Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 15 Mar 1995

Vol. 450 No. 7

Adjournment Debate. - Canadian-Spanish Fishing Dispute.

Mr. M. Smith

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for allowing me to raise this matter on the Adjournment and the Minister of State for being present in the House.

This issue relates to the conservation of fish stocks and the management of depleting resources in a way which is ecologically viable. There is overwhelming scientific evidence that the fishing of Greenland halibut is in excess of what the stocks can sustain. In recent years EU fishing effort has taken over 80 per cent of the Canadian halibut catch in an area covering only 20 per cent of the Greenland halibut habitat. It is contrary to the recommendations of NAFO, the scientific council which includes EU scientists, to have such concentrated fishing. It is well known that concentrated fishing of this kind, especially with new technologies, can drastically reduce fish stocks.

The Spanish factory freezer trawler fleet began fishing Greenland halibut at the beginning of 1989 when the most important stock at the time, northern cod, became increasingly scarce — it was eventually put into moratorium in 1992. This pressure on the fragile stock, together with the fishing of juvenile fish, will exhaust these stocks, bearing in mind that the halibut reproduces at the age of ten years and over. I accept that one of the freedoms of the high seas is to fish but that is not an unqualified freedom. It must be subject to the duty by distant water fishing states to co-operate with each other and to conserve and rationally manage the stocks being fished.

I am not backing the measures taken by the Canadian authorities to arrest the Spanish trawler — I have reservations about this action — but there is little doubt that the Spaniards have a case to answer. Were the logs on the trawler falsified or were there two sets of logs, one showing a 40 per cent catch of halibut and the other an 80 per cent catch? I have been told by a reliable source that 80 per cent of the catch in the hold of the ship was juvenile immature fish. This is a flagrant transgression of conservation policies throughout the world. These small sized young fish could only be caught through the use of a net mesh half the legal size.

There are now more Spanish trawlers in this area than there were last year when 46,000 tonnes were fished, this notwithstanding the fact that the total allowable catch has been reduced to 27,000 tonnes and that the EU portion has been considerably reduced. Spanish trawlers are now thought to have fished more than a quarter of the total allowable catch for all countries for the full year. I want to make it clear that I have no problem with the Spanish Government or the Spanish people. My problem, and it is a serious one, has to do with the Spanish fishing fleet which is obviously out of control. The consequences for spawning stock are catastrophic; this is unadulterated plundering, destructive fishing. I am not raising the issue of the share out of the total allowable catch between the EU and Canada as I do not have the time. Suffice it to say that there is room for negotiation and compromise. I would advocate restraint and the carrying out of a totally independent analysis of the situation in Greenland by a third party.

Next January the Spaniards will be able to fish in the Irish box. We desperately need meaningful and effective enforcement controls and measures to combat this wholesale plundering. Instead of showing teeth and independence, the Minister and the Government have given the Spanish fishing fleet a blank cheque to ride roughshod over everyone. Given this mortal threat to fishing stocks and the fishing industry, the Government should be active in promoting effective international mechanisms to deal with vessels which transgress the law. They must protect our fishing stocks and the livelihood of those dependent on them and build up the Naval Service to ensure the controls which we desperately need are in place at the beginning of next year.

The Government has a great opportunity to tighten up international laws, to work in the United Nations towards removing legal uncertainties in this area and to protect the specific rights of coastal countries. Many small communities in Europe, and in Ireland, are frightened by the prospect of this reckless overfishing and they need to be sure that Governments are on their side in ensuring that there is respect for international law and that depleting stocks will be conserved.

Minister of State at the Department of the Marine (Mr. Gilmore)

I welcome this opportunity to set out Ireland's position on the fishing dispute between the European Union and Canada.

The dispute has been simmering for some six months now. Ireland has been actively involved in discussions at European Union level and there have also been ongoing high level contacts with Canada. Our position has been defined over a lengthy period and is based on an objective and principled approach to what is a complex and difficult problem. We have throughout this period urged restraint on both sides and have encouraged efforts at an negotiated settlement.

We support the European Union position because we feel this is in the best interests of the Irish fishing industry. Ireland is a Member of the European Union. The key decisions which affect Ireland's fishery concerns are taken within the European Union and unilateral action by Ireland against the European Union position in an international dispute would be an extremely grave step to take.

The facts in this case would not justify such action and Canada's arrest of the Estai in international waters was an illegal act which we cannot support — I am glad Deputy Smith does not support it either. Indeed, support for the Canadian arrest of a European Union vessel on the high seas would run directly counter to Ireland's interests. If, for example, Spain should arrest an Irish vessel in international waters we would vigorously defend our legal rights and demand and expect support from other states in the Union.

We understand Canadian concerns. We support their calls for conservation and appreciate their frustration with the difficulties in controlling the activities of certain fleets. We are also fully aware of the deep socio-economic problems and loss in employment in Newfoundland which have resulted from the collapse in cod stocks. Given the natural affinities between Ireland and Newfoundland, this is obviously a matter of very serious concern for us.

As I said at the outset, we have been closely involved with this issue from its inception and adopted a carefully considered and principled stand throughout aimed at stock conservation. In particular, it has to be stressed that the EU Council of Fisheries Ministers in November last supported a substantial reduction in the total allowable catch of Greenland halibut from 40,000 tonnes to 27,000 tonnes. This was despite strong opposition from Spain and Portugal. Ireland supported this reduction.

The subsequent split decision by the NAFO contracting parties to allocate a mere 12.5 per cent — 3,400 tonnes approximately — of this to the Union and 60 per cent, 16,000 tonnes approximately — to Canada was adjudged by the European Union to be inequitable having regard to recent catching patterns which would justify a reversal of those allocations. The issue, therefore, in this case is not so much about conservation as about share-out of the reduced allowable catch. Thus, the European Union without any dissenting voice among its 15 member states — that decision was not taken lightly — invoked the valid objection procedures provided for in the NAFO Convention and appealed the initial decision. The Union has always made it clear that it was open to negotiation on this issue. Instead of negotiating with the European Union on the issue, Canada chose to take unilateral and illegal action which has precipitated the present crisis.

We condemn illegal fishing activity by any country's fishing fleet. We have been at the forefront of those within the Union who have argued for tighter controls on the Spanish fleet. We are determined to eliminate such illegal activity. I agree that the Spanish fleet must answer questions both in regard to the catch on the vessel now under arrest and about their general fishing behaviour in that area. We must not, however, allow our concerns about the Spanish fleet blind us to our interests in the dispute between the European Union and Canada.

Our strategy of working within the Union and not breaking ranks on this issue best protects the interests of Irish fishermen and allows Ireland to play a credible and useful role in attempting to achieve a solution. To break ranks and take a partisan stance would sideline Ireland in the process while jeopardising Ireland's position on ongoing issues of crucial importance to the Irish fishing industry. Moreover, if any country were now to break ranks with the Union position it would prolong the dispute and make it more difficult to resolve. I believe that we were right to resist any temptation to adopt a populist stance on this issue and I am confident that the reasoned position we have taken will contribute to the resolution of the problem.

It is essential that both parties take immediate steps to de-escalate this dispute and to urgently get back to the negotiating table. A speedy and mutually acceptable durable settlement must be negotiated. This must provide for equitable distribution, proper controls and protect stocks while safeguarding Canada's interests. We are using every opportunity to impress on both sides the need to take this approach.

This Government will take a far more vigorous approach than its predecessor in dealing with the question of illegal fishing, whether by the Spanish fleet or any other, particularly if it affects the interests of our fishing industry.

The Dáil adjourned at 9.30 p.m. until 12 noon on Wednesday, 22 March 1995.