Michael Finucane (Fine Gael)

I welcome the Minister to the House. When I was my party's Dáil spokesman on the marine, the former Minister for Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Woods, was described by the Marine Times as a hero in County Donegal because of his plans for the expansion of the fishing fleet. At that time, fishermen were encouraged to fish for deep water species in order to sustain the expansion of the fleet and provide opportunities to upgrade vessels. Since then, some 25% of the fleet has been decommissioned. Therefore, we spent money on the scheme's expansion as well as on decommissioning the fleet. I often wonder at the level of logic within the marine sector.

I met with fishing organisations on many occasions and consider them responsible in their approach and in the way they represent their membership. They must be frustrated with lack of consultation by the Minister in advance of this legislation because these organisations know the industry better than many in his Department. Staff of the latter are more familiar with the various regulations that emanate from Brussels and the complexity of the Common Fisheries Policy. The situation here is in contrast with the UK, where fishermen were closely consulted on legislation.

This Bill should be recognised as flawed and hurried legislation. Subsequent to its introduction, 222 amendments were tabled, of which 100 were from the Department. The Minister was profiled favourably in the media on this issue because of the sins of a small minority in the marine sector who made it easy for him to advance the Bill without having to heed the vast majority involved in what we all know is a hazardous and expensive occupation.

I closely followed this Bill as it passed through Committee and Report Stages in the Dáil, where representatives of marine constituencies empathised with fishermen and reflected their concerns. To a certain degree, the members of the Select Committee on Communications, Marine and Natural Resources demonstrated independence of mind in articulating their concerns on the criminalisation of fishermen arising from this legislation.

Fishermen have a right to be disappointed. I will not rehearse a history lesson on the late 1970s, when fishermen believed themselves sold out at EU level. Every December, a charade takes place wherein conservation people recommend acceptable quotas to the Minister and horse trading ensues in Brussels. In fairness to the industry, its representative organisations show solidarity with the Minister at EU level. However, the quotas continue to shrink.

I have seen the sophisticated naval system in operation in Haulbowline. That system and the way in which Irish fishermen are penalised cause frustrations because the Naval Service does not board the vessels from Spain and other countries which fish in Irish waters. I empathise with that frustration, understand the difficulties of fishermen and fear that the costs and degree of control involved in modern fishing will drive people out of the industry.

I have before me a letter from the Foyle Fishermen's Co-op in County Donegal, which believes the Department to be anti-fishermen and, when I look at this legislation, I agree. Many Fianna Fáil Deputies have also spoken strongly on this matter, including one representative of a constituency in the south west who expressed his difficulties in voting for the legislation. While I understand the difficulties that arise from breaking the Whip, I was surprised that Members did not risk them. Ironically, two people who were put outside the party because of Shannon related issues are now Ministers of State. Therefore, as one is not necessarily cast into oblivion for breaking the Whip, Members who wanted to take a principled stand on this issue should have adopted that approach.

The Minister of State, Deputy Gallagher, had extreme difficulties with this legislation, as he might, given that fishermen in Killybegs and Greencastle are his constituents. For many years, fishermen in Killybegs saw great potential for the town if a decent harbour could be constructed. They have the harbour now but I am not sure whether they have still have a fishing business.

Fishermen feel they are being criminalised by this legislation. Deputy Perry contrasted the fines in other European countries, which suggest that we are top-heavy in the penalties applicable here in that they often do not reflect the scale of the offence. The Department described the situation in France but we should put that in context. The fines faced by the French Government result from its complete disregard for a 1991 ruling, which forced the European Union to flex its muscles. The spin placed in the media is that we will risk heavy European fines if we do not introduce this legislation but, given that Ireland faces no multi-million euro fines, I am interested to learn from where the Minister is coming. His Department could be criticised for not presenting annual information to Brussels. A considerable amount of marine legislation has been passed but it is the first time in all my years in this House and the other House that I have seen such bitterness, resistance and concern in respect of legislation.

The Minister of State has set his face against those who oppose this legislation and is determined to persist with it. He knows the concerns voiced by members of his own party. I know of the concerns of fishermen in respect of this legislation, about which they are rightly worried. This legislation will not be favourably regarded in the future. It is a bad day for the Department.