asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries if he intends to make regulations in the near future with regard to net fishing for salmon; and if, in making these regulations, he intends to restrict to one person in each family the issue of a licence and, if so, why.
Ceisteanna—Questions Oral Answers. - Salmon Net Fishing.
26.
The question of making regulations with regard to net fishing for salmon is at present under consideration.
Has the Minister or his Department circulated county councils with regard to this proposed legislation by order? Is it also true that in these draft suggestions there is the proposal that no two members of the same family should be licensed for long net fishing as distinct from fishing within the estuary?
The matter is under consideration at the present time. Officers of my Department have had consultations with the Boards of Conservators with regard to the matter. I cannot say what the order will contain. It has not been finalised.
Does the Parliamentary Secretary not think that, if county councils have been circularised with draft orders, the matter is at a most advanced stage and far beyond the consideration stage?
Could I ask the Parliamentary Secretary whether the final draft of the considerations which the Parliamentary Secretary mentioned in regard to these new regulations will be conveyed to the fishing interests, both the Boards of Conservators and the fishermen, before the final word is said? Will there be advance information of the final shape of things to come before the order is actually completed?
We hope to have arrived at a reasonable measure of agreement before the order is actually signed.
Will the Parliamentary Secretary confer with the net fisherman?
This is vital. This is what Deputy Donegan and I are concerned about. Will the proposals, in so far as they can be agreed, be agreed upon? Will this agreement be sought by further circulation of the Parliamentary Secretary's views before he actually makes an order? In other words, will the position be that an order will not be made without further consultation?
The consultations have been going on for some time and are continuing. Before an order is finally made, we hope to have a certain amount of agreement. We cannot get entire agreement, because when one sets out to prevent somebody from doing what he is engaged in at the present time he is certainly not going to agree. Eventually, we will have to make an order but we hope to have a reasonable measure of agreement. The final draft of the order will not be referred back to the fishermen for their approval.
Are we to take it that the fishermen will not get an opportunity to make their case? Some of these fishermen and their families have been licensed for 100 years. An order is to be made affecting their livelihood without the long net fishermen being consulted. They will not have the opportunity to make their case.
They have had an opportunity and they are still making their case. I have been continually meeting deputations. I spent most of last week meeting deputations.
Will the Parliamentary Secretary meet a deputation from the Annagassan fishermen next week?
The Deputy can put that request to me as others have done and it will certainly be considered. I assure the Deputy that I have not so far refused to receive any deputation which requested me to meet them.
We may be at cross-purposes. I am trying to ascertain without any equivocation, deliberate or otherwise, if there will be any further consultation with the fishermen about what will be contained in the order.
Will that be done before the order is actually made? In other words, will the fishermen know anything further than what they have already been given to understand from deputations and from rumours—and that is where they got most of their information— before an order is actually made?
If the Deputy is asking me if what we will have in the order finally is going to go back to the fishermen for their approval, the answer is "no". Consultation is going on all the time.
Consultation is vital, but will they all be able to say that they have all been met? They have been met in the sense that they have been talked to without hope of any changes. That is not consultation, but a subterfuge for consultation. I am asking that there should be a clear assurance from the Parliamentary Secretary that the fishermen and those who depend for their livelihood on net fishing will be given full information before the Parliamentary Secretary decides on the final shape of the regulations which he proposes to make. In other words, the regulations should not be a rehash of what has leaked out by way of rumour and from deputations, and that is that no changes will be made anyhow. There is no point in side-stepping the issue.
There is no question of side-stepping. The draft text of the order was circulated to the Boards of Conservators whose responsibility it will be to issue licences. They had consultations with the fishermen. They were particularly asked to consult with the fishermen's co-operatives. I was asked to receive deputations. I have received deputations and have listened to the fishermen telling me what their objections are to what is contained in the draft order. Some changes have already been made in what we propose to put into the order so that the impact on those who make their livelihood from drift-net fishing, such as salmon fishing, will be as light as possible. We are trying to protect the traditional fisherman. We have altered the draft order from what was originally intended and are still making alterations in it, following discussions with the fishermen. We hope to arrive eventually at something which will be in the interests of fishermen themselves.
Will the alterations be conveyed to the fishermen before they are actually put in the order?
In what order?
The Parliamentary Secretary has been talking about receiving deputations. It is all very well to talk about Boards of Conservators. The Parliamentary Secretary knows——
The Deputy knows that we cannot have a debate on this matter.
——that it is not in the interests of the net fishermen that the Boards of Conservators are being given power under these regulations to issue licences. They never had such powers before. This House should not allow this to be done by regulation.
They are the statutory bodies.
They never had the right to restrict licences. It is now proposed to give them that right.