Seanad debates

Wednesday, 22 March 2017

Sea-Fisheries (Amendment) Bill 2017: Committee Stage

 

10:30 am

Photo of David NorrisDavid Norris (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 1:

In page 3, lines 14 to 19, to delete all words from and including “, unless” in line 14 down to and including line 19 and substitute “(within the meaning of section 85), or is otherwise authorised by law to do so.”.

I have to say various Governments have had a very poor track record in fisheries. They have never really regarded it as a national resource for the people of Ireland. Over many years, I have listened to people talking about how much we got out of the European Union and so on, while neglecting the fact that about €200 billion of Irish fishing was handed out over the years to European Community fishing.

In this legislation, the Government is trying to push through new legislation which is aimed at reinstating what was determined to be an unlawful provision under which millions of pounds of Irish shellfish were taken out of Irish waters by British companies.An upstanding Irish citizen, Paul Barlow from Dunmore East, who is a shellfish fisherman and three other shellfish farmers successfully challenged what had been happening in the Supreme Court. The practice of the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine of allowing some British vessels to fish inside an area specifically designed for Irish fishing vessels was undermining Irish sovereignty and taking away what amounted to Irish natural resources and putting local shellfish fishermen out of business. That is very serious.

The policy was to set aside the law and not prosecute fishing vessels particularly if they came from Britain or Northern Ireland. The policy was called voisinage, which with my limited schoolboy knowledge of French I take to amount to neighbourliness. It is not terribly good neighbourly behaviour to fish out local shellfish resources. Various Ministers responsible for the marine alienated marine natural resources on the absurd principle that these fish and shellfish species were not a natural resource and did not in some fashion belong to the State. The Supreme Court decided in favour of the shellfish fishermen and declared positively and specifically that marine shellfish were a natural resource and belonged to the Irish people. I remember the principles enunciated by a former Minister that Irish resources belong to the Irish people and should be treated as such and it is a pity we have departed from this principle.

During the 50 years and more of this practice, British vessels were in fact fishing illegally in Irish waters. Parliamentary questions were asked and misleading or inaccurate answers were given. A stock answer was that this arrangement existed under a 1964 convention, which was very misleading. After the Supreme Court judgment the Minister is trying to readjust the situation and bring back in the process that the Supreme Court determined to be illegal. He is frustrating a decision of the Supreme Court, which is wrong. The provision I am opposed to states:

Subject to section 9, a person on board a foreign sea-fishing boat shall not fish or attempt to fish while the boat is within the exclusive fishery limits, unless he or she—(a) is on board a sea-fishing boat owned and operated in Northern Ireland while the boat is within the area between 0 and 6 nautical miles ...

This once again provides for British vessels to fish up to the shores and all around the Irish coast and not be liable for prosecution for doing so. I think we are remarkably tolerant of all these invading species, not only the British and the Northern Irish but the Spanish, who have fished out their own waters, are coming in here. Our own record is appalling. I remember when we built the Celtic Dawn, the largest factory fishing vessel in the world. It was so devastating to fish stocks that it was banned from European waters. It went off to Africa and fished out the resources for local African people, putting the tribal fishermen out of business. They were jobless and came to Europe where they were described dismissively as economic migrants. It is perfectly legitimate to be an economic migrant. If the financial circumstances in one's country are so very bad and difficult it is perfectly natural to go somewhere where there are resources and jobs available.

This Bill provides for a British vessel to fish up to the shores all around the Irish coast and not be liable for prosecution. There is no clarity on what vessels will make use of this provision. Has there been an impact assessment of how this unqualified fishing will have an impact on the small national fleet that relies so heavily on this area or of the impact on fish stocks because we could be in danger of fishing out certain species? The four people who took this action risked their personal livelihoods to safeguard a national asset. We should salute them for so doing because they were extremely courageous in taking a case to the Supreme Court, which can be expensive and difficult if it goes against one. They were from Waterford, Donegal, Limerick and Wexford, which essentially covers the entire island. I will be pushing this amendment to delete the offending paragraph.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.