Fidelma Healy Eames (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister. I know he is directly involved with the issue I am raising and we have discussed it in the past. Will he clarify the import of the minutes of a meeting between him, the Taoiseach and a company called Marine Harvest about the Galway Bay sea farm project and licence? Will he clarify the ramifications of those minutes for the licensing process?
These minutes were brought to my attention. I did not seek them. They were the front page story of The Galway Advertiserlast week. The Minister has always been very clear that in deciding who would eventually get the licence for the sea farm project, if it was to go ahead, based on having all the evidence, there would be an arm’s length distance between him and any company involved. I have evidence that a meeting took place between the Taoiseach, the Minister and the then Minister of State with responsibility for the Gaeltacht, Deputy McGinley, Deputy Joe McHugh and four members of the company, Marine Harvest.
Bord Iascaigh Mhara, BIM, says there are 21 expressions of interest in this licence. Why were not all the other companies, apart from Marine Harvest, invited to this meeting? It seems this meeting may have breached the rules regarding tendering regulations for salmon farm licences. I am asking questions.

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

The Senator is making statements.

Fidelma Healy Eames (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am asking questions. My Adjournment matter is to ask the Minister to clarify this. I am making statements but I am open to hearing an answer.

Why did this meeting take place while the Minister is still making up his mind? Why were the other 21 companies not invited?

There is a serious issue about Deputy McHugh’s role. He lobbied heavily for Marine Harvest on the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine. I have several quotations from him. We now know that as Minister of State he has responsibility for Inland Fisheries Ireland, IFI, and Údarás na Gaeltachta which funds fisheries in that area. Serious questions are being asked about that. According to the minutes, Marine Harvest says it needs a champion to drive forward the interests of the industry. The question I have been asked to put to the Minister is whether this champion is Deputy McHugh. He has lobbied for Marine Harvest for several years and according to himself was the person who facilitated this meeting with the Taoiseach and the Minister. He is now in charge of IFI, and Údarás na Gaeltachta, which has invested €1.3 million in the south Connemara salmon farms. Was the Minister of State given this responsibility to keep IFI in check because it opposes the fish farm proposals, to drive forward the industry and co-ordinate interactions with the EU Commission?

The signs in favour of the sea farm are no longer as clear cut as they were. I am on record as having supported this farm at the outset from the point of view of growth in the industry and of jobs, but it has been unravelling. The Minister says structural changes are taking place in the Irish Marine Institute to advance the science. Will the Minister clarify what that means? The size and bulk of the farm is also an issue because of the threat to the environment and the local fishing and angling industry. I am more concerned about what seems to be a cosy relationship. Since this was brought to my attention, it is important to have the truth on the record. This freedom of information revelation must rule Marine Harvest out of the running for this licence.

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

I am glad to have the opportunity to respond to this matter. The premise behind the Senator’s question is incorrect. The meeting to which she refers was not about the Galway Bay farm.

On 30 January, I met with representatives of the company referred to by the Senator. The meeting was chaired by An Taoiseach. Officials from the Department of the Taoiseach and my Department were also in attendance. The meeting was held at the request of the company to discuss licensing and industry development issues associated with the company's operations in Ireland. It is a very big employer here and happens to be the largest salmon farming company in the world. It is a huge multinational so there was nothing inappropriate about meeting it, just as I meet other multinationals seeking to invest in Ireland.

As is appropriate, it was explained from the outset that specific applications which the company submitted to my Department for consideration could not be discussed in detail in view of the statutory basis of the assessment process.

Bord lascaigh Mhara, BIM, and not Marine Harvest Ireland is the applicant in the case to which the Senator refers.

It is entirely appropriate for me as Minister to meet Marine Harvest Ireland on matters relevant to the company's operations in Ireland having regard to the important role it plays as a food producer from the marine resource. There is always a strict separation between my ministerial role as decision maker in respect of aquaculture licence applications and my ministerial duty to promote the sustainable development of the industry. This separation of duties is always strictly observed, including at meetings with industry representatives, as it is at meetings with NGOs, which have a contrary view at times.

The report of the meeting was put in the public domain on foot of a freedom of information request by a member of the public. The report is clear in setting out the limited parameters of the discussion and I draw the Senator's attention in particular to the specific statement at the outset of the meeting that individual licensing applications could not be discussed in detail because of the statutory basis of the licensing system.

The company in question plays an important role in the provision of employment from the aquaculture industry in disadvantaged coastal regions. It would be quite incredible if I refused to meet its representatives to discuss general issues associated with their activities in Ireland. Indeed, it would be negligent of me to remain aloof from key employers on the basis of a supposed conflict of interest which does not exist and in respect of which the strictest of protocols are observed by me as Minister and by my officials. If anybody reads the report of the meeting, it will be clear this separation of functions has been applied.

With regard to the Galway Bay deep sea project, an application by BIM for an aquaculture licence for the cultivation of finfish near Inis Oirr in Galway Bay was received by my Department in 2012. The application and its accompanying environmental impact assessment are being considered under the provisions of the Fisheries (Amendment) Act 1997 and the Foreshore Act 1933.

A determination in respect of the application will be made as soon as possible following completion of the necessary assessment process. This assessment process will take full account of all national and EU legislative requirements and will reflect the full engineering, scientific, environmental, legal and public policy aspects of the application. The fullest consideration is being given to all submissions received as part of the statutory and public consultation stages of the process. As the application is under active consideration as part of the statutory process, it would not be appropriate to comment further at this time, apart from saying what I have said many times publicly. I will not grant a licence to any aquaculture or finfish farm application unless and until I am fully satisfied on the basis of scientific evidence from the Marine Institute that it is appropriate to do so. It is important to put on the record that I have not granted a licence in my three years as Minister for salmon farming to Marine Harvest Ireland or anybody else. I act on the basis of the advice I get from marine biologists and marine scientists and I take issue with the insinuation of what the Senator said because it suggests that both the Taoiseach and I are involved in an inappropriate relationship with the company, which simply is not the case. The company employs many people in Ireland. Its chief executive officer was in Ireland and he wanted to get an understanding of the systems here and the ambition within government for the sector. That is what we discussed.

There is no mystery. A meeting was held with a major employer, at its request, to discuss a broad range of issues. It was a perfectly appropriate meeting at which clear parameters were set down on the State's side in respect of "live" applications. That was done by the Taoiseach at the beginning of the meeting. The meeting was the subject of a standard report, which in due course was put in the public domain on foot of a freedom of information request. The minutes of the meeting have no import beyond what is clearly stated in the relevant minutes. The only mention I made at that meeting of any application related to Shot Head was when I was asked a question on when there was likely to be a decision on it, which has been under consideration for at least two and a half years. I said, because of information I had received from my Department, that we were hoping to make a decision by Easter, which was a few months after that meeting. I had absolutely no indication as to what that decision would be or the parameters of the decision or the considerations I needed to make on the back of that application. I did not have recommendations on my desk and, therefore, I could not do that. All I did was update them on a likely timeframe and, as it happens, there has been no decision on Shot Head just in case anybody thinks the meeting resulted in an early decision on that application.

Fidelma Healy Eames (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister for the clarification and that is why it is important that this debate is taking place. The purpose of the debate is to clarify the import of the minutes and their ramifications. I accept the distinction the Minister made. However, it is clear when reading the minutes that Marine Harvest Ireland was trying to rush the licensing process not just for this application, but for all applications, as the Minister said. They find the process tedious and they spoke about "the need for a predictable licensing system which would facilitate investment". I accept Marine Harvest Ireland is a large employer but it is important to put this information in the public domain because doubt is being raised about the bona fides of this project and the licensing arrangements on an ongoing basis. I thank the Minister again for the clarification and I will watch this closely.

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

Marine Harvest Ireland has nothing to do with this application. Like many other companies, it is watching the process because this is a new departure. This relates to offshore deep sea salmon farming and it is the first time we have received an application of this scale off the Irish coast. Everyone interested in salmon farming is watching what happens with the application, including many NGOs, which is why we are being so careful with it to make sure the process is appropriate and is followed. If that results in a rejection, scaling down or granting of the application, so be it. I will take responsibility for that on the basis of all the scientific advice and the stakeholders' input which has gone into the lengthy process

Fidelma Healy Eames (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is going on for years.

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

This started in 2012 and, therefore, nobody can accuse me of rushing anything in this space. I sometimes make the distinction between aquaculture and finfish farming because I see aquaculture as shellfish. People are looking for certainty regarding a likely timeline relating to when they apply for something and when they get a decision and we are trying to put systems in place that can give certainty, whether it is a positive or negative decision. We need to be able to make decisions with proper scientific advice in a reasonable timeframe and we are trying to put systems in place that can do that. I assure the Senator we will not make irresponsible decisions or decisions on the basis of lobbying by any company, regardless of its size or scale. We will make decisions on the basis of the advice I get from experts in the Marine Institute and others who have an input into the licensing process and who deserve to be fully heard as well. That will be the only criterion for making decisions.