Very constructive speeches were made on this matter both in this House and in the Dáil. I am glad to conclude this debate after the contribution by Senator Markey. I agree with him that as far as the future of the fishing industry is concerned one must adopt a positive attitude, that protection of itself is only part of the story and development is the other part, and that protection and development must go hand in glove. For that reason in the course of the negotiations which I have been having over the past 12 months with the Commission and with our EEC partners, I have emphasised the fact that Ireland's developing fishing industry requires an injection of investment and capital. Part of the arrangements now being suggested by the Commission are a 50 per cent grant towards Irish fishing boats within the limit of boats now getting financial assistance under the marine credit plan of Bord Iascaigh Mhara. They are also proposing similar grants towards fish farming, and I intend to fight for an instalment next week on the £30 million which the Commission have also agreed should be allocated towards our fishery protection fleet. The important decision that has been secured from the Commission and from our Community partners over the next 12 months, which will be enshrined in whatever EEC fisheries policy eventually emerges, is that we are entitled to a preferential position by reason of the under-developed state of our fishing industry. That principle has been acknowledged and incorporated in the quotas which have been given on an interim basis for this year and which give a distinct preferential advantage to Irish fishermen fishing in the waters off our coast. The enshrining of that principle is a very big step forward in the future planning of the industry. We have achieved that. There is acceptance of that principle. How to implement it in its most effective way is the challenge facing us in the immediate future.
As part development towards working out a common Community fisheries policy we will have before us next week at the Council of Ministers' meeting in Luxembourg, the first fishing plan ever prepared within a Community framework. This was prepared by the Commission following discussions between the Irish and the Dutch Governments. This fishing plan relates to the herring stock fishing off the west coast of Ireland from Belmullet to Clare in which we, this year, have an allocation of 10,000 tons and the Dutch have an allocation of 4,000 tons. We have secured agreement between ourselves and the Dutch on excluding boats in excess of 84 feet registered length. The Commission will be recommending this agreement to the Council of Ministers. We have secured a box running from Belmullet to County Clare, roughly 20 miles from base line, where, effectively, practically all of the Irish fleet will be included with the exception of three boats, and the whole of the Dutch fleet will be excluded. So, on the basis of a conservation measure, carefully worked out and, hopefully, properly policed and monitored, assuming agreement is reached next week, we will from 1 July be operating the first comprehensive fishing plan in Community waters.
That is being done by a Government who have got down to the business of trying to work out a practical arrangement. The unilateral nonsense on which the previous Government had embarked before the election, purely for election optics, was proved entirely nugatory and ineffective within a matter of days of this Government being elected when the European Court ruled that that unilateral nonsense had to stop. We are in a Community and have to work out arrangements in a patient and detailed way with our Community partners. We have enough intelligence, if we apply ourselves to that problem, to work out arrangements that can be fruitful. The first such arrangement will, hopefully, be in operation from 1 July, involving, I agree, only one species of fish, and one country. It was, therefore, comparatively easy to get it off the ground, but negotiations will be more difficult with regard to other countries, particularly in the white fish area where a number of species of fish are involved.
The plan operating from 1 July will be fully monitored in that we will know the number of Dutch fishing boats coming in, the registration number of each such boat, the skipper, tonnage and so on. The entitlement will enable 15 boats to come in and fish for five days with the overall limitation of 45 boats involved in the operation for specific periods, tonnage of fish caught and so on. Therefore, there can be very close monitoring of the situation. There will be more details available for publication if we get agreement on the matter next week.
That is the sort of practical work on which the Community—admittedly in a very slow way—are now engaged with a view to working out interim arrangements which, if successful, can eventually be incorporated in some final Community policy. The British, pending their general election, are holding up matters at present, but in the meantime we can take practical steps forward and gain advantages for Ireland on an interim basis. One thing which would be absolutely futile and very damaging to the conservation of fish stocks would be a free-forall. There must be some arrangement. To allow the situation to drift without having some arrangement or some management would be very foolish from our point of view, because our whole emphasis must be on the conservation of fish stocks by reason of our advantageous position adjacent to fishing grounds in the north Atlantic. Our main priority and thrust in regard to our own self-interest as a nation must be in the area of conserving stocks. There is not much point in talking about a fishing policy if there are no fish. It is as elementary as that.
What I have been saying is not related to the Bill itself but comment on the matter, naturally, occupied a considerable amount of time among Senators who went off the Bill and referred to the question of the negotiations and so on. I have referred to only one aspect of the negotiations with regard to fishing plans; there are a number of other aspects to which I could refer.
There is a motion on the Order Paper which perhaps will allow another and fuller debate on all aspects of the fishing industry. This measure before the House is related to one practical problem which is to bring the level of penalty for illegal fishing by foreign trawlers—and in some cases by our own fishermen—up to realistic levels. The matter has been made much more imperative by reason of a recent High Court ruling which was not available until early April. I do not want to go into the pros and cons of that, but it would have been very foolish for me or the Attorney General to have embarked on the preparation of a Bill without having in precise terms exactly what the High Court judge decided. This Bill and this area of legislation abound in constitutional and international law mine-fields, if I may use the phrase. That is quite obvious from the whole history of sea offences, not just in Ireland but throughout the world.
By reason of our involvement within the EEC, our involvement in Community waters up to 200 miles off our coast, the involvement of both eastern European and other third countries in certain fishing rights within Community waters, and by reason of our own Constitution, this whole area and the prosecution of offences in this area is fraught with highly sophisticated difficult and technical matters. I assure the House that that was the only reason behind the delay here. I acted at all stages, in the course of the consideration of this measure, with the full advice of the Attorney General who with his staff had to pay tremendous attention to the area I have just mentioned. We are not just dealing with our legal system and our own Constitution, but with the European court and the whole international law system in relation to third countries. Any measure of this kind introducing very substantial penalties against our Community partners, our fishermen and third country fishermen had to be looked at in very considerable detail prior to its introduction. We hope that the Bill will stand up, but I assure the House that the reason for the delay in bringing in this Bill was the imperative necessity to bring in a Bill that not only would pass both Houses of the Oireachtas, but would stand up in our courts, in European courts, or in international courts.
We have had enough experience of how wrong and how futile our national actions can be in this respect. For instance the unilateral measure brought in by the last Coalition Government before the last election did not stand up at all in the European Court, and had no chance from the word go of standing up in the European Court. Within three or four days of becoming Minister for Fisheries I had to go to a meeting of the Council of Ministers of the European Economic Community to find Ireland a laughing stock because of the totally futile unilateral act to which there was not a shred of legal entitlement, and that had absolutely no chance of standing up before the European Court. Our legal measures, especially when they deal with our European relationships, must be such that they will stand up in the courts not alone here but in the courts of the world. That is the reason for the delay, and Deputy Deasy was gracious enough in the Dáil when introducing his Private Members' Bill to acknowledge that he knew that his Bill did not have the back-up as it were of the advice of the Attorney General's office, the draftsmen's office, the whole back-up of legal advice that is necessary in a very difficult and sophisticated area of prosecutions such as are envisaged under this Bill.
In introducing this measure I referred to the various offences, penalties and improvements in the Bill. Broadly speaking, the Bill can be comprehended by looking at the three tables in section 2 which show that the Government are seeking to approach this matter in a three-tiered way—summary conviction with fines of up to £500 and forfeiture in the case of unlawfully caught fish or unlawful gear. Senator Cooney raised a point about unlawfully caught fish. They are under-sized fish or certain species of fish which may not be caught in a particular area. There is a further tier of offence on indictment, with fines of £10,000 and forfeiture of any gear. That is for illegal entry into the exclusive fishery zones of the State. It also applies to illegal fishing methods which can affect our fishermen as well as foreign fishermen.
The important deterrent is in Table III which relates to illegal fishing by foreign fishing vessels within our exclusive limits. That carries a fine of £100,000 and forfeiture of all gear. There are obviously a whole range of offences in this area. There can be a situation where a boat is illegally within our waters but is not fishing illegally. That, obviously, would not be as serious an offence as where a boat is actually caught in the act of illegally fishing. A range of offences are written into the Bill so as to give a number of options to the State in prosecuting an offender depending on the degree of malfeasance involved.
Apart from the range of offences and penalties, the provision of the 48 hours' detention of the boat, so as to enable fishery officers or the Garda authorities to fully examine the boat, the nets, the fish and generally inquire into the matter while the boat is at port, is a very practical and necessary innovation. Various Senators including Senator Cooney referred to the importance of this aspect in actually carrying out the prosecution. This will facilitate prosecutions enormously. Another important aspect is the deterrent aspect of the confiscation of a vessel on the second or subsequent indictable offence.
There are other matters which we can consider on Committee and Report Stages. Senator Cooney and others placed emphasis on the importance of prevention rather than detection. Prevention is very important, and the range of offences and serious penalties envisaged here will act as a substantial deterrent. The deterrent aspect that arises from the series of penalties envisaged here is the real prevention. By reason of the High Court decision the situation at the moment is derisory as far as the deterrent aspect is concerned; a £100 fine and no forfeiture is so obviously derisory that this Bill is essential.
Senator Cooney raised a query about section 9. That really replaces section 35 of the Sea Fisheries Act of 1962. What is involved is that it gives me power to introduce national conservation and management regulations within our 200 miles without international agreement. I was more confined in the introduction of such arrangements until now by reason of having to seek international agreement. That does not really obtain now because as far as the 200 miles is concerned, they are now all part of Community waters, and there is no need to be hamstrung with any international agreement with third countries or anything of that kind.
Senator Cooney and other Senators raised the question of the importance of fish processing, the importance of making arrangements to ensure that we expand fish processing where the employment opportunities exist, and the importance of making arrangements to ensure that we get the volume of landings, if necessary from foreign trawlers, for the development of processing activities. Discussions are going on in Castletownbere on that at present with a view to getting a strong Spanish interest involved. I hope to have some conclusion to the discussions very shortly.
I emphasise that I would only envisage such foreign landings provided they were linked to processing and nothing else. There is no question of allowing foreign landings to come on the Irish fresh fish market. We can consider such developments in the context of fish processing from landings from re-export. That is a matter for business arrangement between my Department, An Bord lascaigh Mhara, and the Industrial Development Authority in consultation with the various interests in the countries concerned. This matter does not really come within the scope of the negotiations for an EEC fisheries policy. Deputy Cooney was inclined to relate the two, which are really separate. One is commercial and the other is diplomatic.
Senator McGowan spoke about the deterrent aspect and the importance of building up our fishing fleet. I agree that if we have an efficient and expanding Irish fishing fleet within our waters, that it is the best deterrent of all as far as foreign fishing boats coming within our waters are concerned. In regard to foreign fishing boats, we do not now have the menace of the eastern European fleets coming within our 200-mile zones since the declaration of the 200-mile zone.
Our main problem is with the Spanish fleet. Reference was made here by Senator Conroy to the Spanish fishing fleet and its tremendous potential and the fact that they are at present fishing in Community waters without a full licensing system in operation as regards their position. There is also a nebulous situation that arises because of the London Agreement in 1963 which gives the Spaniards certain historic rights between six and 12 miles off our coasts. That whole situation vis-à-vis Spain is at the moment under practical and urgent discussion and there are negotiations between ourselves and the Spanish Government and between the Spanish Government and other member countries and between the Spanish Government and the Commission. The discussions all form part of Spain's application to become a member of the European Economic Community. I can assure the House that, apart from Ireland, the Commission is very concerned.
What we are seeking to do is to introduce a licencing system and through a licencing system to have dramatic reduction in the number of Spanish boats fishing in Community waters. We are also seeking to work out some fishing plan arrangement with the Spanish Government that will effectively exclude Spanish boats off our coast for a substantial distance and will also reduce the Spanish fishing effort within our waters up to 200 miles. That is the most important, pressing job at present because there is no doubt that up to now there has been a lack of co-ordination or organisation in regard to controlling the activities of the Spanish fleet within Community waters. That whole area is now being brought under control and the House can take it that the Community's attitude is that it must be brought under control before the Spanish entry into the European Economic Community.
Several Senators, including Senator Conroy, talked about the importance of aircraft in relation to surveillance, patrolling and subsequent apprehension. We have now made arrangements for the purchase of a second spotter plane which will be fitted with automatic photographic equipment so that automatic photograph reconnaissance can take place all the time—the trawler will be photographed and its distance off the coast will be electronically imprinted as well as the name and registration number of the trawler. That information will be available as supplementary evidence in court. The aircraft cannot arrest the boats. That has to be done by another boat but the aircraft can help in the detection sense and can also add supplementary evidence by way of photographs for court proceedings.
Senator McGlinchey mentioned the placement of protection vessels and spotter planes in the north-west. I agree that we need more protection and patrolling equipment in terms of vessels and planes. That is why I place considerable importance on the allocation of £30 million to us by the Community for this purpose. I hope next week to get the first instalment of this at the meeting of the Council of Ministers so as to ensure that we can proceed straight away towards the construction of another protection vessel. We have one under construction at the moment but we want another. The target for about 1981-1982 is to have five or six protection vessels along with a spotter plane fleet of about three spotter planes.
I have covered most of the points mentioned. Senator Harte and Senator Markey were very strong on development as well as protection. Protection is important, but it is negative; it is conserving and protecting. The development aspect is the more important aspect, but first things come first and we cannot have development unless we have the fish.
This Bill is being introduced to ensure that we can adopt a regime of fishery protection with the court and detection backup to ensure that we will deter people from coming in on fishing waters and so that we can then proceed with development on that sound basis. We can then participate with our Community partners and in international arrangements with third countries if necessary to ensure that our waters are developed for the good of the Irish fishermen and the country as a whole, and to ensure the development of processing facilities ashore, so as to give the required employment and to build up a real industry.
There is no question that if we finally get a deal under the European fisheries policy, the industry can then proceed to plan. At present it is very difficult in the hiatus situation that we are in, to have proper planning in the industry, whether at national level or within the industry itself, on the processing side or the catching side. Only when we have a final definitive policy under which we know where we stand as a nation for the years ahead in regard to our stake in the 200 miles off our coast, our stake in these Community waters, can we plan the investment required and secure the employment so necessary to build up a healthy industry. We can do it if we get this settlement and I am hopeful that it will be forthcoming after the British election.
I hope we will see the formulation of such an agreement early next year. However, it is a test of the political will of the Community because the matter has been dragging on for far too long and is only leading to uncertainty in the industry. Very little can be done in the way of planning until one knows definitively what the resources are, what the availability of the resources is to Irish fishermen and what sort of processing is necessary on shore to make use of that resource and to maximise the advantages to our fishermen and to the employees in the processing side. That is the approach as far as the future is concerned. I am certain that our basic advantage is our proximity to badly depleted fishing grounds that can be rehabilitated.
We are like a big static ship near the North Atlantic fishing grounds and that basic advantage will draw investment into Ireland's fishery resources from mainland Europe. It will bring prosperity to Ireland's fishing industry because we cannot lose the basic comparative advantage we have. Our task must be to maximise the resources by conservation methods, even if they are sometimes unpopular. We must have a definite policy agreed upon by our EEC partners within which framework we can work to maximise the natural advantage we have by reason of our proximity to the world's best fishing grounds.
