Vol. 436 No. 6
1 Mr. Barrett asked the Minister for the Marine the current status of the categorisation letters sent to each Irish fishing vessel owner by registered post; the appeals mechanism open to them; if he will ensure that fishing vessel owners will not be subjected to heavy legal costs by having to use the courts to have an appeal heard; if he will consider establishing an independent appeals body; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
57 Mr. Clohessy asked the Minister for the Marine if he will make a statement on the present status of the categorisation letters which were sent to every fisherman in the country by registered post.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 and 57 together.
The Department of the Marine, at the beginning of October, wrote by registered post to every registered owner of a fishing vessel enclosing a copy of a discussion document on the management and development of the sea fishing fleet and setting out on a strictly provisional basis the fleet category into which his or her boat would be put.
It was explained in the letter that the provisional categorisation of each boat is subject to review in the light of any appeal made or in the light of developments arising from the public consultations process. Each owner was given a period of eight weeks to get back to the Department.
I should explain that in the meantime a major consultation exercise has been undertaken entailing the following: as already mentioned, a copy of the document has been sent to every registered owner of a fishing boat; a detailed briefing has been given to representatives of the major fishing organisations; a series of widely advertised regional meetings have been held at ten locations nationwide at which the proposed policy has been explained in detail by senior departmental officials and local fishermen have had the opportunity of making suggestions and an overall input into the policy proposals; and written views have been sought on the document through advertisements in the papers.
Further detailed discussions will be held with the fishing industry organisations early next year. At that point there will be a full review of the proposals advanced in the discussion document with a view to meeting as far as this can be done all reasonable concerns expressed by fishermen.
Pending the completion of the review process there is no change in the status of the provisional letters issued. While the formal date for appealing this categorisation has passed, it has been made clear that a flexible attitude will be adopted to appeals received after the appeal date. I would encourage any fishermen or women who consider that his or her boat has not been correctly classified to get in touch with the Department as early as possible.
In drawing up the provisional categorisation lists the Department drew on all the information available to it on the recent fishing history of each boat. It is probable that in the vast majority of cases there will be no dispute about this. In some cases the information available to the Department may not be correct or there may be inadvertent administrative errors. It is for this reason that every fisherman and woman has been advised of his or her boat's classification. The appeals process involved is an administrative process and I can foresee no reason whatsoever why individuals should feel they would have to appeal to the courts to resolve any genuine claims that may be made. In other words, I am suggesting that there are two other routes — they can appeal either to the Minister or the Ombudsman. As fishermen have been hard done by they should not have to go to the expense of appealing to the courts. That is the reason they should avail of the other option to resolve all genuine claims.
I will deal in a more comprehensive manner with the general issue of an independent appeals mechanism in a reply to Question No. 54 on today's Order Paper.
Does the Minister agree that it is unique to issue a discussion document to a group of fishermen or women and at the same time implement what is contained in that discussion document without consultation? Does he agree that it was wrong to cause this scare among fishermen before the document was properly discussed? Only then should he have taken the decision to categorise certain vessels. Does the Minister agree that if there is to be categorisation the minimum we should do is put an independent appeals body in place so that the person who imposes the categorisation in the first place will not be asked to hear the appeal? Will the Minister therefore withdraw these proposals until a proper discussion has taken place? Irish fishermen are finding it difficult enough at present without being placed in the position where they will be confined to certain areas irrespective of whether this is economically viable.
In my reply I outlined the sequence of events. A document was composed and produced. This dealt with a number of issues, including decommissioning and categorisation. In addition, a letter was produced and I think the Deputy has seen this letter in which the word "provisional" is used three times. I realise that this letter was the cause of concern for some fishermen who saw it as a legal document.
It was sent by registered post.
However, that was far from the case. A series of ten meetings was then held with various fishing organisations and communities. I understand that a number of other communities have asked to meet the officials of the Department of the Marine who addressed those ten meetings. This is in keeping with our obligations as members of the European Union. For the first time in the history of a Government Department the process of democratisation is taking place. As the Deputy said, the letter was the source of concern but there is no question of withdrawing it. There will be flexibility in relation to the due date, 28 November. The discussions are ongoing.
Deputy Barrett rose.
May I appeal for brevity at this stage? Clearly, if we devote a disproportionate amount of time to one question this will be to the disadvantage of the remaining priority questions. Let us have some equity in the matter.
Is the Minister saying that these categorisation letters have no legal status and that they represented an attempt to convince rather than instruct people? Will the Minister give these letters legal status in the future?
I cannot do that——
Then they mean nothing.
It was an offer of categorisation and no more. The last paragraph of the letter states that a further letter will be sent confirming categorisation or adjusting it in the light of the current consultation process or a successful appeal.
It has no legal status.
It was not intended to have a legal status.
One cannot appeal.
Of course one can.
There is no obligation on the fishermen then to stick to those areas.
One can appeal against the provisional allocation. That is what we are about. This is a proposal under a document issued in relation to our obligations under the European Union fleet policy.
I am sorry to intervene so often but it must be quite obvious to Members that half the time available to us for dealing with priority questions is now exhausted. Let us come to deal with Question No. 2.
