Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 11: To ask the Minister for Agriculture; Fisheries and Food his plans to safeguard, develop and promote fishing and allied industries here in 2012; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27916/11]

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This question concerns fishing industry development but it gives me an opportunity to express some of my concerns about the Common Fisheries Policy, CFP. Next year will be about planning for fishing in the immediate term. The major hurdle facing us in the coming weeks is the proposal for total allowable catches, TACs, for next year. The initial proposal from the Commission is not good news for our stocks. Of the 34 stocks of interest to Ireland, all bar four are seeing significant cuts in the amount available for Irish fishermen. The cuts range from 15% and 25% for most stocks to a recommended zero quota for cod in the Irish Sea and off the Donegal coast. These are not the final quotas, however, and the quota negotiations will take place during the first weeks of December. The starting point has clearly put us under pressure to build the science and arguments we need to hold what we have and increase quotas where we have the science to back that up.

The good news is that increases are proposed for cod and herring in the Celtic Sea of 141% and 60% respectively, with a 25% increase in haddock in the north west. This is the result of conservation programmes for cod and herring in the Celtic Sea put in place by the industry primarily. We need to replicate this type of approach in other areas, especially in area 6. My job is to put together the science and data to make a convincing argument in order that any cuts applied are fair and that we get a positive result in respect of stocks that are recovering because of responsible fishing.

Additional information not given on the floor of House

On 27 September, the Commission issued its proposals for 2012 fishing opportunities for stocks which are solely within the EU remit and not subject to international agreements. The Commission's proposal for cuts of 15% and 25% is justified on the basis that member states have not provided adequate scientific data on fisheries in many cases. The cost of providing scientific data is very high. The Marine Institute spent €5.9 million in 2010 on data collection for quota stocks, of which 50% was from EU funds. This covered an extensive at-sea and port-based sampling programme and several dedicated and internationally co-ordinated research surveys. The data collected were provided to and used by all the relevant scientific bodies such as ICES and STECF.

I am advised by my experts that in addition to the availability of funding, other reasons that scientists cannot perform robust stock assessments are related to complex problems such as historical data issues, length of time series and lack of coherence in the assessment data. Realistically for many stocks, full assessments will not be available for 2012 or for future years and I am not convinced that in this situation, the adoption of simplistic arbitrary cuts in TACs is an appropriate response. I intend to examine in detail the proposals for each stock taking account of all available information and to determine Ireland's position in that context. In that regard and as provided for in the programme for Government, I will bring forward to the Dáil a sea fisheries sustainability impact assessment in the coming weeks.

I am committed to continuing the path set out in Food Harvest 2020 for the development of the seafood sector in Ireland into 2012. The strategy set out in Food Harvest 2020 involves both the processing and aquaculture sectors. My Department and its agencies have been working together on a twin-track approach to overcoming existing constraints on the aquaculture sector through the comprehensive bay by bay environmental impact assessments required by the EU birds and habitat directives and development of the feasibility of locating aquaculture in less sensitive but more challenging conditions offshore. We are starting to see promising signs of progress in 2011 on the environmental assessments in Natura sites and I believe this will gather pace as the process is bedded in. BIM provides certain support programmes for the sector, including capital grant support for shellfish production outside and within Natura areas where compliance is delivered, and an innovation and technology support scheme. The continuation of these programmes is subject to budget allocations.

In relation to the seafood processing sector, Food Harvest 2020 recognised that the sector was fragmented, lacking in scale, uncompetitive in terms of production costs, too focused on export of commodity products and constrained by inconsistent supply of raw material. BIM, with Enterprise Ireland and Údaras na Gaeltachta, is working to address each of these issues. Grant aid support under the seafood processing business investment scheme was provided in 2011 to improve competitiveness and help the companies concerned develop export markets for high value added products. BIM launched a new seafood value adding scheme earlier this year to support seafood companies with developing added value products. The scheme assists with concept development, including business planning, product development and packaging. The continuation of these programmes is subject to budget allocations.

Noel Harrington (Cork South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The draft proposals from the Commission are worrying. The Minister and his officials face a serious challenge in maximising the total allowable catch for Ireland. I concur with the Minister that the industry-led conservation initiatives have been positive and should be further promoted. I wish him well in the negotiations later this year.

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This year the Commission has decided to take what it calls a precautionary approach. If we cannot provide detailed scientific data to prove that we can maintain fishing efforts on a particular stock, the Commissioner intends to apply an automatic reduction of 25% to the total allowable catch for that stock. I cannot accept that. Either we are applying science or we are not. Our decisions must be made on the basis of science and in respect of a number of fish stocks which may not have sufficient scientific data to estimate a maximum sustainable yield, a number of signals can indicate whether the stocks are healthy. If strong signals about the size and age of a catch suggest that a stock is not under pressure, I cannot stand over the so-called precautionary principle just because the Commissioner would like to implement it. There will be a lot of heated discussions on this issue. I do not disagree with the principle of the Commissioner's proposals but we must base our decisions on science for the sake of stocks and the industry. This will require give and take on both sides.