Vol. 203 No. 7
I move:
That a sum not exceeding £305,860 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1964, for Salaries and Expenses in connection with Sea and Inland Fisheries, including sundry Grants-in-Aid.
In introducing this year's Estimate for Fisheries, which reflects the increasing attention to the development of our sea and inland fisheries in accordance with the Government's Programme for Economic Expansion, I should like to mention a few facts and figures illustrating the progress made during the past year:
In the year ended 31st March, 1963, the value of landings of sea fish increased by almost 10 per cent to £1,548,000.
In the same year, the value of exports of fish and fishery products increased by some 36 per cent to the record level of £1,686,000.
The estimated income from angling tourism rose by about 12 per cent to the new peak of £1,346,000 which may be regarded as invisible exports.
Thus exports, visible and invisible, arising from our fisheries exceeded £3 million.
Some 11,000 men were directly employed, whole-time or part-time, in our sea and inland fisheries—apart from thousands of others engaged in marketing, processing and transport of fish and catering for angling tourists.
On the sea fisheries side, the main endeavour in the past year has been directed towards implementing the intensified Programme of Sea Fisheries Development published as a White Paper in April, 1962. In particular, the reorganisation of An Bord Iascaigh Mhara is proceeding under a whole-time chairman appointed from 1st January, 1963, and considerable progress has been made towards the establishment of an advisory service to improve fishing techniques and promote co-operation among fishermen and a marketing service to assist in the development of markets at home and abroad for fish and fishery products. I have full confidence that the development of these advisory and marketing services, together with the enhanced facilities and incentives for the acquisition and re-engining of fishing boats, the training schemes for fishermen, the development of fishery harbours and the extension of exploratory and research work will, with a determined effort and the co-operation of all concerned, bring about the further expansion which is needed in the industry.
In 1962, landings of demersal or white fish increased by over 17,000 cwt. to 230,000 cwt. and their value rose by £46,000 to £867,000. Whiting was the most important species in both quantity and value: indeed the quantity of whiting was almost as high as that of all other demersal species together. Other important varieties were, in order of value, plaice, cod, ray or skate, soles and haddock and, in order of quantity, ray or skate, plaice, cod, pollack and haddock. The value of the pelagic fish landed, of which herrings accounted for over 85 per cent, increased by £44,000 to £303,000. The value of shellfish landings also rose by £52,000 to £330,000, the principal varieties being lobsters, Dublin Bay prawns, crawfish and periwinkles.
It is pleasing to note that returns so far in 1963 show a worthwhile improvement on those for 1962, the value of landings of all varieties of sea fish for the first four months of 1963 being almost £70,000 higher than for the like period in 1962.
It will be recalled that a co-operative effort got under way towards the end of 1961 for the marketing of processed herrings abroad. The Irish Herring Export Group, comprising some of the principal fish processing firms and An Bord Iascaigh Mhara, resumed operations in the 1962/63 season but, owing to the buoyant demand for all herrings landed, their activities were not on as large a scale as had been contemplated. Consignments of salted, marinated and frozen herrings were exported by the group to Western Europe and to Czechoslovakia. Aside from this marketing endeavour, some established processing firms continued to work separately and exported sizable quantities of salted and marinated herrings to European countries and to the USA. Exports of Irish fish products were sent to as many as 22 different countries even as far away as Australia where Irish whiting commands a market.
On the home market, the problem of trying to get more people to eat more fish more often has been tackled in a vigorous fashion. As part of a publicity campaign to help in stimulating home consumption, a national fish cookery competition open to whole-time day students of vocational schools was organised by the Fishing Industry Development Committee. This is an advisory committee composed of representatives of fish importers, retailers and fishermen with representatives from An Bord Iascaigh Mhara and the Fisheries Division of the Department of Lands. With the co-operation of the Technical Instruction Branch of the Department of Education and the various vocational education committees, the competition, which was confined to the cooking of whiting or herring, got under way.
It was welcomed on all sides as a great success and throughout the various stages—school, county, regional and national—interest never flagged. The high standard achieved by the 5,000 students who took part was something to be proud of and this was in no small measure due to the painstaking work of the vocational education committees and their staffs and the enthusiasm of the students. Further promotion work of a similar kind is being undertaken on a planned basis with the object of benefiting not only the consumer but the fishing industry as a whole—the fishermen who catch the fish, the auctioneers, wholesalers and co-operatives who market it in the first instance and the retailers who are responsible for its final presentation to the consumer.
The grant-in-aid to An Bord Iascaigh Mhara, which is being increased by £40,000 to £200,000 this year, includes provision for grants of 25 per cent of the cost of new boats and new engines and for subsidising the interest payable by hire purchasers at the low level of 4 per cent. Repayable advances up to £220,000 from the Central Fund to the Board have also been authorised for financing the provision of boats and gear in the current year. Eighteen new boats ranging from 26 to 56 feet in length were issued by the Board to hire-purchasers during the year ended 31st March, 1963. The first of the new 65 foot fishing boats designed by the Board is nearing completion at their boatyard in Killybegs and the second has been laid down. The demand for boats will be further stimulated by the intensified development programme now in operation.
I have already mentioned the reorganisation of An Bord Iascaigh Mhara in accordance with the Programme of Sea Fisheries Development. The Board's policy as a development body is to unify all sections of the industry into a cohesive force geared for expansion at all levels. Fishermen are being encouraged to form co-operative societies with a view to replacing the Board's trading organisation. The Dingle fishermen have already given a lead by setting up their own co-operative society. They recently took over the Board's premises and facilities at Dingle and are now handling all fish landed at that port. Fishermen in other areas are thinking on similar lines and it is expected that those in our leading ports will follow this practical example of local initiative and enterprise. The Board are ready to help in the formation of such co-operative societies and to assist in promoting sales of fish at home and abroad.
The Board's fleet maintenance scheme, which was previously confined to hire purchase boats, is being extended to cover all fishing boats. It is hoped that, by proper care and maintenance of boats, the time spent on actual fishing will be appreciably increased—with a corresponding improvement in fishermen's earnings.
The Board's new advisory service aims to expand production through the improvement of catching techniques, the location of new fishing grounds and the organisation of education and training schemes for fishermen. Regional advisory officers are being appointed by the Board and the sole work of these officers is to win the confidence of fishermen and impart to them up-to-date information, advice and techniques. In general the object of the service is to put the fisherman in a position to make the most of his opportunities.
The Board are preparing a planned market development programme for home and export markets which will go into operation in association with the private trade and co-operative societies. The programme will be designed to increase fish consumption at home, conduct market research abroad, and provide expert advice on the presentation and processing of fish products. In addition co-operative selling arrangements among fish exporters will be encouraged and export marketing will be developed on a quality control basis under an Irish brand. A scheme of help and advice towards suitable structural alterations and the provision of equipment for fish retailers is being prepared, and will be fitted into the overall programme for the home market. In this connection regional distribution from landing points will be encouraged. In particular special sales promotion is being prepared for whiting which, as I mentioned earlier, is the species in most plentiful supply around our coasts.
Perhaps I should refer to the Board's fish processing factories which received a good deal of publicity in the House some months ago. In accordance with the Programme of Sea Fisheries Development proposals were invited for the acquisition of the factories at Killybegs, Galway and Schull. The aim was to transfer them to private or co-operative interests if acceptable proposals were received, thus relieving the Board as far as practicable of direct participation in commercial operations which can be effectively handled by such interests and enabling them to concentrate more intensively on development activities. There was no question at any time of closing down the factories: indeed those at Killybegs and Galway are going concerns and will continue to be operated by the Board pending receipt of acceptable proposals. In fact plans are under way to expand production at the three factories in conjunction with fishermen and trade interests.
As I have stressed on many occasions, it is imperative to provide a regular inflow of progressive and trained men into the catching side of the industry, not alone to make good normal wastage but to man the additional vessels needed for the more effective exploitation of our fishery resources. Training and education are indispensable nowadays in any industry and this applies particularly to the fishing industry if the best possible use is to be made of the expensive vessels and complex modern equipment available. We have reached what may be called the take-off stage in recruitment but more rapid acceleration must be attained if the industry is really to prosper. Discussions are taking place between the Fisheries Division of the Department of Lands, the Department of Education and An Bord Iascaigh Mhara with a view to co-ordinating the efforts of all concerned with the education and training of fishermen.
Under the scheme for training fishermen as skippers, 30 fishermen have so far completed courses. A further 13 are at present attending a theoretical course at Galway in preparation for the examination for certificates of competency. Incidentally, this is the highest attendance so far recorded at one of these courses and, if the increased interest continues, as I hope it will, additional courses will be organised. Fishermen undergoing these courses are paid at the rate of £7 a week plus allowances for dependants.
Under the scheme for training boys as fishermen, trainees receive allowances of £5 per week—which is a reasonable figure for a youth of 16 with no previous experience. Thirty boys trained under this scheme are now working as full crew members and thirty-five more are undergoing training at present. I do not regard this as adequate and my immediate aim is to double the number in training: indeed I would like to see it trebled as soon as possible. Boys who successfully complete training will be encouraged, after further practical experience, to train as skippers and take command of valuable fishing boats. Two of those recruited under this scheme in 1959 are, in fact, being trained as skippers at Galway at the moment. With the facilities and incentives now available, the fishing industry offers opportunities of worthwhile careers at least equal to those in any other industry. Boys of not less than 16 years of age are again being interviewed at convenient centres and, if Deputies know of any others who may be interested, I would be glad to get their names and addresses.
As Deputies are aware, the Government decided to substitute Dunmore East for Passage East in the programme of development of major fishery harbours. This change was made on the advice of the harbours consultant who considered that the subsoil conditions disclosed by trial borings at Passage East were unfavourable. A major scheme for the improvement of the harbour at Dunmore East has been prepared. As a result of the boring surveys at Killybegs and Castletownbere, some variations in the schemes for those harbours have been decided on and detailed designs are being prepared. Work is due to commence at these three centres this year. Site investigations at Howth and model investigations for Galway have still to be completed. Facilities at other harbours and landing places are simultaneously receiving attention; some works are in progress and several proposals are in varying stages of examination.
Research work is of the utmost importance in the development of our sea fisheries as so little is certain about sea life and the movements of fish stocks. Scientists in the Fisheries Division are tackling these problems both by direct investigations and by collaboration in the international field through organisations such as the International Council for the Study of the Sea. The very nature of the problems, however, is such that spectacular results are unlikely to be achieved within a short time. The varieties to which particular attention is being paid by our scientists at present are herrings and mackerel in the pelagic group, whiting, plaice and hake among the white fish varieties, and lobsters, crawfish, Dublin Bay prawns and mussels in the shellfish category. The exploratory fishing vessel "Cú Feasa" has been of great assistance in the conduct of these scientific investigations as well as in searching for herrings and making surveys of the sea bed mainly on grounds off the south and west coasts.
One of the objects of fisheries investigations is the conservation of fish stocks which is frequently achieved by the imposition of an appropriate minimum size limit. I recently had occasion to declare a new minimum size for lobsters related to the rigid body-shell rather than the more elastic overall length. As the question of prohibiting the taking of "berried lobsters", i.e. female lobsters on which eggs are visible, may be raised again in the course of this debate, may I repeat that special consideration was given to that problem before the new order was made. The advice tendered to me, however, was that it would be more effective to enforce a size limit which would permit of spawning, adequate for maintenance of the stocks, to take place before the lobsters attain that size. The removal of berried lobsters above that size should then have no adverse effect on the stocks. Every female lobster is a potential berried lobster and there would be little advantage in prohibiting the taking of a lobster which could be legally taken before becoming berried. I appeal for the full co-operation of all fishermen in observing the minimum size limits that have been prescribed for various species of fish.
As the "Cú Feasa" alone cannot cope with the demand from several areas along our lengthy coastline, an initial provision is made in this year's Estimate for a sister ship. A vessel somewhat comparable with the largest type of fishing boat in use here will probably best serve the purpose. Inquiries are proceeding and a decision will shortly be taken as to the most suitable type and size of craft. The vessel will be constructed at an Irish boatyard.
As the sketch plans approved for the fisheries research station at Galway were related to the particular site selected, the preparation of working drawings has had to be delayed because of the reluctance of the Galway Harbour Commissioners to complete the transfer of the site.
As to the question of extension of exclusive fishery limits, we have missed no opportunity of seeking to secure international agreement on this issue. A further opportunity may present itself at a conference of European countries to be held later this year on the initiative of the British Government to consider fishing rights, access to markets, rights of establishment and policing. Our interest in an international rule of law in this field is well known but we would hope that the proposed conference will produce an agreement of at least a regional character.
On the inland fisheries side, I can report that the past year has been a good and profitable one for the industry and that much useful work has been done towards increasing the productivity of our inland waters.
Last year's salmon catch was the best for many years and salmon exports totalling 19,000 cwt. valued at £673,000 were the highest since 1951. From about the end of June, grilse arrived in the mouths of most of our rivers in considerable numbers. Conditions for netting were favourable and rain came in good time to bring up adequate runs for anglers. Reports on the subsequent spawning told of an abundance of fish on many of the spawning grounds.
Reports this season speak fairly consistently of a spring fish run better than the average of recent years; this may be due to a continuance of the favourable factors affecting the sea life of the salmon which produced last year's phenomenal run of grilse.
Another helpful factor should eventually be the scheme of salmon river improvements which continues from year to year with the aim of opening up new spawning areas and improving existing ones. Though the effects may be gradual and the benefits to the stocks not immediately perceptible, it is certain that work of this kind gives a better chance to the brood fish and must help to increase the runs into our rivers. The protection of stocks from depredation by poachers is, of course, indispensable for the welfare of the fisheries. The law dealing with this problem has been strengthened in the past year and will facilitate determined action by the protection staffs of boards of conservators to suppress illegal practices. Staff of the right calibre are needed for this, particularly at the upper level, and proposals are being considered for the future recruitment of key personnel who would be established on a pensionable basis with fixity of tenure.
In view of misconceptions from time to time about the income of the Salmon Conservancy Fund, I should like to draw attention to the extent of the State grants payable into the fund. This year's grant of £22,000 provides more for general purposes than last year's figure which included an exceptional item of £4,500. Payments from the fund are in the main made to boards of conservators to supplement their normal income.
Two major improvement projects financed through the Fund have now reached the finishing stages. At the salmon hatchery and rearing station at Cong, County Mayo, the hatchery building has been completed and the holding ponds and other works are under construction. This station is expected to be in full operation for the coming spawning season. The main construction work on the fish passes at Ennistymon, County Clare, was completed in time to enable numbers of salmon to travel upstream to the spawning beds of the River Inagh last year. There remain only some minor works now in course of completion and the stocking of the river system has already been commenced by the planting out of fry.
Scientific and technical investigations being carried out by biologists and engineers on the inland fisheries side include surveys of salmon and eel stocks, problems of fish predation and the effects of arterial drainage and of hydro-electric schemes on stocks of migratory fish. As is the rule with fishery research work, the investigations are of a fairly long-term nature and in most cases will take some years to bring to the stage where conclusions can be drawn.
The investigations into the effects on fish life, fish food and spawning grounds of arterial drainage work on the River Moy are proceeding. The drainage authorities and officers of the Fisheries Division are maintaining close liaison in the carrying out of the drainage work in order to minimise interference with the very valuable salmon fisheries of the Moy system.
Investigations into the sharp decline in the runs of salmon in the River Lee are also being continued with the active co-operation of the Electricity Supply Board, the Inland Fisheries Trust and the Cork Board of Conservators. While the work done last year did not yield conclusive results, it indicated that predation by pike in the reservoirs appeared to be a major factor in the loss of salmon smolts and that reluctance on the part of the smolts to use the existing fish pass arrangements was also a serious problem. This year's programme for the Lee accordingly includes large-scale operations to reduce the number of pike and also experimental work designed to make the fish passes more attractive to smolts.
The investigation into the effects of effluent from bog workings on fish life and fish food, for which a biologist was seconded to the Salmon Research Trust late in 1961, has not yet reached a sufficiently advanced stage to produce useful conclusions.
The eel fishing programme this year will again be aimed at the demonstration of improved methods of capture and the examination of the efficiency of certain types of eel fishing engines in operation at present. I am happy to say that exports of eels in 1962 at 2,038 cwts., valued at £33,772, showed a welcome recovery on the corresponding figures for 1961, viz. 1,869 cwts., valued at £25,678.
There is a further substantial increase this year in the grant-in-aid to the Inland Fisheries Trust whose State funds are now derived entirely from the Fisheries Vote. The provision of £75,000 represents an advance of £12,000 on the corresponding figure for last year and it has been decided that the grant-in-aid will be maintained at the level of £75,000 per year for the next three years. I think it will be agreed that this is money well invested. The steady rise in income from angling tourism year by year is more than adequate justification for the expenditure.
The results of the first year of the new five-year angling development plan have been assessed and it is estimated that the number of angling visitors increased by some 12 per cent over the figure for 1961 which was approximately 52,000. Income from angling tourism likewise increased from £1,200,000 to some £1,346,000. This is particularly satisfactory when one considers that economic conditions in Britain in 1962 were not conducive to such an increase. Arrangements continue to operate for co-ordinating the Trust's development work with promotion work by Bord Fáilte.
The progress made in attracting angling tourists is a tribute to the success of the work being done by the Trust and Bord Fáilte and by those local organisations which, I am happy to say, are co-operating so wholeheartedly in the work. The assurance of a fixed income over a number of years should facilitate the forward planning of the Trust's programme, but I must stress that there is a limit to the amount of work that can be undertaken in any particular year. I would appeal for patience on the part of all concerned where, for one reason or another, the Trust is unable to fit into its programme all the numerous requests for development of fisheries.
Three demonstration fish farms in five-pond units which were set up over the past few years are operating successfully and are showing a reasonable profit. A double, or ten-pond, unit in course of construction near Mullingar is nearing completion and is expected to be stocked this summer. Two private five-pond units, one at Thomastown, County Kilkenny, and the other near Holycross, County Tipperary, are also in operation.
The commercial fish farm at Wood-enbridge, County Wicklow, operated by Irish Trout Industries Ltd., has been operating to capacity and that at Waterville, County Kerry, set up by Rainbow Ltd., has recently begun to market its output on the continent. There is every reason to believe that exports of rainbow trout will, in the future, form an important part of our fish exports.
The Fisheries (Amendment) Act of 1962 is now in operation and the heavier penalties it provides for fishery offences will, I hope, enable the courts to deal severely with serious offences such as the use of poison which not only kills off the adult fish but destroys the young fish on which the future of the stocks depends. The Act should serve as an indication to the courts of the seriousness with which the Oireachtas views these offences.
Perhaps I may here refer to a suggestion made when that Bill was under discussion in the House that I might take some action in regard to waters where title difficulties were claimed to be hindering development of trout fishing or coarse fishing. I may say that these waters, which have been described as abandoned fisheries, have not forced themselves on the notice of the Inland Fisheries Trust: indeed, that body is more than fully occupied with development work on waters which present no difficulty as regards title. I have, however, invited members of the Trust and also members of the Trout Anglers Federation to report any cases of which they are aware. If some real problem arises from these title difficulties, my present view is that statutory provision for acquisition of such fishing rights by the State should be confined to cases in which a responsible body, such as the Trust or a board of conservators or a reputable local association,
(1) has sound proposals for development of a fishery;
(2) finds the implementation of those proposals hindered by intractable title difficulties affecting the whole or part of the fishery; and
(3) is prepared to pay an appropriate rent for the fishery if vested in the State.
I would, of course, prefer to see any fishery owners concerned asserting their title and taking steps to preserve their fisheries or to make them available to some appropriate body for development. I think I have shown that excellent progress is being made in the development of our sea and inland fisheries. To enable the good work to continue, I confidently recommend this Estimate to the House.
I move:
That the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration.
The Parliamentary Secretary referred to the reorganisation of An Bord Iascaigh Mhara, to the fact that a permanent chairman has been appointed, and that the new chairman will devote all his time and energy to his duties. It is only right that on an occasion such as this tribute should be paid to the outgoing chairman, Mr. Séamus Mallon. For many years, he devoted all his talents and bent all his energies to the discharge of his duties as chairman of An Bord Iascaigh Mhara and it is only right that on his retirement from the chairmanship of the Board, an expression of appreciation of his services should be placed on record. Of all the men with whom I came in contact during my years as Parliamentary Secretary in charge of Fisheries, I met none so keenly interested in the welfare of the industry in general, of all branches and sections of it, and particularly in the fishermen themselves, as Mr. Mallon. He did more than his share in all the years in which he was associated with the Board.
We could not on this side of the House have been described last year as critical of this Estimate. It was the Parliamentary Secretary's first year in office and naturally one did not expect him to perform miracles in his first year. This is now his second Estimate and, having listened to his speeches, read his speeches, read of the various promises made and undertakings given to fishermen throughout the country, one would have expected to have had from him today, particularly in view of the reorganisation of An Bord Iascaigh Mhara, comprehensive details of the Government's future policy in relation to the fishing industry.
Having listened to his speech this afternoon, my reaction is one of acute disappointment. I expected details of various schemes to be put into operation for the benefit of those engaged in the industry, whether it be catching fish, building boats, marketing and distributing fish, or anything else. The only conclusion I can come to now is that the Government are completely bankrupt of a fishery policy and that the various speeches made by the Parliamentary Secretary can only be described as loud talk without action. Now, an ounce of action is worth a ton of talk. I am keenly disappointed with the manner in which the industry has operated over the past 12 months. The past year was a trying one in the fishing industry. Certain changes were made. May I say that I believe we are not very far from a change of Government and, whatever reorganisation took place in the past, there will certainly be reorganisation by Fine Gael when there is a change of Government?
In the past 12 months, the Government have sold the fishermen, hook, line and sinker, to the fish merchants and the fishmongers. It is no harm for me now to give the fishermen a little confidence in the future; when a change of Government takes place, the fishermen around our coast will not be thrown to the mercy of the fish dealers and the fishmongers. I believe that the vested interests in this industry are anxious to hold the fishermen in the hollow of their hand and squeeze them out of existence. The fish dealers and fish mongers want to get fish as cheaply as possible and sell it as dear as possible.
I am sorry An Bord Iascaigh Mhara have now gone out of fish marketing. In 1932, the Sea Fisheries Association was set up and a strong case was made by the fishermen then for that Association to participate in the marketing of fish, the idea being to protect the fishermen from exploitation by the vested interests in the industry. I do not know what has taken place since that has changed the situation so far as the fishermen are concerned. The Irish Sea Fisheries Association engaged in marketing and the fish merchants and fishmongers could not then squeeze the fishermen out of existence.
I know from experience that for many years now the fishmongers have been trying by every means in their power to put An Bord Iascaigh Mhara out of fish marketing. It is on record in the Parliamentary Secretary's office that during the term of Deputy Dillon, when I was Parliamentary Secretary, I was approached on many occasions; the case made was that An Bord Iascaigh Mhara should not be allowed to participate in the marketing of fish. I visited many fishing ports throughout the country, notably Killybegs, Galway, Schull, Castletownbere, Dunmore East, Arklow and other areas. In all those places, I addressed a question to the fishermen concerned. I asked, both privately and publicly, if the fishermen would like to see the Board going out of the marketing and the reply I always received was that they did not wish to be left to the mercy of the fishmongers. I refused point blank, and would have refused in these circumstances, to allow the fishmongers to hold the fishermen as they are holding them at the present time and trying to squeeze them out of existence.
I feel that there is a background, that there may be an ill-conceived and evilly-disposed background, to the manner in which An Bord Iascaigh Mhara have acted in regard to the marketing of fish to the fishmongers who are out to make big profits for themselves.
I do not offer any apology in this House or outside it for saying that my sole interest when I was in charge of fisheries was to protect the livelihood of all those engaged in the fishing industry. It was the aim of the Minister for Agriculture at the time to ensure that whatever happened in the industry, the fishermen and their families would be protected and, whatever action might be taken by any vested interest, it was our responsibility to save the fishermen from being thrown to the mercy of a small group who were out to make themselves fatter and richer while those who had to do the hard work of catching the fish grew poorer and poorer. I want to say that I am disappointed that the Parliamentary Secretary, in his weakness, has yielded to the appeals of the vested interest, those who are now enjoying the squeeze-out of the fishermen, those few who feel they have the fishing industry in the hollow of their hands. I want to place it on record that as soon as the change of Government takes place, we will take the necessary steps to protect the fishermen again and to see to it that they will not be left to the mercy of these people.
I should like to ask the Parliamentary Secretary what guarantee has he that as a result of the reorganisation of the Board, there will be no redundancy in staff. I have heard from a reliable authority that it is likely that as a result of the reorganisation of the Board there may be certain staff redundancy. I should like the Parliamentary Secretary to give a guarantee that associated with the reorganisation envisaged in the White Paper that has been issued there will be no redundancy whatever.
No doubt, the Parliamentary Secretary will agree that the fishing industry has received a great deal of lip sympathy time and again. It is time now that the industry should be tackled bravely and courageously. There should be no question of tinkering with it. The time has come when substantial sums of money should be voted by this House to put the industry on a sound basis. It is extremely difficult to understand why it is that in this island country that has some of the best fisheries in the world around its coast, where French, Spanish and other foreign trawlers come to fish practically on our doorstep, the industry has not been put on a sound basis so far. Recent statistics show that there are fewer persons engaged in the fishing industry now than previously. The aim of the Government should be to increase the number employed in the fishing industry. Government policy has not been directed to that end. There has not been encouragement. The fishermen do not seem to derive sufficient profit from their labour.
The Parliamentary Secretary and the Minister for Lands have appealed to young men to participate in the Government's scheme for the training of skippers and in the management and control of boats. The response has been so poor that the Parliamentary Secretary has made a further appeal here to-day.
There is large-scale emigration from the west and from the areas near the Cork coast. Yet young people are not offering to take part in the Government's scheme of training and do not seem eager to participate in the fishing industry. Did the Parliamentary Secretary ever ask himself why? The reason is that they do not see any future in it. They do not see a profit in it. A man is attracted to an occupation by the reward he will get in it.
An effort should be made to secure greater employment in the fishing industry. The policy of our Party has been made known in that respect in the last general election and since then. We propose to expand and to develop the fishing industry on the basis of the boat-owning fisherman on the coast. If that is not done, the fishing industry will cease to exist. We must ensure that the boat-owning fisherman, on whom the industry depends, receives a margin of profit for his work and has a market for his catch. In addition, in areas such as Dunmore East and Killybegs, an effort should be made to encourage fishermen to supply fish for processing into fishmeal as well as for marketing.
Our policy is to provide credit facilities for boats and gear. They will be made available for the further expansion and development of the industry. I am not at all surprised that the policy of the Board and the Government in relation to credit facilities for boats and gear is not meeting with the measure of success one would wish for. Additional financial assistance should be given, and it is about time, now that the Board has been reorganised, some consideration were given to that aspect.
Our policy is also to press forward on research into the marketing and processing of fish, in consultation with the fishermen. I should like to hear very clearly from the Parliamentary Secretary if, when the Board was being reorganised, and when Bord Iascaigh Mhara was going out of the marketing of fish, and handing it over to the fishmongers, the fishermen were consulted, and if they were satisfied to be left at the mercy of those people, to be treated as they saw fit.
Another aspect of our policy is to provide up-to-date and safe anchorage and landing facilities. That has not been done, despite the fact that the Minister for Lands and Parliamentary Secretary were very loud in undertakings to provide safe anchorages for our fishermen all over the country. I am sorry Deputy Corry is not here. He was very loud, when Deputy Dillon was Minister for Agriculture, in his demands for an extension of the pier at Ballycotton. He could not understand a 24-hour delay in 1954. This is 1963, and not one inch has been added to the pier at Ballycotton, despite the fact that Deputy Corry and the Cork County Council urged that the pier should be extended to provide safe anchorage for the fishermen.
I understand that safe anchorage is essential in order that the fishermen may know that when bad, stormy weather comes their boats and gear will be safe. It is very depressing to see, as we have seen time and again at Glengad and elsewhere, fishermen's boats smashed against the piers in rough seas and bad weather. It is the duty of the Government to provide harbour facilities and safe anchorage in areas where groups of fishermen are entirely dependent for their livelihood on their catches, and where they are anxious to remain in the industry. The Government are embarking on the provision of four extensive fishery harbours. We wish them luck, but does that mean that, with the exception of the four centres which have been recommended for conversion into major fishery stations, others piers and fishing ports are to be neglected?
A certain amount of work has been carried out at Skerries, Arklow, Kilmore Quay and Kinsale. There are a number of areas on the Mayo coast such as Murrisk, Blacksod, Foulmore and other districts for which a sound case was put forward to the Fishery Division and the Office of Public Works, backed up with local knowledge that the work could be carried out economically. I fail to see that any provision has been made in that regard. Some work was carried out at Clogherhead about 12 months ago. I cannot say to what extent, because I have not seen it since. Clogherhead is one area in which a major scheme should certainly have been undertaken to provide safe anchorage and better facilities for the fishermen. I am glad a start was made, and I hope to call there within the next month or five weeks to see the work undertaken during the past year.
I cannot say whether the Parliamentary Secretary has ever been to Kilkeel, County Down. The wonderful harbour facilities which are there for the fishermen should be provided in most areas around our coast. With the exception of Killybegs, Galway and Dingle, very few places can be compared with Kilkeel. For that reason, I hope the Fishery Division will get in touch with the Office of Public Works and endeavour to provide safe anchorage for all our fishermen.
There seems to be a duplication of work as between the Office of Public Works and the Fishery Division. One Department should be responsible for the improvement, extension and reconstruction of fishery harbours. The money should be provided and expended when the engineering reports are made available. There is very little use in providing safe anchorage and piers for fishermen when the fishing industry is extinct in an area and the fishermen are gone. I want to express my disappointment that there has not been a greater degree of expenditure on our piers and on safe anchorage facilities.
Our policy proposes to meet the needs of a progressive fishing industry, and we will endeavour to expand the boat building industry. The Parliamentary Secretary made little or no reference to the extension of that industry. A very strong case was made for the extension of that boatyard at Dingle. I raised it on this Estimate last year. I presume that in the course of its reorganisation the Board took no action during the year, but I should like to hear whether it is proposed to extend the boatyard in Dingle.
Again, I understand there are fewer people employed in Baltimore. The Parliamentary Secretary will recall that there was an occasion during the term of office of a Fianna Fáil Government when the boatbuilding industry at Meevagh was completely closed down. It was opened by Deputy Dillon. I should like to know how many workers are employed on boatbuilding. Boatbuilding has been undertaken in Arklow by private enterprise, by the firm of Messrs. Tyrrell who have been known for generations in boatbuilding, and whose boats are recognised throughout the world as the best. Apart from those employed by Messrs. Tyrrell, I should like to know how many people are employed in boatbuilding at Baltimore, Killybegs, Meevagh and Dingle, how the figure compares with the past five years, and what orders are in hand. Are apprentices being taken on? The boatbuilding industry is very important. For that reason an effort should be made to guarantee employment, to encourage boatbuilding and not allow the craft to die out. In cases where there is room for expansion, it should be carried out.
In regard to inland fisheries, I should like to express appreciation of the wonderful work being done by the Inland Fisheries Trust. The Trust deserve the highest praise for their wonderful achievements. Every angler in the country should be a member of that organisation. Our fisheries are a great tourist attraction and when we see that private planes are chartered over here by fishermen from England and elsewhere who come to spend weekends or weeks fishing here, I believe it is the Inland Fisheries Trust who deserve the credit for that. I hope the excellent work they are doing will continue. It is no harm on every Fisheries Estimate to give the little reminder of the fact that the Inland Fisheries Trust was established by Deputy Dillon when Minister for Agriculture. At that time, Deputy Dillon foresaw the wonderful advantage such a body could be in the building up of our inland fisheries as a great tourist attraction. We are glad to see they have been successful in doing that and hope they will have an even greater measure of success in the future.
I should like to hear from the Parliamentary Secretary if there has been any progress made in recent months in regard to the extension of our fishery limits. I understand that a conference—I do not know whether it has taken place or is to take place——
Is to.
Yes, and that international agreement will be sought. Naturally enough, international agreement will be necessary if the limits are to be respected. I hope the Department will bear in mind the need for an early and favourable decision in regard to the good case which has been made by our fishermen and others for an extension of our fishery limits.
I notice again that the Parliamentary Secretary refers to the grants made available to boards of conservators for protection purposes, and again he refers to the Salmon Conservancy Fund. I know very well that boards of conservators require money in order to have proper protection for our fisheries. I was expecting again to hear from the Parliamentary Secretary what scheme he had in mind for the general improvement in the staffs of boards of conservators. Has there been any progress in recent months in regard to the provision of employment? Will water bailiffs be employed full-time with pension rights or how is it proposed to provide a good and proper service in that regard?
I am not at all satisfied, as the Parliamentary Secretary appears to be, that the full amount of the Salmon Conservancy Fund is going to boards of conservators for protection purposes. My opinion is that this levy which has been imposed on those whose incomes have been very limited is an effort to relieve the Exchequer rather than to provide protective services for our salmon fisheries or inland fisheries. It was a bad move and one which has certainly imposed an added burden on the fishermen whose incomes are already very limited.
I do not propose to say anything further beyond expressing my disappointment that the Parliamentary Secretary appears to talk very loudly outside this House, in the country, in regard to these proposals for what he describes as the revival of the fishing industry. He has spoken at dinners and other functions and on Telefís Éireann, as he did on 6th November last, and may I say it was not to his credit that he availed of the opportunity to express an opinion on "Newsview" which should not have been expressed. If such an opportunity is to be taken again, where questions are addressed to the Parliamentary Secretary, they ought not to be designed for political purposes. If they are solely to be related to the interests of the fishing industry, the questions should be addressed to those directly concerned with the fishing industry. The questions addressed to the Parliamentary Secretary on that occasion were rightly criticised and described as a disturbing trend in "Newsview". Talks of that kind are not very helpful. I express the hope that the Parliamentary Secretary will make an effort within the next few months to implement some of the undertakings and the promises he has been making to fishermen outside the House.
I am bewildered by the activities of the Parliamentary Secretary. I often wonder should we ask him is he Parliamentary Secretary for fisheries or for fishmongers. When I was Minister in charge of fisheries and Deputy Flanagan was Parliamentary Secretary, we made no concealment of the fact, and made no apology for it, that we regarded ourselves as custodians of the interests of the fishermen on our coasts. I was never a believer in high protection and I never made any concealment of that but I justified protection of fisheries because it has not only an economic but a social purpose and because it is desirable to keep intact the social fabric of the fishing community of the western, northern and southern coasts of this country and the mixed social pattern of the farmer-fisherman in these areas.
To that end, I was prepared to ask the fish consumer of this country to pay a marginal extra price for fish but always remembering the fish we got in Ireland owing to the pattern of our fishing industry, was fresh fish. It was not fish that was caught on the way out to the trawler grounds, kept in ice for maybe a fortnight or three weeks and then discharged when a trawler returned to Grimsby or some other British port after being anything from 14 to 21 days at sea. While admittedly our fish was dearer than it was in Great Britain, it was superior in quality and was providing a livelihood for a large section of our community who had no alternative means of existence.
A part of that general scheme involved an undertaking on the part of the Government, which was implementing it through An Bord Iascaigh Mhara, that we would provide a guaranteed market for all white fish landed by our fishermen; that the markets would be operated primarily to ensure that their total catch would be taken when it was landed and that they would get a fair deal; and that the bulk of the ultimate retail price payable by the consumer would go to the people who caught the fish and not to the middlemen.
An Bord Iascaigh Mhara purchased all the fish, distributed it through the wholesalers. During times of periodic scarcity, as a result of bad weather or something of that kind, if there was a temporary shortage of fish on the Irish market, the Board was the sole importing agent. From time to time An Bord Iascaigh Mhara, acting under that warrant, brought in fish to fill a temporary shortage on the Irish market and made substantial profits on the transactions, but we insisted that every penny of profit derived from such casual transactions would be put in a fund and used for purposes beneficial to the fishermen and the fishing industry. It was called the Fishery Development Fund.
None of these casual profits made on the importation of fish went to the personal profit of anybody associated with the industry. As far as I know, all that has now been swept aside and we are involved in a kaleidoscopic change of schemes for marketing fish, the main result of which as far as I can see is that the fishmongers can do pretty well as they like and the fishermen have to get along as best they can.
I notice in the course of the Parliamentary Secretary's statistical material the following astonishing boast:
In 1962 landings of demersal or white fish increased by over 17,000 cwt. to 230,000 cwt. and their value rose by £46,000 to £867,000. Whiting——
anybody in this Chamber who is familiar with the manner and customs of the Irish fishing industry smiles when he hears mention of whiting—
was the most important species in both quantity and value. Indeed the quantity of whiting was almost as high as that of all other demersal species together.
You are telling me! That was one of the chronic problems with which we had to deal perennially, that there were certain elements among the fishermen who, when the whiting began to act like pelagic fish, as they do from time to time, sailed out a few hundred yards from the shore and scooped up these fish and then dumped them on top of us and flooded the market when there might be a material shortage of prime fish which they would not bother to go out to get. I would be interested to hear from the Parliamentary Secretary what, in his judgment, was the effect of the landing of these massive quantities of whiting. In fact, so difficult a problem was that when I was in office that it was the only form of demersal fish which we were prepared to say we would not accept on a guaranteed price basis at all times. When they tried to bring in excessive quantities of whiting by the device I have described, we used to sell it on the open market and they had to take what they got for it.
That is the remedy which operated to bring that highly undesirable practice under reasonable control. I do not know why the Parliamentary Secretary is so pleased with this increase and I should be glad to know how he got rid of them.
They subsidised the transport of fishmeal.
I do not want to be captious but does the Parliamentary Secretary not think it silly to be producing statistics in which he says that the landings of demersal or white fish increased by over 17,000 cwt to 230,000 cwt and the value rose by £46,000 to £867,000 and then when I am investigating the matter, tells us that it was landings of whiting the transport of which he had to subsidise?
Only the surplus. We are only talking about the surplus.
Really the Parliamentary Secretary ought not to be cod-acting in that way. It is just cod. It is a particularly undesirable cod because it is not edible cod. It is just "cod" cod. The real truth of it is that the Parliamentary Secretary through his own folly is promoting a fishery practice which is notoriously undesirable, that is, to go and rake in shoals of whiting which are acting like pelagic fish and flooding the market and creating the problem of subsidising their transport to fishmeal factories.
I would sympathise with the Parliamentary Secretary if he had said that this practice had reasserted itself and caused some embarrassment but when he proceeds to boast about it and when it emerges that he had to subsidise their transport in order to get rid of them in the form of fishmeal, then it is not only cod but "cod" cod. It is good enough for the dinners and dogfights he goes to because there is nobody there to answer him but he should not get up here and try to get away with what is good enough for the meals Fianna Fáil are always anxious to consume.
We are particularly hungry animals.
If instead of statistics of that character we were given any clear picture of what the marketing procedures are now, or what they are to be in the future, I would appreciate it very much more.
I notice for the first time that the Minister gives us no statistical information about the payments on boats. We all know there has been difficulty in the past with regard to the payments of instalments on boats. I think we brought that substantially under control by a system which was generally acceptable to the fishermen and that was the percentage deductions by An Bord Iascaigh Mhara from the fisherman's catch in reduction of his loan on the boat. In my experience that worked well and it was a system which was operated in a humane and sensible way by An Bord Iascaigh Mhara. If a fisherman ran into a slack period, nobody took him by the throat. They were prepared to waive the instalment but now this crazy idea of abolishing this whole system of a centralised market which had operated was introduced by the Parliamentary Secretary and we found that instalments fell very much into arrears. I do not know what the position is now. We had to write off some large sum which was irrecoverable. I do not know what the current position is, but the Parliamentary Secretary should have told us how the repayments on boats were running and whether they are being kept up to date regularly.
In regard to the Programme of Sea Fisheries Development, the Parliamentary Secretary states:
The Board's policy as a development body is to unify all sections of the industry into a cohesive force geared for expansion at all levels.
That means "sweet Fanny Adams" to me—it is just talk. It means nothing at all. I should be much more eager to hear what precisely the Board intend to do. If it is their intention to bring in larger quantities of whiting for conversion into fishmeal, then all I can say is that the fruits of their activities do not speak very highly for them.
I do not want to be taken as making an attack on An Bord Iascaigh Mhara under its new chairman, and so on. I should be very glad to see it succeed. I do not know the new chairman; I have never met him and I do not know his qualifications for the position. Whoever or whatever he is, I should be delighted to see him make a good job of whatever he puts his hand to. However, I should like to see some evidence other than pious hopes and statistics which, on examination, prove to be highly illusory and which I do not think get us anywhere at all.
I note with interest that 30 boys trained under this scheme set out here for training fishermen are now working as crew members and that 35 more are undergoing training at present. What percentage of the trainees does that represent? Do the 30 boys represent the entire number of fellows who did the training? Have some dropped out? What percentage have we retained?
There are 35 in course of training at present and 30, in addition to the 35, who have completed training.
How many did we take in—35 fellows, five dropped out and 30 remained or 65 fellows and 30 graduated?
Thirty graduated and 35 are in course of training.
What is the percentage of the original intake?
About half.
That is fair enough. It was a new experiment. You have to creep before you can walk. We must watch closely how far these chaps will persist. I should be very happy to see them all persist to the point of acquiring a master's certificate. Is there any possibility of their working, as they are, as deck hands and being brought to the point where they can be masters of their own boats.
By doing a theoretical course, in addition to their experience.
Therefore, it is possible for them to graduate to the position where they would be qualified to get a boat of their own?
Yes. Some of them are now doing a theoretical course.
I have nothing but congratulations for the Parliamentary Secretary; we shall have to watch to see how that succeeds. I understand some of the boys come from fishing families and others from a different background altogether. That is all to the good if it works out.
I do not want to depart from this Sea Fisheries business without emphasising that I am not at all satisfied with the marketing arrangements at present available. I do not fully understand them. I gather the old system which we operated has disappeared. I find no evidence that there is in existence at present a marketing system which makes adequate provision for the due protection of the fishermen's interest and for the reasonable collection of the instalments that fall due on the boats so as to keep the fishermen up to date and secure in their ownership of their own boats.
I come now to Inland Fisheries. That amply justified itself. I want to say a word about the salmon conservancy fund. That is simply a silly Fianna Fáil gimmick to collect an insignificant intake for the treasury. The yield of the salmon levy goes into the salmon conservancy fund. I do not know if the Minister says anywhere what the salmon levy yielded last year but it is simply a tax on men who fish for salmon.
When you speak of a man fishing for salmon a great many people think of a man in knickerbockers and a deerstalker cap fishing with a rod on an expensive preserve of water. Of course, these are not the people who export the salmon. It is true that there are some wealthy proprietors of estuarine fisheries who export salmon. I am thinking of the fishermen in Teelin and such places in their boats paying a substantial licence to catch salmon off the seacoast outside the estuaries of these rivers and making their living by selling them. To me, it is a regrettable concept that they should have levied upon them a tax for export. They are the only export known to our trade which is taxed at the point of export.
Think of wealthy manufacturers being solemnly exempted from all income tax and all corporation profits tax on any trade they do by way of export and then think of a Teelin fisherman with 20 or 30 salmon to send out and being blandly informed that he must pay so much on every pound of salmon he exports. It is all done out of vicious political spite. We had taken it off; Fianna Fáil put it on; we took it off and it is clapped on again. It represents a trifling amount collected to the Exchequer and it is issued out again as a grant to the salmon conservancy fund.
Every standard of decency, equality and justice demands that that export levy on salmon should be abolished. It cannot be justified by any canon of decent administration. It is a public scandal, and every Deputy knows it to be so, that there should be one solitary export from this country bearing a tax at a time when all other exports are declared to be free of income tax and corporation profits tax. That shameful anachronism should be put an end to.
I notice that the provision this year for the Inland Fisheries Trust is £75,000 which, the Parliamentary Secretary says, represents an advance of £12,000 on last year. I think I am right in saying that that offsets—does it not—a contribution by Bord Fáilte towards the work of the Inland Fisheries Trust?
It is a increase.
I am glad. I wonder if it is sufficient. I do not complain. Here, the Parliamentary Secretary says we cannot do everything at once; that we must marshal our resources and proceed from year to year in steady progress. When we bear in mind that he estimates that the income from angling tourism this year will amount to £1,346,000, we begin to ask ourselves whether, perhaps, if we made a little more money available—a few thousand pounds—for the next few years—if we made that grant £100,000 for the next five years—we might make very valuable progress in stimulating a tourist attraction which would continue to grow.
There is additional Bord Fáilte expenditure under the promotion head.
They held about two—
That is right.
I gather there is some delay in work the Inland Fisheries Trust would like to undertake owing to scarcity of money. I agree we must do things in steps but where a very valuable tourist amenity is ready to our hands, the Parliamentary Secretary would be justified in impressing on the Government that the grant to the Inland Fisheries Trust could, with advantage, be increased from the proposed figure of £75,000 to £100,000 a year, certainly over a five year period, to see how they get on.
That brings me to a topic on which I have often spoken but to which I want to return with emphasis because of the dinners and dog-fights at which the Minister for Transport and Power has recently been functioning. He is always ready to give anybody a lecture on any subject in the world except transport. He will talk about cooking, about wines or about housekeeping, any topic in the encyclopaedia, apart from transport and power to which he seems to be allergic. He is always flirting with the idea of filling up the canals. He is either going to park motor cars on them or ride bicycles on them. He always has some charming idea about them except to leave the water in them. I suggest to the Parliamentary Secretary that he has a vital interest in the canals and should keep a vigilant eye on the Minister for Transport and Power who suffers from this passion for wrecking the canals because if they are blocked anywhere, they are blocked everywhere. There is a very grave danger that some daft idea will enter the head of the Minister for Transport and Power and before we have time to get him under control again, he will have blocked the canal. Then we shall be told that nothing can be done about it and that the best thing is to fill it up from whatever point he has blocked it right up to Dublin.
That seems utterly insane to me. Canals are very useful from the amenity point of view in themselves. In addition, they are an incalculable asset as a tourist attraction to a type of tourist for whom this country is admirably fitted to cater and who is readily accessible in the midlands and north of England and who will come here to fish for coarse fish in the canals. They will be brought into a part of the country which otherwise gets little or no share of the tourist traffic. The sea coasts get their share, like the scenic areas around the Gaeltacht, but the midlands, owing to our geographical structure, have relatively little to attract tourists except this exceptional asset of the coarse fishing.
Anybody with experience of a county like Monaghan realises the revolution coarse fishing has wrought there where there was little or no tourist traffic and a corresponding dearth of hotel accommodation. Now, I think it is true that Monaghan town, Clones, Castleblayney, Ballybay and Carrickmacross, all have quite a substantial tourist income stretching from February practically to November. The pike fishers turn up in February. It is hard for those not accustomed to the ways of fishermen to imagine anybody desiring to fish in February but they do, and these waters are rich in coarse fish and the fishermen stay in public houses, small hotels and guest-houses that would otherwise get no business of this kind.
Monaghan is fortunate in having a very large number of small lakes rich in coarse fish. Prudently and sensibly, they divided up the lakes, some for trout and some for coarse fish and preserved them accordingly. There are wide areas in the midlands with no lakes and usually where you have lakes, they are trout lakes and it is only right to develop them for that purpose. There are such lakes around Mullingar and Cavan is famous for the mayfly fishing. Naturally, the tendency there is to depress coarse fish as far as possible, to protect game fishing, but flowing all through the country, from here to Carrick-on-Shannon and from here also south to Banagher, we have the canals. If they are developed for coarse fishing, we have the additional advantage that there is a towpath all along the banks on both sides. That makes them very agreeable places for coarse fishing. The fishermen do not have to climb over barbed wire fences and other obstructions to do a day's fishing.
The canals extend for miles through most agreeable country and for that reason I believe they are a very precious asset and should engage the constant and vigilant care of the Parliamentary Secretary and the tourist administration. If they do not, as sure as we are in this House, if the "Empress of China" is let loose upon them, they will be closed up one of these days and we shall be told that some obscure purpose is served by that procedure. Then it will be too late to do anything.
Does it strike anybody else as odd that we cannot make any use of the canals for transport? I am not asking that the Parliamentary Secretary be made responsible here for transport. I am fighting for the canals as a tourist amenity and as a fishing centre. Public business recently brought me repeatedly to Strasbourg which is on the Rhine and which is much larger, of course, than a canal. But the amount of traffic passing up and down there is quite dramatic and seeing, as you travel along the Rhine the number of canals that find their way into it, you realise that these are regarded as almost main arteries of traffic all over the Continent. It makes me wonder why in this country canal traffic seems to be utterly unthinkable. However, it would be trespassing, perhaps, too much on the patience of the Chair to pursue that reflection at present because we are dealing with the fishery aspect of canals but it would strengthen the hand of the Parliamentary Secretary if some use were made of canals other than fishery which I am advocating. While it may be true that because of the short distances we have to travel in this country, the canals may not be as useful as on the Continent for bulk transport, one wonders when you hear of people boating on the broads of Norfolk and spending that kind of holiday there, would it not be possible to develop an analagous holiday attraction in this country?
Before we started developing coarse fishing here, there was a tendency to regard anybody who advocated it as being a bit eccentric. The idea of offering as a tourist attraction the opportunity of fishing with a worm was regarded as quite peculiar, but those of us who represent counties that have benefited from this amenity realise only too well how wise we were to encourage it. I sometimes wonder, if energetic measures were taken to expand the boating facilities of the Shannon and the canals, whether there might not be some very substantial direct benefit to be derived from it.
I was never in Killaloe in my life until about a year ago. It is not until you get there you realise what a beautiful place it is. I saw a whole lot of young people water-skiing in Killaloe. You cannot help wondering, when you come by chance on such an attraction as that, whether we are unconscious of the things we have to offer to strangers. I came on it as a stranger. If I had come on it on the continent, I would have sent home a coloured postcard to describe its beauty. Recently I was in Cyprus. There is beautiful embroidery to be bought there in Paphos, but if you ask anybody there to sell you Paphos embroidery, they look at you as if you were a kind of half lunatic. They say they have beautiful materials there— manifestly deriving from Birmingham, Paris or Germany—but they brush to one side the Paphos embroidery. I bought all of it I could. In Dublin, it looks like a dream; in Cyprus, it looks like a duster. I sometimes wonder if some of the things we have in Ireland, which look to us quite pedestrian, could not be made to appear to strangers something similar to what Paphos embroidery appeared to me.
I suggest to the Parliamentary Secretary, when he is pressing the interests of the canals and the Shannon right down to Killaloe, he has something there that could be of great benefit to his own constituency. I can see him as a knight in shining armour addressing meetings in Athlone describing how he salvaged the Shannon. I offer him that as a general election parable.
It has been done already.
Has it? I shall guarantee this. If he will adopt that war-cry, I shall commend him—for some responsible post outside politics! I am grateful to the Parliamentary Secretary for having regard to certain problems in relation to the title of fishing waters where there were title difficulties involved in their comprehensive development. What he suggests is, on the whole, a reasonable approach to the situation. I gather from the terms in which he makes the suggestion that, if any unforeseen problems arise, ad hoc proposals can be devised to meet them.
It is difficult to deal with the general problem of poaching, but here I think the Parliamentary Secretary would be well advised to use with Draconian severity the powers he got in the last Fisheries Act to control the buyers of illegal salmon. If there is no buyer for illegally caught fish, there will be very few fish caught illegally. I do not want to make any reckless affirmation, but I always maintained when I was Minister for Fisheries—and I think Deputy Oliver Flanagan agreed with me—that the man who fished by legitimate methods with rod and line was never really any serious enemy of the public interest. He might be a trespasser on another's property, but I, as Minister for Fisheries, never felt I was very seriously involved in controlling the activities of a man who was fishing by legitimate methods on another's restricted fishery. It was for the owner of the fishery to have regard to the processes of the civil law to defend his property and sue the offender for trespass, if he was in fact guilty of it. But I had an altogether different approach to either the fishery owner or trespasser who sought to destroy a fishery for his own private profit by the use of illegal methods. It is not only poachers whom I found capable of activities of that kind. On more than one occasion I found the proprietor of a valuable fishery seeking to exploit it by illegal methods. On one occasion I well remember such a person approaching me to stay proceedings and telling me it was unthinkable that this could have happened. My reply was that, if that were so, he could very easily satisfy the court to that effect, but in the meantime he should let justice be done. I do not think he did satisfy the court subsequently.
There should be no mercy shown to persons who use illegal methods to catch fish. Far more evil, in my opinion is the person who buys the illegally caught fish. In my judgment —and I have some experience of it— 90 per cent of the illegally caught fish is purchased by people who know it is illegally caught. Hotel-keepers of considerable standing have been detected in practices of that kind. That is the place to hit. That is the place that can be reached. Decent hotel-keepers do not do it. But the position is made far more difficult for those who abide by the law and pay the price for legally caught salmon because of the necessity for them to compete with hotels trading in illegally caught salmon. Those dealing in illegally caught salmon ought to be severely punished.
I see the Parliamentary Secretary is becoming rather uneasy. I do not blame him. If he can get in now, he is very welcome.
I can assure the House I shall not delay the Parliamentary Secretary. I am glad the scheme for the buying of boats has been extended to boats of all sizes. It was wrong to have it confined to the larger type of boat costing £13,000 or £14,000. I should like to draw the attention of the Parliamentary Secretary to the silting of our small harbours. The bigger harbours have been mentioned, but the smaller harbours are silting up more than three-quarters way. Some time ago, I was brought by the owner of a Bord Iascaigh Mhara boat to Clifden harbour. He showed me where he was trying to anchor his boat. When the tide is in, it is all right; but when the tide goes out the side of the pier is silted up. If he does not put a chain or a rope on the boat, she falls over on her side.
The Parliamentary Secretary should examine all the piers at which boats arrive to land fish, particularly Bord Iascaigh Mhara boats. I should like to know also, either by way of reply when the Parliamentary Secretary is concluding or in written form, whether fees are paid by Bord Iascaigh Mhara boats at piers supervised by harbour masters. If that is so, it should be discontinued. Some of these small fishing vessels cost £4,000 or £5,000 and they should be allowed to come into piers, unload their catches and either pull out again or stay overnight without being charged fees.
I thank the House for the constructive contributions by Deputies who spoke. Indeed, one particular aspect that struck me forcibly was the anxiety of all Deputies to ensure that we improve our fisheries, both sea and inland. In any comment I make in which I disagree with views expressed on the promotion of that ideal by Deputies on the opposite side, I hope I will not be taken in any sense as being in conflict with the principle.
Deputy O.J. Flanagan, in particular, made a great point of the fact that fishermen were in some way being let down by the policy pursued by us since the initiation of the programme of sea fisheries expansion in April of last year. The facts since then do not bear out his contention. In fact, as I pointed out in my opening statement, the value of landings of sea fish in the year ended 31st March last, rose by ten per cent compared with the corresponding period of the previous year, and the value of exports of fish and fish products increased in the same year by 36 per cent to a record figure of over £1,600,000. These cold facts show that the programme of expansion which has been initiated in regard to fisheries, both inland and sea, has had very real success.
The whole purpose of the reorganisation of An Bord Iascaigh Mhara is further to increase the catching power of the industry so that the figure for landings will increase progressively in the years ahead. This means of course, that while increasing the catching power of the industry, we must raise the incomes of the individual fisherman so as to provide attraction for them as well as to encourage new recruits into the industry. That aim is being pursued in a very practical way. The number of boats issued by An Bord Iascaigh Mhara in the past 12 months increased by 16. The boatyards Deputy O.J. Flanagan spoke of are maintained for the work of building boats of various sizes for the different branches of the industry. There has been no diminution of effort in that respect.
The whole emphasis of An Bord Iascaigh Mhara work is on further assisting fishermen to increase their catching technique, to seek out new fishing grounds for them, to provide an advisory service analagous to the agricultural advisory services for farmers. A special division has been established in An Bord Iascaigh Mhara to provide for regional advisory officers located around the coast and in a position to keep fishermen aware of up-to-date techniques and to advise them generally on how best to go about the catching and the selling of their fish.
I mentioned in my opening statement one practical example of success already achieved—the port of Dingle where An Bord Iascaigh Mhara have transferred their premises to a co-operative society financed by local fishermen. An Bord Iascaigh Mhara have seconded their staff there to the co-operative society and the fishermen in that port are now handling and distributing their own fish, not on the basis of sending it to Dublin and getting it back for regional distribution, but on a completely local regional basis. We hope, and indeed it will be the major endeavour of the advisory officials appointed to various locations around the coast, to encourage that sort of development at many other ports around the coast. If we can organise co-operative marketing in that way, where the fishermen will participate in the sale of their fish and in the profits therefrom, that system must appeal as being a positive approach towards some of the problems mentioned by Deputy O.J. Flanagan and Deputy Dillon.
In addition to all that, An Bord Iascaigh Mhara are also concerned with market development, with developing our inland markets through assistance to retailers to present fish properly by way of promotion work, and also by way of building their exports by giving them advice on how best they can export fish to the various markets abroad. I might say there is no great problem in regard to selling our fish abroad at the present time. There is a buoyant world market for fish and fish products and that shows every sign of continuing.
The Board's main concern, and the concern of the various private firms engaged in export, is that our fish, when exported, is of top quality so that Irish fish will be universally recognised as of high quality, whether in natural or processed forms. I am confident that An Bord Iascaigh Mhara and the Fisheries Division, through the various schemes I mentioned in my opening statement, can ensure that in future there will be an increasing volume of landings, matched by an increasing volume of sales, both on the home market and on the export market. That is the object we have set the Board. As I have pointed out, we have reorganised the Board, appointed a wholetime working chairman, and I am confident that the work will be carried out.
On the inland side of the industry, there again the figures show that very real progress has been made. Last year, the estimated income from angling tourism rose by 12 per cent. That has been due to the co-ordinated efforts of the Inland Fisheries Trust on the development side, and of Bord Fáilte on the promotional side. This will ensure that the promotional work is properly handled and I agree fully with Deputy Dillon that there is tremendous scope for the industry in this direction. Angling is an attraction which we have and other countries do not have. For that very reason, this work is bound to continue to prosper and our rising national income from this source will continue.
I have every reason for confidence that the trend which has shown itself in recent years will continue and that, through the work of the organisations I have mentioned, we will ensure that both in the development and in the promotional sense, there will be a vast co-ordinated effort to attract more and more people here to avail of the marvellous resources given to us by nature.
