This is the first occasion on which the Minister for the Marine, Deputy Coveney, has visited the Seanad. I welcome him and thank him for the speed with which he agreed to have this particular debate, which is of great interest and concern to quite a number of Members. We had a similar debate during his predecessor's term of office, which was very successful and I know that today's debate will be very useful.
Marine Policy: Statements
It is in fact my second time in the House. I was here for an Adjournment debate recently. I wish to begin with an apology. When I spoke to Senator Manning about this, I was not aware that a Government meeting was going to be called for this morning. There are at least three items on the agenda of this meeting for which I must be there. I must, therefore, leave the House after a half an hour and I am sorry about this because I wanted to be here for the statements. The Minister of State at my Department, Deputy Gilmore, will be here for them.
I am very pleased to be here to contribute to the debate on marine policy, which is taking place at an opportune time, coinciding as it does with my announcement and that of my Minister of State, Deputy Gilmore, earlier this month of a fundamental overhaul of marine policy. I would like to start by outlining our approach to the policy review.
The time for a fundamental overhaul of marine policy was due. The Government's programme commits us to pursue an integrated approach to the protection and development of our marine resources. It has been a consistent theme of debate in both Houses of the Oireachtas that we have not begun to realise the full potential of the marine sector. The purpose of the review is to address this acknowledged deficiency. I would like to see that potential unlocked in the interests of regional development, job creation and in the interests of national economic and social prosperity. To do so we need to reassess policies and strategies and to develop a coherent vision of the future. The review will be undertaken in full consultation with the many sectoral interests in the marine area and those inputs will critically inform the process.
We are taking three specific initiatives which will advance the review process in a practical way. First, we will have a public debate on the principal issues. The Marine Institute has been invited to arrange a series of high level public seminars focusing on the separate dimensions of marine policy. This process will commence in June. Secondly, we are going to bring together a high level advisory group to be known as the Marine Advisory Council. The council will include independent experts of national and international standing to advise on longer term strategic options in marine policy.
Thirdly, a major review of the organisational and management structure of the fishery service is to be undertaken by independent consultants. This review will look at the institutional framework for the sea fisheries, aquaculture and inland fisheries sectors. It will advise on any changes necessary to improve the coherence and efficiency of the delivery of public policies and services to those sectors. That examination will spread right across the various agencies under the aegis of the Department of the Marine and will also include the Department itself.
Since coming into office I have been listening to the views of many individuals and organisations on the present structure of the fishery service. While there has been praise for the commitment and professionalism of the staff of the fishery service agencies, there are strong and conflicting views on its overall efficiency and coherence. This points to the need for a review of the kind now proposed. It also ties in with the strategic management process at the wider public sector level which is also taking place in my Department.
Our only agenda in this exercise is how best to harness the human and financial resources of the State's fishery services in the best interests of the sectors. The challenges arising due to pressures on fish stocks and the marine and freshwater environment and from the development opportunities presented by increased EU funding make it imperative to get the best value for money. I am looking forward, together with the Minister of State, to taking these initiatives forward rapidly in the months ahead.
Marine safety and the protection of the marine environment have an overriding priority. There are two main dimensions to this. First we must have in place and apply strict safety codes for various vessels. Second, we must operate effective and efficient marine emergency services to cope when things occasionally go wrong.
There is a large international dimension to marine safety legislation which is governed by the International Maritime Organisation. The IMO Conventions are the cornerstone of maritime safety regulation throughout the world. We will continue to give every priority to introducing into Irish law the IMO's constantly evolving standards for safety and pollution prevention.
The European Union is playing an increasing role in the area of maritime safety and pollution prevention. This role was given increased impetus as a result of the Braer disaster and more recently following the Estonia passenger ferry casualty. The EU's Common Policy on Safe Seas provides the framework for a range of important regulatory measures covering maritime safety, and notably port state control, the international safe management code and reporting arrangements for ships carrying dangerous or polluting goods. We will continue to participate actively at EU level to ensure that practical and enforceable standards prevail.
In addition to regulation, I would like to emphasise the need for education and public awareness in the marine safety area. Our annual maritime safety awareness campaign will once again this year urge people to "take time to think safety" before taking to the water. Far too many maritime accidents which lead to loss of life could be prevented if basic safety practices were observed. While most watersports enthusiasts are responsible in matters of safety, there are many more who have yet to realise that simple safety precautions can save their lives. We will continue to reinforce our efforts to get the message across.
I am particularly mindful of some of the leisure sports which, in many cases, are self regulating in a real and tangible way. In other cases, however, they are not self regulating. I am particularly worried about sail boards, for example, because often in the winter months of October and November you see a person almost out of sight of land on a sailboard in quite adverse, windy weather which suits their sport. I plan to meet some of the organisations associated with that sport because I am concerned about that. It is just one example.
On the subject of maritime transport, ports policy is focused on improving competitiveness and expanding the capacity of the international traded sectors of the Irish economy. The policy is directed at supply side factors which will reduce costs to industry, agriculture and the tourism sectors and will improve access and competitiveness in international markets.
This policy is geared to the improvement of commercial harbour infrastructure, so as to facilitate the provision of fast, reliable, direct and cost effective sea passenger and freight services. We are looking also to achieve major changes in the management structures of the main ports and improvement in labour relations and cargo handling practices.
Work is well advanced on the Harbours Bill. This will provide for the introduction of commercial semi-State structures at the bigger commercial seaports. The main thrust of this new legislation is to facilitate commercialisation and a more customer-responsive service, while ensuring accountability for operational and financial performance.
The development of Irish ports will be achieved by means of an EU supported investment programme of some £140 million up to 1999 in a number of strategic ports. Priority will be given to investment in the principal strategic ports of Cork, Dublin, Dún Laoghaire, Rosslare, Waterford and the Shannon Estuary. A programme of investment in the main regional ports to support regional development is also planned. The reorganisation of the commercial seaports together with continued EU support for development will give the ports the flexibility they need to operate as truly commercial enterprises and will gear them up to meet the transport challenges of the future.
Shipping policy must also be framed in light of our dependence on external trade, our peripheral location and the fact that we are the only EU member state without a landlink to the Continent. The key objective is to ensure that efficient, competitive and safe shipping services are available to meet the needs of Irish trade and tourism.
A related objective within these parameters is to ensure that Irish-flagged vessels can compete effectively, expand and maximise jobs for Irish seafarers.
The international context is very tough. EU flagged vessels in general have come under severe pressure during the past decade or so from flags of convenience. The EU share of the world fleet has declined from 30 per cent in 1980 to 15 per cent today. Employment opportunities for EU seafarers have been severely curtailed by the availability of third world crews at one-third or less of the cost of EU seafarers.
Against this difficult background we are undertaking a review of Irish shipping policy in consultation with the social partners. This will be concluded later this year. The strategic objective under the review is to enable Irish shipping companies to meet international competition under comparable cost conditions without compromising on safety. That is, I must admit, a difficult objective.
The Operational Programme for Fisheries 1994-1999, under the second Community Support Framework, was launched on 21 February. The programme is intended to deliver integrated development in the fleet, aquaculture, processing, marine research, fishery harbours and training. The total investment package for the period is £140 million.
The primary objectives of the programme are to maintain and strengthen the contribution of the fisheries sector to the national economy and to support economic development and long term job creation in coastal communities. Though it is not enough, it will, I hope, create and sustain investment confidence and provide a sound basis for expansion and growth.
The agreement reached at the Fisheries Council in last December on the integration of Spain and Portugal into the Common Fisheries Policy was a satisfactory outcome for Ireland in all the circumstances. I believe it will provide continuing protection for the Irish fishing industry. Since December much work and tough negotiations have gone into translating this broad political agreement into hard and binding arrangements. We have maintained a determined approach in these negotiations to ensure that the arrangements will provide for a stringent and effective management of fishing effort, and in particular for real control and enforcement.
In the negotiations we secured a number of key concessions. There will be no increase in the quotas available in Irish waters to Spanish vessels. Spanish fishing effort is to be maintained at its present level with a maximum of 93 vessels at any one time, and, significantly, will continue to be distributed on the basis of existing geographic spread. We have nonetheless managed to secure continuing recognition of and protection for the Irish Box. Spanish vessels will be totally excluded from the Irish Sea and only 40 named Spanish vessels of the total of 93 will be allowed to fish in other parts of the Irish Box. These 40 vessels will continue to be distributed in accordance with the existing geographic spread, which is a favourable arrangement from Ireland's point of view.
One of our major objectives was to ensure that the control and enforcement provisions would be stringent and effective. I am happy to say that a number of our proposals, notably the proposals on catch reporting and a greatly enhanced role for the coastal state, were included in the final agreement. From January 1998 Spanish vessels will be required to report their catch to this country, not to their own as has been the case. We all know the results of that.
I am determined that we are going to have a more effective enforcement system. We also have two new Casa spotter aircraft, ironically built in Spain, which will greatly enhance the effectiveness of the naval effort to target Spanish vessels that we want to inspect. We also managed to secure recognition of the heavy financial burden faced by Ireland in respect of fishing surveillance by getting a firm commitment at Council giving us additional financial resources not just for the capital costs but also, for the first time, for running costs.
I wish to brief the House on Ireland's position on the contentious fishing dispute between the European Union and Canada and to explain the rationale for our position. Throughout this dispute, which had been simmering for some time, we have constantly urged restraint on both sides and have encouraged efforts to reach a negotiated solution. That settlement must be mutually acceptable and lasting, one which will allow for fair distribution, proper controls and protection of stocks and which will safeguard Canada's rightful interests. I am hopeful, now that the situation has been defused somewhat, that substantive talks along these lines can get underway.
I wish to set the record straight on the background to this dispute since there are any number of misconceptions floating around. The North Atlantic Fisheries Organisation — NAFO — regulates fisheries in the international waters of the north-west Atlantic, outside Canada's 200-mile limit. Its members include Canada, the EU, Iceland, Cuba, Russia, Norway, Japan and Poland. Ireland has no fishing rights in the area so we are essentially a disinterested party in the matter.
Last October, NAFO set a 1995 total allowable catch for turbot of 27,000 tonnes. This was a steep reduction by reference to previous years' catches. Canada argued successfully that the cut was necessary to protect the viability of the stock. Following a majority decision in the EU — opposed by Spain and Portugal — the EU's single vote in NAFO was cast in favour of the lower TAC. Last month, however, NAFO voted by 6 votes to 5 — EU against — to allocate 60 per cent of the TAC to Canada and a mere 12.5 per cent to the EU, that is, 16,000 tonnes and 3,400 tonnes respectively. The remainder of the TAC was distributed to other NAFO states.
The EU could not accept this share out which does not reflect historic catching patterns and accordingly lodged an objection procedure under NAFO rules. Canada reacted strongly. Instead of negotiating through the procedures available, Canada used domestic law to take the right to stop Spanish boats in international waters. The arrest of the Estai followed. I wish to emphasise that this was not an argument about the total catch; it was an argument about how it should be distributed. It is not right to say that this is an argument about the Spaniards wanting to increase the quantity and the Canadians opposing that. It is about the distribution among the nations within NAFO.
We fully understand Canada's concerns. We support their call for conservation and we appreciate their frustration given that their own fisheries have been virtually fished out, largely by themselves. That being said, it is wholly unacceptable that any State should give itself powers to stop or arrest vessels of another State in international waters. It must also be said that the quota allocated by NAFO to the EU was seriously unsatisfactory and inequitable.
Ireland has not, and will not, break ranks with the EU on this issue. In principle and in practice that position is in our own best interests. We agree that illegal or irresponsible fishing must be dealt with resolutely and we will do that in our waters. We are at the forefront in pressing for tighter controls and enforcement within the EU on fleets that do not toe the line. However, the problems should not be tackled by unilateral and illegal actions. The EU, Canada and all NAFO members must face up to their joint responsibilities for management, control and conservation of stocks in the Grand Banks area. They must do it around the table, not by brinkmanship. The latter, in my view, is a recipe for chaos and we are working hard with the Canadians and the European Union to bring about a reasonable compromise. We met with the Canadian Minister, Brian Tobin, about a month ago in this regard.
There will be further development of infrastructure and facilities at priority fishing harbours to cater for the needs of the fishing sector and to meet EU safety and hygiene requirements. We will also support, as far as resources permit, upgrading of local harbour infrastructures to cope with the rapid expansion of the aquaculture sector and local economic activity generally.
The level of investment in recent years falls far short of actual needs. In the trips I have made to various fishery harbours, large and small, I have seen a great need for such investment. That investment would trigger local effort and the creation of local employment. I will, therefore, make every effort to secure additional funding to address the gap as far as possible. The lack of facilities and general underdevelopment of our fishing harbours is difficult to justify given their importance for coastal regions and communities.
Aquaculture offers important development opportunities for coastal regions with few, if any, alternative prospects for employment. It is still a relatively young industry in Irish terms but has grown quickly in the last 15 years to a point where it now accounts for 25 per cent of the value of our total fish production. Over 1,000 people are employed full time in aquaculture with a further 3,000 in part time jobs. Total output is now valued at over £50 million and could double to over £100 million by 1999. Investment under the operational programme will sustain existing jobs and production and generate new employment in the sector and in processing where aquaculture is increasingly a key supplier of raw material.
There is a clear consensus right across the spectrum of interests on the need to put in place a new framework which will ensure that aquaculture development is securely underpinned by a streamlined transparent licensing process in the interests of the industry and all other concerns. The legislation governing aquaculture is almost 15 years old. It pre-dates significant aquaculture development in Ireland. An overhaul is long overdue to reflect changed conditions, new thinking and the needs of all concerned. It will also contribute to sustainable and balanced management of the coastal zone.
We hope to bring forward proposals fairly soon which will address the issues comprehensively and which duly reflect the needs and concerns of all parties. The Minister of State at the Department of the Marine is deeply involved in that matter.
I wish to take this opportunity to comment on the compatibility of salmon farming and sea trout angling or, perhaps, the lack of compatibility. I am firmly of the view that there is room for both. The sea trout task force report has given us a practical and sensible blueprint for the way forward. The programme of action, based on the task force report and informed by ongoing scientific research, is being implemented as a high priority.
The national objective must be to combine the sustainable development of salmon farming with the preservation of sea trout as an important contribution to local economies and jobs. The action taken to date appears to be paying dividends in that sea trout stocks have shown encouraging signs of recovery. It will be a long haul, however, and will take wholehearted commitment and cooperation and some compromise on all sides for the foreseeable future.
Our inland fisheries are a valuable resource. Concentrated mainly in the more disadvantaged areas of the country, they offer significant opportunities for jobs and economic activity. The full potential of our inland fisheries will be realised through strategies for the management, protection, development, conservation and also the marketing of this valuable natural resource.
The Exchequer grant to support the work of the fisheries boards in 1995 is in excess of £10 million. In addition, significant EU Structural Funding will support investment of some £19 million up to 1999 in the conservation, development and protection of our rivers, lakes and fish stocks. This will contribute directly to an enhanced angling tourism product with consequent generation of jobs and revenue.
The development of our marine resources will be underpinned by the national marine research effort. I am sure Senators will welcome the enhanced funding provided for the research component in the fisheries operational programme. This investment of £8 million will be directed towards project based research to underpin the development of the marine sectors, upgrade infrastructure and to provide an enhanced research vessel capability.
That programme is being implemented and administered by the Marine Institute in conjunction with the Department. An enhanced grant allocation of £850,000 has also been provided to the Marine Institute for 1995. This is a significant increase compared with its 1994 allocation and will enable the institute to position itself well to oversee the national marine research effort and deliver on its statutory remit. The Marine Institute is really in its infancy, but I have great hopes for the contribution which it will make to the overall development of the marine sector as it has a first class chief executive with many ideas, initiative and energy.
I have highlighted some of the main themes which will occupy me during my time as Minister for the Marine. The Marine has a valuable contribution to make to national development and I am fully committed to realising that potential.
We face big challenges; a growing economy and ever increasing use of the marine resource brings increased risks to the marine environment and to safety. The pressures for development of the public marine resource lead to competition over the use and increase of the resource, which is very evident in many coastal areas where conflicts arise between the needs of leisure for marinas and the crowding of harbours with commercial use by fisheries and so on. These conflicts have to be resolved at local rather than national level, which I am anxious to develop a means of doing. We must strike the balance between development and conservation in the interests of all beneficiaries of our marine resource.
I look forward to hearing the contributions from the floor. I apologise again that I have to leave, but the Minister of State, Deputy Gilmore, will be here.
Before the Minister leaves, I wish to take the opportunity to welcome him to the House. It is a great honour for me, as a Senator who has represented the Cork South Central area for the last ten years, to see, at long last, Deputy Coveney sitting in this House as Minister for Defence and the Marine. I congratulate him on his appointment. He made a great contribution here this morning and has put a great deal of work into the Departments of the Marine and Defence since the first week he took over.
We have opposed each other at times but at other times, we have knocked on doors together. I am delighted that, at long last, Deputy Coveney is a Minister, not alone for his contribution to the Departments of the Marine and Defence, but for his contribution to the country generally. He will be a very fine Minister and for a very long time to come we will have the opportunity of using his ability, concern, interest and, most importantly, his motivation. He is a highly motivated person——
I did not expect this.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
Neither did I.
I take pride in the fact that I always said that Deputy Coveney had the ability to be a Minister. It is long overdue and I wish him well on behalf of the people of Cork, in particular. I am also delighted to see that he has recognised that Cork should come first.
This is a much nicer House than the other one.
I also welcome the Minister to the House and congratulate him on his appointment. I understand why he has to leave; it is not always easy to arrange to be everywhere one wants to be. However, he should come to Dingle in the next couple of weeks and we can have a chat.
I am going there at the end of April.
I wish him well and thank him for coming to the House. I am sure that the Minister of State, Deputy Gilmore, will be an able replacement; he also spends a great deal of his time in Kerry.
Thank you.
I am delighted to have this opportunity to respond to the programme for fishing development for 1994-96. I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Gilmore, to the House. We will have a question and answer session later, but we will not be too hard on him. Any criticisms which I make today are not personal criticisms of the Minister or the Minister of State but of errors which were made in the whole fisheries programme over the years regardless of who the Minister was, as he is only the office holder.
I am very critical of this document. It covers everything, but I do not know how anybody could stand over a document which can only give us information up to 1992. In any small business in the country the manager can press a button and say how much he owes and is owed up to the previous day, but the information in this document only goes up to 1992. We do not know the figures for the landings of fish after 1992. In this day and age the Department of the Marine must know how much was landed in the last week, month and year. How can the Department plan for the future when it has no idea what happened in 1993 or 1994? The figures should be up to date.
The document refers only briefly to the fishing fleet and says that there are currently 1,460 vessels on the Irish fishing register, which is about 56,000 gross tonnage. According to my calculations, that is an average of 40 tonnes per boat. If the Minister is to plan ahead, he needs to know how many half deckers, 30 foot, 40 foot, 50 foot and 60 foot boats and how many long distance boats, from 80 foot upwards, are in the fleet; what their capacity is and what kind of equipment they have on board.
We need to know the up to date landing figures and the size of the fleet. Senator Daly and I have the opportunity to give our views on this today, but we do not have these figures. I am very critical of those in the Department of the Marine who compile these figures.
I know that it will never happen, but if I was the Minister for the Marine I would not have launched a document such as this in Kilmainham, as it is old hat and I have seen it all before. There is a new document every couple of years with great ideas for the next three or four years, but nothing happens unless somebody puts in the boot. Dingle would never have been developed but for Senator Daly and the former Taoiseach, Mr. Haughey. Pressure was put on to develop Dingle, but the Department was totally against it. I will not make an issue of this, but we can see it is a success story today. The Minister of State knows Dingle and he can see the figures up to 1992; the face of the town and the peninsula has been changed and there has been much job creation.
I also stand over the Minister's decision at that time to issue 20 licences for boats to go to the continental shelf to fish for uncaught quotas. Up to 12 of those licences went to Dingle and good use was made of them; the landings of fish there have increased. There were many complaints from other ports around the coast that Dingle was getting everything but I believe eight of those licences have still not been issued by the Department. If they have not been issued, there is room for them in Dingle and they should go there as quickly as possible.
There is room in Kerry for everything.
The document mentions the fleet. After all the years spent developing the fishing industry, it is strange that the Department or whoever is responsible for this report would stand over what is said about our fleet. The different segments of fishing are outlined and on segment II it reads:
Much of the fleet is old and lacks the facilities and equipment available to modern vessels. Working conditions for crew on deck can be extremely dangerous.
It goes on to say that vessels in segment II fish for whitefish, etc. The report says we must cut down on the stocks and the authors almost praise themselves for reducing the amount of fish we catch:
In recent years, given the poor state of stocks in Area VIIA, a considerable reduction has been achieved[.]
What is wrong with the Department? What we should want to do is catch fish and make this a better place to live, yet here the Department is putting itself on a pedestal for reducing the amount of fish caught. I hope Senator Daly is listening. Not only that, but the Department is proud to state that in this document. I ask the Minister to speak to those responsible for the report.
On segment III, the report states:
Vessels in Segment III fish for generally high value ... species[.] The boats in this segment are in general over 20 years of age.
The boats in segment IV are also over 20 years old and of poor quality; they need to be replaced. Basically we have no fleet. No one would want to drive a 20 year old car in which the speedometer, the fuel gauge and the hand-brake did not work, and where the driver needed three hands — one to turn the key, one to pull the choke and one to pull the starter. Is that the kind of boats we have and if so, why?
Money must be invested in the fleet, but the sums mentioned in the report are not enough. If the money cannot be put into the fleet we must turn to people in the private sector who have the money and ask them to invest, buy boats and hire crews — it does not matter if we have to go to Spain and France for them. We in Ireland do not have deckhands or crews because we are not training them properly for fishing. There is a little school in Greencastle, but it is useless. I visited it when I was a director of BIM and it made me sad.
To organise training, fisherman and the training sector must come together. If I had a boat, I would take on an apprentice who would fish with me for six months or some other period until we see if he is able to fish. I was sent one trainee from Greencastle. I took him salmon fishing with me — that trip was semi-legal. The trainee lasted one week, although he was being well paid after coming from Greencastle. Everyday he had terrible seasickness and was not fit for fishing. He disappeared.
The trainees should be given three to six months on the boat and then returned to the school to learn a deckhand's skills — splicing ropes and wires, mending nets, cleaning decks — or the skills for the engine room or those of a navigator. A young man can to learn about fishing in Greencastle and get a certificate, but it is useless to him because he has not yet set foot on a boat. The first day he goes to sea he will be extremely sick. Before the Minister concludes, I ask him to give the figures for people trained in Greencastle over the last five years and to say whether they are fishing today or if all the training has been wasted.
The fishing industry and the way it is seen by the Department both need major re-organisation. We are quickly going down the drain, so it is great to see an occasional success story. I want to mention a Donegal man, Mr. Kevin McHugh, and his new boat. An Leas-Chathaoirleach will tell me I should not use names but I will say good things about him. An Leas-Chathaoirleach probably knows the man well. I was on the board of BIM in 1989 which did not want to give Mr. McHugh a grant for his boat. He bought the boat, forced the board into helping him and we can see today what he has done for the fishing industry. These are strange times. I support many of the activities pursued by BIM; but in that case it was being held back by the Department of the Marine and the Department of Finance, instead of giving BIM its head and allowing it to develop the fishing industry.
I have spent too long on this topic, so I will deal with other matters. I have spoken for years about conservation. particularly of lobsters. I have written letters to the Department to allow lobster pots with escape holes, as are used in other countries. These have an entrance for lobsters but there is also a small hole near the bottom of the pot so small lobsters can escape. Lobster fishers will not catch as many small lobsters. There is a disadvantage in using these pots because other small predators can come in the hole and eat the bait, so perhaps it may not be as good as it should be.
However, there are problems all over the coast at present. I fished lobster between 1978 and 1984. On average, I caught about 50 dozen lobsters a week each summer. I am told that a person doing the same amount of fishing with the same boat and the same number of pots would be lucky to catch two to three dozen a week now. I have to check if those figures are accurate.
Our training is not good enough. We have no fleet and it is necessary to invest money in a fleet. We have to think of conservation. To be honest, I do not think of aquaculture as fishing. I am against it but it is not in the same category as boats, fishing and nets. It is different. Aquaculture is an investment for rich people who can get money back from it but, in my book, it does not constitute fishing in any form.
If we have a fleet, we need landing facilities. I would be less than honest if I did not say that we have landing places. In fairness, we have reasonably good landing places but they need to be upgraded. Many things are essential in these ports. The five main ports are Donegal, Rossaveel, Castletownbere, Dunmore East and Howth. Dingle follows close behind them. The on-shore facilities for upgrading the quality of fish are not there. It is ludicrous to see a man standing on a fish box on the pier in the Dingle auctioning fish. It is not right in this modern day that such a thing is happening.
The former Minister said that there is not much point in having a good fishing fleet and harbours if one does not have a road from the port. A proper road is essential. If one is trying to get out of Castletownbere at 4 a.m. and heading off for Spain or France with an articulated truck loaded with 25 or 30 tonnes of fish, one finds that the first 25 or 30 miles of road out of Castletownbere are brutal. It is the same in Dingle. Dunmore East and Donegal are just as bad. If a person is going from Killybegs to Spain with an articulated lorry, by the time they get to Dublin or another Irish port, they feel as if they are halfway to Spain because the heavy work is over. The Minister should have talks with the Department of the Environment about improving the road network to the main ports. I am not looking for dual carriageways or a major road. I just ask that they be upgraded and improved because of the nature of the traffic using them.
What happened to the £6 or £7 billion we were to get? Why is such a small amount of it going into fishing? Let us be fair and honest. It is my belief that, over the years, fishing was the ransom paid to free agriculture and other businesses. That is my gut feeling. Surely at this late stage there should be some compensation from the other sectors. I would fight very hard and support the Minister of State and the Minister, Deputy Coveney, in their efforts to get some extra money.
One has only to observe the advantage fishing has above anything else. One could get a 100 acre farm for nothing but one would have to buy cows and set a crop. There is labour and expense involved. However, if one was given a boat, all one would have to do is go out in it because everything one takes out of the water is free. It does not have to be set and it does not have to grow. All one has to do is take care of the fish stocks.
I ask the Minister, why, considering all the money we will get, we could not have fixed up another two or three ports. I think of ports such as Union Hall in Cork, Helvick in the Gaeltacht or our own place in Dingle. Ballydavid is wide open. I could never understand why Ballydavid, in the Dingle Gaeltacht, was never developed. It is within five minutes on a boat of the richest fishing grounds in Europe and there was never any development there.
Both the Minister of State and the Minister must have been very disappointed at the money allocated for the development of fishing over the years. I believe the Minister of State's portfolio has been downgraded. Initially there was a Minister for Fisheries who looked after nothing but fisheries. I think Tom Fitzpatrick was the first Minister for Fisheries. It subsequently was tied in with Defence and the Marine, which covers everything. The Department has been downgraded. Ministers with other portfolios in all Governments could not care less about fishing. They think it is like the hind teat of the cow and they do not care. They believe it is useless and they said: "Give it to Eamon Gilmore and Hugh Coveney. Let them look after it and take it out of our way". I have some advice for the Minister of State. He should be like Senator Daly when he was Minister: stand his ground and dig in. He should not be like the Minister. He should not take "no" for an answer. He should just tell the civil servants how he wants to do things and what he is going to do. They have been proved wrong over the years and all the advisers have been wrong. If they had not been wrong, we would not be in the mess we are in today. Their greatest boast is that they have succeeded in reducing the catch of fish. I could be here all day if we were to sit down and have a nice quiet chat about all the aspects.
I will be asking the Minister of State a few questions later. I am very disappointed about the overall amount of money allowed to keep fishing going over the next three or four years. I am also disappointed that the Department has not learnt over the years to be up to date with their facts and figures. I am disappointed that there is not a proper plan for the modernisation of the fleet. To be truthful, it is only a Mickey Mouse plan giving a couple of pounds here and there. That will not do. Considering the age of the boats, there is a need for major investment.
There is also a need for on shore port facilities. We do not have a good ice plant in Dingle. If the Minister of State visits Dingle, I will show him the situation. If one puts ice on fish and allows it to rest for two or three hours until the ice starts to melt, the fish changes colour because the ice is not clean. It is unhygienic. There was an application for planning permission to build an ice plant on the pier in Dingle. I went to a senior official of Kerry County Council to inquire as to whether the planning permission would be granted. He said it would be granted over his dead body. If this is the attitude of county councils to the development of fishery harbours we will never have ice plants.
I extend an invitation to the Minister to come to Dingle at any time. People will be happy to point out the facts to him. The Minister and the Minister of State would be as welcome as the flowers in May. We will try to show them the problems which exist and for which we are seeking money.
I look forward, as I am sure the Minister does, to the introduction of the Harbours Bill, which will include the designation of Dingle as a major fishery harbour centre. This is covered by three lines in the Bill. I wrote to the former Minister and asked him to deal with Dingle in a separate Bill, before he introduced the main Bill. This matter could be dealt with in five minutes in the Seanad.
I am very disappointed with the plans. However, I am most disappointed with the overall allocation of money. If we had the required money we would have everything.
I wish to share my time with some of my colleagues.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
I welcome the Minister to the House. I wish to concentrate on the inland fisheries element of marine policy and I was interested to hear the Minister's comments this morning when he stated:
Concentrated mainly in the more disadvantaged areas of the country they offer significant opportunities for jobs and economic activity. The full potential of our inland fisheries will be realised through strategies for the management, protection, development, conservation and also the marketing of this valuable natural resource.
I have a copy of a policy document produced by the South Inny Anglers' Club. This is a small club on the Inny River, a tributary of the River Shannon in counties Longford, Westmeath and Cavan. The document covers a general approach to the development of inland fishing and the tourism potential of coarse and trout fishing. I mention this document because its broad policy would be suitable for all areas in the midlands and east midlands tourism area, where there are numerous fresh water lakes and rivers. There is huge potential for this industry, which is growing steadily.
Inland fishing by tourists has a great spin off for the community because these people tend to stay in small hotels or pub accommodation. They spend their day on the lake or river and in the evenings they are prepared to have their meals and a few pints and go to whatever local entertainment is available. They tend to fit into the natural environment and entertainment which already exists. The general input in terms of the national economy is quite small and this is all the more reason why resources should be concentrated on restocking rivers and lakes and so on.
There is a huge need to develop off-the-bank fishing. For example, on the River Shannon at Lanesboro, there is an inflow of warm water at the power station. The area has huge fishing potential and there is a great concentration of anglers there. For some time, the local tourism committee has been calling for better facilities on the river banks. This applies to most fishing areas in the midlands.
Traditionally, this part of the country has not been tourism oriented, but in latter years the people are fighting back. They are coming together and there is a great realisation that this natural asset can be developed. It can be shared and it can add to the national economy. An increasing number of people are becoming interested in providing accommodation and entertainment facilities for tourists who come to fish.
This natural asset should be developed, but it is important that it is also looked after in terms of pollution control. There must be a co-ordinated approach in order to maintain the huge potential of this asset. It is also important that the Minister and his Department, through the various regional fishery boards, concentrate on this matter. I am glad the Minister is bringing forward a policy in that regard, given that extra EU funding for fishing has been approved.
I have experience of dealing with the excellent staff of the regional fishery boards. I am sure Senator Daly agrees that they are excellent. I also have experience of local angling clubs and if they want any help or advice the officers of the regional boards are willing to oblige. They will turn up at night, after office hours, to meet these people. They have great enthusiasm and interest, which encourages other people to realise that this area has developmental potential for the future.
We are capable of presenting fishing in this country as being as good as, if not better than, in any other country. There is a huge market on our doorstep. An enormous number of people from Britain could be attracted to come here to fish. All they want is good clean water and good facilities at a reasonable price. This is also important. I wish the Minister well in his role.
I wish to share my time with Senator Cotter.
Acting Chairman
Is that agreed? Agreed.
I welcome the Minister to the House. I listened to Senator Fitzgerald talking about the problems associated with fishing. However, I wonder if he is correct in saying there is an unfortunate impression that the Departments of the Marine and Defence are considered to be in a lower class to other ministries. If so, it would be most unfair.
The Senator mentioned the potential of fishing. I come from a city but I live quite near the sea in Cork and we are aware of the value and potential of fishing.
It is a sad that we have to argue — and a good argument was made before Christmas — about other countries, Spain in particular, being allowed into the Irish Box. Having listened to Senator Fitzgerald I wonder if we have a policy of continuing the way we are going. I understand the financial aspect. There is a view that County Donegal, in particular Killybegs, is doing exceptionally well from fishing. It has the biggest boat ever bought for Irish fishing. Why should we not have a policy where we give an incentive by buying a big boat for each of the big fishing ports? I do not deny it would be costly, but if it can be done in Donegal there is no reason why it cannot be done in other areas.
I wish to refer to the harbours legislation as I am involved with the Cork Harbour Commissioners and I am particularly conscious of the work of the harbours. With regard to competition between harbours, will we be taking the right approach in the Harbours Bills that will be introduced? Are we taking enough account of what is happening in harbour areas? Cork port is doing exceptionally well, but there is no reason why it could not do better. There is a danger that we are creating competition between ports, particularly on the east and west coasts.
I know how much the Minister of State is involved in the Harbours Bills, and I know he and the Minister are aware that we are the only EU member not linked directly to Europe. We should be making a strong case at EU level for finance to develop proper shipping, safety precautions and the harbour areas, particularly the development of the industrial areas within the harbours.
I was involved in the setting up of Cork Freeport. In theory the legislation relating to it was excellent, but it is not working satisfactorily in practice with regard to the opportunities our harbour facilities afford that other countries do not have — the opportunity to get a fast turnaround for heavy shipping, for example. I am conscious of the moneys that have been spent over the last ten to 12 years on deep water berths in Cork and Dublin and the development of Dublin and Rosslare, but we should be looking at opportunities we are not presently availing of. We should be taking advantage of the fast turn around for heavy shipping, for example. We should be giving the facilities; we have the workforce and the experience.
We must look at the type of shipping coming to Ireland and the comparative cost of the Irish worker. The loss of 30 per cent of the total shipping in the world down to 15 per cent over a ten year period is discouraging and worrying. Before we have any further consideration of the Harbours Bills it is important to have discussions with local groups, as is stated in the policy review. As Senator Fitzgerald and others said, it is important to listen to those who know best. I know the Minister of State will do that. It is important we do not have a situation where there is competition between each port, particularly on the east coast. There is already great competition for business between Rosslare. Dublin and Cork.
Why is it that at EU level there are objections by other nations to have extra passenger shipping leaving Cork and Rosslare? Why do the French authorities object to these extra shipping routes? They would not give the opportunity to Irish Ferries to use other ports in France. There a lot of traffic between Cork and Rosslare and Roscoff, and it is good business for Ireland and France. France does well from Irish tourists and French people like to come to Ireland. I object to a situation where the chamber of commerce of Brest was prepared to give docking facilities for ferries coming from Cork and Rosslare but it was objected to by the French authorities. I would like to know why they got away with that. We could not get away with it as we could not make objections as easily as the French. If they are objecting and are prepared to say that they do not need to use other ports, that Roscoff can take all the business, why is there not the opportunity to build another extension in Roscoff so that extra shipping can come into Ireland at peak times? We must make that argument. If they can object there is no reason why we cannot argue that we are entitled to something else in its place.
I congratulate the Minister and the Minister of State on the items outlined this morning with regard to marine policy. Senator Fitzgerald is right in that fishing is big business for Ireland. I sell a lot of fish and at certain times of the year one cannot get fresh fish. That is a sad reflection on us and is due to the type of fishing vessels we have. We should create a policy where each port, such as Dingle or Castletownbere, should have one big boat and that would be an incentive to others to work out of the port.
This is an important opportunity for us to discuss an area which does not get as much attention as those of us who are interested in it would like. I live in a Border county where fisheries and tourism are interrelated. County Monaghan is the lowest earner from tourism in the country, which is not surprising given its inland and Border location. County Monaghan has the longest boundary on the Border of any county. It has suffered greatly due to the troubles and the existence of the Border.
A great opportunity for growth is available to us to develop tourism, given the movement towards peace, and the waterways are an important element of that. We have important waterways like the Rivers Erne, Foyle, Blackwater and Finn and a huge number of isolated lakes. It is a great resource, but our difficulty is how to handle it.
We have a number of concerns, including, for example, the proper development of the water and its marketing thereafter and how to balance intensive agriculture, which we have in abundance, with the proper development of our waterways. Pollution control and such factors are uppermost in our minds. County Monaghan is a leader in the production of poultry, producing approximately 70 per cent of all Irish poultry. One can imagine the difficulties we have in controlling waste from that scale of production. We also have a huge mushroom business and there is also a huge waste problem arising from that. Indeed, I was disappointed when a project which would have singlehandedly controlled most of that waste by using it to produce electricity was recently turned down. Another look will have to be taken at that. There needs to be co-ordination between all the various interests when one is considering a project like that.
Monaghan has always had very intensive agriculture and small holdings and one can imagine the level of pollution that tends to arise from that. How do we get a balance between the various elements involved? Most people would approach this positively. There is an impressive take up level for pollution control grants in my region. One will find that this will be the same for the new round of grants. The effort is being made and we need co-ordinated support from all the areas involved to give us a break. There needs to be some sort of peace dividend on the ground and this is one area where it could be seen.
Our waters have not been developed properly. We need proper access to waterways and good shore development. We also want the fisheries board to look after our stocks and ensure the fish are healthy and abundant. There is little point in bringing fishermen to the area if they cannot catch fish from the waterways, because they certainly will not return.
I welcome the tone of the Minister's speech. He proposes to carry out a complete overhaul of marine policy, which I have no doubt will include those policies in regard to the inland waterways. I ask the Minister of State to note the level of co-operation that exists between the regional tourism organisations and the Inland Fisheries Board. I have always felt that it was lacking. While they are working well on their own, they should be co-ordinated.
I have beside me a wonderful new production — the Minister of State may have been involved with it — entitled Angling over the Border. It shows the value of our waterways very well pictorially. However, when one looks at the acknowledgments in it — it was produced by the fisheries board — there is no mention of the regional tourism organisations. That underlines the concerns I have. The development, marketing and use of the waters for fishing must be combined. I feel that this is currently not the case. While the fisheries board is working hard on its own to develop the waterways and the regional tourism organisations are doing the same, there is a large slice of middle ground which has not been filled. I ask the Minster to tell the Department, when it carries out its review, to look closely at ways and means of getting better co-ordination at that level. because we need it. It does not make any sense at all to have one group spending a lot of money on development and another group working separately on promotion when they should he almost synonymous. The two boards should overlap heavily and that is currently not the case. It would be far more beneficial to us if there was a well co-ordinated effort by everybody involved. Obviously, co-ordination means co-operation.
The other area with which I have difficulty is that a lot of our lakes are at the end of small roads. What is the point of having good waterways if one does not have proper road access to them? We need — I am confident we will get it over the next few years — a co-ordinated approach involving the Department of the Environment. There are all sorts of stories about tourists arriving in certain parts of the country having their cars damaged by potholes. They spend a few extra days trying to fix them and go away with this bad feeling. They will certainly not return. The difficulty is that they will tell everybody about their bad experience, although they also tend to talk about the good ones. A positive effort must be made to give these people good experiences. Co-ordination across the board from all those relevant people should be the centrepiece of all our work and I leave it for the Minister to tackle.
I have agreed to reduce my contribution to ten minutes in order to accommodate the Labour Party and the former Minister; I think they might have something to say. I welcome the Minister and wish him well in his new portfolio. I know the Minister will bring to it the energy and enthusiasm he has for everything else he tackles.
I come from a town where fishing was its life blood and main industry until tourism caught on.
He is going to try to cash in on Dingle.
To pick up on one of Senator Fitzgerald's points, I believe that we have sold out to Europe to some extent in this area. Our fishing industry has lost out in the European context. Perhaps it has been used as a bargaining chip to make gains in other areas. There are fewer boats in Dingle now then there were when I was growing up 30 years ago. Why is this the case?
I want to refer briefly to the Canadian business. When the Minister responds, I would not like to hear him regurgitate the legal response in his speech, which was clear enough. I note the Minister's objection to the fact that Canadian domestic law gives it the right to arrest transgressing fishermen on the high seas — I do not want to get into that either. I want to hear what we have to say about the fact that, whatever about the means, when the Canadians did finally look inside the Spanish boat, they found that the vast majority of its catch was undersized. Who will take responsibility for that and who will take it up with our European partners?
When Spanish boats have been taken in by Irish fisheries vessels over the last number of years we have frequently found secret holds. What has been done to deal with that kind of practice? I am not raising these issues in a carping way, but Irish fishermen and those involved in this industry do not understand why we are keeping to the rules all the time while others are not.
I also want to raise the question of ferries. I thought that the Treaty of Rome was clear about the movement of people, capital etc. The idea that an Irish company would not be able to land its passengers in a French port of its choosing seems to go completely against what was intended by this treaty, whatever the Maastricht Treaty might have done to it — as far as I know, it did not affect in any way the free movement of people between one state and another. The deregulation of entry and exit through air and sea ports should have allowed the Irish company to make that decision. I would like to hear how we stand on that issue.
The Minister said in his speech that we have no traditional fishing rights off the coast of Canada. There is a different opinion on that in Dingle, because we sent a man there approximately 1600 years ago and we made a saint of him afterwards. St. Brendan left Dingle and established traditional fishing rights off the North American coast — off Canada and the US — and we are not going to give them up so we would like to be represented there.
In a book published in 1947, called It All Happened, a Kerryman living in Dublin wrote about the fishermen from Loughshinny in north Dublin who spent most summers in the 1920s and 1930s fishing off the coast of Newfoundland. I disagree with the statement in the Minister's speech that we do not have traditional fishing rights. We have been fishing there since before Canada was established — for 1600 years — and we should be allowed to continue to do so. I ask the Minister to take that up with the Canadians. I would also like to know about the future of halibut and cod stocks in that area — I am not talking about the figures in the Minister's speech. What are the rules about fishing off the Great Banks? What jurisdiction does the North Atlantic Fishing Organisation have and what is our connection with it?
As Senator Cregan said, we are the only island state left in the European Union. Some years ago we even discussed a rail link under the Irish Sea. Early proposals for European rail systems showed a dotted line under the Irish Sea, but that has since gone by the board. In order to recognise our difficulties in terms of communications, everybody in Europe dealing with fisheries policy and exports should be made drive a heavy truck from Castletownbere to Dingle to Killybegs and back to Rosslare. Roads to ports are substandard, particularly those to Castletownbere, Dingle and Killybegs. That is something which we should deal with quickly.
Except those on the east coast.
I would like to hear the Minister's views on training for skippers of boats. Senator Fitzgerald and I grew up at a time when it was not unusual for someone with little training to be given control of a boat which would be valued at £0.75 million today. They were often expected to look after them with little training. I would like to hear how that is being developed.
Fewer than 2 per cent of those employed, or 16,000 to 20,000 people, work in the fishing industry. I would like to hear more about added value in terms of exports. I understand we land about 100 million tonnes of fish each year at a cost of approximately £100 million. Our exports are worth approximately £200 million which is an added value on whatever proportion we export. It is worrying that so many frozen whole fish are being exported, particularly when they could be used for processing so as create employment here.
I recall looking at figures less than seven or eight years ago which showed that one person was employed on land for every eight at sea. I understand that has improved substantially in the meantime. What is the situation at present in terms of added value in the processing industry? How many jobs are being created on shore? We should double the value of the fish catch being exported. Our total exports are twice the value of the landed value of the fish. We do not export all of the fish and there is a clear opening for much development.
I would like to draw the Minister's attention to the state of the fishing fleet, which was raised Senator Cregan. The fish processing industry and those dependent on fish sales need a constant supply, which can be determined by the weather as much as anything else. Fishing activity in certain weather conditions can be determined by the size and type of boat. The most recent figures which I saw showed that almost 50 per cent of boats were 20 years old and the majority of the fleet was less than 40 feet or 12 metres long, which means we cannot always fish. There are years when we do not reach our quota in terms of what we are entitled to in certain fish stocks.
Every two months we read about problems of disease in aquaculture in the newspapers. What progress have we made in that area? Surely there is a need for research and development? I do not know where it is being done or about the status of boats like the Lough Beltray or of the Sherkin Island station. What research is being done on disease? On the question of marketing, what restaurant in Dublin would serve me a reasonably priced fresh lobster? How can I be sure that the salmon I get is not a pale version of fresh salmon? We should do more processing in the aquaculture area rather than with sea catches.
Will the Minister respond to the question of environmental problems, that is, conservation, which was mentioned by a number of Members, and pollution? The Department of the Environment demands sludge tanks or an area for dealing with it in every port. As far as I know, there is none in any port and it is being dumped. Earlier we heard about the inland problems of mushrooms and poultry, but there is also a problem at sea. The more intensive it becomes and the more technology that is introduced into the industry, the greater the need for dealing with sludge from boats. There is nowhere to deal with it at present. As far as I know, it cannot be dealt with in Dingle, Killlybegs or Castletownbere — I am sure the Minister will correct me if I am wrong. Research and development is required in these areas. We need a constant supply of fish to make this industry more workable and useful and this requires a new and large fleet and more technology. We must look at conservation, catches and infrastructure in terms of roads and auction halls. Dingle, for example, does not have an auction hall.
I am glad to have the opportunity to speak, but I would have liked to have had more time. I thank the Minister for coming to the House today to announce this fundamental overhaul of marine policy and I congratulate the Minister and the Minister of State on their appointment. I compliment the Minister, Deputy Coveney, for visiting ports in west Cork to get first hand information on the position in the ports and on landing areas along the coast. His visit to Roaring Water Bay was deeply appreciated by the fishermen there, who encounter dangers in bringing mussels ashore, dragging in boats in the dark of winter time. There is a need for proper facilities for the marvellous fishing industry that is developing along the south west coast — the development of mussels in our sheltered coves and harbours — and the tremendous potential that is there for future development.
I welcome the Minister's statement on the fundamental overhaul of marine policy because fishing has been for too long the cinderella of the Irish economy. I also welcome the Minister's indication of having public debates, because this is where we will discover what is wanted and required. The full potential of fishing has never been highlighted properly in this country. We talk about regional and rural development and job creation. Fishing can play a major part in these areas. At the moment there is a tremendous number of people employed directly in fishing on the south west coast of Cork, those who are involved in aquaculture and the spin-off from that. The work on land is excellent and can be further developed if a proper overhaul takes place.
I am glad to see that the Minister is taking full account of the problem with fish stocks. I am not worried about what is going on between the Spaniards and the Canadians. I am not taking sides. However, I am seriously concerned about the protection of Irish fishermen, because their smaller boats are being rammed by bigger Spanish ones when they meet at sea. Ireland will have to be strong on this issue and raise it at EU level. I do not want to see any boat or fishing tackle damaged or the lives of Irish fishermen endangered by people who are pirating our waters. The Canadians can handle their own affairs; we have to handle ours.
In the short amount of time I have I would also like to speak about the Harbours Bill. I am very glad to see money being pumped into Cork and Waterford and other places. There are hundreds of other smaller ports along our coast, however, where very valuable economic work is being done in fishing, tourism and other areas related to the sea, which may be lost if EU money is only given to the big ports. There are many jetties and piers along our coast that need financial aid and these will have to be developed also.
The whole field of aquaculture needs research and proper policy. I am pushing for proper development in this area as well as that of our lakes. There is tremendous potential for fishing and tourism to be developed on Irish lakes. There is a lake near my own home where local people have formed an organisation, stocked the lakes, put in a little pier and brought in boats. It is a tremendous tourist attraction already.
I have continuously spoken about the inhabited islands off the south west coast of Cork and the need for their proper development. I spoke to the Minister of State, Deputy Carey, recently. He has been given responsibility for islands, but he is in the awful position that he has responsibility for the islands but has no budget. How can he do anything for the islands unless he has a budget? If he has to send people to the Department of the Marine, local authorities or Government agencies to get money for the islands, we are back to square one again. Deputy Carey should be given money to ensure that fundamentals like a proper landing place on the mainland and a proper landing place on the island are in place on all of the inhabited islands. There is potential for enormous prosperity on these islands if it is developed properly. Aquaculture, fishing, agriculture and other areas will have to be dealt with. There should be proper links between the Department of the Marine, other Departments, Government agencies and local authorities to have a comprehensive policy to deal with the island position.
I thank Senator O'Toole for giving me the opportunity to make some remarks on this very important issue. I wish both Ministers well and assure them of our co-operation in their task.
Senator Fitzgerald mentioned the headline that I set in the Department of the Marine. If Deputy Gilmore really wishes to be successful, I suggest that he might try to introduce the trout fishing licence and he will soon test his popularity.
Was that not tried before?
Acting Chairman
Trying to lose your job.
This is an opportune time to underline the necessity for legislation. My main purpose in intervening here is to impress upon the Minister the desirability of pressing ahead with the introduction of legislation in key areas that are of immense importance and need to be urgently dealt with. There is a special necessity to undertake a review of harbours legislation and to put commercial semi-State bodies in place to operate the harbours. I strongly suggest that he look at the Shannon Estuary Bill — which was prepared but never brought forward or completed — that dealt with putting a modern efficient structure in place to deal with developments in the Shannon Estuary. Each time the Shannon Estuary Bill has come before the Houses, the Dáil has collapsed. I strongly suggest that he think carefully before he brings that particular piece of legislation forward.
In relation to aquaculture, there is an urgent necessity to come to grips with the uncertainty in regard to the licensing of aquaculture projects. I fully support the development of aquaculture. Not only has it been recognised here as being vital to the development of employment and fish products, but it is recognised internationally also. A huge output in international aquaculture is now evident and the pace of development is going to accelerate, in view of the fact that fish stocks are declining. The collapse of the cod fishery industry in the north west Atlantic has brought about the incidents between the Spanish and Canadians. In Canada, 40,000 jobs were lost when the cod fishery industry collapsed. This underlines the urgency of having a very strong conservation policy in Ireland. I would be seriously worried about the changes from the 1 January next which allow Spanish boats access to the Irish Box. The Irish Box was a conservation measure, and a successful one, which needs to be protected. If the activities we have seen from Spanish boats up to now are continued in the Irish Box, then Irish fish stocks, jobs and fishing are at serious risk. We are appalled at the fact that, despite surveillance within the Community, a member state still has a fishing fleet with illegal holds, which takes undersized fish, is damaging the prospects for the livelihoods of many thousands of people in the Community and continues to flout the laws in this regard. I strongly urge the Minister of State to have the Irish naval and protection services carry out a thorough check of every Spanish boat operating anywhere within the Irish economic zone, as a matter of extreme urgency, because they are operating illegal holds and mechanisms which are taking undersized fish. This is damaging the prospect for recovery of international and local fisheries.
The Minister has a very wide remit in his Department. It would be impossible in the short time at our disposal to go into all the areas that are affected. I feel that there is a necessity on the part of the Minister and the Minister of State to look very carefully at the potential of our marine environment for leisure and recreation. The Minister did not mention this in his speech. I know he has a very wide brief and it would be impossible for him to cover everything. It is time that the Department of the Marine took positive action to undertake investment in the provision of marine leisure activities. Even though some new marinas have been built, the provision of marinas and recreational related amenities in the area of the marine is of vital importance. It has immense importance from the point of view of promoting tourism. It has many opportunities for the provision employment and many openings for people to develop facilities which would enhance tourism. It is an opportunity we have not exploited or developed up to now in some areas in west Clare where there is a pressing need for development. The Minister of State recently visited Dun-beg to see applications for leisure and marine related activities which would enhance some of the coastal communities and provide opportunities for employment.
Finally, I want to pay tribute to the Marine Search and Rescue Service, which is based in Shannon, and to congratulate all those who have been involved in that magnificent service which has saved hundreds of lives and has made an immense contribution to safety along the west coast. I would like to get confirmation from the Minister of the future of the Marine Search and Rescue Service in Shannon, if it will be continued along the same lines and what the prospects are for having the service put on a firm footing.
There has been much comment on the necessity for research and other activities. I congratulate the Marine Institute on its establishment and wish it well in its work. It is working in a vacuum because it does not have either the resources or the capability to effectively undertake the research that needs to be done. This is identified in the Government plan. The Government plan states stated that we would still have the Lough Beltray, which has done tremendous work within its limitations; but the Lough Beltray cannot undertake the work that needs to be done. I strongly suggest to the Minister of State that he take a personal interest in undertaking joint ventures with some of the other member states of the European Community in matters of research. I know that some research was done on the Shannon between the German and Irish research authorities. He could involve the universities, young graduates and people who have a general interest in marine research, with co-operation from institutions like the University of Limerick, institutions in the United Kingdom and the French Maritime Institute, which has a huge marine research programme and would be very willing to co-operate with us in joint ventures in this country. It is necessary to proceed with the legislation which is so urgently needed to deal with pollution of harbours and aquaculture. There is need to take stock immediately of the activities of Spanish boats, which take undersize fish and operate illegal holds. They damage the livelihoods of everybody in the Community with their activities. The Minister might take a careful look at how he can assist the marine leisure industry, which could develop job opportunities for thousands of people if it were developed to a satisfactory level.
May I ask how we will be proceeding in the next half an hour?
The Minister will make a statement and then, in order to avoid repetition, we would suggest that when one Senator asks a question, other Senators wishing to ask related questions should indicate so at that time. The Minister will then respond. Questions will be taken alternatively from each side of the House.
I welcome the opportunity to be here. I welcome this debate and the range of issues which were covered during the course of the discussion this morning. In deference to Members who wish to ask questions, I will keep my remarks brief. There were a number of points raised which were of a general nature and on which I wish to comment, and I will try to anticipate some of the questions which may arise. A number Senators referred to the marine, and to fisheries in particular, as being something of a cinderella in our economic and political life. There is some truth in that, historically. It is very regrettable that, as an island people, we have not given the marine and the fishing industries the kind of attention and priority they require. Senator Fitzgerald very eloquently described our fleet as being like a 20 year old crock of a car which is barely able to manage on the road. Of course, one of the things you do when you come across a crock is to have a look at the log book to find out the previous owners, to establish how they maintained the vehicle and why the did not trade it in at an earlier stage. I do not share the conclusion that Senator Fitzgerald drew: that the problem rests with either officials of the Department of the Marine, of Bord Iascaigh Mhara or the various agencies and the staffs of those agencies, who in my opinion are very highly motivated and hard-working officials. Perhaps the problem has to do with historic lack of policy and lack of political direction. That is one of the reasons the Minister for the Marine, Deputy Coveney, and I, when we took up office and inherited the Department of the Marine with all of its problems and opportunities, decided that we could not continue on as we were. We decided there was a necessity to carry out a fundamental overhaul of marine policy, to take stock of where we are as an island people and decide what we need to do with our marine resources and our fishing industry. As the Minister explained this morning, there are a number of dimensions to that overhaul: the seminars to be organised by the Marine Institute, the advisory council that we plan to put in place and the work of the consultants who will examine the work of the Department and of the various agencies. Many of the issues which arose here this morning are general issues of policy. Issues such as training are issues that I envisage will come under that remit.
Senator Fitzgerald also referred to the operational programme. He was critical of the fact that the figures are 1992 figures. The reason for that is that the programme, when it was agreed in 1994, was based on the figures then available. The up to date figures which Senator Fitzgerald is seeking are available and I will be happy to make those available to him. He also raised the question of conservation, particularly in reference to lobster. There is a very encouraging development, which has been initiated by lobster fishermen themselves and which is based on an experiment which worked very successfully in Maine in the United States. It involves notching, putting lobsters back in the water and is now operating very successfully around our coast. I attended a conference of the Lobster Association in Ballyshannon two weeks ago which dealt with that issue.
Inland fisheries were mentioned by a number of Senators, Senators Belton and Cotter in particular. I agree with what they had to say: there is enormous tourism potential in our inland fisheries. The booklet Senator Cotter drew attention to, Angling over the Border, is a publication I was very privileged to launch last week in Ballyconnell, with an attendance of 300 people, representing fishing and tourist interests from both sides of the Border who are promoting the enormous potential for angling on the five waterways that straddle the Border. There is an investment programme of about £19 million in the operational programme for tourism, which is aimed at encouraging angling-related tourism. Our intention is that those resources will be used primarily for the development of the water and its fish. There is not a great deal of merit in having very attractive driveways, little piers and so on, which may look very nice, if the angler cannot find fish in the river. The priority will be the development of the resource itself and the development of hatcheries to ensure the re-stocking of the rivers.
The Harbours Bill was mentioned by Senators Cregan and Daly. Again, we hope that legislation will be published very shortly. Senators will understand that, following the change of Government, there was a necessity for the new administration to consider the work that had been done by the previous Government in drafting that legislation. We have now completed this and the legislation will be published shortly.
Senator Cregan and Senator O'Toole mentioned the problem encountered by Irish Ferries in operating its service form Rosslare and Cork to Roscoff. Our position is that Irish Ferries has a right to operate a service from Rosslare and Cork to Brest or Roscoff. It was originally intended to use the port of Brest. but the company now plans to have a service to Roscoff this summer. The complaint regarding Roscoff is under consideration by the European Commission and I had a meeting last week with the French Transport Minister. I am confident that the European Commission investigation will be completed reasonably quickly and that, arising from these discussions and our contacts with the European Commission, the result of the investigation will be in favour of Irish Ferries and that there will be no further obstacles placed in the way of Irish Ferries operating a valuable service between Rosslare and Cork into Roscoff this summer.
Much has been said — thankfully, not in the House this morning, although it was inevitable that it would be referred to — regarding the Canadian dispute. The contradiction involved here was probably highlighted in the contribution made by Senator O'Toole, where on the one hand he questions the position we took with regard to this issue, but on the other hand he suggested that we may like to follow Saint Brendan and establish our traditional fishing rights off Newfoundland.
Were we to follow Saint Brendan and attempt to do this, the difficulty we would have is that we would have to share a 3,500 ton share of the total allowable catch, which is the disputed share, and we may well find ourselves in the unfortunate position in which others have found themselves. What we therefore must establish in this instance is that the issue in dispute is not one about conservation itself, because the reduction in the total allowable catch was established and we supported and continue to support this. The issue at stake here was the share of the catch and how the dispute over the share was to be resolved. We take the view that this dispute should be resolved by negotiation and we are now happy that the process of negotiation has got underway.
With regard to the question of overfishing, there can be no doubt about our position. We are absolutely opposed to overfishing. We believe strongly that any State, including Spain, whose fleets are engaged in overfishing, must be stopped, that the EU must use its resources to stop those practices from taking place and must take whatever action is necessary in order to achieve that.
I have already gone over time and I am anxious that there should be opportunity for questions, so if there are aspects which I have not covered I will be happy to deal with them by way of reply.
Acting Chairman
I call on Senator Wright to put a question to the Minister.
What role does the Minister see his Department having with regard to the protection of the asset our coastline and his plans for coastal zone management? The Minister will be aware that the same problems pertained in regard to County Fingal, County Meath and County Wicklow but the different ideas put forward should be pooled together in a form of coastal zone management. How does the Minister see this proceeding? I note that for the first time funding this year includes a provision for coastal erosion protection. It is a small amount, but at least it is a start and it is an issue requiring bigger debate, perhaps on Private Members' Business.
Acting Chairman
I call on any other Senator with a related question.
With regard to the matter raised by Senator Fitzgerald and myself on the policy of allowing one group of fishermen to buy a bigger ship——
Acting Chairman
Senator, I require a question which is related to coastal protection and I will call on you later with regard to your question. I call on Senator Daly.
Does the Minister have any funding at his disposal to deal with coastal erosion problems?
The Department of the Marine, the Department of the Environment and the Office of Public Works have co-operated and put together a working group on coastal zone management. This group is engaging a firm of consultants, the appointment of which will be announced shortly, to draw up a coastal zone management plan for our entire coastline and to take into account the up to date thinking with regard to coastal zone management, with all of its different aspects. We expect that the consultants will take approximately six months to complete their work in drawing up a coastal zone management plan for our coastline on which the three Departments involved in this matter can base their plans.
There is a sum of just over £5 million in the operational programme for coastal protection. It is quite small, but it is the first time that a provision has been made for the operational programme for coastal protection. The various local authorities, which in the first instance are the bodies which have the front line responsibility in this area, have been asked for their priorities for coastal protection within their local authority area. Those proposals are being assessed by the Department, but I must qualify this by saying that the amount of money available for coastal protection, having regard to the need for coastal protection works, is extremely small. We will therefore have to approach the allocation of those moneys in a targeted way.
Acting Chairman
Senator Cregan, Senator Maloney had indicated before you, and, as he has not spoken already, I will call on him first, followed by Senator Fitzgerald.
On page six of the speech by the Minister, Deputy Coveney, he refers to the development of Irish ports. However, the sum of £140 million which he indicated will be spent, with priority given to investment in the strategic ports — Cork, Dublin, Dún Laoghaire, Rosslare, Waterford and the Shannon estuary — does not include any allocation for County Donegal. Almost 60 per cent of the national catch comes through ports such as Rathmullan, Greencastle and Killybegs. Rathmullan contains one of the deepest water ports in Europe and is crying out for development, but there is no mention of this. It is first on the list of priorities of Donegal County Council for development.
With regard to ferry services, these are being provided from Buncrana to Rathmullan and from Moville to Magilligan Point, which is in Northern Ireland and which is hopefully a spin-off from the peace process. However, in the programme outlined by the Minister, no provision is made for County Donegal and I am disappointed with this. The Minister should give it priority and I ask him to do so. Will he also explain why no such provision has been provided?
Acting Chairman
Are there any related questions?
I do not wish to preempt the Minister's reply, but perhaps it is because there is over development in County Donegal. With regard to the port of Dingle, there is unfinished work to be undertaken. It has probably been delayed until it comes under the new major fishery harbours Bill. What are the plans for finishing the pier in Dingle, putting in place an ice plant there and so on? When will the Bill to designate Dingle be brought before the Oireachtas?
Can the Minister of State hold out any hope that money will be provided for small fishing ports and landing places to undertake essential works in them? The livelihoods of many small fishermen in them have been threatened.
Will these sort of ports be included in the Harbours Bill? Will a decision be made on the Fingal area of Skerries and Balbriggan? The legislation relating to these two harbours is absolutely antiquated. Nobody claims to have any authority over them. They are of great importance to the towns and I ask the Minister to make a decision as to who is in charge so that some finance can be provided for the area.
We are talking about two categories of ports, commercial and fishing. The reference in the Minister's speech to the development of, and investment in, ports relates to commercial ports. These are essentially the ports which come under the 1946 Harbours Act. The purpose of the legislation is primarily to establish 12 of those ports as commercial semi-State bodies and to provide for a number of options for the other ports which were listed under the 1946 Act. This legislation will be published shortly.
The operational programme provides for an investment of £140 million in the commercial ports. The primary purpose of this is to improve and benefit trade and tourism between this island and the rest of Europe. Many people and bodies have drawn attention to the competitive disadvantages suffered by Irish industry because of our transport distance from the rest of the European market. The investment in ports and shipping is primarily aimed at this.
The development of fishery ports comes under another heading. Provision has been made in the operational programme for these ports. Senators will understand that I would be reluctant to refer to the problems of individual ports with regard to funding and so on.
But you have noted it?
I have noted it and would be happy to respond to Senators on an individual basis if they wish to raise problems of individual ports with me. The intention is that Dingle will be a fisheries harbour centre under the provisions of the new harbour legislation.
May I ask the Minister about the problems regarding the fishing fleet? In Castletownbere at the moment we have Russian factory ships which are doing exceptionally well. The one heavy ship we have in our fishing fleet is berthed in Donegal. In what way can initiatives be given to people so that this type of fishing can be done from other harbours? Would the Department be prepared to decide that there should be ships of this calibre in other fishing harbours? Could money be made available from EU funding or grants from the Department of the Marine to help fishermen in this regard?
With regard to the exploitation of new species and the taking of our full quota, there is evidence we are not taking our full quota in some species. What is the Minister's policy in that regard?
It has to be acknowledged that our fishing fleet is very small. Much of it is ageing. We also have the additional constraint that we are now governed by the EU Common Fisheries Policy in relation to the size of our fleet and what we can do. There is provision in the operational programme for a de-commissioning policy and the Minister for the Marine intends to make some announcements on this in the near future. There was a sense of national pride at the launch of the Veronica and great encouragement for Mr. McHugh for bringing that vessel into operation and we all wish him well.
There is, however, a general policy issue involved. Part of the policy review we are undertaking must involve whether or not the best direction for our fishing industry is in a small number of large vessels or whether it is better to encourage the development of our fishing industry based on the development of fishing communities in ports where fishing has been a traditional way of life. There is a conflict between the two approaches. This is one of the issues we will have to address in the policy review.
With regard to the exploitation of new species, I acknowledge we are not taking up our quota in some areas and there is some potential there. We are keeping this issue under review.
Senator O'Toole asked me to apologise for the fact that he cannot be here while the Minister is answering his questions. He had to go to a meeting.
It just as well because we would be here all night if I tried to answer them.
I think the Minister and all of us would agree that on-shore facilities are very slow in being provided. Would the Minister and his Department agree that the private sector should build auction halls, chill rooms and so on and lease them to harbour authorities and fishing co-operatives for a period of 20 to 25 years? The money does not have to come from the Department's funds.
I feel that from 1996 foreign fishing fleets will be enticed into landing their fish in Ireland because of different policies. What preparations can we make or are making for this?
What plans, if any, does the Minister have to approve the budget for the development and promotion of fish on the home market? Senator Daly raised an issue which is very important for Malahide at present. Will there be a co-ordinated role between the Departments of Tourism and Trade, the Environment and the Marine in the development of marine leisure facilities?
Could the Minister communicate with me later about the long term prospects for the Search and Rescue Service at Shannon? I raised it in my speech. It is a very important issue and has a bearing on all the activities we are talking about.
Acting Chairman
We can extend the time for any related questions if the Minister wants to give a comprehensive reply.
On the question of processing and the involvement of private sector investment, Senator Fitzgerald can take it that the Government would welcome private sector investment in the——
Sorry, Minister. I think you misunderstood my question. I am talking about putting in place onshore facilities which would normally be put in place by the Department of the Marine, such as auction halls and chill rooms, not processing plants but buildings that are essential to the fishing fleet.
We will look at any proposals that come forward. I do not know if Senator Fitzgerald has specific proposals in mind but the Department will look at any proposals that are put forward.
I apologise to Senator Daly for not having mentioned the question of the Air Sea Rescue service earlier. The Department's present contract with Irish Helicopters for the medium range Sikorsky helicopter expires at the end of 1996. The operational performance has been excellent, as reflected in the response rate, which was well in excess of 90 per cent. As you know, the helicopter is based at Shannon, providing coverage for the south west and west and throughout our waters. No decisions have yet been taken on the post-1996 arrangements but I can assure the Senator that the views he has expressed on the matter will be taken into account.
In relation to the development and promotion of fish on the home market, as Senator Wright will know, An Bord Bia is now being established and the Minister will be making appointments to the board, with which we intend to work closely. The future relationship between An Bord Bia's role and BIM's valuable work in promoting fish and other seafood will be part of the review that we are now undertaking and for which consultants are being appointed.
Marine leisure and recreational facilities represent a dimension of marine activity to which we are giving a lot of attention. We will be working closely on this with local authorities to advance proposals for the development of marine leisure facilities around our coastline. Proposals of that kind have to be looked at expeditiously and on an individual basis by the Department.
Could we encourage you to set a specific subhead for expenditure in these areas, because one of the problems has been the lack of seed capital to get them started? Could you put a subhead in place that would give grant aid towards the development of marine leisure facilities like small marinas and tourism projects?
As Senator Daly will know, the policy up to now has been that these activities are not directly funded by the State. I understand what he is saying and we can have a look at that suggestion.
Acting Chairman
That concludes the questions. I thank the Minister for his handling of the questions and the Senators for asking them. Senator Fitzgerald wants to make a few concluding remarks.
I thank the Minister and Minister of State for answering all the questions. I also want to thank the Leader of the House, Senator Manning, for initiating this type of question and answer session. I am sure that the leader of our own party in the House will have something to say on it. It is a new approach and one that Ministers and Ministers of State need not be afraid of, because if they cannot find ready answers no one is going to embarrass them. It is a healthy exercise and I hope that we will see more of it.
I thank Senator Fitzgerald for his generous comments. It has been a useful debate and I thank the Minister, and the Minister of State especially, for his open and frank replies to questions. I also wish to thank those who took part in the debate. It is something that we will see more of in this House. The Minister knows that the questions were asked in good faith and that they all add to the ongoing debate.
Sitting suspended at 1.5 p.m. and resumed at 2 p.m.