Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 21 Feb 2006

Vol. 615 No. 1

Priority Questions.

Fisheries Protection.

John Perry

Question:

63 Mr. Perry asked the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources further to a previous parliamentary question of 25 January 2006, if there is evidence to show that Spanish fishing efforts in the Irish Box are not increasing; if this practice is still in place; the amount of time Spanish vessels spent in the Irish Box in 2005, 2004 and 2003; if these figures are definite or approximate; the way in which the Government is ensuring that the maximum efforts allowed are not being exceeded; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6950/06]

Minister of State at the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources (Mr. Browne)

As previously explained to the Deputy, the fishing effort levels laid down in Council Regulation 1415 of 2004 are subject to detailed reporting requirements by all member states concerned. These maximum effort levels remain in place and are legislatively enforced at EU level. Any breach of those limits by the fishing fleets of any member state is subject to possible infringement proceedings by the European Commission against that state. Information from the Commission indicates that for the year to end November 2005 Spain is within all of its effort allocations and had used up 84% of its annual effort allocation for demersal species in the biologically sensitive area by the end of that month. For all of 2004 the effort consumption rate was 86%.

The issue of who should ensure compliance with the limits is at the core of the Deputy's question and I will focus specifically on that aspect. It is a prerequisite for an effective fishing effort regime that includes many member state zones that a co-ordinating body such as the European Commission should play the central role in monitoring the performance of each member state insofar as compliance with the fishing effort ceilings is concerned. Any suggestion that individual member states would somehow be better placed to undertake this task is ill-founded and based on a misunderstanding of the Common Fisheries Policy, CFP.

Under the CFP, each member state exercises responsibility for vessels flying its flag and this includes the requirement that its vessels complete and submit log sheet returns for all fishing operations irrespective of geographical location. Fishing effort reports by member states are compiled from these logbook records. Member states must maintain and make available to the Commission for audit purposes on request the log sheet returns which are a critical element in providing assurance on the levels of fishing effort in any given area. Through a combination of reporting and audit requirements, the Commission is thus ideally placed to monitor the situation and to take action in the event of non-compliance with the limits. I have every confidence in the Commission's capacity to discharge its function in this matter.

Mr. Perry

I congratulate the Minister of State, Deputy Browne, on his appointment, and wish him the very best.

Mr. Kenny

Hear, hear. Well done.

Mr. Durkan

I wish him tight nets.

Mr. Perry

The Minister of State has a difficult task in that regard, with the many loose ends left on the departure of the former Minister of State, Deputy Gallagher, though I recognise his efforts as well.

Mr. Kenny

Now he has tunnel difficulties.

Mr. Perry

In light of the concern expressed by the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources on over-fishing, how is time spent by Spanish trawlers in Irish waters gauged? I find it strange that stricter measures are not being imposed on Spanish vessels on fishing within the Irish Box. I tried to establish from the former Minister of State, Deputy Gallagher, if there was any evidence to show Spanish fishing effort in the Irish Box was not increasing. In his response, the Minister of State said he was not aware there had been an increase.

The new Minister of State at the Department, Deputy Browne, spoke of the EU role with regard to log sheet returns. Since fish up to the value of €2 billion is taken out of Irish waters annually, the methodology of controlling the entry of foreign vessels to Irish waters seems lax. With regard to the protection of Irish waters, the Irish Naval Service is given very little direction as to how it can ensure the log sheet figures are authentic.

Mr. Browne

It was agreed in 2004 that the EU would be the co-ordinating organisation. With regard to our own efforts, the Irish Naval Service is very involved and applies no distinction between Irish and non-Irish fishing vessels. All foreign vessels operating with the Irish fisheries patrol area are subject to checks by Irish control authorities at sea or in Irish ports. At sea, these checks include the inspection of fishing gear, and vessels boarded at sea also have their catches inspected for compliance with EU fishery legislation on the minimum size of fish. The proper recording of catches is also checked. At the land base, regular checks are also carried out by inspectors on all vessels landing into Irish ports. The Spanish ships within Irish waters would be under the same inspection regime as Irish boats.

Mr. Perry

Is it the case that for Spanish vessels fishing in the Irish Box, not going through Irish ports but going to their port of origin, there is little or no control on the quantities of fish they take from the Irish Box? The Minister of State has indicated it is the responsibility of the EU to monitor this, but in light of the concerns about substantial overfishing by foreign vessels in the Irish Box, has the Common Fisheries Policy been operational to the proper extent?

Mr. Browne

The evidence in that regard is anecdotal. I have in front of me a league table reporting to the EU, and Spain is currently one of the better countries in terms of reporting on effort and on catches to the EU, probably much better than Ireland.

Broadcasting Legislation.

Thomas P. Broughan

Question:

64 Mr. Broughan asked the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources when the Broadcasting Act will be brought forward; if he is bringing forward measures to establish a single regulatory body to regulate all aspects of the broadcasting sector; if the recent awarding of a license to a company (details supplied) indicates the need for a review of the BCI’s licensing process; if there is sufficient variety in existing licenses; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6800/06]

Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources (Mr. N. Dempsey)

The priority issues to be addressed by the legislative proposals that will form the basis of a new broadcasting Bill include the establishment of a single content regulator for commercial, community and public service broadcasters, the establishment of RTE as a company under the Companies Acts, the provision of a statutory mechanism for future adjustments to the level of the television licence fee and the development of the right of reply mechanism, allowing persons whose reputation and good name have been damaged by an assertion of incorrect facts in a television or radio programme to gain redress.

Work on developing the legislative proposals needed to address these issues is continuing. I anticipate I will be in a position to bring my proposals to Government in the coming months, with publication of the Broadcasting Bill in 2006. My intention in framing the legislative proposals will be to ensure that the broadcasting regulatory environment continues to encourage the parallel development of high quality broadcasting by Irish public service, commercial and community broadcasters.

The licensing of radio and television broadcasters in Ireland is a matter for the independent Broadcasting Commission of Ireland, BCI. Under its statutory obligations the BCI determines issues such as the type and number of licences in any region. While I am considering new legislative proposals that are intended to develop the overall licensing framework, decisions on the actual nature of the services to be licensed and who is to be awarded licences should continue to remain the remit of an independent body.

Mr. Broughan

I too congratulate Deputy Browne on his appointment as Minister of State to the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources.

The Minister has in effect decided there will be a single content regulator for the public sector broadcaster, RTE, as well as the private sector companies. What is the timeframe? Does the Minister intend to bring forward the Bill this year? Given that we will spend most of our time in the House tomorrow on the contentious Sea-Fisheries and Maritime Jurisdiction Bill, does the Minister intend to publish the broadcasting authority Bill at an early date and allow at least several months of consultation and discussion between the media broadcasters and ourselves, to avoid the kind of shambles which the Sea-Fisheries and Maritime Jurisdiction Bill has turned into at times?

Is the Minister concerned at the recent performance of the Broadcasting Commission of Ireland, especially as revealed in the court cases between Phantom FM and Zed FM involving the alternative rock music licence? It is alleged that one company involved operated illegally for seven years, that it had illegal events licences, that it accepted advertising illegally, that it had no proper libel insurance and that it flouted the law consistently. Following the oral hearings in November 2004, that company was nevertheless given the licence for the alternative rock music franchise. Is it of concern that much comment has been made on that award? Deputies on both sides of the House have received complaints. There has been consistent criticism of the Broadcasting Commission of Ireland, with the Ox report and the Joint Committee on Communications, Marine and Natural Resources expressing the view that a review is needed. In this context, does the Minister plan to examine the issue of radio licensing?

Does the Minister agree with the comments made by his colleague, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy McDowell, at a recent public lecture on broadcasting. He condemned RTE journalists for agenda setting, campaigning and their investigate reporting. Was it within the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform's remit to do so and complain to the RTE authority about a "Prime Time Investigates" programme on the new prison to replace Mountjoy Prison when he did not take the trouble of going to the Broadcasting Complaints Commission? Does the Minister have any views on his colleague's lecture?

While travelling around my constituency between the hours of 9 a.m. and 10 a.m. I noticed something in relation to the variety of existing licences, as the Minister may also have done. Does he agree that, when one presses the buttons for the five or six most popular radio stations, one finds Ryan and Gerry, Ray and Orla, Dermot and Dave or, in one of our Dublin stations, Colm and Jim Jim?

Mr. Durkan

One should listen out for Jim Jim.

Mr. Broughan

They are basically doing something similar and there is a certain sameness about them. In cities such as Stockholm——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I remind the Deputy that questions are limited to six minutes each. His time has concluded.

Mr. Broughan

Does the Minister agree we should investigate the possibility of having a more varied radio spectrum award?

Mr. N. Dempsey

I hope to have the broadcasting Bill published in the first part of 2006 and discussed and finalised by the end of the year.

Over the past three or four years there has been consultation on broadcasting, including extensive broadcasting fora around the country and a number of reports such as the Ox report referred to by the Deputy. Much of what is in the Bill will give effect to some of the reports emanating from the consultation process. Hopefully, the Bill will be part of an experiment in e-government put forward by the Chief Whip and approved by the Opposition Whips to provide interactive engagement between the public and legislators during the course of the Bill's passage.

I will not get involved in the specifics of the Phantom FM case. It is a matter for the Broadcasting Commission of Ireland, BCI, to award licences. The Deputy and his party would claim to be strongly of the view that there should be independent bodies rather than political people making decisions on licences. This is what happens with independent bodies, that is, they cannot be influenced in their decisions. We cannot have it both ways. We either agree to set up the body and trust in its judgment to do something right or we do not.

Mr. Broughan

Will the case influence legislation?

Mr. N. Dempsey

The review referred to by the Deputy has gone to the High Court and a judicial review has been carried out. The High Court found in favour of the BCI and the case is now before the Supreme Court.

Without referring to the rights and wrongs of the decision, this case raises the general question of whether a previous history of illegal broadcasting should in any way impact positively or negatively on the consideration of the award of a sound broadcasting contract. In this sense the case will have an influence. The matter will be considered under the legislative proposals.

Energy Resources.

Jerry Cowley

Question:

65 Dr. Cowley asked the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources if he will call a halt to the Corrib gas pipeline project due to the non-viability of the project as currently configured and as acknowledged by Shell and everyone else due to the lack of community consent to this project and health and safety fears and in light of there being no compelling need to proceed as a result of recent large gas finds, including the recent find in the north west that is reputed to have 12 times the gas reserves of the Corrib gas field, therefore strongly suggesting that Ireland will have no gas supply problems in the future; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6802/06]

Mr. N. Dempsey

The Corrib gas project is a joint venture between three companies, Statoil, Shell E & P Ireland Limited and Marathon. It is not within my remit to call a halt to such a project provided the developers observe all obligations and discharge all responsibilities in accordance with the terms of the various consents and approvals given. When the petroleum lease for the Corrib development was granted by my predecessor, he was satisfied a viable commercial discovery had been made. I have had no information since then to the contrary.

As I have outlined to the House a number of times and most recently on 25 January, I commissioned an international consulting company, Advantica, on 25 August 2005 to carry out a thorough and independent safety review of the onshore upstream section of the Corrib gas pipeline. In parallel with this safety review I established a public consultation process, including a two-day public hearing in Geesala on the 12 and 13 October, during which the community was given the opportunity to express its concerns directly to the consultants. A draft of the safety review was published and presented to the community on 8 December and written submissions on it were invited. I have received Advantica's final report, which I intend to publish shortly.

The Deputy will be aware that after consultation with relevant parties, I have nominated a mediator, Mr. Peter Cassells, to work with the parties. I am hopeful the mediation process currently under way, augmented as needed by the results of the safety review, will allow all those concerned to work together to resolve the difficulties that have arisen. I will ensure the outcome of all of these initiatives is fully taken into account in making the necessary decisions.

What the Deputy refers to in his question as a "recent find in the north west" arises from an article in a business magazine reporting an estimate of the resource potential carried out for one operator. The reference is to the potential resources in that area and does not constitute a discovery, much less a commercial find. I note that the Deputy recognises the importance of the availability of indigenous gas in the context of security of supply and I inform him that the Corrib remains a key resource in this regard.

Dr. Cowley

I am puzzled by the Minister's reply as he states the mediation process is ongoing. The Minister knows the mediation process is scuppered as it was he who scuppered it. When it began, the Minister appeared on "Morning Ireland" and stated he had appointed a person agreeable to both sides to mediate between them and that he would leave the matter to the person and the sides to agree the format and framework of the mediation. He recently stated it was never presented, certainly by him——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy cannot read from quotes during Question Time.

Dr. Cowley

The Minister stated on Mid-West Radio that he never presented mediation as anything except a very wide process. The Minister has consequently scuppered the entire process. What was the Minister's reason for misleading the House? On 4 October, he stated:

Following the debates, I contacted both sides in an effort to break the impasse and indicated to them that the Government would appoint a mediator if both sides were willing to participate in a mediation process. I then called on both parties to create the conditions which would allow such a process to commence immediately.

However, matters fell apart when the Minister responded to my parliamentary question on 25 January that "the role of the mediator is wider than just the gas project". What is the Minister about? He has misled the House and destroyed the mediation process by interfering at every opportunity. The Minister has not allowed Mr. Peter Cassells to do his job. Mr. Cassells has ended the process because it has become so diluted that the men's concerns have been lost.

Shell and the five men agree that the mediation was between them. However, the Minister has turned the issue around completely. What is the reason? What is the Minister's agenda? Does the Minister agree he has not only misled the House but has not acted as a Minister should? Is the Minister's situation untenable? He has spoken about mediation but has succeeded in destroying the process.

Mr. N. Dempsey

The Deputy has often told the House that Ministers should make their announcements here but I note the Deputy has been on the public airwaves calling for my resignation.

Mr. Durkan

That would be a shame.

Mr. Broughan

Not for the first time.

Mr. N. Dempsey

It is interesting.

Mr. F. McGrath

The Minister has made contradictory statements.

Dr. Cowley

I have the compact disc with recordings of the two contradictory statements the Minister made.

Mr. N. Dempsey

In case the Deputy is not aware, I have referred to two sides of the debate in this House and in press releases. One group favours the development of the Corrib and the other opposes it. What right does anyone have to abrogate the local community's right to be consulted? More than five people are involved in this process, a community is involved and no one has the right to claim to speak for the entire community.

Mr. F. McGrath

The Minister's strategy is to divide and conquer.

Mr. N. Dempsey

This is where the Deputy and the five men he speaks for——

Dr. Cowley

Nonsense. The Minister has treated this community in a terrible way.

Mr. N. Dempsey

Deputy Cowley will not bully and intimidate me like some of his friends tried to do in Mayo.

Dr. Cowley

The Minister made two contradictory statements. The Minister's spokesperson states in The Irish Times on 7 October 2005——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Cowley should resume his seat.

Mr. N. Dempsey

I believe I have the floor. Deputy Cowley will not intimidate me like some of his friends intimidated people in Mayo.

Dr. Cowley

If the Corrib project was safe we would all support it. The Minister made two contradictory statements, which are recorded on this compact disc.

Mr. N. Dempsey

The Deputy can put the compact disc in his pocket.

Dr. Cowley

He should consider his position as he made two contradictory statements and is misleading the Dáil. It is a disgrace.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The time for debate on Question No. 65 has elapsed. I ask the Minister to proceed with QuestionNo. 66.

Mr. N. Dempsey

Is it a compact disc with a recording of Deputy Cowley welcoming the Corrib gas project with open arms, demanding that processing take place onshore in County Mayo?

Dr. Cowley

The Minister is jeopardising the entire community.

Mr. N. Dempsey

The Deputy should represent the entire community and not just a small group of people.

Dr. Cowley

The Minister is working for Shell. It is a disgrace.

Mr. N. Dempsey

We know for whom Deputy Cowley is working.

Dr. Cowley

For whom am I working? I am working for the people in my constituency. People wish to be safe in their houses. I ask the Minister to state for whom I am working.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I ask the Minister to answer Question No. 66.

Mr. N. Dempsey

This is the anarchy Deputy Cowley wishes to support. This is typical of the intimidation and anarchy Deputy Cowley wishes to espouse.

Dr. Cowley

The Minister is talking complete nonsense. Those five men have the support of 99% of the community. People do not wish to be blown up in their houses.

Mr. N. Dempsey

It is a considerable task negotiating with Deputy Cowley, who will not listen to answers.

Bernard J. Durkan

Question:

66 Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources the extent to which he has quantified Ireland’s future energy needs and security of supply in view of the scale of economic growth and the increase in the population; his projections in the area of alternative renewable energy sources; his proposals and expectations in respect of the Corrib gas field; the discovery of further oil or gas finds on or offshore; the early use or availability of suitable interconnectors; if he is satisfied regarding the adequacy of supply to meet demand in the future; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7090/06]

Mr. N. Dempsey

I will publish an energy policy consultation paper in the coming months that will set out medium and long-term perspectives for national energy policy. The policy proposals will be informed by projections for growth in energy demand and related economic and demographic trends as well as the key imperative to ensure sustainability and security of energy supplies and fuel diversity.

The current target for renewable energy is to more than double the contribution to electricity production from renewable energy technologies to 13.2% by 2010. Targets beyond the 2010 target will be determined in the context of the all-island electricity market. We are progressing an all-island vision for renewable energy by 2020 and beyond that we will set future all-island targets.

The realisation of indigenous fuel supply potential, including Corrib, will make a critical contribution to national security of supply. We will continue to encourage further exploration for oil and gas. The development of the east-west electricity interconnector is a critical and immediate priority for Government. Decisions need to be made now to deliver on this strategic infrastructure by 2011. At my request, the Commission for Energy Regulation, CER, is finalising its advice to me on the legal, technical and financial arrangements for commissioning the development.

Following completion of the current technical and planning phase, the construction phase of the second North-South interconnector is set to begin in 2007, and the target date for having the interconnector operational is 2012.

The adequacy of supply to meet demand is analysed in the generation adequacy report by ESB national grid and by the gas capacity statement by the CER. The most recent assessments concluded that the gas transmission system will cope with forecast demand for the foreseeable future and the electricity generation capacity should be manageable up to 2009, predicated on the provision of planned new generating stations.

Mr. Durkan

When does the Minister expect to publish this consultation document to generate an adequate debate? Has the Minister studied the implication of various alternative energy suppliers exiting the Irish market? I refer to wind generated electricity and petroleum or gas. Why are energy suppliers exiting the market? In the case of electricity is it because excessive costs prohibit them from accessing the grid? Are there other reasons and, if so, has the Minister studied these? What type of interconnector is being used, in view of the fact that 2009 is the deadline? Will the interconnectors meet the same standard as those in mainland Europe?

Mr. N. Dempsey

We have some way to go before we put the interconnector in place. When we do so we will select an interconnector of at least 500 MW and the most modern that can be found. We considered two 500 MW interconnectors but most people are of the view that a single 500 MW interconnector would be sufficient for the moment.

I presume the Deputy's comment on players exiting the market refers to a statement by Airtricity yesterday. Regulation of the energy market is a matter for the independent regulator, who will respond fully to the points raised by the company. I would be concerned if anything were to disrupt the progress we are making. We are making progress towards the target of 13.2% for renewable energy by 2010. The system caters for approximately 750 MW at present. Of that figure, approximately 490 MW is generated by wind energy, some 240 MW is generated by hydro energy and 20 MW is generated by biomass. We anticipate the additional 700 MW will be delivered in the main part by wind energy.

The company concerned has written to its domestic customers advising them it will pass on costs to customers but it is retaining the 40,000 small and medium enterprise customers and is continuing work on four wind energy plants. Supply will not be affected.

Concerning the Deputy's first question, the policy paper will be published in the first half of 2006.

Mr. Durkan

Does the Minister think it advisable to direct the regulator, particularly in view of the signals given to the industry generally by energy suppliers exiting the market in respect of the confidence required at present?

We have slipped by approximately 10% in our projections to meet the Kyoto targets. Does the Minister think that given the preparations now being made by alternative energy suppliers who are willing to come into the market but may be impeded from doing so, it will be possible for him to direct the regulator on how that should be handled? If so, what might that direction be?

Mr. N. Dempsey

I do not have powers to direct the regulator, except in extremely general terms. Under the Energy (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, which the Deputy will be pleased to hear will be published shortly——

Mr. Durkan

Very good. It is a long time coming.

Mr. N. Dempsey

——a provision will be included to enable a Minister in an emergency to direct the commission and individual market players to take appropriate safeguard measures in the area of security of supply. It will also extend the remit of CER in some areas, particularly safety and security of supply.

Regarding the point made by the Deputy on the Kyoto Protocol, I was involved in its final agreement. Subsequently, our share of the burden within Europe was our 1990 emissions plus 13% of that figure. The year after we secured that figure, it was estimated we would exceed the 13% figure by another 22%, in other words, it was estimated that by 2008 we would be 35% above the 1990 figure. We are another 10% above the agreed figure at present. While we have made major progress, that is not to say we do not need to do more. It is not that we slipped by 10%. We reduced the amount considerably during the intervening four or five years. At the time we signed it, we were approximately 29% above it. We were due to go to 35% above it, and we are now approximately 23% above it. The matter must be tended to and is a matter directly for the Minister of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. Obviously, as I have responsibility for energy, I have a role to play in this matter, as do several other Ministers.

Wild Salmon Stocks.

Eamon Ryan

Question:

67 Mr. Eamon Ryan asked the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources if he intends to follow the advice of the standing scientific committee of the National Salmon Commission to end mixed stock fishing for salmon from the end of 2006 due to the continued crisis in wild salmon stocks. [7137/06]

Mr. Browne

I thank the Deputies for their kind remarks. I look forward to working with them until the next general election in June 2007.

Mr. Broughan

It cannot be held in June.

Mr. Durkan

Be careful. Do not state that too often.

Mr. Browne

While there remains a surplus of salmon returning to Irish rivers, the Government has accepted the scientific advice that reductions in the overall fishing effort are required to sustain and rebuild salmon stocks nationwide. The question of how best to manage the future fishing of wild Atlantic salmon is being reviewed in the context of setting the total allowable catch, TAC, for 2006.

The National Salmon Commission, in accordance with its terms of reference, was asked to advise on how best to implement by 2007 an alignment of the exploitation of salmon with the scientific advice, bearing in mind the requirement to ensure the future biological viability of the salmon resource in all catchments and also the needs of all stakeholders, including those who derive their living from the wild salmonresource.

I am awaiting the advice of the National Salmon Commission in this regard and while it is disappointing that it did not arrive at a consensus at its meeting last week, I am hopeful it can reconvene in time to submit appropriate advice on a timely basis. I received the advice of the standing scientific committee of the commission and the advice tendered by the fisheries managers. It is my intention to publish these and any recommendations that emanate from the National Salmon Commission in the coming weeks and to make a decision. I will publish my proposed amendments to the wild salmon and sea trout tagging scheme in March so as to afford all interested parties an opportunity to consider them prior to their introduction in April 2006.

Additional information not given on the floor of the House.

It is clear that future policy must be designed to ensure the survival of the species, while balancing the interests of various stakeholders in relation to the quantum of catch that appears to be possible within the independent scientific advice and taking account of the detail of that advice in relation to location and types of fishing.

Mr. Eamon Ryan

I welcome back the Minister of State. Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose. It seems we have returned to the same issues we dealt with three years ago and the situation has got worse in the Minister of State’s absence. The Minister of State did not answer my question. I asked whether he will follow the scientific advice. He does not need to publish it. It is as clear as day and available on the fishery board’s website. That advice states we should end mixed stock fishing, also known as drift net fishing, at sea. If it too late to be done for this year, it should be done by the end of 2006. The Government can no longer prevaricate.

I am sure the Minister of State has read the scientific advice. I want a simple "yes" or "no" answer. Regarding the management of wild salmon stocks, does the Government believe in following scientific advice? At the start of the Minister of State's answer, he stated he had accepted scientific advice. However, the Government has utterly failed to take scientific advice. The Minister of State does not need to take my word for it. He should take the word of the most eminent civil servant in the history of the State, T.K. Whitaker, who is constantly baffled at how this Department can ignore simple straightforward scientific advice regarding the conservation of this most important stock.

Does the Minister of State intend to follow the scientific advice, which could not be clearer, by the end of this year? Our stocks are in crisis. We need an immediate response, which means an end to mixed stock fisheries. That would be greeted with great joy by other European countries because we catch their fish. Does the Minister of State intend to drag the issue out for another year and get into wrangles on compensation, which is a secondary issue? The key issue is the scientific advice to end mixed stock fisheries. Will that be done this year?

Mr. Browne

A commitment was given by the previous Minister of State to accept the advice by 2007. That is still on the table. I received advice from the fishery mangers and scientific advice. It is quite normal, as was the case when I was previously in the Department, that the National Salmon Commission is asked to make recommendations. Unfortunately, when the commission met last week agreement was not reached between all of the parties. The chairman has called another meeting for next week. I hope, and I appeal to both sides, that a recommendation is made as quickly as possible. I will publish it in good time for all of the stakeholders to comment. We will then make a decision for fishing in 2006. I hope the commission makes a decision on this issue next week.

Mr. Eamon Ryan

Unfortunately, I do not believe the National Salmon Commission will reach a consensus. It is impossible to even expect it. Two sides have a direct interest, in some cases financial, in the outcome of a decision that must be made by the Minister of State on scientific stocks. It is nonsense to put all of the emphasis on what the commission will state. The commission will not make the decision. The decision must be made by the Minister of State.

To revert back to his predecessor's mistake of stating he would ignore scientific advice until after the next election, is not the stance for the Minister of State to take as he re-enters office. It is time for the Government to be clear on whether it believes in the conservation of salmon stocks for the benefit of everyone, including the fishing community and anglers.

I am sure the Minister of State read the scientific report. That should be the cornerstone of conservation policy. Does the Minister of State accept the findings that we should end mixed stock fisheries as soon as possible? Does he accept that if it cannot be done for this season, we should at least commit not to continue it for another season? Does he agree with that central point which rings out from the scientific report?

Mr. Browne

It is only right that the National Salmon Commission, which represents all of the stakeholders, should have a chance to discuss the issue. The meeting broke down last week. I expect that when the members meet again next week, they will make a decision. If they do not do so, I will make the decision in the best interests of the salmon industry in this country. It is an extremely sensitive issue. We must balance the needs of the commercial sector, which is important for coastal communities, while at the same time recognising the importance of recreational users, including tourists. I will make that decision. I assure the Deputy we will not hang around or dilly dally. We will make the decision. However, I would like to hear the recommendations of the National Salmon Commission. It is only right that we give all the stakeholders an opportunity. Perhaps they will not arrive at a conclusion or agreement. If not, I will make that decision.