Call it what you like. All our efforts have been constructive. I will quote from a speech I made at the 1976 Fianna Fáil Árd-Fheis:
The fishing industry may now be sufficiently large to justify a large scale development plan, including the training of more fishermen and skippers, the building of substantially more and bigger boats, more protection vessels, better harbours, greater marketing, etc. These developments would in my opinion represent a desirable form of economic and regional development based on a local natural resource, giving substantial employment in just those areas most in need of it.
Later, I said:
This type of development plan could and should be part of any real regional policy. The EEC aid as at present administered is given to schemes already in preparation rather than in providing a framework for new exciting developments in the underdeveloped regions of the country which could transform them as is the intention.
In November last I said at a debate in UCG:
The terms of the agreement negotiated by the Minister for Foreign Affairs recently suggest the necessity for a huge injection of capital in the industry over the next two years, i.e., building of 300 boats, creation of extra jobs on shore and the improvement of harbour facilities and improved protection for our fleet. Allied to this is the need to improve our research educational and marketing facilities.
If our EEC partners are serious in their claim that they are treating Ireland as a special case—although one would question this in view of what has been happening with the non-payment of FEOGA grants to fishermen—let us hope that the Government will provide the necessary structures, leadership, impetus and finance to make these projections a reality.
I am suggesting to the House that from the beginning we have been constructive and have tried to play a positive role in regard to our fishing industry. During the debate on the Maritime Jurisdiction Bill the Minister for Foreign Affairs accused us of hindering the EEC negotiations, a charge which was unwarranted and unnecessary. It is typical of the Government that when things do not go to their liking they look for some scapegoat to cover for their mismanagement.
I will refer briefly to The Hague meeting when the hopes of our fishermen were raised as a result of the wonderful guarantees given to them by the Minister for Foreign Affairs. All the projects we had at that time in relation to providing an extra 300 boats by 1977, expansion of harbours, improved processing facilities, were forecast to yield extra employment on shore and in fishing in general of up to 1,800 jobs.
Again one has to relate this to what has been happening in the Dáil and the amount of money made available for fisheries. On 11th November, 1976, I asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries the number of boats over 80 feet now on order by Irish fishermen and the reply was:
Ten boats of over 80 feet in length are at present on order and all are due to be completed by September, 1977.
On 23rd February the Minister for Fisheries in reply to a question asking the sum available to BIM for administrative purposes and for development in the current Estimate for fisheries said that the sum of £1,790,000 was available. In reply to a question on 9th March, 1977, regarding the amount available for loans we were given the figure of £6,319,000. When one realises that the last large fishing boats in the Irish fleet cost £1,100,000 we can see that the projections given by the Minister for Foreign Affairs in relation to the expansion of the whole fisheries question are indeed very far removed from the amount of money that has been provided in the budget.
On Wednesday, 1st December, 1976, I asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries what plans his Department had for the provision of further major harbours and if he would state where these are to be developed. The Minister replied:
Five harbours are scheduled for development as fishery harbour centres under the Fishery Harbour Centres Act, 1968. I do not propose to add to the list of such harbours.
Where are the famous promises made by the Minister for Foreign Affairs as a result of The Hague meeting? On Thursday, 4th March, 1976, I asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce the number of research vessels being used by his Department. There was none. A similar reply was given by the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries on 10th March, 1976, that at that time we had no research vessel operating. Fishing is a resource that has to be managed and controlled and we have to understand that the only way that the fisheries can be controlled here is by the provision of a 50-mile coastal band. The position in relation to quotas which has been suggested by the EEC is not at all suitable when the Irish situation is being considered and we have to be able to control the fisheries ourselves. We cannot expect the EEC, who have plundered their own areas, to try to preserve or conserve our stocks. We have to have research facilities. We have to be able to tell what stocks are there and the amount and type of fish that can be taken out at any time. Unless we are successful in securing the 50-mile coastal band we can forget about developing the fishing industry. I am sure our EEC partners are well aware of this situation.
Since March, 1976, the IFO have had constant talks with the Minister for Foreign Affairs in relation to the importance of providing the 50-mile coastal band and they have tried to impress on him how important it is for the future of the industry. While the Minister seemed to accept the suggestion, he has always been trying more or less to emphasise the importance of having a fall-back position. In other words, he is going into battle without being fully convinced himself that 50 miles should be sought. This has been proved by the way he has come into this House on a number of occasions and voted against motions from this side of the House in relation to having the 50 miles provided.