I move amendment No. 1.
In page 12, to delete section 30, lines 35 to 41, and to insert the following section:
(1) Sections 102, 103 and 114 and Parts XIII to XVI (which provisions relate to sea fisheries and certain other matters) of the Principal Act shall (notwithstanding section 325 of that Act) extend to the Moville Area and, for the purpose of giving full effect to the said provisions, every other provision of the Principal Act or of this Act which is applicable in relation to any of the said provisions shall also extend to that Area.
(2) The provisions of the Fisheries Acts, 1842 to 1958, corresponding to the said extended provisions of the Principal Act shall, in so far as they continued to be in force in the Moville Area by reason of the operation of section 325 of that Act, cease to be in force.
(3) Section 29 of this Act shall not extend to the Moville Area.
On the Committee Stage, I undertook to review those of the provisions of the Bill which will apply in the Moville Area, that is, the part of the Foyle area which is within the State.
In order to get a clear picture it is necessary to go back to the Foyle Fisheries Act of 1952. That Act, with its counterpart enacted in parallel terms by the Belfast Parliament, provided a common code of law for the administration of the salmon fisheries of the Foyle Area by the Foyle Fisheries Commission. The then existing provisions of the Fisheries Acts, 1842 to 1949, were repealed for the Foyle area in so far as the Foyle Acts rendered their retention unnecessary. It was necessary, however, to retain for the Moville area a considerable body of the pre-1952 law, for instance, the provisions dealing with sea fisheries. Even when those provisions were consolidated in 1959 for the remainder of the State, they remained in force in their old form in the Moville Area. Section 325 of the Consolidation Act had that effect. This situation was changed by the Foyle Fisheries (Amendment) Act of 1961 when the opportunity was taken to extend corresponding provisions of the Consolidation Act to the Moville Area.
The present position, therefore, is that some sections of the Fisheries (Consolidation) Act, 1959, apply throughout the entire State and others do not apply in the Moville area because there are corresponding provisions in the Foyle Fisheries Acts. In other words, there are two codes of fishery law in the Moville area, one under the Foyle Acts connected with the administration of the Foyle Area and the other under the Consolidation Act.
The present Bill amends and extends the Consolidation Act of 1959 and, so far as the Moville area is concerned, it is convenient to consider the sections of the Bill in four groups. One group of 16 sections 2 to 7, 9, 10, 13, 16, 17, 24, 26, 27, 31 and 33, will not apply in the Moville area because they amend provisions of the 1959 Act which do not apply in that area. The second group of 19 sections. Sections 1, 8, 11, 12, 14, 15, 18 to 23, 25 to 28, 32, 34, 36, 37 and 38, will apply in the Moville Area because they relate to provisions applicable to that area.
Section 30 of the Bill, which is alone in the third category, specifically extends to the Moville Area further provisions of the 1959 Act, mainly those relating to sea fisheries. Only two sections—Sections 29 and 35— remain for the final group representing new legislation which will, in the absence of any provision to the contrary, apply throughout the entire State. Section 35 is aimed at conservation of stocks of sea fish and should clearly apply in the Moville Area. Section 29 deals with fishing for salmon at sea and it was my intention, under subsection (3), to except the Moville Area from its scope. However, in deference to the views of the House, I am moving an amendment to add a new subsection making it clear that Section 29 will not apply in the Moville Area. This amendment is included in the revised section which is being substituted for Section 30 and the opportunity is taken to improve the drafting of the remainder of that section.
The intentions expressed by the original subsection can in fact be dealt with by way of regulation under the Foyle Fisheries Act. Both Deputy Dillon and Deputy Cunningham expressed the view on Committee Stage that the more appropriate way to deal with the matter would be to ensure that regulations under the Foyle Fisheries Act would apply to the Moville Area and to the area in the Six Counties. Therefore, in deference to that point of view, we are making it clear that Section 29 does not in fact apply to the Moville Area and that the intention of Section 29 in regard to drifting at sea for salmon can, in effect, be carried out by way of regulation under the Foyle Fisheries Act.