Noel Dempsey (Meath, Fianna Fail)

We had a similar discussion yesterday and I explained at that stage that the maximum possible period of two months imprisonment provided for in section 24(1) matches the maximum possible fine of €5,000 which a court can impose for an offence of obstructing a sea fisheries protection officer in carrying out his or her function, as opposed to log book offences.

With respect to the point being made, one cannot obstruct a sea fisheries protection officer without knowing it. A person cannot inadvertently knock the officer overboard, prevent him or her from getting on board or lock oneself in a cabin to prevent an officer from seeing if a log book is completed. Such actions cannot be carried out unknowingly. In any circumstances, obstruction of a sea fisheries protection officer is the same as obstruction of a garda or any official of the State who has a job to do. It is a serious matter which should be deterred through substantial penalties and the liability to be arrested as provided for in section 24.

The provisions for two months imprisonment and €5,000 fine are the maximum penalties. Neither the sea fisheries officer, the Minister nor a civil servant will decide whether a person will receive the maximum penalties, as the courts will decide this, judging all the circumstances in the case. The courts can impose these as a maximum.

Section 25 deals with the maximum fine which a court can impose on summary conviction of a person for an offence. The courts have the right to decide the actual limit of the fine. If the offence is minor or inadvertent, the courts take this into account and can impose a fine of €100, €20 or €5, for example. The courts must have the freedom to impose conviction in any particular case by reference to the gravity of the offence in question and the particular circumstances in which it was committed.

Section 25 also prohibits and penalises assault on a sea fisheries protection officer. If the assault is serious, conviction and indictment would arise entailing a fine and/or imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years. This is correct because if we ask people to do jobs such as this which can sometimes be difficult and dangerous, protection must be provided through legislation. These people can then know they will be protected. Thankfully there have not been many incidents in the sea fisheries area where people have been assaulted. Not long ago there was a serious incident in the inland fisheries area where a life was lost. We must protect the people we are sending out to do these jobs.

A point has been made on a number of occasions regarding log books. It has been intimated that it is a minor detail if a person is discovered by sea fisheries protection officers not to have the log book filled in or the wrong figure or area put in. The industry has tried to portray this as mere omission, that it is not important and that people are getting tied up in bureaucracy, etc. I dismiss this type of argument. The log book is a fundamental part of the sea fisheries control and the conservation and protection measures, along with efforts made to ensure that everybody fishes within the limits set. It is part of a system to ensure that people are not overfishing or taking fish from fellow fishermen.

I accept that some mistakes are made, and people can argue their case. The notion that forgetting to fill in the log book or pages going missing, which occurs frequently, is a minor matter is akin to saying that people forgetting to fill in a tax return or completing it fraudulently is also minor. We should not pass any heed on that idea. The Senator mentioned farming, an area in which there have been many complaints. I have seen forms where people looking for headage payments, for example, made very simple mistakes on the form and lost thousands of euro, or perhaps their entire income, for a year or two years because the form was not filled out completely. The EU is not singling out the sea fisheries industry on this matter, which should be noted.

I do not wish to minimise the issue. The idea has been mooted on a number of occasions and I did not get the opportunity to address it before. It is not a minor matter, as the log book is a specific EU Common Fisheries Policy requirement for all member states and everybody working in the industry. It is a basic tool to ensure the Common Fisheries Policy is being implemented. It is a serious matter for it to be interfered with or ignored, excepting the fact that people sometimes can make mistakes. In many circumstances purported mistakes are clear attempts to circumvent fishery control.