I will take replies to Questions Nos. 6 and 7 in ordinary time.
Other Questions. - EU Agreement on Fisheries.
John Browne
Question:6 Mr. Browne (Wexford) asked the Minister for the Marine the effect the latest EU agreement on fisheries will have on Irish tonnage; whether 12 metre boats will be included; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11396/97]
I am glad to have this opportunity to advise the House on the outcome of the negotiations on the new five year EU fleet plan which was finally agreed by the Fisheries Council in Luxembourg on 15 April last.
The Council decision sets the broad principles on which individual national programmes will be negotiated bilaterally with the Commission before the end of the year. It differs radically from the original Commission proposals for cuts of up to 40 per cent across the board which were rejected by Fisheries Ministers last October. It is closely based on the alternative approach which was tabled by the Irish Presidency last November. The outcome, therefore, reflects Ireland's overriding position throughout these negotiations that the solutions to over-fishing and over capacity in EU waters should be rational and equitable and targeted as closely as possible at those causing the problem.
The key principles of the agreement include the "critical stocks" approach which targets the reductions on depleted and over-fished stocks and the fleets which fish them; reductions in principle of 30 per cent and 20 per cent spread over five years and weighted in practice according to specific criteria; reductions to be taken in either fishing effort or capacity; safety related capacity increases are excluded; and the option of separate treatment for small scale coastal fishing boats under 12 metres.
The complex technical process of translating these principles into individual national fleet programmes is getting under way. Our assessment is that the practical impact for the Irish fishing industry over the five year period will be comparatively minor by the time the specific criteria, safeguards and weighting mechanisms are factored into the Irish programme. Most notably, the "critical stocks" approach means that the extent to which the stocks in trouble are fished by the Irish fleet will be the key determining factor in the Irish programme. In practice, the most severe cuts will be borne by the fleets causing the real over-fishing problems and will be taken in the areas where stocks are under the most pressure.
The unique circumstances and needs of the Irish fleet will, in practical terms, be taken fully into account in implementing the guiding principles now agreed at political level. In that context, having successfully negotiated the option of excluding fishing boats under 12 metres from the national programmes, we will now assess, in consultation with the industry, whether the balance of advantage lies in exercising that option.
The agreement is a good outcome for conservation and the best achievable outcome in terms of realistically tackling European over-fishing. Our efforts will ensure Irish fishermen can plan for the future with certainty.
(Wexford): I welcome the Minister's reply, although some of the fisheries organisations may not agree with him when he refers to minor cuts. Will he indicate whether the exclusion of 12 metre boats will have a dramatic effect on the cuts with which Irish fishermen will have to comply? Will he be more specific in regard to the percentage reductions for the Irish Sea, the Celtic Sea and the north west coast because fishermen are not happy with his reference to minor reductions?
I will give the Deputy an example. In the west of Ireland zone, two white fish stocks are classified as over-fished, namely, hake and monkfish. These stocks would attract a 20 per cent pilot reduction but because Ireland only has approximately 10 per cent of the quotas in that area, we will only take 10 per cent of the 20 per cent which means that over a five year period we would only take 2 per cent — 0.4 per cent per annum. It is important to realise that because we took this approach, those who are causing the damage should carry the penalty. The countries with larger quotas which are affecting the species will carry the biggest cuts. If one compares that with what was being proposed by the Commission through the commissioner, all member states would have been taking up to 40 per cent cuts, even though we were not causing the damage to the stocks. During our Presidency, we successfully managed to persuade our European partners this would not solve the problem and it was downright unjust.
Deputy Browne said some people may not be happy, but perhaps it has not been fully explained to them the way this system works. The percentage we have of the over-fished stock in an area will apply to either the 30 per cent or the 20 per cent cut. If we have 10 per cent of the quotas, 10 per cent of the 20 per cent is taken out of the 30 per cent. In each area, species have been identified from the available scientific evidence as to the state of the stock. In area X, for example, there could be a particular stock which is regarded as critical or another stock which is regarded as being over-fished. If it is a critical stock, up to 30 per cent is taken but 20 per cent is taken if it is an over-fished stock. That is the way the system works. We only take a percentage of the 30 per cent or the 20 per cent.
To give the Deputy an example, in the Irish Sea we would take 8.7 per cent of the 30 per cent or the 20 per cent — or an average of 25 per cent — over five years. That would relate to a 2.2 per cent cut over five years. I will give the Deputy all the figures now if he wishes to take a note of them. West of Scotland area — 11 per cent over five years; Irish Sea — this is the Irish cut — 2.2 per cent over five years; west of Ireland — 2.2 per cent over five years; the Celtic Sea — 4.1 per cent over five years; and the pelagic, all areas — 4.2 per cent over five years. In any area the most we would take in a year would be 0.58 per cent. The deal was an exceptionally good one for Ireland.
(Wexford): I welcome the Minister's explanation. Perhaps he could find a way to convey this message to fishermen who do not seem to be under that impression. The Minister said action would be taken against fleets which were overfishing. How will this be policed? Has the Minister negotiated extra funding to beef up our under-resourced Naval Service which is not currently in a position to protect our coastline?
By June of this year each member state will have to submit to the Commission its plan for dealing with cuts in each area, and that plan will be transparent in that it will be available to all other member states.
On the question of boats under 12 metres, we negotiated the option to include or not to include them for the simple reason that if all boats under 12 metres were excluded, they would be treated as one segment, and the tonnage could be used only within the 12 metre segment. Somebody who owns a 12 metre boat of 20 or 30 tonnes who wants to give up fishing could, under the old system, sell it on to another fisherman who had a 20 metre boat and wanted to trade up to a 24 metre boat. If 12 metre boats were excluded, fishermen could not use that tonnage. I was conscious that there are some people who regard the ability to use that tonnage in trading up as an asset, and that asset could have been wiped out overnight had we not negotiated this option. There are arguments for and against the inclusion of 12 metre boats but, before any decision is taken, we will discuss the matter with the industry and make it aware of what is involved in either excluding or including them. On initial examination of the matter I thought it would be in our interest to continue to include them. However, it will be a matter for discussion.
On the question of surveillance we have already negotiated a special package for Ireland. We will get £12 million for operational costs over five years. We will also get a slice of the 205 million ECU capital fund that has been set up, and Ireland is the only member state that will get a grant for capital purposes in excess of 50 per cent out of that fund.
(Wexford): The option to include or not to include 12 metre boats is very worthwhile.Has the Minister had much support from other EU countries in this?
The proposal on the table was that 12 metre boats would be excluded. We sought and got the option which leaves the decision to each member state, and we were supported in that.