Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 18 Jul 1956

Vol. 159 No. 8

Sea Fisheries (Amendment) Bill, 1956—Second Stage.

I move that the Bill be now read a Second Time. The House will recall that the Irish Sea Fisheries Association, Limited, which was incorporated in 1930 under the Industrial and Provident Societies Acts, 1893 to 1913, ceased to exist in 1952 when, under the provisions of the Sea Fisheries Act, 1952, it was replaced by a corporate body, An Bord Iascaigh Mhara, upon which the Act conferred wide executive functions and powers in relation to the development of the sea-fishing industry. Among the financial provisions made in the latter enactment for the purpose of enabling the board to exercise or perform their functions are Section 17 which empowers the making of grants from voted moneys and Section 18 which enables the making of repayable advances subject to a limit of £500,000 in the aggregate from the Central Fund from time to time to the board.

The advances already made to the board and their immediate needs are are such that the statutory limit to such advances will have been reached early in the current financial year. Up to 31st March, 1956, advances totalling £431,612 had been made to the board leaving a balance of £68,388. The board's requirements from the Central Fund in the current financial year are estimated to be £215,000. The purpose of the present Bill is, therefore, to increase the present ceiling of advances that may be made to the board from the Central Fund from £500,000 to £1,000,000.

Deputies will naturally wish to know the use to which the advances made to the board up to 31st March, 1956, have been put. These advances have been utilised as follows:—

£

(a)

Provision of boats and gear on hire-purchase terms to fishermen (including stocks on hands)

321,142

(b)

Purchase of three off-shore fishing vessels operated directly by the board

60,000

(c)

Purchase of two marine engines for installation in two vessels proposed to be built for exploratory purposes

13,000

(d)

Establishment of processing station at Killybegs for production of quick-frozen and smoked fish and for manufacture of fish meal on a pilot scale

25,970

(e)

Improvement of board's marketing depots at Dublin, Cork, Dingle, Killybegs and Caherciveen

3,750

(f)

Improvement of boat-building yards at Killybegs and Baltimore

3,250

(g)

Purchase of insulated transport

2,500

(h)

Extension of office premises

2,000

TOTAL

431,612

I should explain that towards the cost of the projects at (d), (e) and (f) namely, the Killybegs fish processing station and the improvement of certain of the board's marketing depots and boat-building yards, grants to an aggregate amount of £11,110 have also been provided through the Fisheries Vote in view of the element of pioneering effort involved and of the consequential unlikelihood of its being possible to repay the cost in full from operational results. All instalments on advances already made to the board from the Central Fund have been paid according as they fell due; the total amount repaid up to 31st March, 1956, was £15,523 12s. 2d.

I am satisfied that the provision of boats and gear and the shore development works as indicated have contributed greatly to the expansion in the sea-fishing industry which has taken place in the past few years. The increase in catching power due to the building up of an efficient fleet of modern fishing boats is resulting in a marked improvement in the supply of demersal fish, that is, fish other than herrings and mackerel, which includes the varieties mostly required for the consumer market.

The board's sales of all classes of fish in the past financial year amounted to 161,377 cwt., valued at £447,342, compared with 107,983 cwt., valued at £414,006, in the preceding year. The shore development works carried out have proved of great advantage in the expansion of the board's marketing business and have made it possible to dispose of increasing quantities of fish at local centres whereas formerly almost all the landings were transferred to the Dublin and Cork wholesale markets for sale. In the financial year 1955-56 sales at the depots established at Killybegs, Dingle, Limerick and Galway came to close on £80,000.

The position of the sea-fishing industry now is that the first stage in development has been almost completed, i.e., the catching efforts of our own fishermen are now sufficient for the supply of home demand for fresh fish at the existing level. Progress must be continued if the fishing industry is to contribute its full share to the economic life of the country by taking advantage of our fishery resources and promoting their development and use to the fullest possible extent. That progress can only be maintained by still further increasing the catching power and by creating additional outlets including particularly the expansion of home consumer demand, employing processing methods to improve distribution and the utilisation of heavy landings of fish such as herrings and mackerel for the production of fish meal. In this connection, the board have submitted to me a provisional advance programme of shore development works to be spread over the next five years. These embrace facilities for improved handling and processing of fish and the extent to which a beginning is proposed to be made with them has already been given by me to the House in my opening remarks on the recent debate on the Fisheries Estimates.

While the total estimated cost of carrying out the long term programme is put at £377,565, this figure cannot, in view of the possibility of labour cost and commodity price increases, be taken as any more than an indication of the order of cost of the proposals. The board in their submission of the programme suggested that about £160,000 of the total cost might be provided as grant in view of the pioneering nature of some of the proposals thus leaving the estimated requirements to be met by way of advances from the Central Fund at, say, £220,000. Included in the programme is provision for the establishment of fishmeal plants. In this connection I am glad to say private enterprise has already shown an interest in the matter.

As regards boats and gear, I am satisfied that the present rate of issue of boats to fishermen under the board's hire-purchase scheme should be maintained for some years to come. The present cost of the issues is about £160,000 per annum and, allowing for the fact that approximately £45,000 becomes available to the board from cash sales, prepayments on boats issued and certain repayments by the fishermen, the sum required from the Central Fund for this purpose is put at £115,000 a year. I am convinced that our fishing resources could sustain much more intensive fishing effort with adequate return to the fishermen in view of the plans envisaged for the utilisation of heavier landings. It is essential, therefore, to provide for issues of a further sum of £500,000 for the execution of the board's proposals for shore installations and the issue of boats and gear to fishermen. This sum will, I expect, be adequate to provide for the board's requirements by way of advances for a further period of about four years from 1st April, 1956, at the end of which period I sincerely hope that, through the employment of the moneys now sought, our sea-fishing industry will have made further substantial progress with corresponding benefit to the country as a whole.

When the 1952 Fisheries Bill was going through, it was not possible to give details of the shore development work that would be undertaken. However, the sum of £500,000 was mentioned as being adequate for the purposes of the Act. The Parliamentary Secretary has now been in a position to state how the money was spent. He has read out a list of things which have been done, costing in all, £431,000. That practically exhausts the £500,000 which was then voted. He has also indicated that the board presented him with a further programme which will cost, in round figures, about £400,000. Credit is due to the board for what they have done and the preparation of this further programme. I doubt if the provision of £500,000 is sufficient, but I am quite satisfied that the progress that is now being made in the development of fisheries, or that has been made in recent years, will be sufficient to induce Dáil Eireann to make any further advances that are necessary.

On the question of advances, I do not think the Department in charge of fisheries and the board immediately charged with the administration of sea fisheries, ought to be afraid to incur advances as against grants. There is no reason why they should not seek advances rather than grants for all the development work. In respect of the five-year programme which was prepared by the board, I notice that £160,000 is to be sought by way of a grant and the reason given for it is that it is of a pioneering nature. That is true, but it is advisable that we should be in a position to keep, in handy form, year by year, the up-to-date cost of all this development work. The danger is that part of it, provided for it by way of grant, may be lost sight of and if we finance it by way of advances, these will always be an accumulated figure and we will always have a knowledge of what development costs are when the matter is under discussion.

I am saying that because I have confidence in the future of the fishing industry that it will repay the advances which will be made for it. I have no doubt that the former story of collapse in the fishing industry will not be repeated. As I remarked on the occasion of the recent annual Estimate, I feel reasonably confident that the time may come when a great deal of the fruits of the pioneering work, to use the Parliamentary Secretary's expression, can be put on the market for private enterprise to acquire and carry on from that point forward. That is why I favour the financing of all this work by advances rather than by grants.

One or two points in the statement are worthy of repetition. The Parliamentary Secretary states that all instalments on advances already made to the board from the Central Fund have been paid according as they fell due. I think that statement is worthy of repetition and shows that the board has not defaulted in its repayments to the Central Fund of the annuities built up on the advances already made to them. That is in striking contrast to the experience of the Sea Fisheries Association, particularly in regard to the pre-war period.

Another fact which arises from the statements is that of all the sales of fish made by the board, practically one-fifth, or a little more, were made from the board's depots around the coast. Practically one-fifth was entirely disposed of on the western coast between Kerry and Donegal. That is also a development which is praiseworthy and which will lead to the rationalisation of marketing, which was badly needed.

Another statement made by the Parliamentary Secretary which deserves emphasis is that the first stage in the development of the sea-fishing industry has now almost been completed, that is, the catching efforts of our own fishermen are now sufficient to supply the existing home demand for fresh fish. That is a very satisfactory achievement and imports of fresh fish have been practically eliminated. I do not think that I should delay very long on this matter. It is a case of renewing the moneys payable out of central funds for the purposes of the board; and these purposes are, as has been pointed out by the Parliamentary Secretary, capital purposes. The money which has been spent is showing good fruit and the money that is now being asked for will be spent in a continuation of that developement work.

In spite of the complaints which one comes up against in the public Press and elsewhere about certain inadequacies in the distribution of fish, nevertheless these inadequacies are being overhauled one by one. As I remarked on the Estimate, certain private interests are not, perhaps, too well pleased with the developments, but I think these private interests have nothing to fear. If their interests are being impinged on for the time being, I am quite satisfied that, when this industry has been finally put on its feet and is able to stand alone, these private interests will then see that, not alone the nation, but they themselves have benefited. I think it will be a great achievement and a justification for what has been done by the public authority up to the present, when the time is reached that the State can say to these private interests: "Now, you take over and carry on from where we left off". I am satisfied that that stage will be reached, and reached in the foreseeable future, if the present progress which has been initiated by the board is continued; and I do not see any reason why it should not continue.

Question put and agreed to.
Top
Share