The Bill before the House today has been promised for some time and, apart entirely from the recent controversy which has been raging in regard to landing of catches throughout the country, boats and the threat from the Spanish fleet which has been operating in the south west, there has been concern generally and widespread anxiety in the industry about some of the developments within the Community especially in recent times. It would appear now that the legislation may well be overtaken by events in the Community and may be a little too late to deal with the situation developing within the Community. I want to highlight the recent efforts by the Community to bargain away fish from our waters to the Norwegians. This is a total capitulation on the Common Fisheries Policy; and the agreement on that policy which took so long to reach at such enormous expense of time and energy seems to be broken before the ink on it is dry. That is a very retrograde step, a fraud for the Community to be interfering already with the agreement on the CFP by granting or attempting to grant rights in our waters to states outside the Community, rights which they never had. I appeal to the Minister to be vigilant. He will be assured of our support if he stands up to the Community in any efforts which may be made to water down the Common Fisheries Policy agreement which was signed so recently.
We have said at the outset that we will support the Government in legislation which will consolidate the Irish fishing industry, but this legislation has some objectionable features on which we need clarification if we are to give it our total support. Generally speaking, I find the measure vague, riddled with loopholes and not very specific in a number of key areas. In all probability quite a few of the big fish will escape unless the sections can be tightened up and made more specific in relation to what form of regulation the Minister proposes to introduce. In many ways this legislation gives the Minister power to do anything or, indeed, to do nothing. It would be desirable that many of the regulations which the Minister intends to make — and I have no doubt of his sincerity when he says that he will make these regulations — should be written clearly into the Bill, otherwise the firm basis and firm time limits should be specified within the Bill to ensure that these regulations will be brought in within a specified period or a certain time.
We have an explanatory memorandum now which we did not have until today, but the Bill can be seen as a complicated measure involving a number of Acts and sections of various Acts which are already in existence. Section 2 appears to give the Minister authority to license all Irish boats except perhaps the smaller boats. I would like the Minister to identify clearly in his reply how he proposes to classify these and if, for instance, under this legislation it would be necessary to license a boat which might be used by deep sea anglers in angling competitions. I am also concerned at the amount of bureaucracy and red tape likely to be generated as a result of this legislation and the regulations, classifications and whatever may be introduced. Further complications may arise in that licences may be subject to time limits and must be renewed. Certain boats can apply for exemptions. For instance, will there be exemptions for small fishing curraghs such as are used by traditional salmon fisherman? Must they be licensed under this? Will rowing boats which are used by bigger boats as an accessory to the activities of the bigger boats be exempt?
Further, I would object if I felt that there was any suggestion in this new licensing arrangement that the measure would be used as a vehicle for the collection of further revenue for the State. We would want some assurance from the Minister that it would not be used for that purpose. If any licence fees are to be attached to the issue of these licences for fishing boats we would require that these would be merely nominal and certainly not used as a method of raising further finances. The fishing industry is going through pretty difficult times at present with enormous problems in meeting loan repayments and so on and imposition of licence duties would be a further hardship on an already hard hit industry.
It appears to me that section 3 covers all the boats of every member state and what is causing most concern is the provision whereby the Minister is seeking the power to establish regulations which will govern the operations of these boats, including the Spanish boats. Anyone who looks at this section will see that it is clearly wide open and dependent entirely on what regulations the Minister makes. The Minister's recent statement indicated that the legislation itself would specify very clearly the percentage of crew members, who would have to be EEC nationals operating on these fishing boats. This is not indicated in the Bill. The Minister may well say that the UK brought in legislation similar to this and in that UK legislation something like 75 per cent of the crews of these boats had to be EEC nationals. There is nothing in the Bill before the House which says that 75 per cent of the crews in our situation must be EEC nationals. It is important to be specific here. The legislation on its own will do nothing to avoid the situation which has been developing and which is being highlighted. The threat from the Norwegian boats which is now emerging and perhaps a further threat of a Danish invasion of the north west mackerel stock leaves us in a very vulnerable position and our industry at risk. The situation must be amended and strengthened here and at least the regulations should be drafted and introduced with the legislation and shown to us here if the Minister is serious about the situation. While the Minister's intentions are good, in strict terms the Bill before us at present will do nothing to deal with the situation. It is important that the regulations be introduced so as to give us an indication of what the Minister has in mind. If he is not in a position to do that now, at least early on Committee Stage we should get an indication from the Minister that he has a firm date in mind for the introduction of the regulations. I believe the British regulations were brought in immediately after the passage of the Bill.
The fine of £100,000 is inadequate. It should be at least £200,000 and there should be power to order the forfeiture of the boat, the final decision as to how the boat should be disposed of resting with the Minister.
Section 4 refers to various sections of other Acts and would appear to cover the question of freezer ships. Would it be possible to license the freezers and will boats which are trans-shipping fish to unlicensed freezers be subject to penalties or apprehension?
The authority of the Naval Service in relation to salmon protection outside the 12-mile zone is very important and it is useful that the Minister is availing of this opportunity to clear up any doubts which may have arisen on this matter.
I have always been concerned about the level of fishing activity for salmon, especially in the Faroes by the Norwegians. These are Irish salmon which are being taken and conservation measures are needed to deal with escalation of fishing activity in that general area. The Faroese are now engaging in salmon fishing to a far greater extent than heretofore. I know that conservation measures have been introduced but I am not satisfied that a sufficient effort is being made to ensure that these measures are being adequately enforced. What evidence has the Minister of the efforts being made to check on the fishing activities of the Norwegians and the Faroese? Our stocks are being seriously damaged. There has been criticism that our own industry is damaging stocks by the use of illegal nets off the west coast generally, but untold damage is being done by the Norwegians and the Faroese.
Successive Ministers worked out detailed measures in the Community to control the activities of the Faroese but it is not clear that the regulations are being enforced or how they could be enforced to minimise damage. This is an area which needs close observation and monitoring and I am not satisfied that we can rely totally on the protection services and on the records from other member states to be sure that stocks are not being further damaged and threatened. We should demand action in regard to the activities of the Norwegians and the Faroese who are now taking Irish salmon and causing further depletion of our stocks, in spite of the fact that they have no traditional rights in that area. This must be resisted within the Community and, if necessary, taken up outside the Community.
Section 6 covers the activities of fishing boats from member states of the Community within the six to 12 mile band. The Minister appears to be empowered to regulate the activities of member states who have traditional rights in this area. I endeavoured when Minister to negotiate with the French Government to get them to withdraw or at least freeze their rights in the six to 12 mile band, especially in the Galway Bay area. I was disappointed that the present Minister did not hold out against the French in the days leading to the agreement on a Common Fisheries Policy. I know that the Minister and his officials would have done so and would have been prepared to take a very firm stand against the French authorities had they got the full and wholehearted backing of the Taoiseach and the Government when the policy was being finalised. Anyone who was following the events during the final days of the discussions on the CFP knows that pressure was put on the Minister to agree to the draft which was before the Council of Ministers. Secret messages were passing from Ministers of member states to the Government here over the head of our own Minister and unnecessary pressure was put on him. Had he been left to himself, the Minister would have succeeded in getting the French out of Galway Bay or at least in freezing the French rights there.
I was particularly interested in freezing the prawn fishing by the French off the Aran Islands. This is a valuable prawn fishing area and the French recognise the fact. This is the reason they were so adamant in holding on to their rights and establishing them under the CFP. While the opportunity has been lost of getting the French out of Galway Bay under the CFP, nevertheless if the Norwegians can insist on a quota for blue whiting we can equally insist on getting the French out of the Galway Bay area. We will certainly support any efforts by the Minister to achieve this. I know the French have traditional rights and that they are entitled under various conventions and agreements to retain these rights, but if people who have no rights are getting Community backing to establish such rights we can argue for Community support in freezing or minimising activity within our six to 12 mile band.
I have always been more interested in the prevention of illegal fishing activities rather than the imposition of fines. Imposing fines after the damage has been done is not a solution. In relation to foreign trawlers, fines are certainly not a deterrent because they have a pool to pay the fines so that there is no special hardship on individual boats. This should be watched carefully by the Minister and he should investigate whether this pool system is in operation with the support of governments' financial backing which would enable third country boats to fish illegally knowing that the fines will be paid for them. We should investigate whether this pool system is being contributed to by the fleets. If there is any suggestion that third country governments might financially back up such a pool system it should be raised at the highest level in the Community.
Applying higher penalties in these cases is realistic. However, I do not think fines are sufficiently high. I should like to know whether forfeiture of boats provided for in this Bill will apply to all boats of all member countries, including Irish boats. If it applies to Irish boats the Minister should look carefully to make provision for exemptions to ensure that he will have the final say in forfeiture proceedings:
They are some of the objections we have to this measure. It is no use passing the Bill today or tomorrow unless essential regulations are made. When the British Government brought in their legislation they made their regulations the next day. In relation to the regulations proposed here, we would need information from the Minister about how soon the regulations will be brought into effect. Under this section I think the Eirenova operation in Castletownbere will now be illegal. What are the Minister's intentions in relation to that? Is it his intention to close down that operation? Will the regulations allow the setting up of joint ventures or will the regulations be phased in over a period? Although we may make provision to cover the situation in Castletownbere, there may be a loophole to allow similar situations to develop elsewhere. We need to be quite clear and specific about this so that we will not have any doubts about it and that we will not be back here in a few weeks to tighten the situation further because it may have begun to get out of control.
There are some general comments I should like to make about the industry and particularly about salmon, which is covered in the Bill. No volume of legislation or imposition of penalties in an effort to conserve stocks will be of any use unless there is goodwill and co-operation between the fishermen and the Government and the conservation services. Conservation measures are an essential part of the future of our salmon fishing, but in relation to recent events and the clashes that have taken place between fishermen and the inspection service, no useful purpose can be served by that type of confrontation. Order and goodwill must be restored. I appeal to those involved in the recent clashes on the south-west and north-west coasts to stand back from this type of confrontation and try to work for conservation of stocks in the interests of the fishermen themselves. This should be done by consultation and communication. The fishermen have responsibilities but equally the conservation staff must be sensitive to the pressures surrounding the fishermen and ensure there will be co-operation and dialogue.
In relation to the Common Fisheries Policy, the Community are at a crossroads because a Common Fisheries Policy will be the cornerstone of future fishery development in the Community as well as of our fishery development. However, the actions which the Community have already engaged in are making the Common Fisheries Policy into a Phil the Fluther's Ball over there, with the herring dancing in the middle. If the Community continue with the stance they are now adopting, becoming involved in trading and bargaining before the Common Fisheries Policy has been given an opportunity to become established, the whole Community policy in relation to fishing will collapse around the Community's ears. If that trend is to be allowed to continue we here must be ready with our own national fisheries development plan and if necessary to back that up with our own national measures.
For many years we have been making speeches here, the Government have backed up the industry financially and otherwise, but now we need clearly defined policy to enable the industry to expand. We need to link the fish catching sector with the processors and those involved in marketing and selling. We need to do this fairly soon. We need investment to enable that development to occur. Overall fisheries development can make an enormous contribution to the national economy. We have got tired of repeating this, we have said it so many times. The Government must provide the financial support, but I do not see any evidence of Government commitment yet. As I said, if the Community are not prepared to accept their responsibility we must be prepared to go ahead with our own national policy to safeguard our position and to enable our own industry to expand and develop. I should like to see more specific information before us from the Minister rather than having this loophole measure which can be implemented only if the regulations are there.