Deputy P. Gallagher has been given permission to raise on the Adjournment of the House the subject matter of a Private Notice Question which he submitted yesterday.
Adjournment Debate. - Mackerel Quota.
I want to thank the Ceann Comhairle for giving me an opportunity, even at this unearthly hour, to raise this matter on the Adjournment. With his permission I wish to divide my 20 minutes with Deputy Daly and Deputy Coughlan. I am assuming that the relevant order was imposed on Friday last. At the beginning of 1985 we impressed on the Minister the inadequacy of the quota for that year of 80,000 tonnes as compared with 85,300 tonnes in 1984. We sent telegrams to him and raised this subject on a number of occasions and supported him in his efforts in Brussels to obtain an increased quota. Unfortunately, we were unsuccessful in those efforts, which is very disappointing. It had never been known in the history of our membership of the EC that the quota would have been set at such an early stage but perhaps that was because it was Ireland's Presidency and the Government wished to show what good Europeans we were. To give a comparison, the British quota this year is 220,000 tonnes, the Dutch 35,000 tonnes, the Germans 34,000 tonnes, the French 16,000 tonnes. We understand that the announcement of the present order was made over Malin Head radio.
I was not in Malin Head and there was no radio involved.
An announcement was made over the radio for the boats to return to port but then it was said that the order was rescinded and they were allowed to fish on. We appreciated the fact that the Minister was on his way to Brussels and we hoped that he would get a supplementary quota which would be relatively high, in view of the fact that 60,000 tonnes of the British quota will not be caught by the end of this year and they are fishing in the same area off the north west coast of Scotland. It is an absolute outrage that the Minister has done nothing whatsoever about obtaining a supplementary quota for the whole of 1985.
We all knew from March of this year that it was necessary to introduce a ban on fishing only if the supplementary quota could not be obtained from Brussels but the fishermen then agreed to suspend fishing until September-October. Their boats are not too versatile and types of fish available to other boats are not available to them. They have major overhead expenses on these boats, insurance, and various other expenses particularly when the boats are tied up but they agreed to this suspension in the best interests of the fishing industry. They did so in the hope that the Minister would grant them a licence to commence fishing from 1 October. The matter dragged on into one week in October, with pressure from the industry.
It is ironic that, during the week commencing 2 October, we were in a position to purchase fish from boats fishing off Scotland and landing their catch at Killybegs while our boats were not allowed to fish mackerel. It was as a result of the embarrassment caused by this that the Minister introduced licences on 14 October. We must remember that those licences were current only from that date until 16 November and again from 17 November to 13 December and the most important period of all is from 1 December to 14 December. There was no question of further licences being issued subject to mackerel being available. On the evening of 6 December the boats were told over the radio to return to port but that order was rescinded. We did nothing about it until the Minister signed the order, we understand, in Brussels. Do we have to use that type of pressure? Do the Europeans not trust our Minister enough to let him postpone signing until after he had returned to Ireland?
We must look at the importance of the mackerel industry. There may only be six major boats and about 20 boats in total involved but that constitutes about 60 per cent of the total fish landings. There are from 1,500 to 2,000 people directly involved as a result of the decision taken this week. One could pose the argument as to why we should be allowed to exceed the quotas, but I shall give one very good reason. The Dutch, with a quota of 35,000 tonnes, have to date from the autumn fishing landed 110,000 tonnes, exceeding their quota three times. We are not allowed to exceed our quota by even 4,000 or 5,000 tonnes to finish out the end of this week. We are not just dealing with fish, but with human beings in a depressed part of the country. These are people who need the extra income, particularly at Christmas.
I do not believe that it would happen in any other industry, or in any other country. It certainly would not happen in the agricultural industry. We have already caught slightly in excess of 80,000 tonnes and we should be proud that we are able to do this. We have proved that we need an increased quota, as we insisted early this year. No efforts are being made to get a supplementary quota while, at the same time, the British quota of 220,000 tonnes will result in a shortfall of 60,000 tonnes. I do not believe that one tonne of the 80,000 we have caught has gone for fishmeal. Of our catch, 90 per cent was taken ashore and helped in the creation of jobs, whereas in the UK 80 per cent of the mackerel go to freezer vessels and are sent abroad without creating any employment within the EC. A strong case should be made by the Minister to obtain 50 per cent of that shortfall of 60,000 tonnes. He would find himself in an extremely strong position to look for an increased quota as against the scientists' recommendations for a reduced quota of 62,000 tonnes.
We must ask that consideration be given to the inter-Governmental contract between Ireland and Egypt, a country which the Minister visited this year when he secured a contract for 15,000 tonnes. We must also remember that part of that contract was a rerun of a contract obtained by Deputy Daly as Minister for Fisheries from November to February 1982. No consideration was given to the fact that a percentage of this quota was to leave this country on the high seas for Egypt. No consideration was given to the fact that preference bonds were being jeopardised, that the financial arrangements which the industry had entered into were being jeopardised. The only consideration was that we were to be good Europeans. The Dutch have got away with an increased quota of 70,000 tonnes, which is similar to our own catch to date.
We speak about venture capital and trying to stimulate an interest in the industry but I do not believe that anybody with venture capital would consider investing in the industry, apart from those who have been committed to the industry over the past ten or 20 years. Boats were purchased a number of years ago when there was heavy investment in freezing facilities and there was an assumption that we would have a quota of at least 95,000 tonnes or 100,000 tonnes. Our boats have a capacity to fish 120,000-140,000 tonnes and our factories are in a position to freeze that catch. Even more important, the enterprising industrialists are in a position to sell it and we have the labour available. However, we want to be good Europeans and we have not looked for a supplementary quota. The total allowable catch off the north-west coast will be down this year. The Dutch are to invest another £70 million in more freezers and they want to catch well in excess of 110,000 tonnes. They are coming to the north-west coast, the most prolific grounds in Europe.
In my area we have an unemployment rate of 2.5 times the national average. There are people there who have heavy commitments and it was a sad reflection on the Government that they introduced a ban such as this without making any efforts to get a supplementary quota.
We must question the scientific evidence which is available. Research has been carried out but I understand the working groups have not received the facts as yet. We should not agree to any quota until the evidence is available and if we are bound to agree to some quota it should be 60,000 tonnes for the first three months of the year. We could then negotiate, following a review at the end of March, to establish quotas for the remainder of the year. The scientists have been proved wrong regarding the herring stocks. They are being over-cautious now because the herring stocks are being depleted while they suggested the opposite. They have also suggested that the salmon stocks are being depleted but I contend the opposite.
The people who were most vociferous in the past about problems in the fishing industry have been conspicuous this week by their silence. They are now in powerful positions and are not prepared to echo the problems of our fishermen. There is a lack of commitment by the Department and the Minister and they are failing to instil confidence among those involved in the industry. We would support fully the Minister's efforts to get an increased quota next year. The problem which has now arisen is something we will have to accept but I hope it will highlight the situation and that the Minister will make every effort to obtain a greatly increased quota.
Mr. Coughlan
I come from the Killybegs area which is hardest hit by this problem. There is grave concern among the fishermen and those engaged wholetime or parttime in the processing factories there. They have now very little to look forward to. Usually they obtain seasonal work but this year after only a short time they have been told that the whole thing is terminated. Many of these people were in receipt of unemployment benefit during the summer but the benefit is now exhausted and the prospect of further claims being processed before Christmas is unlikely.
I am critical of the Minister because the problem was very obvious as long ago as last March. We had a mackerel quota of some 82,000 tonnes but it was obvious at that stage that there would be overfishing. From March to October or early November we had to make arrangements to increase our quota or to ensure that the fishermen would be allowed to fish until the end of the year when a renegotiation could take place. That could and should have been done. Britain did not reach the quota and an extra 60,000 tonnes of mackerel could have been caught. Had it been done properly we might have been able to negotiate part of that for our fishing industry.
We do not seem to have a proper fishing policy and consequently there is much fragmentation. The state of the fishing industry, especially in regard to mackerel fishing, leaves a lot to be desired. Our quota for 1986 is to be reduced to 62,000 tonnes. This is almost unbelievable in view of the fact that so many boats are engaged in mackerel fishing. There is nothing else for them, no other form of livelihood. I would ask the Minister to adopt the suggestion put forward by Deputy Gallagher and accept a quota of 60,000 tonnes in the early part of the year in the hope that this can be renegotiated and raised for the rest of the year.
I want to add my support to the case which has been very adequately made by both Deputies from Donegal. The Minister fully appreciates the situation of the fishermen. We believe it is essential that the stock position within the Community should be protected, but nevertheless we do not accept that the Irish industry has been the cause of the crisis in the mackerel fishery. Fishermen from countries which are not even member states are firing the shots in this issue and the crisis is not due to over-exploitation by the Irish industry. We have behaved in a very responsible way and will continue to do so but our fishermen are in an impossible situation because the quota is totally inadequate. This is causing financial problems for the industry and for the fishermen and there will also be a loss of markets. There is also a risk to the processing industry. This is a critical situation which demands urgent action by the Minister at Community level.
I propose to give three minutes to Deputy McGinley.
I am also aware of the importance of the fishing industry, especially in regard to mackerel, to Killybegs because of the number of jobs it creates on a seasonal basis. I was in touch with a number of industries engaged in the processing of mackerel in Donegal yesterday and today and, fortunately, I understand that there have been very few redundancies so far. I am glad that the new quota can be commenced at the beginning of January and any difficulties which may arise within the next few days will certainly be of a temporary nature.
I should also like to compliment the Minister on the stand he took in Brussels during the week when he said he would defend to the utmost our quota at 80,000. I know that some of our European partners want to have that number reduced but I am confident that the Minister will do his best to maintain the quota and to increase it if he can. The United Kingdom do not use up all their quota and perhaps there is an opportunity here of swapping with the UK authorities. Perhaps we could give them a quota of fish which we do not catch ourselves and they could give us their mackerel quota. I do not know if there is anything in the Treaty to prohibit that but perhaps the Minister will explore that possibility.
Some Deputies mentioned that United Kingdom boats have landed fish, including mackerel, at Killybegs but, if they are within their quotas, I see nothing against it especially if it creates employment for Killybegs or any other part of the county. It is to be welcomed but I hope that our quota will also be landed in Killybegs and not in foreign ports. Any difficulties we have are of a temporary nature and they can be sorted out on 1 January.
I wish to inform the House that I signed an order yesterday closing the fishery. I did not announce it on the radio on Friday ——
Were we not to take the announcement on Friday seriously?
There was no announcement by me on Friday and I wish that Deputy Gallagher would stop playing politics with the fishermen of his county and with the EC. I did not interrupt Deputy Gallagher although at times I was severely provoked as he indulged in conjecture and unfounded and inaccurate allegations. He will now hear some facts. We had been informing the fishermen for the past couple of weeks that their quotas were nearly exhausted and last Friday I understand they were told that a closure order was imminent. That order was signed yesterday. As we have reached the quota we are obliged by Community law to close the fishery. I note that Deputy Daly, who understands what goes on in Brussels, did not make unfounded allegations or suggestions which he knows are not feasible in the EC context.
The Dutch have not acceded.
That is pure conjecture.
The Minister knows it is true.
It is not fair to ask the Minister to come here at this late hour and then to keep interrupting him.
The Deputy said that the British had left 60,000 tonnes unfished but that is also conjecture. We have fished our quota of 80,000 and I have exchanged with the British the volume of 6,000 tonnes so, in effect, we have fished 86,000 tonnes. There is provision to make a bilateral exchange, we have done that and will continue to do so. The suggestion by Deputy Gallagher that I should seek, through the Council, 30 per cent of the unfished quota of the UK is not on and the Deputy should not be making suggestions like that. There is no provision for this in the Common Fisheries Policy.
We will have to send for the Dutch advisers.
Do not press me too hard, interrupting will get the Deputy nowhere as he is not prepared to listen to the facts. He also mentioned the loss of 2,000 jobs. Only 1,000 jobs are affected and, from information recently received from the industry and the processers, the Egyptian contract is not jeopardised by the closure of the fishery. If Deputy Gallagher was in touch with his constituency fishermen they would tell him that they are now processing the final tonnes for the first shipment to Cairo before Christmas.
(Interruptions.)
As I said, the Egyptian consignment is going ahead. Furthermore, on 16 October the fishery was re-opened and at that time 20,000 tonnes of the quota were left. As it happened, there were 26,000 tonnes because I did an exchange deal with the British. Of the 26,000 tonnes, the Deputy might be interested to know that 17,867 tonnes were landed outside this country. Then the Deputy comes crying to me about the loss of jobs and processing opportunities. He should talk to the fishermen. I know there are good reasons for this but the Deputy should not blame me for it. I would not expect any fisherman to plough through heavy seas for 36 or 48 hours but the Deputy should admit that. There are no job losses in Killybegs at present. The fishery closed because the full quota was fished, plus 6,000 tonnes. It will be open again on 1 January and, as it would have been closed next week anyway, we are talking about eight days at most. The fishermen did not know they had 6,000 tonnes extra fishing quota. As far as they were aware, they had to spin out the 20,000 tonne quota to Christmas. Even with my thick skin it really hurts to hear allegations that I am not getting the best deal for our fishermen in Brussels. I reject that accusation and I am glad that Deputy Gallagher towards the end of his speech offered his assistance to me. Perhaps his tirade, inaccurate and unfounded as much of it was, will help me in Brussels next Monday and Tuesday to try to squeeze a further quota for the coming year. I hope it will and I would appreciate his help.
The Dáil adjourned at 12 midnight until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 12 December 1985.