John Browne (Wexford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 169: To ask the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the steps he is currently undertaking to protect the interests of the Irish fish producers and processors against the proposal by the European Commission to introduce individual transferable quotas; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14553/12]

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

My overarching goal for Ireland's fishing industry is for a sustainable, profitable and self reliant industry that protects and enhances the social and economic fabric of rural coastal communities dependent on the seafood sector, while balancing these objectives with the need to deliver a sustainable and eco centred fisheries landscape for future generations.

The proposal by the European Commission for the introduction of a mandatory scheme of Transferable Fishing Concessions (TFCs), otherwise known as individual transferable quotas (ITQs), is to my mind totally at odds with the unique dynamic that is the Irish fishing sector.

This proposal will, I believe, lead to a privatisation of fish quotas and their concentration in the hands of multinational companies with limited or no links to Ireland's coastal communities, resulting in the likely loss of the economic benefit and ultimately jobs which flow from Irish fish quotas being treated as a public good and allocated to Irish fishing vessels.

This is not only an economic argument, the unique social and cultural fabric of our coastal communities would be devastated if the link between the fleet and the ports and processors was broken.

I have forcibly voiced my opinion at EU Fisheries Councils and indeed privately in bilaterals with fellow Ministers and indeed Commissioner Damanaki herself. I have been heartened by the support I have received from other like minded Member States but recognise that it will be an uphill battle to get the mandatory nature of the TFCs removed from the CFP reform proposals

In partnership with the Irish industry, I am taking every opportunity to lobby and influence the key decision makers at European level and have made a strong case when I met key members of the Fisheries Committee of the European Parliament at the beginning of the month.

The negotiations on the CFP reform are ongoing, indeed they are on the agenda at next weeks Council of Fisheries Ministers on 19 March. I will continue to defend Ireland's right to determine how our quotas will be allocated in the best interests of our fleet, processing sector and the communities dependent on them for their very survival.

John Browne (Wexford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 170: To ask the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he fully supports the concept of regionalisation or decentralisation in the context of the ongoing review of the common fisheries policy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14555/12]

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

Ireland is a strong proponent of a regionalised policy as part of the proposal for the new CFP. I am actively pursuing a policy for a more regional and holistic approach to management where responsibilities are clearly established under an overarching policy established by the Council and European Parliament. This would involve increased stakeholder involvement through the Regional Advisory Councils (RACs) and Producer Organisations (POs). I want to see measures developed under this overarching framework at regional level that will be given legal effect under the EU legislative framework in order to ensure that all fishing fleets are treated equally and to ensure a level playing field across the relevant Member States in each fishery. Where there is full agreement among all regional Member States on specific measures, I would support the full introduction in European law by the EU Commission under delegated powers. However, where agreements can not be secured, I consider that measures must be adopted under co-decision by the Council and European Parliament.

The Commission suggest after establishing a high-level framework at Union level. that it is a matter for Member States at regional level to co-operate, agree and implement a joint approach for fishing operations at a regional level with the measures implemented nationally and individually by each Member State. It also provides that where regional Member States are not in agreement, the Commission would itself introduce measures under delegated powers. This approach is I believe flawed and would result in either a diversity of measures operated in the same fishery by fleets of each Member State or, and more likely for fisheries in Western Waters where our fleet operates, the EU Commission having power to implement measures under delegated acts. That is an even greater centralisation of power than applies now and would appear to be moving in exactly the wrong direction, considering the shared diagnosis before the reform that poor compliance with aspects of the CFP was often a result of the lack of involvement of relevant players in the decision making.

John Browne (Wexford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 171: To ask the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine his position in regard to the ongoing discussions on the long-term management plan for Atlantic horse mackerel; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14556/12]

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

The EU Commission proposal aims to establish a long-term plan for the conservation and management of the Western stock of Atlantic horse mackerel. The proposal was initially tabled by the EU Commission in early 2009. In drawing up the new plan stakeholders were consulted by the EU Commission through the Pelagic Regional Advisory Council, including Irish stakeholders. As had been in the case with other management plans adopted by the Council up to that point, the proposal included a Harvest Control Rule, to place strict boundaries around the annual Total Allowable Catch to be set by the Council.

The original proposal was made and the proposal was expected to be adopted before the passing of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which extended co-decision to fisheries policy matters, other than where related to the fixing and allocation of fishing opportunities, which remained solely a Council competence. The proposal was not adopted before the application of the new Treaty and is now subject to co-decision between the EU Council and the EU Parliament.

Since early 2010, the matter of legal competence for aspects of the Common Fisheries Policy, particularly Harvest Control Rules (HCRs) has been a matter of intense debate within the Council and between the Council and the European Parliament. In essence some interpretations point to HCRs as being central to fisheries conservation policy and therefore a co-decision matter, whereas others see HCRs as intrinsic to the fixing of fishing opportunities and therefore a Council only matter. The seriousness of this debate is such that despite the acknowledged value of long term plans to the conservation of fisheries stocks, no new management plans have been adopted since 2009. With Council and Parliament divided on the issue of the legal base for the Harvest Control Rule under a long term management plan for Horse Mackerel, the Council, despite the on-going efforts of successive Presidencies, did not adopt its position on the plan, and therefore no formal negotiations had taken place with Parliament and the plan was not adopted.

The Polish Presidency made a compromise proposal late last year. This was progressed by the Danish Presidency in the early months of their Presidency and secured a Council position, which was supported by all Member States. The intention, under the Council position, is to remove explicit reference to Harvest Control Rules and instead to simplify the approach by establishing an objective, rather than a rule, and to focus on the need to ensure the sustainable exploitation of western horse mackerel on the basis of maximum sustainable yield (MSY), which would be achieved by aiming at a fishing mortality (F) at MSY or less on appropriate age groups. Ireland, with all other Member States, supported this position with a view to progressing the adoption of the long term management plan for horse mackerel.