I move:
That Dáil Éireann takes note of the serious implications for our fishing and fish processing industry from the proposed enlargement of the Community by the admission of Spain and Portugal to the EC, and calls on the Government to ensure that whatever arrangements are necessary to protect our national interests are included in the accession agreement.
The EC enlargement negotiations with Spain and Portugal have been going on for some time. Progress has been slow but the negotiations are now entering their final phase. Inevitably, the issues being discussed now are the most difficult and complicated and it is true to say there is widespread anxiety and uncertainty among fishermen here in regard to future prospects for their industry. I will put on record views expressed by the representatives of the three major fishing organisations, the Irish Fish Producers Organisations, the IFO and the Killybegs Fishermens Organisation. A circular issued to all TDs stated:
The primary objective of the I.F.O., the I.F.P.O. and the K.F.O. in relation to their opposition to current accession negotiations is to prevent Irish fishing interests being subordinated to the interest of other sectors within the Community.
The circular states that the Spanish fleet:
is so large that concentrated fishing in Community waters would decimate the Irish Industry. Even limited access to Community waters by Spanish vessels spells danger for Ireland, given their blatant disregard for any rules or regulations.
Spanish fishing activities in our waters have been the subject of an agreement between Spain and the EC, signed in April 1980 and ratified in May the following year. That framework agreement arose from The Hague Agreement of 1976 and set down the outlines for and EC agreement on fisheries, and this has been going on since 1976. Ireland would accept an agreement subject to the condition that Ireland would fish the 50 miles around the Irish coast. The Spanish rights would terminate at the 12 mile zone and Spanish catches would be reduced progressively to a modest level.
This framework agreement was ratified in May 1981 and its terms have been complied with since. There has been a systematic effort made by the Community to reduce fishing activities by Spain in Community waters and this has reduced the Spanish activities in coastal areas by 50 per cent since the agreement. There is no doubt that Spanish access to Community waters and fish resources is the most difficult problem that will have to be dealt with in the current negotiations. Spain is pressing for equality and has suggested that its fishing rights should be based not on the framework agreement but on the situation in operation in 1981 before the framework agreement became operative.
We all know the size and proportions of the Spanish fleet and that it will pose a major threat to our industry. I will give a brief indication of the capacity of the Spanish fishing fleet. The fleet numbers 17,500 vessels capable of 750,000 gross registered tonnes. We have approximately 1,600 vessels with a capacity of 36,000 tonnes. In the Community the Spanish fleet would represent 70 per cent of the entire fishing fleet. Total fish landings by Spain in 1983 was 1.1 million tonnes as against Irish landings of 200,000 tonnes. Spain imported 270,000 tonnes and exported something like 200,000 tonnes, about our total catch.
The position is that Spain, with a fleet of that size and capacity, is now fighting very hard in the Community to gain access to Community waters. If access is granted to Spain it will mean annihilation of the Irish industry and devastation, with widespread unemployment, with prospects of employment in the future seriously undermined.
We expected the Government to adopt a strict line in regard to the negotiations with Spain and there were indications earlier that the Government would insist on at least a 20-year transition period and that within that period Spanish activities in our coastal areas would not be increased so that their operations would be minimised and curtailed as far as possible in Irish waters. Our industry is a young one which has already made significant gains but we need to expand and protect our industry.
There has been recent indication of a weakening of the Government resolve in regard to Spain. We understand that a ten year transition period has been agreed and it later transpired that that period would be added to by a possible five years, this to be insisted on before negotiations could get under way. However, there has been a Council proposal that the 20-year transition period which we understand the Government to be maintaining had been replaced and there has been a suggestion of a seven year transition period. There is genuine fear that the transition period will not be even ten years but seven years.
It may be that in further negotiations Spain will seek to get concessions in a graded way which will bring them fully into our areas within a short time. That would be disastrous for us and it must be resisted by those negotiating on our behalf. We are not satisfied that that is being done to the best advantage as far as we are concerned.
It has been suggested that because there is such a huge demand for fish in Spain — Spanish consumption of fish is in the region of 1.2 million tonnes per year; the per capita fish consumption in Europe is 40 pounds annually as against 12 pounds here — that we would have an opportunity in the marketing area to exploit. We should look at our marketing arrangements in regard to Spain because there is a cause for some concern in that area. It is known and well understood by those involved in the negotiations that Spain has many third country agreements because of their need for fishing opportunities. They have about 20 international agreements along the west coast of Africa, with Canada and the United States. In 1983 Spain had 106 joint ventures involving some 200 Spanish vessels and it was estimated that these were responsible for duty free imports of 180,000 tonnes of fish.
It may be that because of Spain's arrangements with third countries the prospects in the marketing area for our industry may not be as they appear. That is why we are concerned and want an assurance that in the accession negotiations the agreements and joint ventures which carry with them concessions do not adversely affect our prospects of getting into that market. The Spaniards also have a marketing problem with fish because of their imports but their biggest problem seems to be in the area of structures. It is well know that their huge fleet is not in a healthy state. Huge injections of capital will be needed to modernise their ageing fleet, get rid of obsolete vessels and overcapacity in the industry. That will weigh heavily on Community resources to the detriment of our economic development under the Common Fisheries Policy. We recognise that our fleet has been expanding and developing with the aid of Community resources which we expect will be available under the Common Fisheries Policy. If we are to be limited in an enlarged Community it will be detrimental to the modernisation and restructuring of our fleet. Any curtailment of funds to our industry from Community sources will be a disadvantage which must be dealt with in any enlargement negotiations.
There is a major concern about the whole area of access to Irish waters. We have had a 50 mile box within which activity was permitted on licence and under strict control and management. In the negotiations involving Spain the Government must insist on getting back to the original demand for a 20 year transitional period. Any attempt to water that down must be opposed by our negotiating team. We must have a longer period than that mentioned.
It is important to note that the Irish case can be based on Article 4.1 of the Regulations 170/83 which states that the volume of catches available shall be distributed between the member states in a manner which assures each member state relative stability of fishing activities to each of the stocks considered. The Government must insist on preserving what we have, particularly in the west and south-west where widespread illegal fishing by Spanish vessels takes place. Our fishery protection service almost daily charge Spanish boats with blatant breaches of our fishery regulations. We must adopt a hard line on that. We are dealing with this from a position of strength. We know where our fleet has progressed and developed in recent years and we see the need for further development. The preservation of the 50 mile box is vital. Preservation of the stocks not being exploited at present is also vital so that our industry can expand in the non-traditional areas. Many people in the industry say that in order to have substantial gains in the fishing area in the coming years there will be a need to move away from the traditional species and get involved in research into new methods of fishing and catching species which have not been exploited by us up to now.
It is evident that the Spanish authorities are seeking access to the species I have mentioned such as horse mackerel, blue whiting and so on which have not been developed to any great extent here. That represents an area for development, job creation and an opportunity for an increase in the incomes of fishermen that will be lost in the negotiations unless the Government provide the incentive to our fleet to get involved in them.
The development of our fishing industry under the Common Fisheries Policy is crucial to our economy. We must respond vigorously to the challenge of the new economic order now confronting us. We have a valuable natural resource and we must develop and exploit it to the fullest. Downstream industries must be developed and extended. The entire fishing industry must be injected with more capital. Participants in the industry must be trained to the highest possible standards if they are to avail of the opportunities that will be available in a new fisheries development programme that will evolve as the Common Fisheries Policy comes into operation.
We are at a stage where the policy is beginning to show results. We have seen the development which has taken place in our fleet. It is recognised that there is a huge potential which has been relatively unexploited. Some of the figures for improvements which have taken place in the fishing industry in the past number of years will give us an indication of how far we have come in such a short time and where we can go if the industry only gets an opportunity to avail of the Common Fisheries Policy, which will be the cornerstone of development in the next few years.
Fish landings have increased from 86,000 tonnes in 1972 to 206,000 tonnes in 1982. Fish exports have grown by 294 per cent between 1978 and 1982. Employment in our fishing industry has grown by over 30 per cent since the mid-seventies, with in excess of 13,000 people being employed in it at present. In the short few years we have seen the expansion of the industry and the development which has taken place in providing jobs in a whole variety of areas, especially in the isolated areas among the coastal communities. It is essential not to put any brakes on that impetus in future. It is vital in the present negotiations that the Government adopt a firm stand. If they do not get the support of the member states they must continue to fight their case, because it is essential in the interests of the industry and of those involved at present; but much more vital to its expansion and development and future possibilities is that the Irish Government take a firm stand and do not allow themselves to be stampeded into reaching agreement in negotiations, not for social or economic reasons but for other reasons. There would appear to be at present a motivation which has nothing to do with enlargement of the Community or with economic or social policies, but with other issues unrelated to them.
I urge the Minister to adopt a firmer line than he has adopted up to now. I am aware that the Minister for Foreign Affairs is conducting these negotiations. At this time there is need for the Minister for Fisheries to become directly involved in negotiations as far as possible. We insist that the Irish case be fought to the very limit in the Community to ensure that our industry is protected and also the present jobs, and plans and prospects with regard to job creation. This will be to the benefit of the fishing industry and the economic benefit of the State in the enlarged Community.
The reason for tabling this motion tonight is that we are not satisfied with the information given or the progress which has taken place to date. We are not satisfied that this issue has been fully teased out and full information given to everybody involved. We are dissatisfied with the way in which the negotiations are being handled and call on the Government to state clearly their position and how they see the enlargement negotiations progressing between now and 1 January 1986, which is the date on which the new enlarged Community will be ratified.
