Mr. Brendan Byrne:

To respond to the question Deputy Mac Lochlainn asked, in fairness to him, in his earlier question to the SFPA he outlined the robustness of the control measures in place right across the sector.

Before I go into the detail of the answer, however, we have to address the reality of where we find ourselves as processors and exporters. Our entire world has been thrown upside down by the removal of the control plan. The control plan brought certainty to us as processors and exporters. Article 61.1 brought with it a level playing field, that is, the derogation to weigh within our factories. We are one of seven countries in the EU that can do that. Historically, that has had to happen in Ireland because of the locations of our factories. Article 61.1 is therefore an instrument of fairness that creates a level playing field for us as fish processors and exporters. That is the purpose of that article.

The earlier witnesses from the SFPA gave what was to me a very shocking misrepresentation of the facts surrounding processors and exporters. We are the most regulated and most controlled of all fishers right throughout Europe, with no exception. Our record has been exemplary over the past ten years. Yet there is this audit of 2018, which none of us have had sight of, an administrative inquiry of 2019, which none of us have had sight of, and at least 15 different sets of leaks that emanated from somewhere that accuse us of all things and, most importantly, are destroying the Irish fish sector through misinformation. No other nation would tolerate what has been inflicted on the Irish fishing community over the past six months as to what has gone on here. In our paper we have identified that we have to get a way forward.

Before we do that, however, let us deal with the reality of what we have heard from the SFPA. The SFPA is a flawed entity. It is not just me saying that. The Wolfe report of 2012 stated that. The PricewaterhouseCoopers report of 2020 stated that. The greater part of the problem we find ourselves in at present is through the incompetence of the SFPA as our regulatory authority. The control plan brought certainty to us as processors and exporters. What is being talked about now is effectively the creation of a Chinese wet market on every pier and harbour in the country, where the food going into the food chain is open to the elements, be that sun, rain, wind or the fowl above our heads. No other country would tolerate this, yet it is being foisted on us through two audits, or an audit and an administrative inquiry we have not had sight of. I take exception to the earlier speaker who said an administrative inquiry cannot be released to the public. That is factually incorrect. It was confirmed to me that, under Article 4 of the same regulation, that information can be released at the discretion of the Minister.

We need to have a serious discussion as to where we are going with fishing. For too long the Irish fishing sector has failed to get a political voice, but we have crossed the Rubicon and are in an unprecedented situation in which Brexit has inflicted a 20% cut to our quota, which was already small. Now as processors we are not even allowed to function in the way we have functioned with certainty since the foundation of our businesses.

I wish to address three sections of this. It is grossly unfair to have shellfish included in the removal of this control plan because they are non-quota and were not part of the control plan or weighing, yet fishers are being forced to weigh them under the elements, on piers and harbours throughout the country. There is no basis for that and it has to stop. Both whitefish and pelagic were subject to the derogation. I seriously question the weight of evidence the SFPA has suggested is in this yet-unseen audit and this yet-unseen administrative inquiry. If we got full sight of that, I think there would be a greater body of evidence for the incompetence of the regulatory authority than against us as fishers.

I thank the Chairman for his indulgence. I want to say one further thing about due process and where we have got ourselves. Deputy Collins was right when he said that within one hour on 16 April everything had changed and everything was turned on its head. Deputy Collins is 100% right, but that should not have happened. No transitionary arrangement was made by the EU or this national Government to protect us. However, Article 102.4 of the 2009 regulation states:

If the administrative inquiry referred to in paragraph 2 does not lead to the removal of the irregularities or if the Commission identifies shortcomings in the control system of a Member State during the verifications or autonomous inspections referred to in Articles 98 and 99 or in the audit referred to in Article 100, the Commission shall establish an action plan with that Member State. The Member State shall take ... [the] necessary measures to implement that action plan.

We were not afforded an action plan. We were not afforded a transitionary period. We were afforded nothing. We were thrown out into the proverbial deep waters and cut loose. I ask the committee to stand up for fishing.