Denis O'Donovan (Cork South West, Fianna Fail)

One aspect of the Bill, which relates to administrative sanctions, is making it stick. I will clarify a couple of issues. First, the entire House agrees that criminal sanctions must remain in place for serious offences. There is a perception that the Minister is introducing criminal sanctions for the first time, but that is not the case. What is being endeavoured is to change the criminality aspect to that of an administrative-style sanction as it pertains in Europe.

On the infringement cases that come before the courts, the average catch involved in Irish cases is in the region of €5,000. This involves the entire catch, which may include €4,000 worth of a valid catch and €1,000 worth of an illegal catch. Some 98.5% of European countries are considering administrative sanctions, while Great Britain is considering dealing with less serious offences being dealt with in a magistrate's court or by way of an administrative or on-the-spot fine, which I would support for such minor offences. Let us say the value of the illegal catch was €3,000 — I am using this as a ballpoint figure — anything lower than that should be dealt with either administratively or in the District Court. If someone caught €500,000 worth of illegal fish, obviously this case should be dealt with automatically in the Circuit Court where the full rigours of the law should apply. However, given that the vast majority of the offences that come before the court in Ireland involve a total catch worth approximately €5,000, 75% of infringements in Irish waters by Irish vessels should be dealt with at District Court level.

The amendment to section 28 proposes changing the word "shall" to "may". This would be of great benefit, particularly in regard to minor offences. If someone is caught committing a systematic premeditated offence, the maximum sentence of confiscating the fishing gear and the catch should apply. I reiterate that we in the Oireachtas when making laws send a signal to the Judiciary and the courts which are an independent branch of our administration. I was very impressed by a letter sent by a member of the legal profession to the chairman of the joint committee, Deputy O'Flynn. It instanced the plight of a fisherman who was fishing out of Howth in bad weather conditions and whose wife was ill. He was short a crewman and he was fishing in a small 50 foot vessel, which in international terms is just a big punt. This man's nets and catch were legal, and all other aspects were totally above board. However, on the day in question, because of weather pressures, personal problems and being a crewman short, when he arrived in port and was boarded by the fishery officer his log book was not filled in. Some log book offences are serious but this was a technical offence. When the case went to the Circuit Court, the State employed solicitors and barristers and this man employed a solicitor and a barrister. As a result of the court case, the man's gear and catch was confiscated and a heavy fine totalling approximately €50,000 was imposed on him, which did not include the cost to the State. The solicitor said to the chairman of the committee that on that occasion the judge's hands were tied. The Oireachtas had sent him the message that he must deal in a non-discretionary fashion with the man, which meant that the penalty imposed on him exceeded his net income for the previous year. This is not fair. These aspects should be considered sympathetically.

I am in a difficult position because, while my colleagues are swimming with the political tide, I am swimming against it. While I sometimes feel I am being dragged down, I will continue swimming for a while.

See this speech in context