I thank the Chairman for those kind words. I am happy to report that we have established a federation of Irish fishermen, which represents 90% of the vessels in the fleet over 12 metres. That is a significant first step in what we hope will be a progressive process of jointly expressing our interests. I appreciate the confidence placed in me to represent the views of members from the north, south, east and west at this meeting. I thank the Chairman for the invitation.
I will refer to a number of comments made. Dr. Beamish in particular gave the committee a comprehensive and useful framework for examining the challenges facing us in the talks next week. I am conscious of time but I will outline a number of measures that happened this year.
The first is the advent of the regional advisory councils, which involve industries from different countries along with environmental organisations and other stakeholders, considering what should be done about the conservation and management of stocks. We are participants in two of those regional advisory councils, one to do with pelagic species and the other to do with the north western waters, which effectively covers the Irish territorial waters of interest to us.
It is worth noting that the process by which the regional advisory councils work, which is to produce advice for the Commission and in the decision making process, has not been incorporated into the Commission's opening proposals for logistical reasons. The value of the work done during the year will be carefully examined by the industry and the NGOs involved in those groups to determine the degree to which they are taken into account in the forthcoming talks.
The second area I would recall to the committee is the question of the use of cod to drive general policy, particularly to do with the Irish Sea but it is extended to other areas also, and a widespread belief in the fishing industry, which is probably shared in other quarters, that the way that issue was tackled in the past did not appear to produce results. The lack of results cannot be laid solely at the door of the industry, as appears to have been done by some people. There may be — I believe there is — a fundamental methodological weakness in the approach being taken to it. To that end, we note the Commission has promised and intends to conduct a full evaluation of the cod recovery programmes in 2007. We, as an industry, have come forward with some valuable proposals, which were mentioned by Dr. Beamish, particularly in regard to the Irish Sea where the assessment is littered with the word "uncertainty". If one notes the stock book or reads the ICES advice, one will note the word "uncertainty" is littered throughout it. I do not argue with the trajectory in regard to cod, but we have major concerns when significant economic decisions with an environmental impact are being taken on the basis of something we believe should not be subject to this degree of uncertainty
We, as an industry, as has been acknowledged, have made a great effort in the past 12 months to develop jointly the UK, Irish and Northern Irish industries in regard to the Irish Sea, working in co-operation with the Marine Institute and departmental officials. It is a model of how we might progress. The kernel of the issue is that it represents an alternative approach, which is not simply based on swingeing cuts in quotas, as being the most useful way of achieving conservation or management objectives. The same principle applies to the cod closed areas off the south east coast. This was an industry initiative, which was accepted and which we believe deserves serious evaluation prior to what we would call draconian additional cuts in quota being made, as the sole solution.
The third area with which I wish to briefly deal, is work in which we have engaged, at the industry's request, on a strategy for our industry. The Government set up a review group to examine the strategy for our industry. We, as an industry, and the organisations that make up the federation, which I represent, submitted 11 submissions to that strategy group and publication of its report is awaited. Part of that work involved a major decommissioning programme, which at that stage we were basing on the available level of quotas, namely, 45% in tonnes, as a means of attempting to align the fleet with the resources available to Ireland, which I believe will be largely successful. We are very much afraid that if the approach being taken by the Commission further undermines that process and if the outcome of the December Council were to reflect anything like what is proposed here, successive quota cuts may be a deterrent to our attempt to ensure everything that is done in this industry is above board, transparent and manageable into the future, and would be counterproductive in many cases.
I will not go into detail in terms of the stocks other than to say there are a number of categories in the proposals, one being proposed cuts in some stocks which are based purely on the fact that they were not taken up this year. There is not a scientific justification for such proposed cuts other than that the stocks were unused this year. Fishing, by its nature, is difficult to predict and plan. Therefore, that approach of simply taking off stocks, on the basis that they were not used, is not supportable.
A second category of stocks is cod stocks or stocks associated with the fishing of cod, as in by-catches which would be in the same basket of fish. I expressed our reservations about the approach to the management of the conservation of cod and I doubly express fears about the bundling in of other stocks. With regard to a comment made by Dr. Connolly, whom I hold in the highest regard, if we are to move towards ocean management as opposed to fisheries management, it behoves us to start getting our fisheries management right and removing some of the uncertainties from it before we take on the universe, so to speak.
There is an increase in a number of stocks, which is welcome. Such increases prove we have not succeeded in fully raping the seas yet, as some people claim we have. There has been a recovery in the hake quota and there are scientifically justified increases in monkfish, which is extremely important commercially. We note the increase in the mackerel quota, which is significant, although the legacy issues, to which Dr. Beamish referred, probably loom large in our immediate future, and the word "legacy" would cover a multitude.
Hake preferences, as was pointed out earlier, is a significant issue, whereby under a rather complicated system Ireland has benefited relatively from share-outs. We view that, effectively, as being a part of the Irish entitlement, notwithstanding and not disagreeing with Dr. Beamish's legal interpretation of it. We view the incorporation of that into the negotiation of quotas as a central and a fundamental issue, which is of critical importance, particularly in regard to our strategy for this country. We share the Department's view on the need to maintain, where possible, the restrictions and proposals on deepwater gillnets — which we consider have done a great deal of damage — which have been largely overturned during the year.
I will comment briefly on the question of experimental fisheries. Experimental scientific fisheries, which would be undertaken by bodies such as the Marine Institute or its international colleagues, are done in a strict and above board manner in which we would have confidence. In the guise of such experimental fisheries, purely commercial interests have engaged in, for example, unannounced so-called experimental fisheries, using reduced size mesh in gillnets off the west coast, which is completely unacceptable, anti-conservation and a move entirely in the wrong direction. That is a misuse of the power that exists and I fully support what Dr. Beamish said about that.
The reduction in days at sea is very much bound up with the seriously questionable approach to cod recovery. It is unlikely that cod stocks can recover, much as we would like them to, under the present set of programmes that are in place and are going to be intensified. More of the inappropriate medicine is unlikely to cure this disease. At this stage five years down the line it might require us to make a further diagnosis of the position and possibly prescribe alternative or other medicine.
The weighing of pelagic species is a technical issue which may be esoteric from the point of view of members but significant, particularly for those involved in the processing industry away from the main centre of pelagic fishing in Ireland, the north west. I am thinking, in particular, of factories in Connacht and the south which must transport fish and for which there are significant operational disadvantages in this rule. We cannot see the logic behind it. If it is okay to weigh fish having travelled 100 km, we cannot see why it is not okay to do so having travelled 200 km. I fully appreciate the need for effective controls and monitoring, but we believe distance is not the appropriate measure. Therefore, I am glad to hear it is a matter the Department will be taking up.
I covered the matter of Irish Sea cod in dealing with the approach to cod recovery. We would be loath to perpetuate the myth that the Federation of Irish Fishermen is against the management and conservation of these resources, as nothing could be further from the truth. We are, however, exasperated at the inappropriateness of some of the more outlandish features of existing cod recovery measures. For example, as a first step, we have a major project planned on the Irish Sea, with scientific and administrative support from the Government, which we appreciate, as well as from environmental NGOs and others at the regional advisory council. We must remove the uncertainty as to what is happening in the Irish Sea. We are prepared to engage in a scientifically vetted and designed programme of assessing discards which is seen as the major issue in order that we can determine what is happening. We see this as a prerequisite. We do not view increasing uncertainty and then invoking the precautionary principle as a means of covering up for it as an effective way to achieve these aims. We hope to build on this approach.
The confidence of fishermen to propose such measures is predicated on the degree to which they are accepted at the Council. We strongly urge that the genuine attempts we are making to grow up as an industry and take our responsibilities more seriously be given due recognition at the Council in order that we can build a platform on which fishermen can gain further confidence. If they are knocked back again by yet another set of seemingly mindless across the board doctrinaire cuts such as those on the table, the federation will see this as being very damaging to a process in which we realise there must be rationalisation and better management of the resource. We are intent on putting our house in order. We await with considerable interest the strategy report. We do not want the ground to be shifted from under the industry while we are taking these steps.
We hope to work with the Minister and officials in Brussels next week as we are largely on similar tracks. We are often at loggerheads but our interests are largely the same. I look forward to this process, while not underestimating the difficulties involved.
