I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
The purpose of the Fisheries (Amendment) Bill, 1996 is to introduce a new and enhanced statutory basis for the licensing and regulation of the acquaculture industry. The framework proposed will provide a more effective, legally secure and transparent licensing process which should command the confidence of the fish farming industry and all other relevant interests.
There are two statutory mechanisms at present under which ministerial authority can be exercised to licence fish culture or aquaculture. They are provided for by section 15 of the Fisheries (Consolidation) Act, 1959 and by section 54 of the Fisheries Act, 1980. In addition, aquaculture installations or structures on the foreshore are also subject to the requirements of the Foreshore Acts and land-based facilities are subject to the requirements of Planning Acts.
In the period since the introduction of the 1980 Act we have witnessed the growth of the aquaculture industry to the point where it accounts for some 25 per cent of total fish production in Ireland and internationally. Total production of farms in 1995 amounted to almost 27,000 tonnes with a value of some £50 million. The total number of people engaged in all sectors of the aquaculture industry stood at 2,946 at the end of 1995.
Aquaculture or fish farming implies human intervention in the rearing of fish. This can involve, for example, the farming and feeding of fin fish in cages or the propagation of shellfish which filter feed naturally in the waters where the seed is placed. The world-wide decline in stocks of wild fish, together with the buoyant consumer demand for fish, has meant that aquaculture products now account for an ever-increasing proportion of fish production. Ireland is in an ideal position to benefit from this trend. Experience has shown that careful, environmentally sound husbandry is the key to the production of quality aquaculture food.
The Government is committed to the continued sustainable development of this valuable industry and to delivering on the potential for jobs and growth which it offers, particularly in coastal communities. The planned development and expansion of the industry is a major element of the investment programme in place under the Fisheries Operational Programme 1994-1999. The operational programme envisages doubling aquaculture output to £103 million by the end of 1999 and the creation of an additional 1,300 jobs over the period of the programme. A total investment of £36 million is planned in new projects and in the modernisation of existing facilities. To date, 58 investment projects in aquaculture have been approved under the programme involving a total investment of some £14.2 million.
To facilitate the realisation of the targets for expansion and maximise the benefit of the Structural Funds investment, a sound legislative framework to solidly underpin aquaculture development is essential. It has been agreed for some time by the industry and other interests that a thorough overhaul of the existing legislation is essential. It is necessary to address not only deficiencies experienced with the licensing procedures and constraints imposed by court decisions, but also to take account of new thinking on planning and environmental issues, as well as the significant technical advances in aquaculture itself. The existing legislative provisions do not command confidence. The claimed failings and defects are both perceived and real.
The aquaculture industry sees the present procedures as a disincentive to enterprise and as being cumbersome and slow in terms of finalising licensing decisions. The industry needs and deserves a greater degree of certainty in the process of assessment and decision making and in terms of the timeframe for decisions. Others perceive the present licensing process and procedures as failing to have sufficient regard to public rights and environmental concerns. Furthermore, all sides agree that appeals mechanisms against licensing decisions are inadequate, and applicants and objectors are poorly served by the present system.
There is a large degree of consensus on the broad requirements of any new licensing system. The degree of common ground on what is needed is particularly significant given the differing, often opposing, perspectives on aquaculture development. Views on the specific issues to be addressed in new legislation converge in many respects. Key industry concerns centre on: the need for a streamlined, impartial and speedy licensing framework; enhancement of notification-consultation procedures for licence applications; strengthened rights of appeal against negative licensing decisions; security of tenure; safeguarding of other interests; the need for more effective policing and regulation; a sound statutory basis for licences; new fee basis; and the need for explicit policy guidelines to inform decision making.
Key third party concerns centred on the need for an impartial and transparent decision making process, improved public notification-consultation procedures, better access to information, improved appeal mechanisms, enhanced regulation, monitoring and control of industry, a clear-cut penalties regime to ensure full compliance with licence and other requirements, and explicit policy guidelines to inform decision making.
Consequently, one of my primary concerns in the drafting of the Bill was to endeavour to strike the necessary balance between the essential development needs of the aquaculture industry and the acknowledged and real concerns of other parties. Getting this balance right is essential to ensure that the development of aquaculture is planned and regulated in a sustainable way. Thus, the objective of the Bill before the House is to establish a new licensing process which (i) facilitates the continued sustainable development of the aquaculture industry while meeting local and environmental concerns; (ii) gives those directly involved with aquaculture, and all other interested individuals and organisations, a reasonable opportunity to express their views on particular development proposals within a framework of clearly defined procedures and times-cales; and (iii) makes provision for the establishment of an Independent Appeals Board and process.
I would like to take this opportunity to lay to rest a number of emerging myths about this Bill which have been the subject of an advertising campaign last week in the provincial press. It is unacceptable that misinformation and distortions of the Bill's provisions and objectives may regrettably have gained a degree of credence among some fishery and angling interests. Specifically, I would like to offer the following assurances and clarification to the House that people's rights are enhanced and not diminished by this Bill. The allegation that the Bill could put fish farms on every lake, river, estuary and bay in Ireland is a gross exaggeration and distortion of the facts. As things stand, any person can lodge an application for a licence to engage in aquaculture at any place or on any waters. That remains the case. The consent of the owner, whether private or State, is required and in the case of salmonoid breeding installations, marine or freshwater, EU requirements for environmental impact assessments must be complied with. For inland or land based developments, local authority planning requirements must be met. Licence applications will also continue to be subject to full and rigorous assessment by the Department's technical services from all relevant perspectives.
The Bill will not abolish all rights to fishing, navigation and recreation. Public waters and the foreshore are a common resource with competing demands from a wide range of economic, ecological and recreational interests. No one interest can dominate. There must be a balanced usage in the public interest. Rights of appeal are enhanced and not abolished as has been claimed.
The Independent Appeals Board will not replace the courts. As in planning law, any person wishing to contest a licensing decision will still have recourse to the courts by way of judicial review provided the court concludes that there are substantial grounds for doing so. In any planning sphere, it is important to dissuade vexatious or frivolous appeals to the courts and it is reasonable to insist that appellants at least have grounds for their objections.
The Bill, as is standard practice when introducing a new format of licensing permission which will be subject to strengthened regulatory requirements, provides that all existing and future licensed aquaculture operations will be brought within a comprehensive licensing and regulatory system.
There are different types and methods of fish culture and, indeed, a range of fin fish and shellfish species are farmed. Currently, licences are granted for ten year periods, and the aquaculture industry has represented its case that licences of longer duration are needed to underpin investment, secure finance and provide the necessary security of tenure. The Bill provides for licence duration of 20 years and more, although I envisage that 20 years will be the norm.
Public notice procedures will remain in place. Our objective is to have the fullest possible consultation prior to any licensing decision being taken. Application regulations, as provided for by section 10 of the Bill, will facilitate the broadest possible consultation process, including consultation with other Departments, State bodies and agencies. The Independent Appeals Board is not biased towards fish farmers. The composition of the board is carefully balanced to ensure that aquaculture, environmental protection, wild fisheries, planning and development and industrial and community development interests are represented with no interest having a majority position.
The appeals board will be totally independent but, as in planning law, ministerial power is reserved to issue general policy directives in relation to aquaculture to which the board must have regard.
Objections to licensing proposals are not severely restricted. It will be open to any person to lodge an objection to or make representations on any proposed aquaculture developments within a reasonable timeframe.
It is proposed to exempt trial licences from appeals. Such licences will be of strictly limited duration, temporary and non-renewable, to facilitate experimental aquaculture and research and development. Long-term commercial aquaculture developments following completion of trials will be subject to the full licensing process.
The State foreshore is not being privatised. Placement of seafarm cages or structures on the foreshore for aquaculture purposes will continue to be licensed under the Foreshore Act, 1933. It has been long-standing practice for the State to grant licences or leases for areas of the foreshore for a range of economic or recreational activity.
I will now deal with the main provisions of the Bill and the new framework for licensing and regulation proposed. A fundamental requirement of the Bill is that one cannot undertake aquaculture without a licence. Furthermore, section 11 will disqualify persons from applying for a licence for any area where they commenced aquaculture operations without a licence.
Applications for licences to engage in aquaculture are to be made to the licensing authority, that is, the Minister for the Marine or a designated officer of the Minister in the event of the power being delegated. A statutory time objective for determining licence applications within four months is provided for with the licensing authority empowered to extend this period in specified exceptional circumstances. In such circumstances, reasons will have to be given to the applicant concerned and the date by which, or period within which, the application will be determined must be stated. This provision setting a four month time objective for licensing decision takes account of concerns expressed by the industry that there should be a fixed time frame for dealing with applications. It will be open to the Minister to delegate the function of deciding on licence applications and reviews of licences, or on particular categories of applications and reviews, to an officer of the Department.
An independent Aquaculture Licences Appeals Board will be established to determine appeals against decisions of the licensing authority. A statutory time objective for determining appeals within four months will apply with similar provisions for extending this period in exceptional circumstances. The board will consist of a chairperson and five ordinary members with knowledge or experience of aquaculture, environmental protection or wild fisheries, planning and development or industrial or community development who will be appointed by the Minister. The chairperson's term of office will be five years and other members will hold office for a term not exceeding five years to be specified at the time of their appointment.
There is a standard provision for disclosure of interests by the board or persons engaged by the board in circumstances where a particular beneficial or material interest exists. The board may engage consultants and advisers for evaluating appeals. The concerns expressed by the industry and the various interest groups on the need for accountability through an appropriate right of appeal have been recognised and taken on board. To a large extent, we have used the Bord Pleanála model for the structure and procedures of the aquaculture appeals board.
The procedures relating to appeals and their consideration by the appeals board are derived from the streamlined planning appeals procedures established by the Planning Acts. The main features include: a time limit of one month for lodging appeals by any aggrieved person; a requirement to state the full grounds of appeal when appealing; an entitlement for the other parties to an appeal, and anybody else who wishes to do so, to make written submissions on the appeal within a time limit of one month; a discretionary power for the appeals board to invite a further submission from any person concerned with an appeal, where it considers it appropriate to do so; a power for the appeals board to decide, in its absolute discretion, to hold an oral hearing of any appeal and power for the appeals board to dismiss frivolous, vexatious or abandoned appeals.
The Minister will be empowered to issue general policy directives, and any designated officer exercising licensing functions and the appeals board will be required to have regard to such directives. This is a standard provision in planning law on which this part of the Bill is modelled.
The licensing authority may grant trial licences authorising experimental investigations for particular aquaculture developments. Such licences would be subject to a maximum term and would not be renewable. Because of the limited nature and duration of these licences, appeal provisions will not apply. It is clear there is a need for more flexibility in licensing experimental operations. For example, trials to establish site suitability including suitability for fallowing purposes or the viability of farming novel species have to be facilitated if the industry is to grow and adapt to new developments and technology. Diversification into new species and products is needed to avoid over-dependence on particular species or markets. The potential to develop into new areas needs to be encouraged and not hindered. Trial licence provisions will assist the ongoing research and development effort into experimental techniques of cultivation for new and currently farmed fish species.
This is not a new concept. Granting temporary permissions for trials or pilot projects is a well established procedure under the existing Fisheries Acts. The trial licence provision in this Bill will, however, impose a statutory time limit on future trial licences granted.
The Minister will be empowered to prescribe by regulations, with the consent of the Minister for Finance, fees for licence applications, licences and appeals. This provision will make it possible to lay down fees for applications, reviews or appeals as is the case under the planning Acts, in addition to fees for licences.
Matters which must be taken into account, as relevant, in determining licence applications and appeals are delineated in the Bill. These include the suitability of the area in question for the aquaculture development proposed, the likely economic effects, other beneficial uses of the water, the ecological implications for wild fisheries, natural habitats, flora and fauna. The aim here is to introduce clear licensing criteria as sought by both the industry and other interest groups.
Provisions to deal with unauthorised development and breaches of licence conditions are considerably strengthened. This will protect existing or future licensees against developments which undermine confidence in the industry and the Department's ability to regulate properly. It will also allay the concerns of other interests who can be confident that the aquaculture industry is properly regulated and placed on the same footing as other natural resource sectors.
As a measure of the importance I attach to ensuring that fish farmers comply with the responsibilities placed on them by this Bill, stiff penalties, including fines of up to £100,000 and or imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, are provided for offences committed. In addition, provision is made in section 68 for the ultimate sanction of revocation of an aquaculture licence, without compensation for the licensee. I have included strengthened provisions with regard to the recapture of fish in the event of escapements occurring at finfish farms. This is a matter which I know concerns people involved in the wild fisheries sector. Licences will be open to review once three years have passed. Any decision following a review will be appealable in the same way as a decision on a licence application.
As regards other miscellaneous provisions I have taken on board concerns expressed by the aquaculture industry about security of tenure and prevention of interference with licensed operations and incorporated specific provisions to address these concerns. I have also made provision to underpin licences currently in place authorising aquaculture developments, the bulk of which were granted or renewed by my predecessors since the mid 1980s.
In the course of preparation of this Bill, my Department has had extensive consultations with a range of interest groups and State bodies. Extensive consultations have taken place with other Departments, particularly the Department of the Environment and the National Parks and Wildlife Service. The views of BIM and aquaculture industry representative bodies have been considered fully, together with views of fishery and environmental interests.
Since this Bill was published I have made it clear that I welcome submissions from interested parties and am willing to consider any reasonable amendments that will improve the Bill. I am anxious that we enact the best possible legislation and am examining a number of submissions received, together with comments that were made when the Bill was before the Seanad last December. It is in this spirit that I bring the Bill before the House.
The aquaculture industry has been poorly serviced by out of date legislation and a licensing process which has failed to deliver in terms of decisions within a reasonable time frame. Those who wish to lodge appeals, representations or objections against any licensing decision were also poorly served by the statutes in place. I am satisfied the Bill provides the necessary legislative framework to command both industry and public confidence in the licensing and regulatory processes for the aquaculture industry. It underlines the Government's commitment to the sustainable development of this valuable industry and to ensuring that aquaculture develops within strict environmental standards with the rights of other users protected fully. I commend the Bill to the House.