asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries the price of oil to fishermen in Ireland, England, France and Northern Ireland.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Fishing Industry.
4.
I presume the Deputy is referring to the price of marine diesel oil which is the fuel oil used by the bulk of Irish fishermen.
While my Department is not responsible for monitoring the prices of oil products my information is as follows:
In Ireland there are marginal differences in the unit price of fuel oil to fishermen depending on individual distribution arrangements.
The maximum price has been fixed at 7.72p per litre, including an increase of 0.55p with effect from 20th November, 1976.
In Britain and Northern Ireland apart from marginal distribution differences there is an overall zoning arrangement based on distance from the various refineries. The present maximum prices for the different zones including an increase of 0.77p sanctioned recently are:
|
Inner zone or within 25 miles of refinery |
7.35p per litre |
|
Outer or central zone which includes the whole of Northern Ireland |
7.39p per litre |
|
General zone which embraces more distant regions |
7.43p per litre |
As regards France, I understand the price arrangements there are comparatively more complicated in their zoning and taxation structure and there have been recent price revisions, details of which are not yet available in my Department.
Will the Parliamentary Secretary admit at this stage that the price of oil to Irish fishermen is a lot higher than to any of our EEC partners? Has the Parliamentary Secretary or his Minister any scheme on hand to entice his colleague, the Minister for Finance, to subsidise the price of oil to Irish fishermen in view of the distastrous fishing season Irish fishermen are having?
There is a marginal difference in the price of oil here and in Northern Ireland. It is approximately .3p per litre. As far as France is concerned, the price is generally higher but it will be another week before up-to-date information will be available. The answer to the second part of the Deputy's supplementary question which does not arise directly from this question is that there are no proposals to subsidise oil at present.
Is the Parliamentary Secretary happy that Irish fishermen are paying a lot more than any of their EEC partners for oil?
I would like to see Irish fishermen happy and making as much money as is possible but the Government have given them every consideration as far as the availability of public funds is concerned. Since we took up office we have increased the vote on fisheries by more than 300 per cent. Fishermen are aware of that and if further improvements are needed such improvements will be made if and when we feel that it is feasible to do so.
Would the Parliamentary Secretary consider recommending to the Minister for Finance that VAT be removed from oil to fishermen?
That is a separate question. Question No. 5.
That is a matter to be dealt with generally in the budgetary proposals that will be coming before the House.
Will the Parliamentary Secretary indicate to the House whether he will make the recommendation to the Minister for Finance?
There are no such proposals at present.
Question No. 5.
5.
asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries the number of Norwegian fishing boats owned by Irish fishermen; when they were purchased; the price paid; and the difference in repayments on loans due to the devaluation of the pound.
Fifteen Norwegian fishing boats were purchased by Irish fishermen between 1968 and 1972 at a total cost of 12,696,884 Norwegian kroner which was equivalent to £745,730 at the rates of exchange applicable on the dates the vessels were purchased. The most recent half-yearly repayments due in respect of eight vessels still the subject of Norwegian loans amounted to £46,464, whereas these repayments would have been £28,322 at the rates of exchange which applied when the vessels were purchased.
I did not get the Parliamentary Secretary's figures in relation to the changes.
The most recent half-yearly repayments due in respect of eight vessels still the subject of Norwegian loans amounted to £46,464, whereas these repayments would have been £28,322 at the rates of exchange which applied when the vessels were purchased.
In view of this enormous increase from £28,000 to £46,000, is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that fishermen are not able to meet their repayments? What does the Parliamentary Secretary intend doing to try to alleviate the situation? Fishermen now find themselves in a worse situation than when they first purchased the boats.
The position is that two of the 15 Norwegian vessels referred to in the reply were cleared in full within their repayment periods, and six purchasers are meeting their repayments as far as is known to BIM, and two or three purchasers are finding it difficult to meet repayments. When these people decided to purchase their boats from Norway that was a risk they took. It was open to fishermen to buy boats in Ireland. These people decided to buy in an outside market at a time when the present exchange rates could not be foreseen. Undoubtedly, it will cost them money but that is one of the hazards of business life and the Exchequer should not be asked to subsidise them. The vast majority of Irish fishermen had their boats built in Ireland but there were no restrictions on any who wished to purchase abroad. As a result of their decision to purchase foreign boats, they are now caught up in the currency exchange rates. I have great sympathy for them but a number of them are able to cope with the situation.
The Parliamentary Secretary said that Irish fishermen opted to buy abroad on the recommendation of An Bord Iascaigh Mhara.
No.
An Bord Iascaigh Mhara organised the purchase of these boats abroad.
An Bord Iascaigh Mhara guarantee the loan repayments for the purchasers. They do not authorise them to buy abroad. Once a person decides to buy a boat and qualifies to do so with BIM aids it is up to him to decide whether to buy at home or abroad. We emphasised again and again the desirability of purchasing at home in order to keep our boat yards working. We do not preclude people from buying abroad but when they did so and when by virtue of the currency exchange rates they now find it more difficult to meet repayments that is a business hazard. There was no question of the board asking anyone to build a boat abroad. The opposite would be the case. As a result of the currency exchange rates now the demand for foreign boats is almost negligible.
The Parliamentary Secretary——
May I ask for brevity so that some appreciable progress may be made on other questions also?
From all sides.
Yes. I shall allow a final supplementary from Deputy Allen.
In other words, the Parliamentary Secretary is telling us that he has no intention of coming to the assistance of those fishermen whose half-yearly repayments have been increased from £2,900 to approximately £6,000.
There are no proposals at present to help in this regard.
6.
andMr. Allen asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries the number of trawlers built through foreign loans; and the effect the devaluation of sterling is having on the repayments of loans by the fishermen.
Twenty eight fishing boats were purchased between 1966 and 1973 with the aid of non-sterling loan finance. The most recent half-yearly repayments due by fishermen in respect of 17 vessels still subject to such loans amounted to £89,842. These repayments would have been £62,284 at the rates of exchange which applied when the vessels were purchased.
This is more or less on the lines of the previous question. Would the Parliamentary Secretary accept that when fishermen concerned bought these boats they were told what their repayments would be and acted on that basis when they decided to go to Norway for the vessels but that in view of the change that has occurred in regard to repayments the Department should endeavour to have the period of repayments extended so that the annual repayments would not be more than those contracted for originally?
I accept that the fishermen did not anticipate the changes that were to take place in the currency situation but people in this House or elsewhere who might have much more knowledge of economics than have the fishermen could not have anticipated them either. Anybody who, a few years ago, could have anticipated such a major inflationary trend would be a millionaire now. I agree that these changes in currency rates have resulted in hardship for those fishermen who had bought their boats abroad but as I indicated in my reply to the supplementaries on the previous question, that is a business hazard. A number of the boats in question have been paid for. At this stage I cannot say whether there is any indication that Exchequer funds might be used to assist those who are suffering much hardship because of the changed situation.
Is it not reasonable to ask the Department to endeavour to have the period of repayments extended for those people who are experiencing difficulty?
The Deputy's suggestion is reasonable and is one that I would be prepared to have examined. I might ask An Bord Iascaigh Mhara to consider whether it would be possible to implement something of this nature because I agree that it is very difficult for the fishermen concerned to meet their increased repayments.
Should the Parliamentary Secretary get agreement on this, would he communicate with Deputy Gallagher and me on the matter?
Yes. There is the possibility of extending the time.