Willie O'Dea
Question:6 Deputy Willie O’Dea asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food his views on the sale of Coillte’s assets as part of NewERA; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27950/11]
Other Questions
Coillte Assets
Although Deputy O'Dea is not present, I will read the reply into the record. Coillte was one of 28 commercial state bodies reviewed by the review group on State assets and liabilities, chaired by Mr. Colm McCarthy, which reported in April 2011. There were three recommendations in the section dealing with Coillte, one of which was that the State should initiate the disposal of Coillte's forest and non-forest assets but not its forest land. My Department has considered the recommendations in the report and I also asked Deloitte on a pro bono basis to examine the recommendations in the McCarthy report as they apply to my Department, including Coillte. The analysis and possible outcomes from this work will be considered by the Government, along with the future of other assets, in the context of the work of NewERA.
Coillte was established as a private commercial company under the Forestry Act 1988 and currently manages some 442,000 ha of land, of which some 390,000 ha is under forestry. It also plays a significant role in the provision of forest recreational activities, which was evident from the participation in National Trails Day last weekend. Given its extensive forest holdings and its role as main supplier of timber to Irish sawmills, it is a key player in the Irish forestry business. The group's two panel processing companies, Smartply Europe Limited and Medite Europe Limited, also export significant volumes of wood panelling. The review report recommends the disposal of Coillte's forest and non-forest assets but not its forest land. However, there are still a number of considerations and options arising from that recommendation.
As I outlined to the House in an Adjournment debate on this issue in June, it is essential to maximise the information available to the Government to make an informed, sensible and well-thought out decision that will not compromise the State's core asset, which is the land Coillte manages on behalf of its shareholders, amounting to some 7% of our land mass. NewERA can play an important role in this process. To assist in its examination of options for the possible disposal of assets in general, the Government has requested the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, in consultation with relevant line Departments, such as my own, and NewERA, to consider a number of possible candidates for disposal. The Government will be advised on the appropriate valuations to be placed on the assets in question, and on the most appropriate method of disposal, likely timeframe and economic impact of any such disposal to inform any further decisions that the Government may wish to make in this regard.
Since the Forestry Act 1988 and before it there was a drive in some parts of the country to take on forestry. In my own part, over 50% of some parishes are under forestry. There is a significant concern about the issue and it is vital to make a distinction between the Minister's comments and the notion debated on the public airwaves and elsewhere that Coillte land is for sale. Whatever the recommendations from the various bodies reporting on the sale of assets, it is vital that the land be kept in State ownership. It was sold to Coillte for minimal prices 20 or 25 years ago and it was never envisaged that the land would go to outsiders. I caution against such action. The Minister should also take account of what such action would mean to peripheral regions in the country which have given, in some cases, more than 50% of the land to afforestation.
Will the Department consider that forestry is a national asset as well as the land? There will be a future need to develop a wood biomass industry within the country to offset oil consumption and usage. Will the Minister give this consideration in making a decision? I hope he will make the right decision and not dispose of the assets.
We do not have to go into the argument of the merits or otherwise of selling a State asset. Some 18 million visitors use Coillte land every year and I imagine if it was sold for private purposes, there would be some serious insurance issues arising from the public using the land which is currently a magnificent facility for the people.
I wish to be absolutely clear on a number of issues. No one is considering selling Coillte land and that is off the table. When I asked Deloitte to consider the matter, I stipulated that there should be no consideration of the sale of Coillte lands. I appeal to people to be responsible on the issue if and when we must discuss the matter at some stage in future.
It is true to say that the forests which Coillte manage are also valuable assets. One may argue about the valuation of a crop of 390,000 ha of woodland but the idea considered in the Deloitte report was that a crop, or asset, could be sold through harvesting rights for the next 20 or 50 years, depending on how much value we want. At the end of the process, the land would revert to the State, with a requirement in place for re-afforestation and replanting. Essentially, the asset of the forests and land would come back to the State at some time in future.
That is the kind of option we are considering but I stress that no decision has been made on the sale of Coillte as a company or in terms of forest assets. Any sale will take account of the issues raised by Deputy Wallace with regard to ensuring public access to recreational land and so on. There is a significant portion of Coillte land that is not accessed by anyone and we are considering all the options now, including valuations. We will make some decisions as a Government in the not too distant future.
Milk Quota
Paul Connaughton
Question:7 Deputy Paul J. Connaughton asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food his views that Ireland could be over quota in the new 2011-2012 milk quota year; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27719/11]
This question relates to the milk quota and I will give a short answer so people have the opportunity to ask questions. Currently, Ireland is at risk of being fined at the end of the milk quota year next March for being over the quota, meaning superlevy fines of 28 cent per litre will be applied to people producing over their quota. I do not want to see that so I encourage farmers to try to operate within quota or reduce surplus milk if already over the quota. In the meantime we will be working hard to try to get some kind of flexibility on the so-called soft landing issue. As of today, we have not made the kind of progress which allows me send a signal to farmers that we are off the hook. We are not.
I thank the Minister for his response. There is a significant possibility that we will be over the quota this year and going towards 2015, and farmers are gearing themselves up to the removal of quotas in 2015. Could we get an all-European quota system, taking in the whole of Europe instead of an individual country? Will the Minister work with the Commission towards allowing Ireland in particular, as it is working to the targets of Food Harvest 2020, to build in a gradual and annual increase in quotas?
I will not hold up the Minister in trying to answer. In his earlier response to my colleague, Deputy Michael Moynihan, there was a suggestion that the butter fat adjustment may provide a possibility for a partial solution to the serious issue we have looming in Ireland on 31 March 2012. Perhaps the Minister will elaborate on the mathematical calculations that will be involved with that.
My second point is a follow-up to the question asked by Deputy Lawlor and relates to the possibility of finding a solution within the Community or, perhaps, by localising it in the context of a bilateral arrangement with Britain. At present, significant volumes of milk quota have been bought from the UK by farmers in Northern Ireland. My information is that the total quota in the North will not be filled in the current year, although one does not know what might happen next year. The possibility of it being utilised to alleviate the problems of farmers here should be examined. It is on one island, so it is not a question of breaking into mainland Europe to find a solution.
In sections of the agricultural press the possibility of leasing dairy cows to partner farmers in Northern Ireland has been suggested, so the milk can be produced in Northern Ireland. It is a variation on what we are discussing but there appears to be an inherent health risk in the concept of moving dairy cows from farms in Cork, Louth, Offaly, Kildare and elsewhere in the South to farms in Northern Ireland. If we could reach a bilateral arrangement, however, it would help to alleviate the pressure.
I can understand that people are trying to find imaginative solutions to this problem. We have examined whether it is possible to transfer surplus quota from Northern Ireland to the South. Unfortunately, although I would rather it was otherwise, Northern Ireland is considered a different country and jurisdiction from the Republic of Ireland and, whether we like it or not, it is not possible to do bilateral deals under the European policy on milk.
We are constantly looking for new or clever opportunities to solve the superlevy problem. From the Europe point of view, for example, we are examining the possibility of front-loading the remaining quota increases into one year, which is not a runner at present; a reduction in the superlevy fines, which is also not a runner; and a further reduction in the butterfat correction levels, which is the one we are pursuing most proactively at present. We believe it is the only one on which we have a chance of potentially getting agreement this year.
We are also examining a far more flexible approach which would see the overall quota as a European quota rather than a quota for individual countries. Last year, even though countries such as Denmark and the Netherlands had significant superlevy fines imposed on them, Europe as a whole was approximately 5% under quota. This is the same problem as we have with Britain. Britain is consistently under quota while we are consistently on the edge. We were less than 0.5% under quota last year, and that was after a severe pull back for the last two or three months of the year.
If the Deputies have suggestions, they should keep forwarding them to me and we will consider each of them. I had heard that there was some discussion about trying to come to an arrangement with Northern Ireland to find an all-island solution and putting that case to the Commission. We responded to that and put feelers out to the Commission to see if it would consider it, but we did not make much progress. It would set a very awkward precedent for the Commission in terms of other European countries trying to do similar things. We need to find a solution to Ireland's current difficulty that we can sell across the European Union. Unfortunately, that has not yet happened to the extent that it solves our problem.
Food Harvest 2020
Tony McLoughlin
Question:8 Deputy Tony McLoughlin asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will provide an update on the targets agreed in Food Harvest 2020; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27712/11]
The main targets set under Food Harvest 2020 were to: increase the value of primary output in the agriculture, fisheries and forestry sectors by €1.5 billion, a 33% increase on the 2007-09 average; increase the value added in the agrifood, fisheries and wood products sectors by 40% compared to 2008; achieve an export target of €12 billion for the sector, representing a 42% increase compared to the 2007-09 average.
The CSO data show that the value of the agrifood and fisheries sector has shown a significant increase in 2010 over 2009 values. Specifically, the value of overall primary output increased by 28% in 2010. This included a 40% increase in the value of milk output, a 1.8% increase for beef, an 81% increase for cereals and a 9% increase for pigs. In 2010, total food and drink exports reached €7,884 million, an increase of 11% on 2009 figures. The current trend in exports is also positive, with the first six months of 2011 showing a 14% improvement on the same period in 2010. Final year projections are for exports of the order of €8.9 billion.
These underlying trends provide a sound basis for achieving the Food Harvest 2020 targets. To secure success I set out interim milestones for 2013 and 2015. These are laid out in the document, Milestones for Success, which I launched this summer.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House
These are:
|
2013 |
2015 |
|
|
Primary Output |
Increase value by €300 million |
Increase value by €700 million |
|
Value Added |
Increase value by €500 million |
Increase value by €1 billion |
|
Exports |
Achieve €9 billion in exports |
Achieve €10 billion in exports |
I am driving progress on the Food Harvest 2020 report and, through the efforts of the high level implementation committee, I consider that good progress has been made in the past year, as illustrated by the export figures outlined. Details of all initiatives being pursued to date were published in Milestones for Success last July. This is the first progress report on Food Harvest 2020 implementation and is now available on the Department's website at www.agriculture.gov.ie.
Departmental Schemes
Michael Moynihan
Question:9 Deputy Michael Moynihan asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will commit to maintaining funding for all the main farm schemes in budget 2012; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27947/11]
This is about the farm schemes again; it is a pre-budget submission from Deputy Moynihan. The answer is the same as the one I gave earlier. There will be reductions in expenditure, and I have been frank about that since the week I took office.
Currently, we are lucky to be in charge of an industry that is expanding. Agriculture and agrifood have been the big good news story for the past six months. Unfortunately, that does not disguise the fact that there will be two difficult budgets in a row, with the first more difficult than the second. My Department must undertake its fair share of the reductions in expenditure that are required of all Departments. The Deputy will be familiar with the four year budgetary commitment made under the previous Government and which this Government is committed to implementing. Even though agriculture is a performing sector, we will still have to apply reductions in expenditure in the agriculture budget.
The political challenge for me is to work with the farming organisations, Opposition spokespeople and my party colleagues — and there is a great deal of talent in Fine Gael in the agriculture area at present — to find ways to reduce expenditure that do not damage the growth story of agriculture and that protect vulnerable sectors within agriculture that are not benefitting in income terms from a strong harvest, strong prices and good yields. For that reason I have repeatedly said I will do everything I can to protect the rate of payment in disadvantaged area payments and to support vulnerable sectors within agriculture such as, for example, suckler beef, which is vulnerable to an expanding and growing dairy sector.
At present, 50% of our beef comes from the dairy sector and 50% comes from suckler herds. The high end quality product generally comes from suckler herds. We must try to keep that ratio intact which means we must try to support high quality suckler farming. I will be as open as I can be in the build up to the budget. When we make decisions, they will be based on trying to be consistent with the targets set in Food Harvest 2020, as well as protecting vulnerable families and sectors in agriculture.
What is happening in the agriculture sector is a good news story and the predictions are that it will continue to be. However, it is vital that in every discussion the Minister has and in every decision he makes in the next couple of months which will be difficult, about which there is no doubt, peripheral regions and low-income sectors are protected. One often hears people living on the margins say they will be the last generation farming in a region. They have suffered a lot during the years, including as a result of the tough decisions made in recent times. I appeal to the Minister to ensure they are looked after in whatever way he can.
I agree with the Deputy. There are vulnerable persons in rural Ireland on farms, the sizes of which do not allow them to expand and grow and increase their income from farming activity. We all have a responsibility to keep them on the land. I am not a Minister who will impose policies purely on the basis of economics and solely focus on the efficiency of food production in making decisions. While we need to increase the efficiency of food production and improve the skills set of farmers, we also need to recognise that unless we support farming in certain regions under the schemes in place, people will simply leave the land. That has happened in other parts of the world as supports have been done away with. That is not the environment we want to create in rural Ireland.
Farm Safety
Nicky McFadden
Question:10 Deputy Nicky McFadden asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will provide an update on the recent initiatives in which he has been involved; and his views on the increased numbers of fatalities on farms this year. [27703/11]
I am delighted the Deputy has asked this question because farm safety is an issue which is not spoken about enough. When one looks at the figures for the numbers of fatalities on farms, one begins to realise why this issue should be a priority. I took a number of specific initiatives in this area over the summer. In June I made the opening address at the national farm safety conference which was organised by the Health and Safety Authority in Roscommon. The theme was livestock safety. In June I also attended Dublin Zoo to launch the family farm and countryside safety week at the request of Agri-Aware. In August I made the opening address at the annual international meeting on agricultural occupational health and safety held for the first time in Ireland. In September the Irish Farmers' Journal contained a farm health and safety supplement, to which I contributed a short piece promoting increased awareness of farm safety and focusing, in particular, on the need to change farming attitudes, the key issue in farm safety. I also visited and lent my support to the Health and Safety Authority stand at the National Ploughing Championships in Athy a few weeks ago.
In addition to these initiatives, I have been involved in and my Department is strongly committed to promoting farm safety in tandem with the Health and Safety Authority which is responsible for health and safety in the workplace more generally. A large number of organisations are trying to contribute to this issue. There is a farm safety partnership advisory committee, to which all the key stakeholders in agriculture contribute.
Even with all of that work, we have tragically seen 18 fatalities on Irish farms and five fatalities in the fisheries sector. Farming accounts for approximately 6% of the workforce in Ireland, yet this year more than half of the people who will die at work will be farmers or fishermen, which is an absolute scandal about which we must do something. We need to change what is in farmers' heads and in those of their wives and families. Their workplace is their home, which often results in lax and inappropriate attitudes to their safety and that of their children and families. I will continue to try to raise the priority, in terms of policy, given to farm safety in order that we can try to make an impact on what are tragic and unacceptable figures.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House
The statistics consistently indicate that the highest proportion of farm fatalities involve accidents with tractors and other farm machinery. Livestock, in particular bulls, comes next, followed by falls and drowning accidents. Despite the good work being carried out by the HSA, the farm safety partnership, Teagasc, the Agricultural Consultants Association and the farming bodies, we have not had the desired impact on reducing farm fatality figures.
I am totally committed to supporting farm health and safety initiatives, as is my Department. There is legislation in place, the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005, which places the same duties on farmers as on other self-employed persons to provide a safe place and a safe system of work for their employees. The HSA has doubled its safety inspections this year to 3,000. While enforcement has a role to play, the key to bringing about a change in the farm fatality figures is to bring about a cultural change among farmers regarding farm health and safety. The key to bringing about this cultural change is self-regulation by farmers, by which I mean they need to challenge themselves in regard to the potential for their tractor or livestock or other aspect of their farming activities to cause the next fatality and, most important, to consider what they can do to prevent a fatality from happening. They need to make farm safety an integral part of the farming culture.
The farm safety strategy is fundamentally about changing attitudes through raising awareness. Teagasc has been very active to date in providing farm safety training for farmers nationwide. My Department is dealing with the farm safety element in the dairy efficiency programme 2010-12. This is especially relevant because the dairy sector consistently has the highest number of farm fatalities among all farming enterprises. Farm safety is given a prominent place on my Department's website and it continues to be incorporated into all farm building specifications as they are drawn up or reviewed.
My Department will continue to support and work with the farm safety partnership advisory committee, the HSA, Teagasc and others in achieving a reduction in fatalities and accidents on Irish farms.
I commend the Minister and the HSA on the initiatives taken. Some 1,500 deaths have occurred, all of which could have been avoided. Some 54% were caused by livestock, in particular bulls. The use of machinery and tree felling are also a source of serious concern. While I commend the Minister on the initiatives he has taken, I wonder about the undertaking of an awareness campaign in the media, including on television.
I do not wish to take away from the question, but the Minister touched on the marine sector. There is an issue about the use of personal beacons as opposed to EPIRBs, emergency position indicating radio beacons, with which I know the Minister is familiar. There seems to be some resistance in this regard. Perhaps he might investigate the Department's attitude to moving towards the use of personal beacons rather than EPIRBs, particularly for inshore boats. We all remember the yacht which overturned. The EPIRB did not work because the yacht did not sink. The personal beacons activated the emergency services. Perhaps the Minister might consider that issue.
A couple of weeks ago a neighbour of mine was attacked by a bull and died as a result. It had a devastating impact. The Minister is right in that farmers who have grown up on farms and been around animals and livestock all their lives tend to think they understand them but at a moment's notice, an animal can turn on them. The devastation caused by these accidents is considerable and we must do more in this regard. Most of the information given is on the use of machinery, lifting and so forth, but as Deputy McFadden said, 54% of accidents are caused by livestock. It is vital, therefore, that we inform people in a more robust and better way about livestock.
This is primarily a machinery and livestock issue with reference to the handling of powerful animals, some of which are unpredictable, particularly bulls. The number of bull beef animals has increased as a proportion of the stock. In the past there would have been a lot of bullocks whereas now there are a lot of young bulls being produced for beef, which carries with it some risk.
On the use of machinery, 14 and 15 year olds regularly drive large tractors in farmyards and pick up and deliver grain between fields and farmyards. We need to redouble our efforts in this regard and look at ways by which we can be more effective.
This is a problem across the European Union. Ireland's figures for fatalities are not that different from those in most other European countries.
What Deputy Harrington has referred to is essentially a device which, if one falls into the water, will immediately send a signal to the recuse services, which can dramatically reduce the likelihood of fatalities at sea. For some extraordinary reason, we have made huge progress in getting people to wear life jackets in the marine leisure sector, but little or no progress has been made in getting fishermen to wear them. We launched a life jacket campaign over the summer but I am not sure it made a huge difference because for some reason fishermen seem to think they will never fall in the water. I have considered the personal beacon approach used to good effect by the RNLI in the UK. Given the division of rescue functions between the Coast Guard and the RNLI, we cannot simply copy UK policy to Ireland because both organisations will need to be able to pick up signals from the beacon. We will investigate the matter further. As it is an area in which I have close personal experience, I am anxious to do the right thing.
Fishing Industry Development
Brian Stanley
Question:11 Deputy Brian Stanley asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food his plans to safeguard, develop and promote fishing and allied industries here in 2012; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27916/11]
This question concerns fishing industry development but it gives me an opportunity to express some of my concerns about the Common Fisheries Policy, CFP. Next year will be about planning for fishing in the immediate term. The major hurdle facing us in the coming weeks is the proposal for total allowable catches, TACs, for next year. The initial proposal from the Commission is not good news for our stocks. Of the 34 stocks of interest to Ireland, all bar four are seeing significant cuts in the amount available for Irish fishermen. The cuts range from 15% and 25% for most stocks to a recommended zero quota for cod in the Irish Sea and off the Donegal coast. These are not the final quotas, however, and the quota negotiations will take place during the first weeks of December. The starting point has clearly put us under pressure to build the science and arguments we need to hold what we have and increase quotas where we have the science to back that up.
The good news is that increases are proposed for cod and herring in the Celtic Sea of 141% and 60% respectively, with a 25% increase in haddock in the north west. This is the result of conservation programmes for cod and herring in the Celtic Sea put in place by the industry primarily. We need to replicate this type of approach in other areas, especially in area 6. My job is to put together the science and data to make a convincing argument in order that any cuts applied are fair and that we get a positive result in respect of stocks that are recovering because of responsible fishing.
Additional information not given on the floor of House
On 27 September, the Commission issued its proposals for 2012 fishing opportunities for stocks which are solely within the EU remit and not subject to international agreements. The Commission's proposal for cuts of 15% and 25% is justified on the basis that member states have not provided adequate scientific data on fisheries in many cases. The cost of providing scientific data is very high. The Marine Institute spent €5.9 million in 2010 on data collection for quota stocks, of which 50% was from EU funds. This covered an extensive at-sea and port-based sampling programme and several dedicated and internationally co-ordinated research surveys. The data collected were provided to and used by all the relevant scientific bodies such as ICES and STECF.
I am advised by my experts that in addition to the availability of funding, other reasons that scientists cannot perform robust stock assessments are related to complex problems such as historical data issues, length of time series and lack of coherence in the assessment data. Realistically for many stocks, full assessments will not be available for 2012 or for future years and I am not convinced that in this situation, the adoption of simplistic arbitrary cuts in TACs is an appropriate response. I intend to examine in detail the proposals for each stock taking account of all available information and to determine Ireland's position in that context. In that regard and as provided for in the programme for Government, I will bring forward to the Dáil a sea fisheries sustainability impact assessment in the coming weeks.
I am committed to continuing the path set out in Food Harvest 2020 for the development of the seafood sector in Ireland into 2012. The strategy set out in Food Harvest 2020 involves both the processing and aquaculture sectors. My Department and its agencies have been working together on a twin-track approach to overcoming existing constraints on the aquaculture sector through the comprehensive bay by bay environmental impact assessments required by the EU birds and habitat directives and development of the feasibility of locating aquaculture in less sensitive but more challenging conditions offshore. We are starting to see promising signs of progress in 2011 on the environmental assessments in Natura sites and I believe this will gather pace as the process is bedded in. BIM provides certain support programmes for the sector, including capital grant support for shellfish production outside and within Natura areas where compliance is delivered, and an innovation and technology support scheme. The continuation of these programmes is subject to budget allocations.
In relation to the seafood processing sector, Food Harvest 2020 recognised that the sector was fragmented, lacking in scale, uncompetitive in terms of production costs, too focused on export of commodity products and constrained by inconsistent supply of raw material. BIM, with Enterprise Ireland and Údaras na Gaeltachta, is working to address each of these issues. Grant aid support under the seafood processing business investment scheme was provided in 2011 to improve competitiveness and help the companies concerned develop export markets for high value added products. BIM launched a new seafood value adding scheme earlier this year to support seafood companies with developing added value products. The scheme assists with concept development, including business planning, product development and packaging. The continuation of these programmes is subject to budget allocations.
The draft proposals from the Commission are worrying. The Minister and his officials face a serious challenge in maximising the total allowable catch for Ireland. I concur with the Minister that the industry-led conservation initiatives have been positive and should be further promoted. I wish him well in the negotiations later this year.
This year the Commission has decided to take what it calls a precautionary approach. If we cannot provide detailed scientific data to prove that we can maintain fishing efforts on a particular stock, the Commissioner intends to apply an automatic reduction of 25% to the total allowable catch for that stock. I cannot accept that. Either we are applying science or we are not. Our decisions must be made on the basis of science and in respect of a number of fish stocks, which may not have sufficient scientific data to estimate a maximum sustainable yield, a number of signals can indicate whether the stocks are healthy. If strong signals about the size and age of a catch suggest that a stock is not under pressure, I cannot stand over the so-called precautionary principle just because the Commissioner would like to implement it. There will be a lot of heated discussions on this issue. I do not disagree with the principle of the Commissioner's proposals but we must base our decisions on science for the sake of stocks and the industry. This will require give and take on both sides.
Animal Welfare
Gerry Adams
Question:12 Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will introduce the new animal health and welfare Bill. [27913/11]
I intend to introduce a new animal health and welfare Bill before the end of the year. This legislation should have been put in place long ago. It was partially drafted under the previous Government and the work has continued since I came into office. I am anxious to bring it forward at this stage. The Bill will deal with the protection of animals, whether on farms or in homes. We are trying to consolidate animal welfare legislation dating back more than 100 years into one clear Bill, while adding new sections as appropriate.
Unfortunately, we have witnessed awful instances of cruelty to and mutilation of animals. We need strong legislation to deal with such practices. Other issues are more subtle, such as the responsibility of farmers to their stocks or private home owners to domestic animals. These responsibilities need to be set out clearly in law. It is a privilege and a responsibility to own an animal and we need clear legislation in this area.
Common Fisheries Policy
Joe McHugh
Question:13 Deputy Joe McHugh asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food his priorities in relation to the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27705/11]
Brendan Griffin
Question:16 Deputy Brendan Griffin asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food his key priorities for Common Fisheries Policy negotiations; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27704/11]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 13 and 16 together.
I mentioned the discards issue earlier. Every European country has a problem with discards. When fishermen catch fish which are out of quota or are not large enough to be marketable, they are thrown over the side of the boat because it costs money to bring them ashore. The proportion of discards are considerable in certain Irish stocks. It serves no one's interest that juvenile fish are being caught, killed and thrown over the side. The industry wants to see a new policy that can reduce and, it is hoped, eliminate quotas for certain fisheries, and I certainly want to see change in this area. It is not defensible morally or from a food perspective and it does nothing for the revival of fish stocks. The Commissioner has taken a hard line on the issue and intends to put an end to discards on a phased basis between 2014 and 2016 by forcing fishermen to land everything they catch. I do not believe that approach is workable because it will not bring the industry with us. What is needed is a scientific approach to look at individual stocks one after the other and examine technical ways in which we can use the quota system, but more importantly technical measures in terms of how we design nets to allow juvenile fish to escape and to be more targeted at the fish we catch. Whether it is a cod by-catch when fishermen are fishing for prawns in the Irish Sea or a whiting or haddock by-catch when one is fishing for cod in the Celtic Sea we need to use the technology, design and mesh size that is available to ensure that we are more targeted at catching larger marketable fish and releasing the fish that we do not have a quota to catch and that are too young to sell. That process will take time but it is already under way from an Irish point of view.
I note that the Minister was also taking Question No. 16 in conjunction with Question No. 13. It is on the same subject.
There are issues also around the Hague preferences if the Deputy wishes to ask me questions on that. We are anxious to protect what are called the Hague preferences which give this country preferential treatment on quota allocation when quotas fall below a certain level. If one is catching white fish such as monkfish, whiting or haddock if the quotas fall below a certain level there is recognition in the Hague preferences that to keep a coastal fishery intact one must have certain economies of scale; otherwise the fishery becomes unworkable. That is where the Hague preferences kick in and allow this country to get an increased percentage of quota when the overall quota falls below a certain level. We are very protective of the Hague preferences.
Ministerial Responsibilities
Noel Harrington
Question:14 Deputy Noel Harrington asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will provide an update on his meeting with EU Commissioner for Maritime Affairs andFisheries, Maria Damanaki and their discussions on the Common Fisheries Policy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27702/11]
Noel Harrington
Question:18 Deputy Noel Harrington asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will provide an update on the recent visit from Commissioner Damanaki; if he will provide an overview of the discussions held during the visit; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27701/11]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 14 and 18 together.
The questions are about how the visit of Commissioner Maria Damanaki went when she visited this country several weeks ago. I thank the Commissioner for coming. I invited her to come several months ago. I also invited our Commissioner, Mrs. Máire Geoghegan-Quinn to visit.
For Commissioner Damanaki's visit I had two purposes in mind; to visit the Marine Institute in Galway to see the extraordinary work it is doing and to allow her to have detailed discussions with me, the fishing industry and NGOs to give an understanding on her perspective on the Common Fisheries Policy and what she wanted to achieve.
In the meeting I used the opportunity to map out in detail why this country feels vulnerable when we look at her approach towards the transferability of fishing concessions or quotas, which essentially means the privatisation of quotas. I reminded her that we support in principle what she wants to do on discards but we think her approach needs to be much more targeted to work with the industry. We had a good discussion. I am confident that when she left she had a much better understanding of Ireland-specific issues.
The reality is that we only catch 18% of the fish in Irish waters. That is the full scope of the EU waters for which this country has responsibility. That puts us in a very unusual position whereby we have large Spanish and French fishing fleets in particular fishing in Irish waters which would like to get their hands on Irish quota if they could. I have explained why I am uncomfortable with the concept of moving away from a quota being treated as a national asset which is then allocated to boats in the Irish fleet in a way that keeps the fleet commercially viable to a system whereby boats could trade quotas among themselves which will result in consolidation and many fewer fishing ports here.
I am sorry to interrupt the Minister but the time is up and I wanted to allow 30 seconds to Deputy Harrington.
Only 30 seconds.
We finish at 5.45 p.m. and it is that time now.
I welcome the Minister's reply. There are headline issues that the Common Fisheries Policy will discuss. I agree entirely with the Minister's stance on individual transferable quotas. While it makes sense for countries such as France and Spain it would make no sense for this country and would have a severely negative impact on the Irish fishing industry.
Similarly, on the issue of discards it is important that we move with the Commissioner in her position on discards which are immoral. It is a crime. The methodology behind her proposals over-simplify the issue and they need further discussion, particularly with the industry. I hope the Department will work with the industry here to deal with what is a complex issue, more complex than it would appear. It is simple to say it is immoral but it is a difficult issue to deal with and to find a good solution.
Other issues arise as well such as enforcement. The Sea-Fisheries Protection Authority, SFPA, has been working hard and compliance within the fishing industry has greatly improved, which has led to improved prices. That should be acknowledged.
I listened to the Commissioner when she spoke at the Institute of European Affairs. I was concerned that she held up the Danish pelagic industry as a model. The Minister might take note of that. In Denmark 12 or 13 companies control the pelagic industry. That is not something we would wish to emulate. The Commissioner held it up as the way forward. Perhaps the Minister would examine the matter and raise it in his discussions with her and persuade her towards an Irish solution that would maintain the integrity of our industry.
Written Answers follow Adjournment.
The Dáil adjourned at 5.50 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Friday, 7 October 2011.