Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have had a number of opportunities to address this House and the Seanad on fisheries matters of late in a challenging time for our fishermen. I have welcomed each of these opportunities as it is my firm belief that it is our collective duty to engage in informed debate to enlighten the policy formulation process for the betterment of the industry.

The subject of this debate is the December Agriculture and Fisheries Council which will, as usual, be dominated by discussions on the Commission's proposals for setting of total allowable catches, TACs, and quotas for 2009. There is enormous complexity attached to these proposals and the time afforded me does not allow me to examine the issues in full detail. The Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Deputy Smith, has been already actively engaged on many fronts since the publication of the Commission's proposals on 7 November, including active discussions with industry and a bilateral meeting with Commissioner Joe Borg in Brussels last Thursday, 5 December.

The Minister, Deputy Smith, has also had discussions with Mr. Huw Irranca-Davies MP, UK Minister for the Natural and Marine Environment, Wildlife and Rural Affairs, on areas of common interest and with a view to work closely with him at this Council. In general, however, the proposals do not paint a pretty picture and give bad news across many stocks, suggesting cuts to many of the stocks of economic importance to the Irish fleet and additional conservation measures that will impact significantly on the activities of the fleet. I share the concerns of the industry as to the clarity, rationale and appropriateness of some of the proposed measures.

I want, however, to dispel any misunderstanding in this matter. The proposals are, to a large extent, based on scientific advice from the International Council for the Exploration of the Seas, ICES, and I will return to this topic in detail later. The indications are that many of the stocks targeted by our fishing fleet are in a poor state from a sustainability point of view. It is important to understand that the Commission's overall goal in proposing these measures is to deliver a viable and sustainable European fishing industry into the future. The cuts do not target Irish fishermen specifically. Quotas for individual member states which have an interest in a given stock are reduced proportionately, in other words, the concept of relative stability, where each member state continues to get its fixed percentage of the available catch, is maintained.

There has also been some positive news, namely, with regard to mackerel, where agreement was reached at the coastal states meeting in London on 30 and 31 October, with the overall TAC going up by 33% from 456,000 tonnes in 2008 to 605,000 tonnes in 2009. This will result in the net Irish quota, after deductions for the payback for undeclared Scottish landings, going from approximately 45,000 tonnes to 62,000 tonnes. One caveat on this stock is regarding the discussions on the EU-Norway agreement, the third round of which is in progress in Oslo this week. There have been suggestions that mackerel could be used to balance the fishing opportunity exchange this year. We are defending our strongly held belief that mackerel cannot form part of the transfer as we do not gain from the exchange of opportunities.

I do not want to underestimate the challenge facing us in successfully defending our stance on the matter, but assuming we are successful, the increase in the mackerel TAC will be maintained and available to our fishermen. This is greatly significant for Ireland and is the reward for Irish fishermen adopting tough, responsible fishing practices for this stock. In value terms using an estimated price per tonne of €1,200, this results in an increase of over €20 million to the pelagic fishing sector in 2009, from €54 million to €74.4 million.

I acknowledge the efforts of the Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Deputy Killeen, at the November Agriculture and Fisheries Council in successfully negotiating for the exclusion of the Celtic Sea from the new cod recovery plan, which will also be given effect in the TAC and quota regulation. This was of major importance for the Irish mixed whitefish fleet as the restrictions suggested would have been disproportionate. It was also a recognition of Ireland's position that a one-size-fits-all approach to stock recovery was not appropriate for the Celtic Sea. We are committed to working to strengthen the state of this stock, which is of importance to the Irish fleet. We are supportive of the appropriate conservation measures for Celtic Sea cod, such as spawning area closures which were originally proposed by fishermen, and are delivering positive effects on stock levels in that area.

I said earlier that I would return to the question of the science and the scientific advice. As legislators and administrators we have to be informed by the expert advice, though not necessarily accept blindly the advice given. Many questions asked about the veracity of specific scientific data or lack of it at any given time. We must always be conscious of the fact that the fisheries resource is the bedrock of the seafood industry and scientific advice on the state of the fisheries resource will dictate the level of fishing opportunities that will be available. Our objective must be to halt the decline in many fish stocks so as to protect the future of our fishermen and coastal communities.

I will give a brief flavour of the state of some of the key stocks from an Irish perspective. Scientists are concerned about the overall state of the fisheries resource. There are serious concerns about the state of the cod, whiting and haddock stocks off the west coast of Scotland. The Commission proposes a closure of these fisheries for 2009. Irish Sea cod has collapsed and shows no sign of recovery. However, the haddock stock in the Irish Sea is increasing. The Celtic Sea cod stock remains below the desired biomass level and there is major concern about data quality available for scientific analysis.

The stocks of hake, monk and megrim are important to vessels operating from the south west and west coasts of Ireland and scientists consider these stocks to be in a stable state. However, because of the poor data available for analysis, the Commission considers it important to limit expansion of these fisheries and so the proposed 2009 TACs will be reduced by 15%. There are many plaice and sole stocks in the waters around Ireland but for many of these stocks there is limited scientific data and the state of the stocks is unknown. There are serious concerns about the Irish Sea sole stock and the introduction of recovery measures is recommended.

Nephrops stocks, which we know as prawns in the fishing harbours of my area, Fingal, are of vital importance to the Irish fleet with very important grounds in the north Irish Sea, Celtic Sea, Aran grounds and the Porcupine Bank. These fisheries support many coastal communities. Scientists consider the stocks generally to be in a stable state but there is concern about the stock in the Porcupine Bank. The stocks of mackerel and horse mackerel are healthy, while there are serious concerns about the herring stocks in the Celtic Sea and off the Donegal coast. The blue whiting stock is decreasing and the 2009 TAC will be severely cut. Sharks and rays are important species in the ocean ecosystem and are vulnerable to overfishing. There are serious concerns about the decline of the spurdog population. The introduction of a new total allowable catch for rays is not the preferred option from a scientific perspective for sustainable fishing of this stock.

As I have said, the proposed regulation is complex and detailed, and I hope I have given a flavour of that. I cannot address every issue here; however, I do wish to elaborate on some of the key issues we face in the ongoing discussions leading into what will be tense and protracted negotiations at Council.

The system of the Hague preferences stems from a European Council decision in 1976 that recognised the development needs of peripheral coastal regions whose populations were heavily dependent on fishing activity. The system simply grants us an improved share of our traditional stocks when they fall below a certain level. The system also benefits the UK. Each year at the December Agriculture and Fisheries Council the concept of the Hague preferences may come under attack from a number of other member states, and this year will be no exception. The application of the Hague preferences is of paramount political importance to Ireland. Our strong view is that the system reflects a formal political agreement of all member states which forms a foundation stone of the Common Fisheries Policy and a critical element of the system of relative stability. We do not believe it is in any way appropriate to challenge this integral element of the CFP at each December Council. The proper place for any debate on the Hague preferences is in the context of the overall CFP review debate, which is scheduled for 2012.

The Minister, Deputy Smith, met with Commissioner Borg in Brussels last Friday to discuss issues of major importance to Ireland in advance of the Council. The Hague preference system was top of the agenda, and the Minister informed the Commissioner in a very forthright manner that we would be expecting him to maintain the consistent position of the Commission on the matter and defend this fundamental element of the Common Fisheries Policy.

Tom Sheahan (Kerry South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I was not long in the House when I attended a meeting of the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food at which the former Minister, Deputy Coughlan, was in attendance. Perhaps naively, I asked her whether she had ever gone to Europe and asked for an increase in fishing quota. I got a very disingenuous answer and wondered whether I should not have asked the question. The answer I got was "No". The Minister of State referred to the Hague preferences and so on. When one considers the full picture with regard to fisheries in this country, one realises that since we joined the EEC €400 billion worth of fish has been taken out of Irish waters. It is no wonder the majority of coastal communities voted "No" to the Lisbon treaty. It is well known that fishing communities all over the country strongly rejected the treaty. Nothing is being done now that will encourage people to support Lisbon II. In fact, it is the opposite. This is something the Minister needs to bear in mind when he goes to the December meeting.

A big issue at present is the closure of area 6A under the guise of cod recovery. The Minister of State mentioned in his statement that cod in the Celtic Sea is in a relatively healthy state and he even mentioned that it was the fishermen themselves that introduced seasonal closures of Celtic Sea cod fishing during spawning season. Why was such a system never introduced to area 6A by the EU? The fishermen are the best conservationists out there because they are not in it for a fast buck. We are talking about generations of families that have been involved in fishing. They did this in the Celtic Sea, and I must ask why such a system was not introduced in area 6A rather than a blanket ban.

The proposed ban on fishing in area 6A is a serious issue for fishermen in the north west and also as a precedent for other areas. The European Commission is claiming that this approach is required as a response to the state of cod stocks. It is part of the proposal on total allowable catches and quotas which is to be decided in Brussels in December. The Commission has proposed what would effectively be a complete closure of whitefish fisheries in area 6A inside 100 fathoms for 2009. Under this proposal, only prawn fisheries, with very low by-catches, will be allowed in the area inside 100 fathoms. It is clear there is a serious threat for all, particularly for vessels that have limited potential to move to other areas, that is, to the Celtic Sea. Given other changes in control in the Irish Sea and area 6, this adds to the complications that will be caused by the measure.

Needless to say, we wish to make clear our hostile reaction to this proposal. An extraordinary aspect of the proposal is that it has only been tabled in recent weeks with the quota proposals. It did not go through the consultative stages that all proposals normally go through with the Minister, the Department, advisory committees or regional advisory councils. The European Commission did not even do the Irish Government the courtesy of informing it or consulting with it before publishing the proposals. One must question the Minister's clout at the Commission when it publishes these proposals without even consulting him or any of the other authorities involved in the fishing industry. It gives us little confidence for December to know that the Minister and the Department were not even contacted about this.

The Commission's proposals for total allowable catches and quotas for 2009 involve major cuts in fishing quotas. In fact, the quotas of 22 out of the 25 species listed recently at a committee meeting have been reduced by between 15% and 35%. This represents multi-million euro losses for the industry at time when it is trying to recover from its recent difficulties. It is on its knees due to what it went through during the year with high fuel costs and so on. Apart from the obvious negative effects of lower quotas, there are a number of other issues. The reductions in quotas completely undermine the basis for the decommissioning programme, on which €38 million has been committed in 2008. The programme's aim is to allow vessels which remain in the fleet to have more quota to share, thus increasing their viability in the future. If these proposals go ahead we will have to have another decommissioning scheme. We had decommissioning in the whitefish fleet to bring down the number of boats so there would be a bigger catch for a smaller number of boats. Now the quota is to be decreased. There will need to be another decommissioning if this is to go ahead in its present form. Quota cuts will also have a counterproductive effect by encouraging discards. The word "discard" is a dirty word. Perfectly healthy produce is being cast overboard and this is immoral. Discards have been highlighted as a major problem for a long time. If these proposals go ahead in their current format, it will only force people to discard more fish. The quota cut for prawns is totally unjustified because the scientific advice called for catches to be kept at 2007 levels which penalises Ireland simply for catching near enough to its full quota. This should be high on the Minister's list of priorities come December.

Another feature of the quota cuts is the fraudulent approach based on average catches in recent years rather than average quotas. We simply cannot have more quota cuts. We must adopt a new approach based on sound science, as the Minister of State said. At a recent meeting of the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, the science available from the Marine Institute was questioned. This science should take account of the regional, social and economic aspects in a partnership approach. The present approach is not helping. It does not help stocks or fishermen and it discredits the whole system.

The Hague Preferences to which the Minister of State referred, were negotiated by Dr. Garret FitzGerald in 1976. We have benefited from additional quota based on a complex formula. The Hague Preferences are an integral part of the share out of quota although technically they have to be approved each year. The Minister of State said that other EU countries attack the Hague Preferences every year and these must be copper-fastened.

We are dealing with statements on the Agriculture and Fisheries Council but I have to ask what is the state of the Cawley report. What is the Government strategy? A massive investment package was announced. Only part of the decommissioning identified as being required has been delivered. When will the money left over from decommissioning be spent? Will the rest of the Cawley report be implemented?

Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to share time with Deputy Willie Penrose and I propose to take seven minutes.

John O'Donoghue (Kerry South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Agreed.

Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Something that does not necessarily relate to the Agriculture and Fisheries Council, given that we do not have many opportunities to discuss fisheries is the additional funding emergency measures were agreed in July. It is still urgent that progress be made to make funds available at the earliest possible date. I understand that the Federation of Irish Fishermen, FIF, has made submissions and there is an ongoing campaign. We all know that fuel prices have decreased dramatically but the cost inputs for fishermen during that period were significant as were losses incurred during that period. We should support that measure. Will that €37 million expenditure be expedited? Perhaps the officials could revert to us in due course on this matter.

With the pending December Council of Ministers meeting due on 18 and 19 December, it is important that this House give time to debating the issues at hand. I have had some significant briefings today from the FIF, more specifically from the Irish South and West Fish Producers' Organisation, on the issues. It is worth reiterating some of the points they make.

They state that the decisions taken at the December Council meeting will be vital to the future of the industry. I note the Minister of State said he supports the appropriate conservation measures for Celtic Sea cod such as spawning area closures which were originally proposed by fishermen and are delivering positive effects on stock levels in that area. The organisation's position is such that it proposes that the creation of a sub-divided management area separating the English Channel from the rest of the existing Celtic Sea, has certain implications for Ireland. The organisation's briefing paper states:

The separation of Area VIId, the English Channel, from the remainder of Area VIIb-k for the purposes of management, and the establishment of a separate Total Allowable Catch for that area has significant implications for the Irish fishing industry.

While the measure is not objectionable in itself, the subdivision of the stock must not disadvantage Irish fishermen by directly dividing the quotas, giving Ireland quota in an area (VIId) where Irish fishermen do not fish.

Irish fishermen catch most of the Cod in the west of the existing management area, to the south of Ireland. This must be reflected in the new subdivision of quota between the management areas.

I could not have put the argument any better.

With regard to the proposals on the fishing effort, there is a school of thought that suggests that the European Commission is effectively re-writing, after the fact, the decision reached by the Council. The FIF state that the Commission is re-writing the text of the decision on fishing effort in the Irish Sea and the north west which was reached at last month's EU Agriculture and Fisheries Council. This cannot be allowed as it would mean an immediate 25% cut in fishing possibilities in 2009, from what was in the decision which was in itself misguided, draconian and punitive. The November Council of Fisheries Ministers reached a decision on a new and intensified series of measures for fisheries in the Irish Sea and the north west. I also understand that the Irish Government and industry succeeded in thwarting the efforts to have this approach extended to the south and west coasts. The FIF has stated this to me today. The measure agreed which affect the Irish Sea and north west, clearly curtailed fishing effort in the form of kilowatt-days to the amount of effort in previous base years. It has only come to light in recent days that the Commission is going significantly beyond what was agreed and it now proposes in 2009 to impose a further 25% cut from the base effort. This is contrary to all understanding of what was agreed. I understand the Minister may share this position but he needs to put it on the record of the House at some stage.

I note the Minister of State's statement on the Hague Preferences, that they are an integral part of the TAC, total allowable catch and quota allocations system and they must continue to be allocated or formally incorporated into the TAC and quota system and not perhaps subjected to the annual approval which they must undergo. I understand the point made by the Minister of State when he states that certain member states would seek to denigrate or downgrade that agreement. The position adopted by the FIF in continuing to ensure that the Hague issues are maintained, is paramount to the industry in the future. More recently there has been positive interplay between the fishermen's organisations and the Minister. The emergency package agreed in July, however, needs to be expedited. It is a matter of grave importance to the industry.

Willie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Coming from a midlands county where the lakes and canals are important to its fishing industry, I have listened with great care to what Deputies Sheahan, Ferris and Sherlock have said about coastal fishing. In July I took an interest in developments in the fishing industry. I know the significance and the potential of the forthcoming Agriculture and Fisheries Council meeting will have on fishermen's incomes. It is important we ensure the quota restrictions and the emergency measures introduced in July are fully discussed and the Cawley report recommendations, particularly in the structural measures and decommissioning, are accelerated.

In July, when the Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Deputy Tony Killeen, met with fishermen's representatives in Athlone, one major issue was the decommissioning of fleet vessels over 18 m. The question also arose as to what would happen to those vessels under 18 m. Will the Minister of State inform the House what developments have been made in this area?

Fishing is a tough livelihood to which many of us have never been exposed. Fishermen work hard and it is important they be given every assistance possible. Although I live in an inland county, I admire the bravery of fishermen who go out at all hours, day and night, to secure a limited but declining livelihood.

While I hope it is only a rumour, it has been indicated to me by some inland fishermen that there will be a stock delimitation in eel fisheries. The coastal and sea fishermen have suffered from quota restrictions and so forth. They have taken more than their share in hardship in this regard. In the case of eel fisheries, however, there are up to 1,000 jobs at stake. We can ill afford to lose any more jobs in the fishing industry at whatever level at sea or inland. Any restrictions on eel fisheries will affect a significant body of fishermen from the midlands to the south west. It has been indicated to me that there might be a 95-year restriction on eel fishing which I believe is an incorrect interpretation. Will the Minister comment on this?

Martin Ferris (Kerry North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is vital the Government takes a strong stand in opposition to the latest proposals from the Commission regarding quota allocation and further restrictions on Irish fishermen in Irish waters when the Council of Fisheries Ministers meets next week. In particular, it must expose the fact that the Commission has gone well beyond what was discussed at the last meeting of the Council in November. If put into effect, the implications of the Commission's decisions would mean the overall quota available to Irish fishermen will be 25% lower in 2009 than it was this year. It would also mean the opposition at the November meeting of the Agriculture and Fisheries Council to the extension of measures for the Irish Sea, the north-west, south and the south-west fisheries at the November meeting of the Council of Fisheries Ministers has been ignored and overturned.

The Commission has also moved the goalposts with the agreed measures to be applied to the Irish Sea and to the north-west fishery. It now proposes a further 25% cut, from the base effort, in 2009. It is incumbent on the Minister to state his view on the Commission's proposals and that he will vigorously oppose them at the Council meeting next week.

The manner in which the Commission has acted on this issue illustrates once again the bureaucratic and unaccountable nature in which fishing policy is created in Brussels. It further underlines the need for this country to make a strong argument in favour of completely overhauling the Common Fisheries Policy, in particular the manner in which it is applied to Irish fishermen and to Irish waters. It is perpetuating a grossly unfair and inequitable system of quota allocation that goes back to the disastrous deal made on the fisheries sector in the negotiations leading to EEC accession in 1973.

However, that is a broader argument and the priority now is to address the immediate threat as posed by the Commission's proposals. The Minister needs to ensure the so-called "Hague preferences" which represent a concession on the original 1973 bad deal on the allocation of quotas in our waters, are placed on a statutory basis. That is the minimum required to ensure the Hague preferences are not, as is the case at present, subject to annual attack. An attack which if successful would mean a cut in the cod quota for Irish fishermen of up to 60%.

It is likely other member states will mount an offensive against the Hague preferences next week at the Council meeting. The Minister must commit himself to resisting that attack and to securing the preferences on a long-term basis. That is the minimum that needs to be done, pending a more radical review and reform in the interests of fairness in the entire fisheries policy. It is worth restating such reform is urgently required. Otherwise, we will continue to find the Irish fishing sector being subject to constant undermining and attack, with, in many people's opinion, the ultimate reduction of the sector to insignificance.

The Minister must also reject the proposed closure of the whitefish fishery in area 6a. This would mean the closure of the entire north-west fishery. Again, the Commission has acted arbitrarily without the proposal being discussed properly at EU level at the advisory committees on fisheries or the north-west waters regional advisory council. The sector believes the implications of the closure proposal were not subject to a proper economic assessment. The closure of the north west fishery would have a devastating impact on the fishermen engaged in demersal fishing in that area. The proposal must be rejected. If it were allowed to go ahead, the knock-on effect would add to the pressures on other coastal fisheries, including the south west.

Fishermen also argue that the proposed 15% cut in the nephrops quota in area 7 contradicts scientific evidence which has found the stock to be stable. They also claim it penalises Ireland for having utilised its quota. Other issues have emerged with, for example, the measures on ray and skate in areas 6 and 7 and in the spurdog fishery. One problem is with bycatch where a maximum 5% limit has been imposed on spotted dogfish. This raises the issue of discard catch due to vessels not wishing to contravene regulations but which, by extension, also leads to a massive amount of waste as bycatch is dumped at sea. A week last Friday, a trawler fishing off the Kerry coast was forced to dump 2.8 tonnes of spurdog overboard. The regulations in question often bear little relationship to the reality of the fishery in question.

Irish fishermen are also opposed to the proposed large scale transfer of the blue whiting quota to the Norwegian fleet, a transfer that could involve as much as 100,000 tonnes, almost 20% of the overall quota for blue whiting in EU waters. There is also the issue of proposed quotas for many species in 2009 being based on the average catch in recent years. Fishermen claim this is penalising them for years in which they have not filled their allocation. They also claim it will reduce the fishing opportunities available to vessels which remain in operation after decommissioning and that reducing the amount which they can catch will lead to the discarding of marketable fish. Due to the impact this calculation of quota based on averages will have for the Irish fishery it must be strongly opposed. The flawed nature of the emergency package agreed during the summer in response to the crisis brought about by increased fuel prices continues to be exposed. Sufficient funding is not available to address the serious issues and needs that exist and little or nothing has been done to alleviate the difficulties in which a large number of Irish fishermen continue to find themselves at the end of a difficult year.

Next week's Council meeting is therefore of crucial importance. If the Commission's proposals are accepted they will have massively negative consequences for the Irish fishery in 2009. Coming after an already bad year, it would be enough to further accelerate the numbers leaving fishing. Indeed there are many who believe this is, ultimately, the objective of the Commission and of EU fishing policy as it relates to the Irish industry. The Minister of State must take a strong stand as he is being urged to unanimously across the Irish fishing sector. In opposing the Commission proposals I am certain that he will also have the support of others in the House and I urge him to do so.

Pat Gallagher (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am pleased to express some views on the forthcoming Agriculture and Fisheries Council of 18 and 19 December. This is a new development and a welcome one. I congratulate the Minister of State, Deputy Killeen, on his exceptional efforts since his appointment as Minister of State with responsibility for fisheries and forestry in representing Ireland at European level. He has left his mark and I know that after the Council meeting he will have left an indelible mark in Europe, taking into account his brief period as Minister of State. I congratulate him on his success in securing a justified increase in the mackerel quota, going from 49,000 tonnes to 66,000. This is worth €20 million to the industry.

Given the good shape of the stock, which is in its best shape since the egg survey of the 80s, we will be able to maintain this level and hopefully increase it. I have noted with enthusiasm in 2007 and 2008 that the mackerel has moved south much earlier than heretofore. This means that more Irish fishing vessels are fishing nearer to the port of Killybegs and will land at Killybegs. Even Scottish vessels will land at Killybegs during January. These will be additional resources for pelagic processing plants there. We would like all vessels to do that but they cannot be mandated to do so. Various Ministers have considered this. It is hard to expect large pelagic vessels fishing off the coast of Norway, if they are inside the four degrees, or off the north coast of Scotland to travel down because of the exorbitant cost due to the increase in the price of oil in the past. This has changed. I remember when most fish were landed at Killybegs and we will witness that again this year.

I refer to the proposed closure of the whitefish fishery off Donegal, area 6A. This is not justified and the Minister of State will prove this to the Commission and his colleagues at the Agriculture and Fisheries Council next week. We have the highest rate of unemployment in the Donegal region and the closure would exacerbate this. That is not a scientific argument but it is an economic one. This would be a disaster for Donegal and the Minister of State will resist this measure with great vigour at the Council. It is not sufficient to resist it, he must offer alternatives. The alternative is to recommend technical conservation measures such as an increase in the size of mesh. Ireland has always been to the fore in recommending technical conservation and real time closures. That would be more effective and I suggest the Minister of State should approach the proposed closure in this vein.

We are in the 11th hour in respect of blue whiting and transfers to Norway but the Minister of State will take a strong line on this. He has done so heretofore. He will try to ensure the EU and Ireland will have a viable blue whiting fishery.

I remember when all blue whiting was for industrial purposes. The ingenuity of the Irish processing industry developed a valuable blue whiting fishery for human consumption. We must ensure that the outcome is that there is sufficient blue whiting in the EU and sufficient blue whiting so that Ireland has that valuable fishery.

I wish the Minister of State well. He has a good track record in his short time in the industry. He will do his utmost in these difficult times to ensure Ireland secures a fair and realistic deal when decisions are taken at the end of next week.

Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Ar dtús báire ba mhaith liom buíochas a ghabháil leis na comhaltaí go léir a labhair ar an díospóireacht thábhachtach seo faoi chúrsaí iascaireachta. D'éist mé go géar agus go cúramach leo agus beidh mé ag caint leis an Aire Stáit, Deputy Tony Killeen, i dtaobh na tuairimí agus na moltaí a d'ardaigh Teachtaí le linn na díospóireachta.

I want to assure the House that we will not shirk our responsibility when it comes to opposing proposals that are unfair, not supported by science, inappropriate or simply impracticable and unable to deliver on the required outcome. The Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Deputy Smith, cannot and will not defend the indefensible and, where it is indisputable from a scientific perspective that particular stocks are being fished unsustainably, he will support the appropriate measures to rectify that situation. The issues for decision at Council are causing concern around the coast and Members are hearing this at first hand from their constituents, as I am from mine. It is clear there are issues that will affect the north-west area significantly.

Deputy Sheahan referred to the Cawley strategy, which remains the widely agreed Government development strategy for the seafood sector. The Government committed total funding of €118 million for the support and development of the seafood sector in 2009. The Cawley strategy covers the period from 2007-13. Dr. Noel Cawley continues to chair a broadly based implementation group, which met two weeks ago, to drive on the implementation of the strategy.

I agree with Deputy Sheahan's comments on discards and the importance of reducing the level of same. Discarding fish is not acceptable. We have raised this issue as a priority and we are committed to supporting measures at EU level and bringing forward our ideas to the EU so that urgent action can be taken to reduce and eliminate discards. Deputy Sherlock referred to the fuel package in July. In September, Ireland submitted proposals for additional EU funds to support a package of measures to adapt the fleet and increase profitability. This package involves further decommissioning of fishing vessels. The Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food raised this matter at the most recent bilateral meeting with Commissioner Borg last week and pressed for the Commission to bring forward proposals for the allocation of additional funds to Ireland at an early date.

Deputy Penrose referred to eel fishing. There is serious concern about the state of eel stocks at EU level. The eel fishery is not subject to consideration at the December Fisheries Council. However, the management and conservation of eels is a matter for my colleague, the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, and I will convey to him the Deputy's concerns regarding the eel fishery.

Willie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Especially the impact on 1,000 jobs.

Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Ferris raised the issue of cod recovery measures agreed at the November Fisheries Council. Under the cod recovery plan agreed at the Council, a limit on time at sea will apply to vessels targeting whitefish. The time at sea, established through Ireland's fishing vessels track record in the area, will, for the first time, be administered by each member state. Our officials have been asked to work closely with the industry in order that these arrangements are best suited to the needs of the fishermen operating in the area. In addition to this restriction, the Commission is proposing a ban on the use of most whitefish gear in the area. This is completely unacceptable to the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and our officials have worked with industry to come forward with alternative measures that both help to protect the stocks under pressure while allowing fishermen viable fishing in the area. This issue has been identified as a priority and we will be making the strongest case possible for the alternative proposals we have submitted along with the UK authorities. With the poor scientific advice on the cod, haddock and whiting stocks in this area, we must accept further restrictions will be introduced.

However, in the Irish Sea, we also face a number of challenges. Like the cod in the north west, the November Council agreed restrictions on time at sea in the area to help conserve cod. There is an important prawn fishery in the Irish Sea and the Commission's proposal involves a cut in that total allowable catch, TAC. We will seek a roll-over of the 2008 TAC, which we consider is justifiable from a scientific perspective, and we will also work to ensure the Commission's proposal for a new regime for the conservation of rays does not stop our fishery in the Irish Sea. All the scientific advice available to us is supportive of a managed targeted fishery for rays in the Irish Sea and the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food will make a strong case for such a regime.

A number of proposals will impact on the Celtic Sea fisheries. Cuts in the TACs are proposed for a number of stocks such as monk, megrim, whiting and cod. These are all important fisheries for our whitefish fleet and, where the scientific advice allows, I will seek adjustments in the Commission's proposals. In this regard, we will work closely with industry to identify the key stocks of most economic importance and give the highest priority to them. I take on board the economic impact referred to by Deputy Pat The Cope Gallagher, particularly in Donegal, which must be part of the debate on the best way forward.

We face tough negotiations at this Council with many cuts in quotas and new difficult conservation measures. We have a great deal of work ahead of us but we have consulted widely with industry and others and we are clear as to our objectives. We will leave no stone unturned in our efforts to deliver the best package for Ireland. That will not, unfortunately, include the decommissioning package sought by Deputy Sheehan. However, I have taken his comments on board and I will give them serious consideration to see what can be done. As an Irish Sea Minister, I am aware we face serious issues regarding the size and the number of boats fishing limited stocks, which makes it difficult to maintain our conservation objectives.

The Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food is determined to act in the best interests of Ireland and the broader Irish fishing community. We have had some successes regarding the mackerel quota for 2009 and the decision at the November Council not to include the Celtic Sea in the cod recovery plan and I will pass on the encouraging words of Deputy Pat The Cope Gallagher to the Minister of State, Deputy Killeen. Every Member will wish the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and his Minister of State, Deputy Killeen, well in their endeavours on behalf of our fishing sector and the Council negotiations will deliver a fair and balanced package of measures, which will both protect fish stocks going forward while supporting the domestic fishing industry and the coastal communities dependent on fishing.