asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs whether quota restrictions on Irish exports to Britain will disappear or be phased out on accession to the EEC or if they will continue as part of the Anglo-Irish Free Trade Area Agreement during the transitional period.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Membership of EEC.
20.
The quota restrictions on Irish exports of agricultural goods to Britain for which there is a common organisation of the market in the European Community will be abolished on the accession of the two countries to the Community. This will be the case for butter and sugar and also for cheese in respect of which a system of voluntary restraint on our part is in operation.
There is also provision in the Anglo-Irish Free Trade Area Agreement for restrictions on potatoes and bacon. Until such time as there is a common organisation of the market for potatoes in the Community member States are permitted under certain conditions to maintain national arrangements including quantitative restrictions on imports. The position in regard to imports into Britain of bacon has yet to be clarified in the negotiations.
What is the position in regard to main crop potatoes?
The position is that the arrangements which apply between Britain and ourselves will continue because potatoes are not included in the Common Market agricultural arrangements as of now.
We shall still be restricted in exporting potatoes to Britain?
Pending potatoes being included, if they are ever included, in the Common Market agricultural arrangements.
21.
asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he is aware of the proposals of the EEC Commission which would allow Britain, Norway and Denmark to retain their 12-mile fishing limits in certain coastal areas but which would exclude Ireland from having any such limit should this country enter the EEC.
22.
asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if, having regard to the widespread public anxiety caused by the EEC announcement of certain terms on fisheries which would be offered to the other three applicants for EEC membership but not to Ireland, he will make a statement on the matter.
23.
asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he is aware of the difference in the approach of Denmark and Ireland in the matter of negotiating the terms of entry to the EEC in relation to the fisheries industry; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
24.
asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will elaborate on the recent report emanating from Brussels that our fishing industry had suffered a major setback in our negotiations for entry into the EEC.
With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 21, 22, 23 and 24 together. These questions have been overtaken by developments, particularly the Ministerial meeting with the applicants on 9th November at which the fisheries problem was discussed. Developments are continuing and I shall be making a statement to the House as soon as the position has been clarified.
Is the Minister aware that there is grave concern among the 50,000 people who are directly or indirectly dependent on fishing that this country is getting less favourable consideration than the other three applicant countries in the negotiations?
The Deputy must not have read his morning newspaper.
I read them very well.
The situation on this precise issue is that we are at one with Norway, Denmark and Britain and because of our attitude in the matter a further Ministerial meeting has been arranged for the 29th November.
Are the Government giving serious consideration to the idea of protection for a certain part of our coastline to the exclusion of the rest of the coastline? Would the Minister please bear in mind in these negotiations that the fishing grounds which have been deemed to be overfished in recent years due to the incursion of foreign trawlers are the fishing waters of South Wexford and South Waterford particularly as far as herrings are concerned? Would the Minister clarify the position of Mr. Brendan O'Kelly, head of Bord Iascaigh Mhara, who was excluded from the negotiations? Will the Minister not admit that this man has been and is a key figure in the fishing industry?
Hear, hear.
I wish to emphasise that this is a Governmental matter in which we are seeking to preserve the rights which we have at this time and in this particular negotiation, which, as I say, has been adjourned until 29th November, we are all for seeking to preserve the situation along with Norway, Denmark and Britain.
The Government are going to sell out Irish fishing.
Is the Minister not aware that unless this Government makes it quite clear to the Council of Ministers in Europe that we reject the principle of free access the Government is putting into jeopardy the livelihood of all inshore fishermen?
I wish Deputies would not play politics with this important matter.
The Government are playing politics with the livelihood of the inshore fishermen.
Would the Minister say if our position is similar to that of the Norwegians namely, that we will not enter the EEC unless the 12 mile limit is retained for the whole coastline of Ireland?
That is a separate question.
We are fighting our case to the ultimate limit on behalf of the Irish fishermen.
(Interruptions.)
Why was Mr. O'Kelly, the head of Bord Iascaigh Mhara, excluded from the delegation thereby weakening it? Could the Minister make a statement on the circumstances which led to that?
That is a separate question.
This is a Governmental matter and the person operating on behalf of the Government is the Minister for Foreign Affairs.
(Interruptions.)
Why would he wish to exclude that kind of expert advice?
Is there a conservation policy in respect of fishing?
I am calling Question No. 25.
I insist on an answer. Is there a conservation policy in respect of fishing?
Will the Deputy please resume his seat?
Has the Government got a conservation policy in respect of fishing?
As I have a question on the Order Paper about this matter, surely I am entitled to ask one supplementary? Was the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries misleading the fishermen when he came home from Europe last summer and told them there was no danger to our 12-mile limit? The Minister for Foreign Affairs agreed with him and said he was correct. Was he deliberately misleading the fishermen?
The matter is in the very capable hands of the Minister for Foreign Affairs who is acting on behalf of the sovereign Irish Government.
Can the Minister say if Mr. O'Kelly was sent home because he disagreed with Government policy?
That is a separate question, it does not arise——
Of course it does.
It does not arise on any question put down by any Deputy.
It arises out of the answer which the Minister is attempting to give.