Michael McCarthy (Labour)

The issue is not as simple as one might assume, although no one in this House has suggested it is simple. It is a fraught and complex one. I am not going to lecture the Minister of State, Deputy Gallagher, who comes from a strong fishing constituency and has vast political experience on the finer details of the issues.

The committee referred to a perceived imminent and ongoing threat to salmon stocks from commercial netting, a decreased survival of salmon at sea, the taking of salmon destined for other rivers, especially east coast rivers, by drift nets on the west coast, the management system based on quotas, the economic benefits of commercial fishing vis-À-vis angling, the social and cultural value of the commercial fishery and the advisability of a compensatory or set-aside scheme. We are all aware that salmon stocks are declining, and declining rapidly. It is important that the Minister of State should endeavour to secure the survival of the salmon species. There is no fear of contradiction or lack of consistency in this regard. We are being warned by marine biologists, anglers and all those involved in the industry.

We know from experience that the plundering of thousands of species of fish in other areas was rampant. Entire species were wiped out in some parts of the world, including cod in one area. The North Atlantic Salmon Fund took a lead in this regard. It sought to protect the stocks in Greenland, around the Faroes and in areas where boats from different seafaring nations were hoovering up what salmon was available. Due to this fund and a number of initiatives by people who were extremely concerned about the issue, it has now been halted. It leaves us in an undesirable and lonely position because this is the only country which has yet to deal constructively with the matter.

Science is very accurate in this regard. I was struck by the amount of information and figures available from people involved in salmon science. I am advised that 20% of salmon waters have sufficient spawners, but the difficulty arises in the remaining 80% where, for a number of reasons, these areas are not conducive to good spawning because of poor water quality, habitat and, in particular, non-human predators. The Minister of State referred to seals. I join with him in condemning the outrageous behaviour that took place recently in this area. It is a very sad facet of any society which allows this type of activity to prevail and where this type of cruelty is inflicted on animals. It detracts from the issue.

I wholeheartedly endorse the first recommendation of the committee, namely, single stock management. It is one of the ways forward in dealing with the issue. We are aware of the numbers of people involved in the industry who make very little money during June and July. The number of people who make a living from the industry is extremely small. What could make the decision in regard to compensatory schemes easier is the various voluntary compensatory deals between the European Union, the State and those involved in the tourism sector who would be willing to contribute.

With regard to the National Salmon Commission, there is a school of thought that this comes down to a Government initiative in dealing with the issue because there are layers of bureaucracy involved. To put it simply, there is no broad consensus on the part of most political parties on the issue. The stance taken by the Progressive Democrats is particularly well considered. One can see the level of detail involved. Other parties are considering the thought process that exists in regard to the recommendation. I looked at the Labour Party's website in the UK on the matter, including the number of people of note and experts involved in the sector. They have compiled a UK anglers' charter which touches on the various issues. I made inquiries about the Conservative Party which appears to have taken no interest in the matter. The issue is too important to neglect to have an official policy on it.

I referred to bureaucracy. There are 12 different organs of State involved in this area. These include the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, the Central Fisheries Board, the seven regional boards, all of which are autonomous, the Marine Institute, which deals with scientific research and the National Fisheries Management Executive, comprising of the CEOs of all the fisheries boards. However, ultimately, the decision rests with the Minister of State. While I am aware he is awaiting a report from the commission, he must take a lead in the issue and make a decision. No one wants to see this being a problem leading into a general election year in 2007. While the matter can be dealt with clearly, it cannot be dealt with easily, because it is a complex matter. I urge the Minister of State to examine the committee report and to take on board in a practical way its recommendations.