification to delay addressing overfishing and also for any allocation of resources. We can push the Commission to make guidance available and we are looking for that, but it is more important to push the Minister to ask questions of his ministerial colleagues and to ensure he is also providing his justification for national allocations.

The point of that text being written into the Common Fisheries Policy, CFP, was to protect the small guy or rather the fisher who fishes in the most sustainable way. The key is what we make of that and how we capitalise on the text now. It will take effort. It was stated that Ireland is just a tadpole. We are quite an influential tadpole. I do not know if the Minister is listening today, but he is very well known in fisheries circles and is well respected among fisheries Ministers. During the Irish Presidency of the EU, he chaired the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy. While we may think we are a tadpole, the Minister is an influential person. We must ensure he has a position for Ireland that makes the most sense. He is, of course, under pressure. Our fish stocks are under pressure, the sector is under pressure and the Minister is also under pressure from parts of the sector. We know that, but he still must represent Irish interests more widely. It is written into the legislation and we should ask him how he is doing it.

On the specifics of the report where I showed the 4% to 5% loss in employment, it is from the New Economics Foundation. I will find the information for the committee. As far as I know, it looked at the number of people directly employed in fisheries. I cannot say which member states were considered or how good the information was, but I am sure it is available and I will get it for the committee.

I was asked about the uplifts and what they will look like. I do not know what they will look like. Some information became available as recently as last week, but it was very little information. I am not a fisheries expert and it was not clear to me how the numbers were calculated. It was not a complete table. As such, I do not know what they will look like. Having spoken to the Marine Institute and the Minister in the space of the past two weeks, it is not clear how it will operate. As it is the first year, it could take a while for it to be sorted out.

I was asked about maximum sustainable yield, MSY, getting more income, how quickly and for which stocks, but I am afraid I will have to come back to the committee. I do not know off-hand. The exercise has been done for a number of stocks and the reports I referred to were at EU level. There is more work being done in the Marine Institute to model what stocks would look like, the implications of the landing obligations and what can be extrapolated from that in terms of what the revenue would be. As such, work is happening closer to home but the reports I quoted are at EU level.

One of the things that came out that would be worth exploring in greater detail is the local knowledge and the expertise that exists within local communities from different types of fishers, the risks of it not being used and the extent to which it is not being used and is being lost. That is something that has come up with us before. When we are looking for the Marine Institute to ensure funding is available for what we call "citizen science", it is about a way for different sectors or parts of the community to contribute information that can add to decision-making processes. We hope that there is money available through things like the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund, EMFF, for citizen science initiatives. That is something it would be worthwhile for the committee to explore in more detail with the Marine Institute. Certainly, it is an area we are interested in.

If I have missed any specifics, I ask members to flag them with me. The key thing here and in the space of the next couple of weeks is to change old habits. We are in a new framework. Our Ministers across Europe last year were meant to have raised their game to bring an end to overfishing. There is an opportunity to do it this year through the sustainability impact assessment. I would be looking for more clarity and information about what our Minister is bringing to the table by way of sustainability in respect of fishing opportunities.