In lieu of the unilateral measures which the last Government brought in the Minister announced that he was going to bring in new measures. The new measures which he did bring in were limited and unsatisfactory. We had to believe that herring fishing was going to be banned right around the Irish coast and that he was going to bring in measures which would prohibit the use of small meshes for the fishing of white fish. Unfortunately, the measures which he did bring in covered the banning of herring fishing on only a section of the Irish coast and made no reference at all to the banning of the type of nets that the other members in the Community are using at the moment, much to the detriment of our fish stocks.
We did have an option under the original unilateral measures. The Commission offered us at the time a proposal whereby we could accept the fishing plans of the other nations. Before the court ruled temporarily against us or granted this temporary injunction these fish plans were supplied by the other members of the Community. These fish plans would have made a reasonable alternative to our unilateral measures and would have been of some assistance. However, the Minister did not accept those fish plans, or he ignored them completely. He has made no attempt to implement the views expressed by the other Governments in these fish plans.
It would be a tremendous advantage if the Minister did bring in some interim measures until such time as the final agreements are made, because while the meetings which are due to take place next week and in the coming weeks may be very important, we may not have a finalised policy for months or maybe a year or so. The French general election, for instance, is coming up in March, 1978, and it is unlikely that the French are going to agree to a settlement which might anger their fishermen before that date. Brittany fishermen catch the bulk of their fish off the British coast and off our coasts also. Therefore, in the interim I am asking that the Minister bring in something effective, because these people can fish right up to our 12-mile limit at the moment and even up to our six-mile limit. That is not good enough. The Minister has banned only herring fishing.
Our alarm is justified by some subsequent statements we have seen. In The Irish Times on 7th October, we had a statement from Mr. Gundelach telling us that he was very close to reaching agreement with the Irish Government on the terms of the common fishery policy. We know that he has virtually clinched a deal with the British on this matter, but it was news to us to read that he had almost finalised the details with the Minister. I have not seen any denial of this statement. We are also told on that day that the present Government have not taken the same emphasis as that adopted by the Coalition Government with regard to fisheries. That is a very condemning statement. It indicates that the Minister has relaxed his demands, and I think we are entitled to an explanation.
We have heard more and more talk about special zones and preferential zones and less talk about an exclusive 50-mile limit. This is another aspect of the softening-up mentality. We had not heard the words "special zone" before. We had not heard the words "preferential zone" used by the Minister up to this. It looks as if he is going to do much the same deal as the British did with an exclusive inner 12 miles and this type of preferential zone from 12 to 50. That would be a calamity. It is not acceptable. Later on in the same week Mr. Gundelach made a similar statement to the effect that quotas can work and that he was going to see that that was the alternative solution for us. We know that quotas cannot work. The North-East Atlantic Fishery Commission tried for years to implement quotas and they were fooled completely. The French and the Dutch are going to do the same if the Minister tries to bring in quotas. Quotas are an excuse for deception.
The Minister is also fighting a case for the EEC to pay some part of the cost of fishery protection patrols. A figure of 50 per cent has been mentioned, and I read in today's paper that the Minister is hoping to get 75 per cent. The Minister should remind Commissioner Gundelach that while 22 per cent of the sea area which is within the 200-mile zone is within our jurisdiction, we are catching only 2 per cent of the fish from that area at the moment. We hope to increase it to 4 per cent by 1979, and we would, if our unilateral measures were allowed to continue.
It was gratifying to read last week that the Minister had met the IFO and told them he was still committed to an exclusive 50-mile zone, but on the following day it was reported in The Cork Examiner that Mr. Gundelach's opinion was that the Irish demand for a 50-mile fishery zone was illusory. Who is codding whom? Those are two diametrically opposed statements within two days.
Mr. Gundelach is an honest man; in fact he is a far superior Commissioner of Fisheries to his predecessor Mr. Lardinois, who seemed to be infantile in his approach. Mr. Gundelach would hardly have made a statement of this kind unless he was aware that the Government had softened or even reneged on the commitment to a 50-mile exclusive zone. We note also that when he came here last Friday there were no negotiations between the Minister for Fisheries and the Commissioner. We were told there was merely an exchange of views, that the Commissioner said they were poles apart and that there was nothing to negotiate about. That is a most alarming position. I go on to a commitment which Fianna Fáil made before the last election and which appears as follows in the Fiana Fáil manifesto:
Fianna Fáil firmly believes that to protect the livelihood of our fishermen, a 50-mile offshore limitation on foreign trawlers and factory ships is of urgent necessity.
I hope they will keep this election promise. Election promises are often broken but this one is far too important to be broken. I would like to refer to some of the other statements which members of the Fianna Fáil Party made prior to the election when there were a number of motions and Bills dealing with the fisheries issue discussed in this House. Many Fianna Fáil Deputies spoke strongly in favour of an exclusive 50-mile limit, and we are wondering why we have not heard from them lately, because the very same position obtains. On Private Members' Business the Minister for Foreign Affairs, then Deputy O'Kennedy, read the following motion at column 377, volume 293, of the Official Report of 26th October, 1976:
That Dáil Éireann, conscious of the vital importance of a developing fishing industry to Ireland's economic development and of Ireland's legal and equitable rights, declares its total opposition to any future European Community common fishery policy which does not reserve exclusively to Irish fishermen a coastal zone of 50 miles.
In relation to our fishery rights he went on to say at column 384 of the same volume:
These are the rights which we are now prepared to share with the Community. In this connection it is important to recognise that if we did not make the unilateral declaration on our part by January, 1977, all the waters to within 12 miles of our shores would be open waters to the fleets of every nation, Russia, Bulgaria and so on.
That is the kind of ridiculous statement Deputy O'Kennedy made. But it was that declaration which absolutely saved us from the type of fishing the Russians, the East Germans and the Bulgarians were carrying on at the time. The Fianna Fáil Party argued continually that we should not have made that 200-mile declaration. That saved the Irish fisheries because up to that time these people were able to come within six and 12 miles and the damage which was caused was immense, because the fish unfortunately do not stay within these limits and the catching power of these ships was such that the herrings off the south coast and off the west coast for that matter completely disappeared. There-fore, it was a major achievement to declare that limit and keep out these third country boats. In the same debate on 27th October, 1976, Deputy Haughey, now Minister for Health and Social Welfare, said we would be guilty of a serious dereliction of duty if we did not confirm our right to an exclusive 50-mile limit for Irish fishermen in this evolving situation. At column 430, volume 293, of the same debate on 27th October, 1976, he said:
The extension by the Community of the limit to 200 miles creates an entirely new physical and legal situation. Nothing in the Treaty of Accession can affect our demand for some sort of sensible and rational approach to this new situation. I am certain that my lawyer friend would agree with me that our case could be maintained in any international court, that the change brought about by an extension to 200 miles is of such fundamental significance that an entirely new legal and physical situation now obtains to which there must be an entirely new approach.
I would like to know why this reference to the International Court has not been followed up by action on the Government's part. All this has been forgotten. We were told there was no problem. A number of Fianna Fáil speakers said prior to the last election that it was only a case of going out and declaring a 50-mile limit. This is the kind of thing we have to put up with. The Minister, Deputy Haughey, also said in the same debate that an exclusive 50-mile limit was the only answer for the development of this industry. I hope he keeps echoing those sentiments, because we feel the same.
The then Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy FitzGerald, pointed out during those debates that our position was very weak because of incompetence when it came to negotiating the Treaty of Accession and we have repeatedly stated that if a reasonable case had been made at these discussions we would not be in the serious dilemma in which we find ourselves today. We failed because we did not, it seems, open our mouths. The agreement had been made before there was even a whimper from the then Fianna Fáil Government about the fishery issue. The Norwegians have complained bitterly that their case was weakened by the absence of support from the countries from which they might have expected it, principally Ireland. There was no support whatsoever forthcoming, and time and again they found themselves alone in the discussions among the ten nations.
Fianna Fáil stand indicted for having done a dreadfully bad job in that regard. They piled abuse on the Parliamentary Secretary, Deputy Murphy, and on the Minister, Deputy Donegan, as well as on the Minister for Foreign Affairs at that time. It was totally unjustified, particularly considering the present Minister's inability to negotiate.
In that debate Deputy Molloy told us that he was speaking on behalf of the people of Galway. He said that Fianna Fáil would not deviate from their insistence that a 50-mile exclusive fishing limit for the Irish fleet would be established. He said:
That is the attitude of my party in this House and we represent 50 per cent of the electorate.
From the results of the last general election that was true but his statement about the attitude of his party is another matter. On 8th December of the same year we had a debate on the Maritime Jurisdiction Order, 1976. It was a motion, and Deputy Haughey said:
In other words, we are asking the Government if they must, as apparently they must, extend our limits to 200 miles, they would at the same time give an undertaking to the House to the people and to the fishermen, that they will make an Order under section 3 of the Maritime Jurisdiction (Amendment) Act, 1964, as they are perfectly entitled to do and, as we submit they are entitled to do under the existing Community legislation, to establish an exclusive 50-mile band for the development of the Irish fishing industry.
Deputy Haughey, now a member of this Government, did not foresee any difficulty at all in declaring a 50-mile limit. Why the delay in declaring a 50-mile exclusive limit? Deputy Haughey also said on that occasion:
This is a crucial turning point in our membership of the European Economic Community. It is a test of faith for many Irish people of the goodwill of the Community. The future of the Irish fishing industry depends basically on the establishment of an exclusive 50-mile zone for Ireland's fishermen. Nothing else matters.
He continued in that vein:
I am suggesting that modern Ireland as an underdeveloped economy in the European Community is entitled to an exclusive 50-mile zone.
Deputy Crowley, as he then was, told us:
The real exercise we want him to get interested in——
He was referring to the Minister for Foreign Affairs.
——is to devote all his time to ensuring that we get our 50-mile exclusive limit. Nothing else will do.
Deputy Brennan also contributed to that debate. He said:
I trust the Government have not abandoned the hope of getting this exclusive 50-mile limit. Our fishermen will settle for nothing less.
At a later stage the same Deputy said:
We have the right to declare a 50-mile limit without reference to anyone. We have that right under international law, so let us hear from the other side of the House as to whether it is the intention to declare exclusive limits.
The then Minister, when he was replying, referred to the let-down the Norwegians had got when they went to negotiate in 1972. On 14th January, he said that in the early stages of the negotiations the Norwegian delegation had proposed that fishing within the fishery limits should be based on the same principles as those which were valid in the Treaty of Rome in relation to the right of establishment. He said:
During the enlargement negotiations we were not supported in our proposal by the Community or the other applicant states.
It ill behoves the present Government to come along later and accuse the then Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy FitzGerald, in regard to a very difficult position. During the debate on the Maritime Jurisdiction motion, Deputy Haughey told us that the English were of the opinion they had the right to declare a 50-mile limit and he did not see why we should not do it. He said:
We are asking the House to legislate in a simple, straightforward manner. If this Bill is passed, the situation will be clear. Ireland will have new fishery limits of 200 miles. The first 50 miles will be reserved exclusively for vessels operating from ports in the State.
That reference was to an Opposition Bill which was moved by Deputy Haughey on that occasion. He went on to quote Mr. Silkin during a debate in the British Commons who had said that it was vital to have the necessary powers for a 50-mile limit. Deputy Haughey said:
Clearly, the British Government take the view, which is our view, that the situation is not covered by existing Community legislation; that it can be legislated for and must be legislated for by the British Government. They have the power in their legislation to create an exclusive 50-mile limit and that is what we are asking the House to do for the benefit of our fishermen.
I say to them, now that they are in Government, to do exactly that.
At that time Deputy Brennan was all for a unilateral declaration of a 50-mile limit. He said:
We have the right, irrespective of what was or was not in the Treaty of Accession. If we were now in power we would be standing out for a 50-mile exclusive limit, hard, fast and definite.
Why have they not made such a declaration since they came into Government? They have been terribly dishonest and have not even apologised for the tirade of abuse of Deputy FitzGerald who had done so well in the negotiations at that time. We are now suffering from the mistakes made in 1972.
We accept that any future allocations of fish within our 200-mile limit should be based on past fishing performances. We contend that the Dutch and the French have abused our fishing grounds to such an extent that their past fishing performances should be disallowed. If one poaches in inland fisheries one loses one's licence. The French and the Dutch have being doing that wholesale and yet they are making the case that their allocations in future should be based on past performances. That is completely out of the question and the Minister should fight that case. Not alone did they take our fish but they did irreparable damage to our fishing grounds. They do not care what size fish they take, whether it is spawning fish or anything else. They just come in and take. They have no idea how to farm. They just destroy.
They must be stopped. We know they rigged the common fishery policy back in 1970. They set things up for themselves. We know Fianna Fáil made a right mess of the negotiations. There is now a strong moral right and the Government should demand that we get an exclusive 50-mile limit with the right of access for licensed boats from other countries if the fish are available. That is not too much to ask. Ours is not a dog-in-the-manger attitude. We will give the right of access to others provided the fish are available, the boats are licensed and we know how many there are and where exactly they are.
Deputy Dr. FitzGerald won a tremendous concession, a concession that was never appreciated by Fianna Fáil, for our fishing industry. Fianna Fáil did not want to know about it. Were the present Minister to base his strategy on similar grounds the industry could look forward to prosperous days. It was admitted that Ireland's fisheries were a special case. That was accepted. We were to get special consideration. We were to continue with the progressive development of our coastal fisheries. That meant we were entitled to double our catch by 1979. That must strengthen our hand for an exclusive 50-mile limit. If we are confined to the present six or 12 miles mentioned recently we have not a hope of doubling our catch. The unilateral measures brought in by the last Government early this year gave us a chance to increase our catch. Herring catches are up tremendously in Donegal. People can now get 30 to 40 boxes of white fish instead of ten or 12. That proposal was derided at the time by Fianna Fáil. They said we could not possibly do it. The latest return showed that we can do it. That development plan was of tremendous benefit to our fishermen. This policy was to continue after 1979 and we, on our part, agreed to postpone our right of veto.
We have seen a fantastic depletion in fish in certain areas. In the North Sea they switched from one variety to another. Herring in the North Atlantic in 1964 yielded 3,334,000 tons. In 1974 this dropped to 1,616,000 tons. In the same period mackerel dropped from 1,090,000 to 973,000 tons. The herring fisheries had been seriously depleted and they turned over to mackerel. The catching power of modern vessels is a serious matter when it comes to conservation and unless activities are restricted these ships will catch everything before them and all varieties of fish will be wiped out. The figures show that that will happen. When one species is wiped out they will turn to another. That was done with hake around the south coast. It was done with herring in recent years. It was done with mackerel in the North Atlantic. The Russians are doing it with mackerel off our southern coast. In 1972 we caught 48,000 tons of herring. In 1976 we caught 22,000 tons. The fishermen are not to blame for the depletion in stocks. It is the Dutch and the Russians who are to blame. There has been a tremendous decrease in the number of mackerel caught. At one time it was thought the quantity of mackerel was infinite. Not any more. The need for conservation is paramount.
When it comes to looking after our zone we must be very careful. We cannot allow the other members of the Community to fish without restraint. The Russians have reneged on their deal with the Community in regard to fishing in the Bering Sea. They had an arrangement but they have reneged on that. They want a far higher catch in our waters. I hope they will not be allowed too much freedom. Last year they caught something like 600,000 tons of fish off our coast and it is estimated they caught 375,000 tons in Irish waters. Irish waters cannot tolerate that type of depletion.
We ask in our motion that there will be no consent to bilateral agreements involving an exchange of Community fishery rights on a reciprocal basis with third countries until and unless agreement is reached within the Community on a fisheries regime that includes an exclusive Irish costal band of up to 50 miles. This is the most effective weapon we have and we want the Minister to use it to the maximum. We got the impression at Question Time today that the Minister was evading the issue and that he was getting soft. We would ask him to dig his heels in. The Russians will be looking for fish in our waters. So will the Norwegians and the Faroese. The British and the Dutch will be looking for reciprocal arrangements. We would ask the Minister not to agree to anything until we get what we want.
