Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Deputy Creed. I thank him for appearing before the joint committee to update us on the aquaculture licensing review process. I also welcome his officials.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official, either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the members of the joint committee for the invitation to meet them to discuss aquaculture licensing in the context of the report of the independent aquaculture licensing review group. The committee is familiar with the background to the issue, but it is useful to restate the position to avoid confusion. Therefore, my opening statement is intended to provide committee members with a broad overview of the aquaculture licensing system and how it operates; the key issues associated with the backlog which gave rise to the review; the key recommendations made in the review; and the progress made to date in their implementation. I will be glad to take questions from them afterwards.

An aquaculture licence is required by law for the cultivation of finfish, shellfish and certain marine plants such as seaweed. Some aquaculture takes place on land, but the vast majority of aquaculture activity takes place in the marine environment on the foreshore. In Ireland almost all of the foreshore is in public ownership. Therefore, aquaculture activity requires both an aquaculture licence to conduct operations and a companion foreshore licence to lawfully occupy the area of foreshore in question. Even in the rare case of private ownership of foreshore, an aquaculture licence is required to engage in aquaculture activity. The foreshore is measured from the high water mark out to 12 nautical miles and is approximately 39,000 square kilometres in overall size. It is roughly equal in size to just over 50% of the land area of the State. However, the areas suitable for aquaculture represent a small fraction of the foreshore and, in the case of finfish cultivation, are exclusively along the western seaboard.

My Department considers all applications for aquaculture licences in accordance with the following legislation: Fisheries (Amendment) Act 1997; Foreshore Act 1933; EU Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC; EU Birds Directive 79/409/EEC; Consolidated Environmental Impact Assessment Directive 2011/92/EU; and the public participation directive, otherwise known as the Aarhus Convention. The licensing process involves consultation with a wide range of scientific and technical advisers, as well as various statutory consultees. The legislation also provides for a period of public consultation. In addition to the legislation mentioned, my Department must adhere to a wide range of regulatory requirements and other legislation which impact on the licensing process. The public participation directive has emerged as a crucial factor in the roll-out of the licensing system as it applies to individual cases. The key aim of the directive is to grant the general public specific rights in gaining access to information in governmental decision-making processes on matters concerning the local, national and trans-boundary environment.

The major complaint from aquaculture farmers about licensing relates to the backlog that has developed in the processing of licence applications.

The background to the backlog is that in 2007, the European Court of Justice issued a negative judgment against Ireland for breaches of the EU birds and habitats directives. A large element of the judgment concerned a failure by the State to put in place a system for data collection, definition of scientific interests and adequate assessment of aquaculture licence applications in Natura 2000 areas. At the time of the European Court of Justice case, national legislation was put in place to ensure that Irish aquaculture operations operating under pre-existing licences and that were seeking renewals could continue to operate under those licences until a determination could be made on their renewal applications in compliance with the Natura 2000 directives.

In the negotiations to address this European Court of Justice judgment and to enable aquaculture to continue in Natura 2000 areas in the interim, a process was agreed with the Directorate General for the Environment and this is being implemented. The process includes data collection, the setting of conservation objectives by the National Parks and Wildlife Service, identifying the scientific interests to be protected in the bays, the carrying out of appropriate assessments of the licence applications against those scientific interests and appropriate licensing, taking account of, among other things, Natura 2000 requirements.

The production of these appropriate assessments has been resource intensive and very time consuming, not least because of tidal cycles and seasonality issues relating to data gathering on bird migrations and other environmental phenomena. In many cases multi-year time series data had to be collected. In addition, the sea beds in Natura 2000 areas also had to be mapped to identify conservation interests. For example, this work involved 123 survey events carried out by ten contractors. In addition, profiling of aquaculture industry activities was carried out for all bays to define the likely interactions with conservation features of sites. In many instances there were few data or little published literature on likely interactions between aquaculture activities and conservation features. A number of targeted studies and reviews were commissioned to investigate responses of conservation features, for example, birds and-or habitats, to specific aquaculture and fisheries activities. Many of these have subsequently been published in primary literature. All of this preliminary work to prepare the groundwork for consideration of licensing went on from 2009 onwards.

I am glad to report that most of this data collection, definition of scientific interests and the appropriate assessment process itself is almost complete, and appropriate assessment reports have been received by my Department from the Marine Institute in respect of 29 bays. These bays constitute the bulk of the aquaculture activity, and the work carried out since 2009 has permitted licensing in compliance with the Natura 2000 directives and the European Court of Justice judgment to commence. Since licensing commenced under the new system, a little over 600 licensing decisions have been made on aquaculture sites around the coast up to the end of 2017.

Dealing with the Natura 2000 elements has been the major focus for all involved in the licensing process up to recently, but there are other issues, including legislative reform, the streamlining of procedures and the optimum use of technology associated with licensing, which also need to be addressed. As a consequence of all these elements, I commissioned the independent review of aquaculture licensing in December 2016 and the report was delivered to me at the end of May 2017. The review group carried out a detailed examination of the existing aquaculture licensing process, undertook comprehensive stakeholder consultation and looked at comparative national and international consent systems to determine best practice for managing a complex licensing process in a transparent, environmentally appropriate and legally robust manner. The group’s report is published and available to view on my Department’s website. A total of 30 separate recommendations are contained in the report.

Since receiving the report of the review group, my Department has engaged in detailed consideration of the recommendations set out in the report with a view to their implementation, having regard to the legislative, environmental, technical and public interest issues that arise. My Department has also engaged closely with industry representatives and relevant State agencies. The core recommendation of the independent review was to deal with the backlog by the end of 2019. In response to the priority given by stakeholders to the elimination of the licensing backlog, my Department has been actively working towards the achievement of 300 licence determinations this year with a further 300 projected for 2019. I can confirm that the target of 300 licence determinations has been achieved two months ahead of schedule. This is a very substantial achievement and gives a clear indication of my commitment and the commitment of my Department to dealing with this issue in a comprehensive manner. I can further confirm that we are fully committed to achieving 300 further licence determinations in 2019 and that this will effectively eliminate the shellfish licensing backlog as an issue affecting the industry. The elimination of the shellfish licensing backlog will be a game changer for the industry and will provide a solid footing for the industry, long demanded by industry representatives.

The bar chart that I have circulated with the script sets out clearly the dimensions of the change that has been brought about in 2018 and is projected for 2019. Effectively, the rate of determinations of aquaculture licence applications this year is almost three times the level of decisions that were made in previous years. Shellfish aquaculture represents by far the greatest number of operators who are also, in the main, small family-run businesses. For this reason, and in conjunction with industry representatives, my Department has prioritised the elimination and reduction of the backlog in respect of shellfish aquaculture during 2018. For 2019, it is expected that the backlog in shellfish aquaculture will be effectively eliminated. Once shellfish farmers operating within Natura 2000 areas have been relicensed in compliance with the Natura 2000 directives, they can access development funding under our seafood development programme.

On finfish aquaculture, a focused modular approach towards addressing the backlog in finfish licensing will be accelerated. The processing of applications for finfish licences in the marine environment is significantly more complex than the situation relating to shellfish aquaculture due to the requirement for operators to produce environmental impact statements and for my Department and relevant agencies to analyse these reports in detail. My Department must then produce an environmental impact assessment for each application. In addition, developments that apply generally to aquaculture licensing have a particular resonance for finfish licensing for the following reasons: a greater focus by environmental NGOs and the public on key EU legislation and heightened public awareness and concerns about aquaculture operations, mainly relating to salmon farming but also arising frequently in shellfish licensing.

There should be no doubt in anybody’s mind that the core reason I established the independent aquaculture licensing review group was the need to address the licensing backlog arising from the European Court of Justice judgment. This was the primary concern of industry stakeholders. This core need is being actively and urgently addressed by my Department, and the first results of our efforts are discernible. We have achieved 300 licence determinations to date this year. I am confident that we will achieve a further 300 licence determinations next year. The related recommendations are also being addressed and will be implemented as part of a larger reform of the regulatory process. I have been very conscious, however, of the need to prioritise implementation in response to what the industry itself has pointed to as the most urgent issue, namely, the licensing backlog. Once this has been eliminated for the bulk of operators, who are in the shellfish sector, they will be operating under ten-year licences and can access developmental funding and supports available from the State.

On finfish licensing, my Department is scheduled to request operators formally to submit environmental impact statements in respect of their licence renewal applications. This request is scheduled to issue to all operators shortly and will specify the timeline for submission of the necessary documentation. This process was commenced by my Department in 2014, but following strong representations from IFA aquaculture on behalf of the aquaculture industry, the matter was not advanced until additional guidelines and workshops on the issue were provided by Bord Iascaigh Mhara. In the context of the reference to the IFA, I pay tribute to the IFA aquaculture representative, Mr. Richie Flynn, who, sadly, passed away recently. He had given many years of sterling service to the aquaculture sector, and his unfortunate and untimely passing is a great loss to the aquaculture sector and to everybody in the IFA. I had the great privilege of working closely with him over many years, both as a Minister and also as an Opposition spokesperson.

He was always the most courteous of gentlemen to meet but he had a steely determination in respect of the sector he represented. It would be remiss of me not to avail of the opportunity to acknowledge his role and his passing.

My Department indicated it would suspend its request in respect of this process until these workshops were complete. This was without prejudice to any operator in the finfish industry who wished to submit a valid environmental impact statement in the interim. The process will be renewed with requests for environmental impact statements before the end of the year. This represents a significant response to the recommendations of the independent aquaculture licensing review group in the context of finfish aquaculture. The provision of valid environmental impact statements in compliance with the guidelines prepared by Bord Iascaigh Mhara, BIM, and given to applicants will enable my Department to advance these applications in line with the EU legal requirements.

An efficient and effective licensing system can be an important tool in the strategic direction of the aquaculture industry and can set the weather, so to speak, in terms of aquaculture development. As indicated, my Department has delivered 300 aquaculture licence determinations this year, a trebling of the previous rate of determinations, and there is a commitment to deliver a further 300 next year with a view to clearing the backlog which built up due to the European Court of Justice judgment. In addition, my Department is engaged in forward planning in conjunction with industry representatives and relevant agencies directly focused on the rapid reduction and elimination of the finfish licensing backlog. A key part of this planning process is ensuring that the industry can continue to operate as normal in accordance with legislative requirements. The legislative provisions that were put in place to enable operators to continue working, pending completion of the licensing process, in line with the EU Natura requirements have enabled all operators to continue their business. This still applies.

It is important to note that while attention has been given to difficulties associated with licensing, this is in fact a buoyant industry with a good record of employment. The 2018 BIM annual aquaculture survey indicates that Irish aquaculture output in 2017 increased to 47,147 tonnes of farm gate produce, worth €208.4 million. Production continued to expand in overall volume, which was up 7%, in value, which was up 24%, and in unit value from 2016. The salmon sector was the major contributor to the increase in both overall volume and value, while oyster sector output continued to expand. The unit value of both of these sectors continues to increase, as does the recognition of their product quality. The bottom mussel sector continued to recover in 2017, although seed supply uncertainty remains a threat to this. The overall industry employed almost 2,000 people directly on some 280 primary production units in 2017.

My Department has put in place substantial financial and other supports for the industry as a whole. Financial support is supplied under the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund operational programme and is directed towards three main areas: sustainable aquaculture production; knowledge, innovation and new technology; and more effective governance of marine planning. In addition to the direct financial supports, BIM provides a range of technical supports to the aquaculture sector to assist in the development of existing businesses and to address industry-wide issues, such as disease management and the introduction of new technologies.

The steps that have been taken by me and my Department to establish the independent review and take forward the core recommendation on eliminating the backlog are bearing fruit. We are well on the way to eliminating this historic issue and putting the industry on a sound footing going forward. My Department will be glad to update the committee on progress in aquaculture licensing, as and when required.

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister and his officials for the presentation and overview of the issue. We had a very thorough session with the officials a number of months ago in regard to the aquaculture licensing report, which we went through in some detail. They outlined to us a lot of what the Minister has outlined about what has come to pass and the background, the fact a prioritisation is being made in terms of dealing with the backlog in shellfish applications, and the 300 licence target for this year and next year.

During that session, we pressed the officials very significantly on the implementation of all of the recommendations from the aquaculture licensing review report. The feedback we were getting in that session was that the prioritisation at this point was on the shellfish backlog and that the other recommendations would have to await progress being made and be dealt with subsequently. As the Minister pointed out, there are 30 separate recommendations from the report. After those 30 recommendations are outlined, the review committee goes on to make a point that I think it useful to quote:

The Group undertook its review work in line with the Terms of Reference and acknowledges that implementation of the report is a matter for the Minister and the Department. Implementation of all of the recommendations in this report will be challenging. However the Group considers that it would be beneficial to set out an Implementation Strategy which would assign responsibility for recommendations, accountability and set milestones for delivery and identify the necessary resources to support the implementation process.

That summarises where the group is at and what it feels needs to happen with regard to the 30 recommendations it put forward. The first two recommendations were that there should be a reasonable timescale for licence determinations and, as part of that, legislation should be developed to put in place a new licensing system.

When we discussed this with the officials the previous day, we were informed there had not been progress on that legislation and that it would have to take a back seat to the prioritisation of resources towards the shellfish licensing backlog. While I acknowledge the important work of dealing with the shellfish backlog, I do not see a reason, almost a year and a half on from the publication of the licensing review, we do not yet have an implementation strategy. Moreover, the Minister has published nothing dealing with the various recommendations, outlining to whom responsibility was assigned for implementing each of those recommendations or putting in place an implementation timeline for each of them. I would have thought that was a minimum basic response to the report and a basic outline of how we would progress. It is not acceptable that the Minister has not yet produced that or ensured his officials have produced it. That is why, having discussed it here at committee, we decided it was important we engaged further with the Minister, as the political head of the Department, to tease out these issues and, in particular, to put the point to him in regard to getting that implementation plan in place and then looking to back it up with the necessary resources to make progress.

I want to touch on the issue of the finfish licensing backlog. While the prioritisation has been on the shellfish licences, there is a very significant backlog which has not been addressed yet in regard to finfish, and we have to bear in mind that finfish make up 75% of the value of the aquaculture market overall. The Minister will be aware of a company in my part of the world, Marine Harvest, which is by far the largest salmon producer in the country and works down the west coast as far as Cork, with its processing base in Fanad. That processing base operates at something like 40% capacity despite having the capacity to process far more fish were they available, with the resulting employment that could create. This is an area of north Donegal where employment options are few and far between. I had a meeting with the company recently and looked at the list of licences it has on file that are awaiting decision. Going back through the date of the renewal applications, it will be seen they are from 2005, 2006, 2007, 2011, 2014 and 2015, with five from 2005, seven or eight that go back to 2011 and two from 2006.

It has three new live applications in place. One commenced for the Shot Head in Bantry back in 2011, one was submitted for Waterfall in 2016 and another for Lough Swilly in 2014. Those applications are not able to be progressed. The company has indicated it is in a position to invest up to €22 million if licences can be progressed through the system. That could add another 250 jobs, many of them in north Donegal but also right along the west coast, including in the Minister's county. That is an example in the finfish sector. We are not on top of processing the applications and we do not have the resources or a streamlined licensing system to move them on. We are not utilising and maximising the value and potential of our agriculture industry. I refer in particular to finfish.

In 2003, salmon production was 23,000 tonnes whereas last year it was just under 19,500 tonnes. If we compare that with other countries, in particular with Scotland, we see a scenario where licences can move from submission to conclusion and decision in a couple of years. As a result, that sector is growing. We have seen Marine Harvest pioneer organic salmon production in recent years. That is meeting a strong need in the market, but because of the backlog and delay in processing licences, that increased demand is not being met.

Will the Minister respond to my points on the implementation plan, the legislation and specifically on finfish? I refer to the backlogs we are experiencing and the need for a radical overhaul to put a new system in place.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister for his update on the licensing review procedure. I have a number of questions on the process. I understand why it is taking such time to carry it out. There has been a backlog because testing had to be done. I said to the Minister's predecessor that I understood this was preparation for the roll-out of an EU-wide system of licensing. I was referring to this island being used as a kind of a testing model for an EU-wide body. Will the Minister explain and expand on that for the committee? It might have some implications for Scotland and other countries as well in respect of what can happen. Alternatively, is this only an Irish system and is it being forced on us by the EU because we have to go along with a more rigorous licensing regime?

The 300 a year or whatever number of applications that have been granted have been in for an awfully long time because of the testing regime. There has also been a big problem with the public. I refer to when a bay gets approval. Nothing will have happened with the licensing applications, some of them having been in for a number of years. All of a sudden, the public are informed these licences have been granted and they wonder where they came from and what is happening. The public are being left out as stakeholders in this process. That is leading to much conflict and difficulty. Whatever licensing regime is put in place has to be able to facilitate the public and allow them to have their role in it.

Is the Minister's Department the right body to be issuing the licences? It is integral for funding aquaculture as well licensing and everything else. I see from the Minister's overall response that the public does not get a mention or a look-in. That is regrettable because many of the issues that can be dealt with would involve the public as well. The Minister should be looking at the public as being a stakeholder as well. There should be a requirement that they be contacted and talked to.

On the updating of information, a substantial amount has been gathered over recent years from all of the different bays. It is important information but it will not be static forever. It has to be updated. Have systems been put in place to update that information? When these renewal applications come up, whenever the ten-year licences expire, that information is going to have to be new and fresh again. Are we going to end up in the same situation again when the new licenses are going to be reviewed? That is going to be important so there is going to have to be a system to update this information constantly. Will the Minister expand on that as well?

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Our committee asked the Minister's Department to submit an updated report dealing with the 30 recommendations. What we received was a summary document with no details and no recommendation-by-recommendation update. That is what we asked for. What we have here is not good enough. It is similar with what the Minister has given us today. I apologise for being late for the Minister's presentation, but if we look at progress to date on implementation, there are three paragraphs. All they state is that the backlog of 300 applications in shellfish is going to be dealt with over the next two years. That is not what we asked for. We asked for the Minister and his officials to tell us what is being done to implement those 30 recommendations. If the Minister is refusing to implement them, he should tell us.

We assume he is going to implement all 30 recommendations. The Houses of the Oireachtas deserve to know, recommendation by recommendation, where the implementation is at. That is not what we have here today. It is not acceptable. It is offensive to this committee that we have had this really poor report and now we have this presentation today. Three paragraphs are dealing with 30 recommendations. It is not acceptable.

The reason this Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and Marine is so exercised is because of the stunning failure of this State to develop the salmon farming industry. In 2018, Norway, a European country, is producing 1.278 million tonnes, Scotland is producing 174,000 tonnes and the Faroe Islands, which is five times the size of Achill Island, is producing 73,000 tonnes. Ireland is producing 17,000 tonnes while 17 years ago we were producing 23,500 tonnes. It is outrageous how a Department can strangle the potential of an industry that could create hundreds of jobs in rural coastal communities.

We had this independent report with 30 recommendations but we have had no update, either from officials of the Department or the Minister today, as to what is happening to deal with this crisis, this profound failure to develop the potential of this industry. I visited Marine Harvest for the first time 16 years ago. It is an important employer in rural north Donegal. I could see then the potential of that industry. Today, that industry's potential is being strangled. It is shocking. It has been 16 years, which is almost the entire length of my public service. I have been a public representative for all of those years and it is just going backwards. That is the urgency of the issue. The salmon farming industry is 75% of aquaculture yet the Department focuses on shellfish.

That is low-hanging fruit. The Department goes for 300 licences this year and 300 licences next year in the shellfish area. The Aquaculture Licences Appeals Board is not adequately resourced. These low-hanging fruits, applications in shellfish, are 25% of the overall industry and the aquacultural appeals licensing process will be backlogged without being resourced adequately. That is the appeals process. I am shocked at the lack of urgency in the Minister's Department, considering the shocking failure to develop this industry that is of real importance to rural, coastal communities. Those statistics are irrefutable.

In Scotland, it typically takes 18 to 22 months to deal with applications. One application has been on the board here since 2005, 13 years ago. The process has been absolutely strangled by bureaucracy and a failure to update systems. The Minister will get the word in his ear now from his officials about the EU. That is ten years ago. That is a long time ago. That is a long time to deal with these issues and address them with resources.

I commend the Minister on the independent report. I am not having a go at the Minister personally, but I think the Department officials have seriously failed our rural, coastal communities. The report is finally published and there are hearings in this committee and still we do not know what the Department officials are doing about the 30 recommendations. We need to know soon.

Who in the Department is responsible for making recommendations to the Minister about the issuing of licences? Who are the officials who deal with the enforcement of regulations? There should be a separation of Department officials or State agency officials who are responsible for the development and licensing of the industry from somebody in the environmental sector who deals with the enforcement of regulations in the industry. Those two matters need to be separated. That is one of the recommendations from the independent report. There needs to be no conflict of interest. I am interested to know if different individuals deal with the recommendations on licensing and the enforcement of regulations. Are they separate people and departments, or are they one and the same? That appears to be a challenge.

I may have more follow-up questions.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the three members. It is no accident that they are all from Donegal and I appreciate their long-standing interest in this issue.

Senator Mac Lochlainn made reference to one company, as did the two previous speakers. I visited that facility a number of years ago, long before I was in this position. I appreciate the potential in the sector. It is a relatively new industry in the context of farming generally and globally. It is in its nascent stage in Ireland relative to global development.

I make absolutely no apology for running with the most critical element of the report to which my colleagues allude. Clearing the licence backlog is, by a country mile, ahead of any of the other recommendations. I make no apology whatsoever for that. That is the key to unleashing the potential and all of the rest are secondary considerations. In an ideal world, we would have flowcharts and indications, but I specifically asked the division within the Department and equipment is there.

The first step in the light of the report was that we prioritise the clearing of the licensing backlog, to the cost of every other recommendation, if necessary. That is what we will do. The Department is making progress and I make no apology for that. That is the key and critical issue because no one can work without a licence. I cannot operate outside the law. It is important to take into account the very clear judgment and finding against us by the European Court of Justice about our licensing agreements in the context of the habitats directive. To give credit to officials who have been unfairly maligned, they did negotiate permission for those who currently had licences to continue to operate under those licences while we did an enormous undertaking in gathering the data for the appropriate assessments in all of the bays. We were starting from scratch. That was a mammoth undertaking. The judgment was challenging but it would have been calamitous if the judgment was applied with its full rigour and intent. It would have closed down the industry. The Department negotiated an ability for the industry to continue to operate its existing licences.

Reference has been made to the tonnage and I am aware of the international comparisons but we need to be sure we are comparing like with like. Our production is generally in the organic sphere, so it is not as intensive an operation or production system as others in the international sphere that have been quoted. That said, the tonnage is lower than it was in the early 2000s. The history of the sector will show that, in the early 2000s, there was a collapse of the European market. Many of the early operators, by virtue of the economic consequences of that, got wiped out. There was an anti-dumping court case taken at European level but the consequences for the early operators in the industry here was they were wiped out. We were virtually starting from scratch again post 2003, when we produced 23,000 tonnes, which was the figure to which Deputy McConalogue alluded. The flexibility of the arrangements we have, albeit they are restricted arising from the European Court of Justice ruling, show that, in 2012, it was 12,000 tonnes. In 2016, it was 16,300 tonnes and, in 2017, we produced 19,305 tonnes. The trajectory has been in the right direction but we need to make more progress on finfish, which seems to be the area of primary concern for the Deputies, and I understand that. It is not 75% of the value. In fact, the figures I have for 2016 show the value of the finfish side was around €100 million and the value of the shellfish was just shy of €60 million. It is more in the region of 2:1 rather than 75%, but that is a moot point as both are extremely valuable sectors and provide valuable employment. Our endeavour is to get to a situation where the licensing regime enables the full potential of the sector to be realised.

In taking into account the licensing regime, we must be conscious that, in the context of that process, there are rights enjoyed by all parties, as Deputy Pringle alluded to. There are rights of third parties to register their views and there is an independent appeals process for any licence determinations that are issued. If one looks at comparable issues, the most obvious one is a routine planning application to a local authority. There is an appeals process to An Bord Pleanála. There is an appeals process for these licensing decisions and that can be exercised by either a third party or an applicant.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The council does not fund the development as well.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No, but the local authority is responsible for both granting planning permission for a development and for enforcement.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes, but it does not provide funding for them as well. That is an important difference.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is appropriate that my Department has a role. It is one we take seriously. We negotiated substantial funding under the MFF to assist approved and licensed operators to achieve their potential. That is not in any way in conflict with our role to determine a licence.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I believe it is in conflict with the role to determine licences. It is exactly the Department's role to get as much funding as possible for the industry but it should not also be licensing the operators. The licensing system should be independent of the Department.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We might not agree on this. There are different views on it. I do not see it as a conflict at all. We take all the respective roles extremely seriously. There are many licence applicants who would wish that was not the case, although I appreciate that successful applicants are quite happy with the process. However, there are appeals and checks and balances built into any system. We are striving to address the licensing backlog as an imperative. That does not mean finding in favour of all applicants. The statistics show that of the approximately 300 applications this year, there were 160 grants and 144 refusals. It is not a slam dunk. We are not compromised in the integrity of the process by one iota. There are checks and balances in the system as well. I do not intend to refer to an individual application, and it would be inappropriate to do so, but Deputy McConalogue mentioned the one at Shot Head. That was one of the licences granted by the Department.

The finfish issue is obviously of greater interest in Donegal. I appreciate the geographical spread of the industry. In trying to accelerate that licensing process, we will be issuing a requirement for environmental impact statements. That is the necessary next step in clearing the backlog in that area of licence applications. Bear in mind that the existing licenceholders continue to have that licence and operate under it.

It is a complex process; it is not easy. I referred to all the legislation that governs it, ranging from the habitats directive and birds directive to foreshore legislation. It is extraordinarily complex to do all the appropriate assessments, taking account of the individual nature of all the bays involved, the flora and fauna, the competing demands for access, the feed potential in the bays and so forth.

I believe I have covered the questions.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I asked a question about the potential for conflict of interest. There is no need to name names but are the officials who make a recommendation to the Minister regarding licensing also the officials who would make a recommendation regarding enforcement and penalties? Are they in the same department?

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The unit operates out of the Department's headquarters in Clonakilty. It is not a large unit. There is recommendation and input in terms of the development process from BIM-----

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is the same people.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No. BIM is an independent agency in respect of the development of this-----

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My question is about the officials. The Minister signs off on the authorisation of a licence. There is also enforcement and penalties. Do the same people do both?

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is a problem.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The same system operates in the Department in the context of agriculture as well.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes, but we have just brought to the Minister's attention an industry that has been squeezed for the best part of two decades. It has not achieved its potential.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is squeezed not by virtue of the point the Senator raises but by virtue of the bind that was put on the industry and the Department by the judgment of the European Court of Justice. In the context of that bind we are accelerating the process of licence determination, which is a critical part.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Let us discuss the European Court of Justice, ECJ, judgment given that the Minister mentioned it. The judgment was in 2007, which is 11 years ago. That arose from the habitats directive not being transposed, which was 24 years ago. Governments did not do it. It had nothing to do with the industry. That was 11 years ago. The other point is that there are applications for areas where SACs do not apply and they are facing the same delays. Eleven years is hell of a long time to get to grips with the implications of a judgment. The birds directive mentioned by the Minister was in 2009, which is a decade ago. The Minister sees the impact it is having on the industry. We are desperately trying to get jobs into rural, coastal communities and to get employers to locate there. It is a decade now and the excuse of the ECJ has long run out. After 11 years it should not be put forward as a barrier.

This makes me quite angry. The Minister referred to people from Donegal. I am a former member of this committee and my two colleagues are current members. The coastal communities down the west coast of Ireland from Donegal to Cork have been let down, despite the potential this has. It is estimated that the loss as a result of all this will be over €1 billion within a year or two. That is the estimated loss in production by the industry. How many jobs is that?

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Senator-----

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will finish with this point. This independent report has been published and I commend the Minister on doing that. Apparently, it is the third report examining changes in the system. However, this one is critical. It has 30 recommendations. As I have not heard the Minister or the officials say they are not going to implement those recommendations, I assume all 30 will be implemented. One clearly states that the decision on licensing must be separated from the other matters. Decision making processes have to be separated in order that they are independent of each other. If somebody is responsible for development and licensing that person can get on with that. Somebody is also responsible for ensuring that licences are complied with and that the concerns of the public are heard, which is also important. These matters need to be separated. That is one of the recommendations, yet the Minister says he does not see a conflict of interest and that there are different views on it.

We must have clarity. Is the Minister going to implement all 30 recommendations? Will he also listen to our concerns as representatives not only of Donegal but of rural coastal communities? There is a massive loss here yet there is a lack of urgency. The Minister says 65% and others say 75%, but the significant majority of value in this sector and where there is also an urgency is in the finfish area. However, the summary from the Department refers to it being kicked back to 2020, two years hence. Two thirds of it is in chaos or is stalled and being squeezed, yet the Department will wait two more years. That is the lack of urgency and lack of acceptance in the Department. I see nothing in the Minister's statement today. My venting of my frustration and anger as the Minister listens patiently - in fairness, he is a calm and patient man - does not achieve anything.

I am appealing to the Minister to understand and perhaps meet some of the stakeholders in the aquaculture industry who feel they are being stymied. He should visit their production centres, see the potential and then demand change from his officials. What has happened previously must end. There must be a change in attitude. It is shocking that after everything I have said the committee gets a report that states it will be two more years before the Department prioritises finfish. It is prioritising the low-hanging fruit of the shellfish licences.

Something has to change if we are to achieve our potential.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I had two questions earlier relating to the role of the EU and the European Commission in enforcing this licensing procedure. Will the Minister expand on that? With regard to the updating of this information for future licences-----

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Sorry, Deputy. I was distracted.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Will the Minister provide an update on information for future licences? If a person has a ten-year licence now and has to reapply for another licence in ten years, the environmental information that that person has now will be out of date and presumably will have to be updated.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is being-----

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is what I wanted to check.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am at something of a loss. I appreciate Senator Mac Lochlainn's commitment. He talks about a loss of €1 billion to the sector. Under the European Court of Justice ruling, we negotiated a situation where everybody who had a licence could continue to operate under that licence. With regard to finfish, in the period from 2004 to 2017, the tonnage has increased by almost 30% from 15,200 tonnes to 19,500 tonnes. In the face of pretty severe constraints by the European Court of Justice, the industry has grown in volume and that is not disputable.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is one tenth of the production of Scotland.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I accept that but the licensing regime in Scotland is not exactly a walk in the park either. There are seven different licences-----

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is not 12 or 13 years.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I appreciate the point the Senator makes. My ambition, having engaged with the sector, is to have a system that is fit for purpose, delivers on the potential, recognises the rights of applicants and third parties for the process to be fair and transparent, and, as an imperative, deals with the licence backlog. Until we have done that and made determinations on all those backlogs, the first thing that is needed to grow production is to have a determination on licence applications. That is a critical gatekeeper. There are others. I have mixed views on some of the recommendations. I do not think the Senator would find unanimity within the aquaculture sector on 20 year licences. Although some might agree with them, I suspect a majority of operators might not, including with the costs associated with it. Third parties and non-governmental organisations certainly might not like that we would be giving away rights for effectively a generational period. There would be significant costs that might be beyond the scope of many smaller enterprises. There are 30 recommendations but I make no apology for prioritising, in absolute terms, dealing with the backlog of licences. That is where we are.

Deputy Pringle raised an important point. Will we be caught up again in the next wave? We are doing the second round of appropriate assessments now. We continue to update the database to enable us to make determinations more effectively. We started without any baseline on those bays and what was happening there, and all the criteria we were found against on with regard to our quota. We had a mammoth undertaking and it is important that we do not see that as a finite obligation. It is a revolving obligation because bays change and their biological capacity to sustain wildlife and aquaculture operations is defined at any particular time. It is important that we continue that process regularly.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is an issue relating to the EU too. The Minister said Scotland has its own licensing process. We were told by the previous Minister that the EU was using Ireland as a template to roll out across the EU. If our system is so rigorous that it takes years longer than Scotland, how can that be? Either the Irish system is-----

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am not an expert on the Scottish system but I understand it takes over two years and there are seven different approvals or licences within the aquaculture licence system. They may well have had an implementation period. I am not sure that they fell foul in any way of the European Court of Justice in respect of the application of any individual directive. There is-----

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

So these are multiple cases where this is okay.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I understand that there is not a single cut and paste system which is transferable to all member states. We are grappling with the consequences of all those directives and our own legislation and with framing a licensing process within that that takes account of those things.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

So the European Commission made a bespoke arrangement for Ireland.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The European Court of Justice found that we were not applying the relevant directive and we then had to amend our licensing process to take account of that. That involved doing an appropriate assessment for all 29 bays identified around the country. That was quite an undertaking. I appreciate the point that Senator Mac Lochlainn makes that we are 11 years on from that but it was a mammoth undertaking and, as a consequence and understandably, a backlog of licences built up. This is reflected in the growth of the sector even within the constraints we are operating under. We secured permission for existing licences to continue to operate while we built the infrastructure to be able to make better informed decisions on those licence renewals as well as on new applications.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The aquaculture licensing procedure in Scotland, Denmark, France, Spain and Portugal meets all the same requirements as we do.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

They all operate under the same EU legislation. Some states fall foul of some directives. We fell foul of this one and the European Court of Justice ruling obliged us effectively to go back to the drawing board with our licensing system. I am not an expert. I know the review group looked at international best practice. We have had to build our system from the ground up but secured a concession that the existing licenceholders could continue to operate.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If I make an application relating to a bay that has been decided on, how long will it take?

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My best guess would be in the region of two years.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

So for anyone who applies now, it would be sorted in two years. That would be on a par with everywhere else.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The industry estimates that the economic loss in the context of Food Harvest 2020, with multipliers and so on included, is €1.3 billion. It is devastating. There have been a number of references to the Minister and the Department engaging with stakeholders. Is the Minister willing to meet industry representatives, including the IFA, for example, to facilitate that? It is important that they are able to tell the Minister what they think the potential of the industry is and what they are asking for.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If the Senator is under the impression that I do not do this personally, I alluded to the late Richie Flynn of the IFA in my opening remarks. I met him and representatives of the sector.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On the basis of today's concerns, is the Minister willing to meet the industry?

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The sector has ongoing engagement with both me and the Department.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister is a Deputy representing a rural coastal community.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not represent a coastal community but I do very much understand and appreciate the sector's potential. One of the first things I did on being appointed as Minister was to get this review under way. It was a significant undertaking for the people involved and I appreciate their efforts. It is clear that the biggest imperative is to deal with the backlog. As already stated, I have had ongoing engagement in this regard and I continue to be able to do so. The industry-----

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If the IFA, which is a respected representative body-----

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Representatives of the IFA are constantly in and out of my office in respect of all matters.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am talking about-----

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not think I have ever refused to meet them.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----the aquaculture sector.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That includes the aquaculture sector.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will not name any individual company, but the Minister would be willing to meet a representative group of companies.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As I said-----

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is helpful.

My next point concerns the Aquaculture Licences Appeals Board. Apparently, it is postponing a number of determinations to 2019. Obviously, if there is a high volume of refusals - I think the Minister indicated that the number exceeds 140 - one would imagine that quite a number of appeals are going through. I would like it if there were an independent body dealing with licensing and a body dealing with regulations and ensuring that the law is implemented. In the absence of this, would the Minister be willing to provide additional resources to the Aquaculture Licences Appeals Board in order that we can deal with all this?

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The board is independent. I am not aware of it raising any case in respect of resources being the issue in dealing with appeals.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister will appreciate, though, that if the board is already postponing decisions to 2019, and he can be sure there will be-----

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It may well be doing so for reasons other than resources.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This is an important point because, obviously, we are concerned about the loss of economic growth in the coastal communities along the west coast. An efficient decision-making and appeals process is in everyone's interest. It is not just in the industry's interest; it is in that of those who may be concerned. It is best for everyone - all interested parties - if this process can be as efficient and timely as possible.

The Minister has taken trade delegations to foreign countries, which is important work. On such missions, he tasks about Food Harvest 2020 and seeks new markets, particularly in view of concerns regarding Brexit. There are companies involved in aquaculture that are trying to find new markets and new customers. Prospective customers want to know that such companies have a consistent, steady supply. The problem for the industry is that it cannot guarantee this as a result of the logjam of appeals. There is also the matter of very old licences and 35 year old regulations that are not up to date and do not relate to the modern aquaculture industry. How can the industry possibly compete on the global market? This is why the Minister really needs to meet the stakeholders as soon as possible. They are being asked to step up for Ireland, to find new export markets and to satisfy the demands of new, growing markets and customers but they cannot guarantee a consistent supply of product for five or ten years. I am sure the Minister can see that this is a major problem. Again, if nothing else arises from this meeting, I ask him to meet those involved and listen to their frustrations. My strong view, regardless of whether people accept it, is that there has been a failure in this regard. My view is backed up by considerable objective evidence.

Today, however, is about the future. It is no good bleating about what has gone wrong. Today is about how we will move forward, develop the industry's potential and have a system that is fair to all. It would be a huge help if the Minister were to meet the industry and hear directly from it.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Senator referred to one of the representative bodies. As already stated, its representatives are continuously in and out of my office and I have never refused to meet them. I have been on trade missions and I am aware that there is an insatiable global demand for seafood products. Aquaculture is critical to meeting this demand. In fact, production from farmed fish, whether shellfish or finfish, rather than the wild-catch sector, is likely to be the majority source of meeting this major global demand. We are therefore very anxious that we maximise our potential in this sector, bearing in mind that one should ensure that one compares like with like when comparing production figures. We have a specific niche market operation, primarily on the finfish side, on organic status, and certified organic status product commands a premium relative to other production systems. I keep repeating this point, but my ambition - and the rationale for conducting the review - is to see how we might unleash the sector's potential. I have been open to meeting all stakeholders in this regard. As I said in the context of the licensing and the report, I asked that this element be prioritised. I make no apologies for that. Collaboration is the hallmark of the agrifood sector, including the fishing industry and the aquaculture side, and it is by working together that we will achieve the sector's potential. As my said, my door has always been open for this engagement.

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister mentioned briefly the Shot Head application earlier and stated that a decision was been made by the Department. I do not want to get into the detail of this but I ask him to give just the timeline of the application. It was submitted to the Department in 2011, there was a decision in 2015 and, since then, it has been with the independent Aquaculture Licences Appeals Board. That is-----

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am aware of the detail of the case but I do not wish to go into it now. There are circumstances surrounding the case which gave rise to that time delay. As I understand it, there was a requirement to re-engage in the public consultation process.

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is another application in respect of which-----

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will not discuss individual applications.

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----an environmental impact assessment has been with the Department since 2014 and a fresh application has been made. One of the recommendations of the review was that increased resources be provided to the independent Aquaculture Licences Appeals Board. Has this happened or has the Minister committed to or planned for it? When the departmental officials were with us on the previous occasion, we teased these matters out in detail. I certainly felt we were being stonewalled regarding the further and full implementation of the report and the timeline associated with the implementation of the various recommendations. This is why we asked the Minister, as the political head of the Department, to come before the committee and discuss the issue. I feel we are being stonewalled by him as well. I ask the Minister to let me finish, and then he can come back in. I feel he is still stonewalling us in not grabbing this and ensuring that the various recommendations are being implemented.

As stated earlier, one of the key aspects the review committee noted was that an implementation report or implementation plan should be put together and that this could look at the 30 recommendations, assign responsibility for them, put timelines in place for their implementation and assess resource implications. When we discussed this matter previously, we have requested that the Minister put together a review or implementation plan. He still has not committed to putting in place such a plan. It is accepted that there will be different timelines associated with the implementation of different recommendations. However, as a basic starting point in responding to the report, it is essential that the Department publish an implementation plan on the 30 recommendations and, if it agrees with them, state that each should be implemented and indicate how it will go about achieving them, the timelines for doing so and the resource implications involved.

If, in assessing that, we identify that there is a need for additional resources and if it is felt that allocating those resources could lead to improved growth within the sector and an improved financial return to the economy, it would make eminent sense to examine how they might be allocated.. To get to the nub of the issue, I am seeking a commitment from the Minister to the effect that he will put together a implementation plan together that will include timelines.

I wish to make a few more points. One of the recommendations in the report relates to a reasonable timeline for licence determinations. The report indicated that a reasonable timeline for all new applications after 1 January 2018 would be six months. Another immediate recommendation of the review group was that work commence immediately on the preparation of new aquaculture legislation, having regard to best practice in other jurisdictions and in other relevant consenting systems that obtain in Ireland. When I asked the officials about that at our previous meeting, the answer was that work had not commenced on the legislation because the resources were not available. I ask the Minister for an update on this matter. If that work has not commenced, I ask that it would do so immediately and that he allocate the resources in respect of it. The feedback I have received is that one of the stumbling blocks in terms of the development of the sector is the fact that there is not a streamlined licensing process or specific timelines and that this is leading to a reluctance to commence and proceed with new applications.

In the context of finfish licences, the Minister indicated that the Department is scheduled to formally request operators to submit environmental impact assessments, EIAs, before the end of the year and that it will then engage with applicants regarding these. He went on to indicate that this represents a significant response to the recommendations of the independent Aquaculture Licences Appeals Board. While that needs to be done, the Minister is indicating that his point about finfish licence applications is a significant response to the findings of the review group. It is an essential part of furthering those licences but I imagine that there would need to be clear timelines associated with them in terms of how we can expect those EIAs to be dealt with, answers given and progressing matters once they are received.

On the separation of the licensing powers and the development function within the Department, the chairperson of the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission before the committee last week to discuss the proposed unfair trading practices directive from Europe. She stated clearly that she felt a new sector regulator should be established to implement the European directive on unfair trading practices because it was in conflict with its remit of consumer and competition protection. She stated that it is more about the producer than about consumer and competition protection and that there would be tension between those two functions, that it would not be appropriate to have the same person dealing with that tension and that two separate bodies would be needed. Similarly, while licensing is a function of the Department, development can often be in tension with it yet we have a situation where the same people are dealing with those functions. There should be a healthy tension in that regard. That is something that would need to be considered. It is one of the 30 recommendations. If we were to see the implementation plan, that is something that could be fleshed out and addressed and on which we could get a clear line of sight in terms of what the Department's response will be to it.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On the latter point, the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine runs agricultural schemes. It determines the nature of the scheme, invites people to apply, determines the outcome of applications and polices compliance with the terms and regulations. I have never heard the Deputy make the point - because I do not believe it is sustainable or that the case is made - that the Department should not be responsible for all of that. He makes a different case for the aquaculture side, as does Senator MacLochlainn.

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The review panel makes that case.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am not convinced by that argument. It appears to be borne out of a belief that it might be less onerous in some way. We all operate under the same law. In many respects, I would say that the Deputy should be careful what he wishes for because a new body might not be as understanding as the Department in the context of breaches or compliance issues.

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If that is the Minister's position, it should be discussed and teased out. The aquaculture review group made the recommendation.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I appreciate that.

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are hearing that the Minister is not convinced on that point. In fact, he does not believe it is the right way to go. However, it highlights the point that what we need is an implementation plan with regard to those reviews. The industry is currently working off the 30 recommendations in the review, of which that to which I refer is one, but we have not had a clear response from the Department that this is not something it will pursue. If that is the case, the Minister should put the implementation plan together and say that he does not believe that recommendation is one that should be pursued. Let us have the clear picture; put it all on the table.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I appreciate the Deputy's observations. I said at the outset what I thought was the most critical recommendation, which is to clear the backlog; the report states that also. It states that this is the most critical service we could do for this sector, and that is what we are doing. We are dealing with that. The rest is secondary. Legislation is required in terms of some of it. The Deputy knows the difficulty in getting fisheries legislation through the House.

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It has to be started first.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have to have support as well when we try it. I hear the points the Deputy is making.

On resources, I am advised that the last time the Aquaculture Licences Appeals Board sought additional resources it was given additional resources. There is no current ask. I understand they were given if not last year, the year before that.

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is reasonable to assume they have serious pressure coming at them.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am saying there is no standing ask from them. There are issues that cause delays other than resources. Additional resources have been given to the section in the Department also.

I do not propose to change tack in respect of the overarching imperative to deal with the backlog. We have touched on some of the other recommendations. There would be mixed views in the industry about some of the other recommendations but the priority remains to clear the backlog. I would imagine that in 2019, as we proceed, hopefully, with the same level of progress, we can begin to examine in more detail some of the other recommendations, but this is the critical issue.

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To come back on that point, it is not good enough to say that the backlog is the key priority in the review group's recommendations. It is the priority that deserves the biggest amount of resources and top priority in the context of getting movement. I do not believe, just because the Minister is saying that is the key one and that he is moving on it, that it is acceptable that we leave the others as secondary-----

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have moved in terms of resources and other issues in terms of the-----

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister might listen. There are 30 recommendations. If some of them, as the Minister indicated, require further consultation with the sector-----

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy touched on the six-month timeline recommendation. I appreciate that six months is an important target but I would suspect it is extremely difficult to meet that target. The Scottish licensing process takes approximately two years.

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If it is extremely difficult to meet that six-month target, let us get a response from the Minister as part of an implementation plan outlining the reason for that and the steps he will take to deal with the matter.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are doing that.

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have a report with 30 recommendations. However, by and large, most of the report will gather dust on the shelf before we deal with it in more detail, apart from the couple of key pressing matters with which the Minister is dealing.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The report identified the backlog, with which we will deal.

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I ask the Minister to come back to the joint committee with a comprehensive response to the 30 recommendations made. I would like to receive in writing the fleshed out responses the Minister will give us and an implementation plan for the recommendations.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will do so once I have made sufficient progress on the licensing issue. I do not propose to task the division which has been challenged to deal with the backlog to deal with other issues that are less important.

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It may not take the application of massive resources simply to have a timeline and a plan to implement the report which is sitting on the shelf.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We could then start to miss the deadline of 2019. I do not propose to miss it.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister has referred to two thirds of the industry, but we understand salmon accounts for three quarters of the value of the industry. Let us go with the Minister's figures of €65 million-----

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

They are €65 million and €57 million.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What the officials------

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are 38 finfish licences, while more than 300 shellfish licences were dealt with last year alone.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This is about trying to get the overall aquaculture industry ready. Obviously, people have a right to object and we need a fair and efficient decision-making process. Sometimes it will be successful and sometimes it will not be, but decisions should be made sharply and efficiently. Let me repeat that in the call he is making the Minister is failing to turn around the larger share. The report was published 18 months ago in May 2017.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have made substantial progress since in dealing with the backlog.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are 30 recommendations.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

None of which is as critical as the issue we have prioritised.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

A year and a half later the Minister is before a joint committee of the Houses of the Oireachtas. I have read that we are at a figure of 10% of the size of the Scottish industry.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Senator should compare like with like. We are producing organic product. The Senator's lack of knowledge is being exposed. He is showboating.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No, the fact is that we are at a figure of 10% of the size of the Scottish industry in terms of hard numbers and value. We are producing less than the Faroe Islands. That is the scale of the failure. The Minister's response to the joint committee is that the sector can wait for two more years for a real solution, that he will focus on the low hanging fruit and will not address the recommendations made. I appeal to him to open his mind. I know that he relies on his senior officials, but there are others with expert knowledge available - the stakeholders. I appeal to him to sit down with them as soon as possible.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister said he would sit down with them.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am asking him to do so as soon as possible. I am stunned that we are at this point one year and six months later.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Senator is stunned that we are making progress.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have given the statistics. A year and a half on the Minister has not given us an assurance that he will address all of the recommendations made or the concerns of the industry.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Will the Senator have the good grace to acknowledge the progress made in dealing with the most pressing issue?

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

According to the Minister's numbers, two thirds, and, according to the industry's numbers, three quarters of the overall sector must wait for a further two years. He does not think what I have read to him needs to be reflected on and that he needs to keep an open mind until he meets their representatives to see what can be done. Will he rely on the same officials who got us into this mess in the first place? Will he rely on their advice or talk to the people who have been failed by the system?

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Senator should not reflect on the officials in his comments.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is no need for reflection. The objective evidence is shocking.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Senator is grandstanding.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am not.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Senator is taking cheap shots at the officials who do not have an opportunity to defend themselves.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The officials have presided over a calamity in the sector. I have given the figures and a year and a half on we are where we are.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have dealt with the ruling of the European Court of Justice which severely constrained their capacity.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Eleven years. I would be looking at the issue of pensions at this stage.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will bring the discussion to a close following Deputy McConalogue's contribution because the Minister will need a chance to reply.

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Will the Minister go into the matter in a little more detail? He has indicated that 38 applications are in the finfish sector and that the sector will be requested to submit before the end of the year an environmental impact assessment to the Department.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is a critical part of the licensing process.

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Will the Minister take us from the point where the sector will submit an environment impact assessments at the end of the year and give us a timeline and the targets he will be working from for the completion of applications and the making of decisions on them?

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Each individual licence application is different.

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I accept that, but will the Minister give a general idea of the timescale about which we are talking?

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not want to mention a timeline, but there will be no undue delay on the Department's side.

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In other countries the process can be completed within a two-year period, but in Ireland the sector is only being asked for an assessment this year.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What if there is outstanding documentation that has to be sought?

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We know that.

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It will be done as quickly as is possible.

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

How long is a piece of string?

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are making progress. These are more complex licencing processes than that in the shellfish sector. We will be commencing the process by requesting from the sector an environmental impact statement before the end of the year.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The industry would like it to happen as soon as possible.

Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On the implementation plan, is the Minister agreeing to come back to tell us where the Department stands on it?

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I intend to drive the principal recommendation to the point where I am satisfied that we will achieve it. I will reflect on the other recommendations thereafter. Let us bear in mind that progress has been made in dealing with some of the other recommendations made in terms of resource allocation.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister came before the joint committee to update it on the aquaculture licensing review process. Having listened to the debate, I am convinced that he will come before us in the medium term to update us further on where the process is at. I thank him and his officials for attending and bringing the committee up to date on the aquaculture licensing review process.