I move:
That Dáil Éireann solemnly declares it will reject any arrangements which will permit access by Spanish or Portuguese fishing boats to what is referred to as The Irish Box in the present EEC negotiations on the enlargement of the Community.
For more than a year now we in Fianna Fáil have been pointing to the disastrous consequences that would result for the Irish fishing industry by reason of the enlargement of the Community consequent on the accession of Spain and Portugal unless adequate steps were taken in the negotiations to protect the Irish industry and to safeguard our vital interests. On every occasion on which we raised the issue, whether by way of debate here on motions relating to fishing affairs, or motions dealing with developments in the Community, or by way of parliamentary question, we were given assurances that no agreement would be entered into that would be detrimental to the development of the industry or to its future prospects. It is emerging now from the recent discussions that our worst fears have been realised and that, unwittingly or otherwise, the Government have accepted a position that will spell the death knell for our fishing industry. They appear to have agreed that enlargement of the Community, with all the unfavourable aspects that would follow from our point of view, is more important than holding out in the negotiations for an agreement that would ensure adequate protection for our fisheries and enable further expansion and development of the industry.
We contend that Irish fisheries have been sold out, that jobs in the industry have been put at risk, that confidence has been undermined and that the prospect of further development and expansion of the industry has been damaged. The whole affair has been handled badly. It has been poorly negotiated. The outcome will be disastrous for our fishing industry.
In June 1984 I expressed our deep concern at the manner in which the negotiations had been conducted and I pointed to the implications for the industry in the event of the accession of Spain and Portugal. It was obvious that for technical, administrative and indeed, political reasons it would be impossible to meet the deadline that had been set for the conclusion of the negotiations. That was the view also of experienced people in the industry, people who had been following the course of the discussions. It was the widespread belief also of the fishing industry in the Community generally.
Because of the lack of preparedness, of discussion and of examination of the complex issues involved there was a general understanding throughout the Community that the deadline could not be met, that in the final analysis a decision would be reached without full and adequate consideration or without taking into account the implications for the long term development of the industry and that a decision would be reached in the final days in which it was decided to conclude negotiations.
The Common Fisheries Policy which represented a fragile balance between the member states involved a period of six years discussions and negotiations. The enlargement of the Community to include Spain with its fleet of 17,500 fishing trawlers would obviously endanger the very fine balance of that policy. It is obvious also that with regard to access to fishing waters, enlargement would have a dramatic impact not only for Ireland but for all the fishing interests in the Community. In short, the entire marine resources management policy of the Community would be endangered. This view has been expressed also by responsible people in the industry throughout Europe. A further implication is the extraction of marine resources by vessels operating under third country flags which would have free access to the markets. Conservation measures, protection policies and development prospects would all be affected. The lack of consideration given to the issues involved would mean that permanent re-negotiation would be needed and this inevitably would destroy the confidence of fishermen in the Community. The whole operation of the Common Fisheries Policy, a policy that was arrived at after protracted negotiations, would be put in jeopardy at a very early stage and before it had the opportunity to work satisfactorily.
The most immediate impact of enlargement for the Irish fishing industry would be the presence in our fishing waters of the huge Spanish fleet. Even in the best regulated fishing regime, the cost is massive in terms of protecting our fishing rights but it is even more forbidding when it is clear that large sections of the northern Spanish fleet now operate illegally. For evidence of this one need only have regard to the figures for convictions of Spaniards in respect of illegal fishing in Community areas. In our exclusive area in the past few years, many Spanish vessels have been apprehended. In 1982 there were convictions in respect of 30 Spanish vessels and in 1983 the figure was 43. Of the 29 foreign boats apprehended in 1984, 24 were Spanish registered and five were ex-Spanish vessels that were registered in the UK. The fines in respect of our area for 1981 in this regard totalled £1,033,672. The fines in respect of 1984 will total more than £500,000 and there are probably other very substantial fines yet to be imposed for that year.
The protection of our exclusive fishing area is a big problem. We have a coastline of 1,737 miles. The 200 mile exclusive fishing limit gives us a sea area of approximately 132,000 square miles to patrol and protect. For the year 1980 there were 25 convictions for illegal fishing in those waters. The number of vessels apprehended represents only a small proportion of the numbers operating illegally in our waters. It is important that strict vigilance in respect of our fishing area is maintained. This has been done in the past. Nevertheless it is clear that protection will become more important in the future because many foreign vessels will encroach on our exclusive areas as their own fishing grounds become denuded of stock. It is evident that this will pose enormous problems for our hard-pressed protection services.
It is well known that there has been increased illegal activity recently by Spanish boats in anticipation of Spain becoming a member of the EC and once agreement is reached there will be increasing pressure to secure quotas and access to our exclusive areas. Fianna Fáil have complained consistently of the lack of information emanating from the discussions and the failure of the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Minister for Fisheries to disclose what has taken place behind closed doors in Brussels.
We criticised strongly the system that has developed where negotiations in such a complex and complicated area are being handled by the Minister for Foreign Affairs and his Department. I have every confidence in his ability to negotiate but we think the primary responsibility for negotiating in this delicate and complex area which is so involved and interwined with fishery development in the Community should be the responsibility of the Minister for Fisheries. It is not good enough that he sits in as an observer at these important discussions: he should be involved directly in the negotiations. We may well suffer as a consequence. It is our opinion that the Minister should be involved directly in the negotiations and now in the days prior to the next round of discussions we urge that the system that has been adopted in recent times be changed and direct responsibility given to the Minister for Fisheries to finalise that agreement.
It is true that an understanding emerged in the early discussions that the Irish Government would hold out for a definite transitional period and it was understood by all involved that the present fishing regime would be frozen at present levels. We understood that negotiations would proceed for the integration of Spain with the Community's fishing industry during the transitional period but that there would be no escalation of Spanish activity in our areas in that period. We understood that the principle we had adopted in the framework agreement we signed previously would be adhered to: in other words, that there would be a systematic phasing out of Spanish activity within Irish coastal areas and that that principle would not be changed. This had ensured that during the five years of the operation of the framework agreement Spanish fishing within Irish coastal areas had been reduced by 50 per cent. It was considered important that during the transitional period Spain would rationalise its fleet, reduce its capacity and generally streamline its efforts by getting rid of its overcapacity and its obsolete boats and thus fit into the Community fishing fleet when the transitional period would have expired. By then it was hoped the Spanish Government and the Spanish fleet would accept their responsibilities fully, not only in relation to their behaviour in respect of the Common Fisheries Policy but also in the way they operated their fleet so that we would not have the illegal flouting of the law that is taking place on an ever-increasing scale by the Spanish fleet at the moment.
The length of the transitional period has been the subject of some discussion here. On the last occasion when we debated the issue the Minister for Fisheries pointed out that it was the first time he had heard of a 20-year transitional period. I would remind the Minister that in December in the debate here on developments in the European Communities I spoke of the need for a 20-year transitional period from the date of Spain's accession to the Common Market during which time the issues I raised would be discussed, negotiated and decided upon. I said there should be no question of any escalation of fishing activity in that 20-year period.
It is generally accepted in the industry that until the summit in Dublin there was no question whatever of anything less than a 20-year transitional period from the date of entry of Spain and Portugal, which will be 1 January 1986. It was with some alarm we learned in the Dáil from the Minister that not alone had the demand for the 20-year transitional period been abandoned but that what was being discussed was a situation where a transitional period would not apply at all. A Community offer was on the table that would give Spain access on the basis of 1984 quantities to the species it currently enjoys and this would be extended to allow Spain catches in other species that were to be determined such as horse mackerel and blue whiting within a transitional licensing system. Horse mackerel and blue whiting are two species where we could expect to see some exploitation by Irish fishermen in the development of our fishing industry in the next few years. Because of the stock situation the traditional species we have been fishing in the past years are under strict control. It is essential to expand our fishing industry and to develop it and we must have adequate availability of horse mackerel and blue whiting if we are to have such expansion in the future.
The transitional arrangements that have been talked about by the Commission would last possibly for ten years but with the possibility that it could be reduced to eight years if satisfactory post-transitional arrangements could be adopted by the Commission and by the Council. If such arrangements could not be implemented the ten-year transitional period would be extended for a further five years. There was some surprise expressed that the summit had agreed not a 20-year transitional period but a ten-year period with the possibility of a further five years extension. Apparently in the later Commission proposals it seemed to well informed people who were watching developments that not only was the ten-year transitional period with a further extension of five years being abandoned but that the Spanish fishing fleet would be entitled to get inside the Irish box in seven years. This was totally unacceptable and we made this point clear in discussions here. There was also a proposal to give access to fishing for hake, monkfish, pollack and many other varieties in regard to which we consider there is a prospect for future development.
There was a bid to expel boats from the North Sea area but there did not appear to be any provision whereby large parts of the Spanish fleet which fish in non-Community waters would be prevented from entering Community zones which would pose a further problem for us. What we are seeing is a total sell-out of the Irish position which will put the Irish fishing industry into the dark ages and which will put a brake on further development of the fishing industry.
Apart from the question of access and quotas some very important issues appear to have been glossed over in the rush to find agreement. There is a growing fear that fish and fish products produced by member states will be displaced by similar products coming onto the market from Spain. It is then anticipated that because of the huge demand and the huge Spanish market for fish there would be an opportunity here for fish markets for the Irish fishing industry. It is well known that Spain has many third country agreements. They have over 106 joint ventures and we have little or no information from the Minister as to what effects these arrangements will have on fish markets, fish prices and on the jobs in the processing industry here.
We are dissatisfied with the situation in the area of structural development. The Commission were apparently hampered by the lack of information in relation to the size and the state of the Spanish fleet. It is understood that Spain will require substantial sums for modernisation and for the disposal of obsolete vessels. The lack of information from the negotiations leaves us in a position where we are not satisfied that adequate funding will be available from the structural policy of the Common Fisheries Policy to fund the modernisation of the Irish fleet so that the restructuring we need as urgently as any fleet in the Community will be done through funding by the Community, bearing in mind that at present Community funds are under severe pressure and there are no indications that there will be a substantial increase in the funds set aside for structural improvement.
In relation to the council meeting last week, which brought about this motion, it was obvious from reports from Brussels last Wednesday that in the negotiations concessions have been made by our negotiating team which clearly admitted that the exclusive position in the 50 mile box was to be breached after a ten year period. In other words, Spain would get access to the Irish box after the ten year transition period. There was some doubt as to whether or not that was agreed. This would mean that increasing pressure would be brought on us to get access to the 12 to six mile limit. The failure to get any worthwhile assurance from the Minister for Defence who replied to a Private Notice Question last week on behalf of the Minister for Foreign Affairs, and the confusion which resulted at the Foreign Affairs Council Meeting on Thursday night, demands this evening a clear and unambiguous statement from the Minister and the Minister of State if possible, as to what has taken place in Brussels in these final negotiations. It was obvious from press reports of what transpired that the Minister felt he had agreement but was not sure whether or not he had an agreement. It is equally obvious that the French Minister objected on behalf of his industry because he was not satisfied with the control on the number of boats getting into the French coastal areas. It was also obvious that the Danish Government were prepared to use their powers of veto to keep Spanish boats under control in the North Sea area. This was made quite clear by the Danish foreign office in a statement issued in Copenhagen, clearly indicating that the Danish Government in the fisheries negotiations were not satisfied with the increased Spanish activity which they were anticipating in their fishing areas and that they were prepared to use their powers of veto to hold up any agreement on the common policy which would be adopted by the Community and Spain. Our negotiating team, both the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Minister for Fisheries, were out-manoeuvred by the Danish and French Ministers. The Irish position is now critical. Apparently we have agreed to an infringement of the Irish box after a short transitional period which can be negotiated further before these negotiations are concluded so that we will be left in a very vulnerable position as regards the Spanish fleet. The French Government have no intention of letting the Spanish fleet into their area; the Danes have threatened to use their powers of veto, but we have accepted a situation which will inevitably mean that much greater pressure will be directed towards us if the Spanish authorities and the Spanish negotiating team wish to encroach further into our areas. We want an assurance from the Minister here tonight, from not only the Ministers for Foreign Affairs and Fisheries but from the Taoiseach, that in the event of failure to rectify the situation in the negotiations that will take place this week there will be a very hard line adopted by the Taoiseach at the summit to ensure that there is no weakening of our position and that there is no question of abandoning our position of maintaining our exclusive 50 mile box.
In proposing the motion we are not prepared to sacrifice a national interest in the fishing area for enlargement of the Community to satisfy other member states who appear to be more interested in enlargement for reasons other than social or economic development. We are seeking vote support in the Dáil for this motion and asking those who value the development and preservation of our natural resources to back this motion. We believe it to be in the national interest to take a stand on this issue now. The House cannot accept that the 13,000 people employed in the fishing industry can be deprived of their livelihoods or be driven from the industry. The future prospects for the preservation and development of a major national industry cannot be threatened. There is no alternative for the Taoiseach except to scrap this deal which has been negotiated and to ensure that in the summit there will be no sell out of the Irish position in these negotiations.
