Thomas Pringle (Donegal South West, Independent)

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the statements on the Common Fisheries Policy review. I welcome the positive news from the Council meeting last night and early this morning in Luxembourg, as well as the Minister's contribution to this debate.

When we debate the Common Fisheries Policy in this House, we should always start by mentioning the historical precedent that was set. I believe this goes back prior to our accession to the European Economic Community, as it was at that time, where, while we were negotiating, the six so-called partners actually changed the rules to ensure they got control of our fisheries stocks. They did this because they knew what we were bringing to the table. I do not believe we were fully aware at that stage of the potential and resources we had. From an Irish perspective, we need always to take this as a starting point when we talk about the CFP and about fisheries policies across the EU. We need to set it as an objective to try to revisit that decision at some stage in the future and this needs to be a starting point in negotiations.

That decision led directly to the CFP, which has gone through a number of reviews before the current review. We have always been playing from a point where we were disadvantaged from the very start. We were disadvantaged because decisions were taken by other countries in a negotiating stance that left us handicapped. We need to try to find a way to rectify that at some future stage, which should be an overarching goal to work towards. If we can achieve that sense of fairness and equality that is supposed to be the foundation stone of the EU, we can then have a fishing industry that can address some of the regional imbalances that exist within this State, where the west, north-west and south-west coasts have been underdeveloped historically. It is only by trying to develop marine resources and aquaculture to the greatest potential possible that some of those imbalances can be reversed.

The Minister has been praised and I would like to add to that and congratulate him on his work at the Council meeting. The agreement on discards in particular is important for the Irish fishing industry. There is much to be worked out in regard to the mechanics of how it will work and what the technical measures will involve. Will the technical measures include, as Mr. Seán O'Donoghue said on radio this morning, the inclusion of areas which are not fished at certain times, which would help to reduce the level of discards? To have the measures for discards of pelagic fish come into effect on 1 January 2014 is more than likely achievable because there would not be as big a problem with mixed fisheries within the pelagic sector as there would be within the whitefish sector. To have the time period begin from 2015 gives three years to allow for the discards measures to take effect for all species in the whitefish sector, which is very important. It will give that room for developments to take place and for technical measures to be introduced in regard to mesh sizes and so on, so we can see what actually works and what can help to reduce the level of discards.

I am slightly concerned about the fact the Commissioner has agreed additional quota will be provided, although this was said to be a concession. While this has to happen and is welcome, I wonder how it will be policed during this transition period. If fishermen get additional quota, will they be penalised through the enforcement concerning the discards and the technical measures if they land fish over that quota? Will we force a continuation of discarding because of that additional quota element? We need measures that ensure all fish that come over the rail are landed and we need to find ways to ensure fishermen are not penalised. Whether they achieve the full economic value of that fish is perhaps a method that could be used to ensure discarding is eliminated completely and that we do not force it further underground. This would add to the scientific knowledge and the knowledge of what is working within the sector through the technical measures as well as improving the information set and the overall standard of control within the fisheries sector. These issues need to be worked out and there will be ongoing discussions in terms of the practicalities in this regard.

It has been welcomed in the House that it has been left to member states to decide whether they will participate in regard to the individual transferable quotas, ITQs. I have previously expressed my concerns that the principle has been conceded in regard to these negotiations on ITQs. I would foresee in future reviews of the Common Fisheries Policy increasing pressure to bring this in here. I wonder what we would lose in terms of negotiating stance if we continuously oppose it. Obviously, it is a negotiating process and it was the best that could be achieved from that process, and it does protect the Irish industry until the next review of the Common Fisheries Policy. From that point of view, I would definitely welcome it and consider it vital.

Aquaculture has huge potential for us. The Minister has been very proactive in terms of the offshore proposals and trying to develop that area further. I do not know how a regional advisory council, RAC, for aquaculture would add anything to the equation and we have our own difficulties in dealing with the Natura 2000 sites. That is working its way through the system at present and, hopefully, over the next year or two that system can kick in and allow licensing to restart, and allow the potential for development. Many jobs could be created in inshore aquaculture throughout the country and many companies would be in a position to avail of that if the licensing regime was sorted out. The regional advisory councils might only add another layer of bureaucracy and control into that situation. I do not see where the value could be in terms of aquaculture unless it is in regard to the offshore and deep water developments.

The Council agreed the policy and a general approach earlier today. As I understand it, that is the Council's negotiating position and we will then enter into negotiations with the Parliament on the overall shape of the CFP reform. The Minister in his concluding remarks might expand on how that interaction with the Parliament will work and where the weighting is between the Council and the Parliament. Is it a 50-50 approach whereby everything has to be negotiated? In terms of a negotiating stance for the Council and Parliament, it is a very good starting position and there has been good movement in terms of the discards and the ITQs, which is positive. The Minister might expand on how the negotiating process will work, where the weightings are and what the final shape of the CFP might look like when it is finally reviewed in 2013.

It is a positive development that the Minister will be chair of the Council of Ministers during the final stages of the review. There is no doubt he has taken a very proactive role in regard to fisheries and has a lot of knowledge in the area. He can bring that to bear in terms of the final make-up of the CFP. Overall, the news is positive. There will be measures and issues to be ironed out with regard to how this will work on a practical basis. In terms of a negotiating stance with the European Parliament, it is positive and I commend the Minister on his work in getting it this far.

See this speech in context