Vol. 506 No. 6
9 Mr. Finucane asked the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources if he will give a commitment that the report of the national Common Fisheries Policy review group, which recommends significant Government investment over the next seven years, will be given serious consideration in the national development plan. [15974/99]
I was very pleased to launch last week the first report by the CFP strategy review group, entitled National Investment Priorities for the Irish Seafood Industry. The review group recommends a total investment programme for the seafood sector of £365 million over the next seven years, of which the EU and Exchequer would contribute £199 million and the private sector £166 million. The group's report fully backs up BIM's analysis of the investment needs of the sector in the latter's Seafood Industry Agenda 2000-2006. The review group's own economic analysis points to the significant contribution which the sector already makes to output, exports, jobs and regional and local development. It underlines the potential for further growth and added value which will create lasting jobs in the regions.
The review group disagrees fundamentally and in detail with the conclusions of the ESRI that public investment in the sector should decrease. Instead, the group makes a compelling economic case for enhanced investment support for the sector, highlighting its importance for balanced socio-economic and regional development and an equitable distribution of economic activity.
I will be working with Government colleagues to secure the necessary investment support in the next round to underpin the development of the Irish seafood industry and, indeed, of the marine and natural resources sectors generally. The review group's report is another critical and well informed contribution to the current debate on national investment priorities. I endorse the group's analysis which, together with BIM's report, accords with my own assessment of future strategic directions for the sector and the communities which it supports. The challenge now is to secure the necessary investment support to consolidate this sector and position it to move ahead. The context is one of overall stiff competition for resources and many national challenges. I believe, however, we have a convincing and well founded case for support for the seafood sector over the next seven years.
This is the third report we have had in recent times. First we had the BIM report, then the Marine Food Council's report and, in recent times, National Investment Priorities for the Irish Seafood Industry, produced by the special task force reviewing the Common Fisheries Policy for 2002. All three reports are consistent in that they seem to indicate that the amount of EU and Exchequer funding will be about £200 million and Exchequer funding will be about £45 million.
Will the Minister assure the House that if there is a deficit with regard to EU funding, national funding will be increased? Does he agree it is vital that this £200 million is found in order to underpin the development of this sensitive industry which is centred in areas which are classified for Objective One status? Will the Minister give an assurance that he will do everything possible in the next few weeks in the context of the national development plan to deliver this £200 million to an industry which has been earmarked for funding on the basis of £28 million a year over the next seven years? It is a very small price to pay for the further development of this industry.
The Deputy is correct in saying that the three different groups came to broadly similar conclusions as to the prospect of real opportunities in the industry and how they should be pursued. I disagree fundamentally with the ESRI analysis which is limited and flawed. The review group has concluded that the Irish seafood industry is a vital indigenous sector. In relation to the funds I will, in the first instance, be working to get the maximum possible investment under EU Structural Funds for fisheries post-1999. These were recently discussed at the Council of Fisheries Ministers. It is my priority to achieve a fair allocation of Structural Funds for the fisheries sector in the next round and to ensure that satisfactory financial regulations are agreed in the October Council meeting.
In relation to shortfalls, I will be putting it to the Government that the proposals are reasonable and right for the industry and that any shortfalls should be made up to try to achieve the objectives which have been set.
Was the Minister concerned, as I was, to read in the ESRI report its criticism of the whole fishing industry and funding for it? I concur with the Minister's sentiments in regard to the ESRI's submission. Is the Minister equally concerned that because the ESRI is respected as an astute body, its report alters the complexion of the national development plan with regard to other Ministers? I want an assurance from the Minister that he will work with might and main at the Cabinet table when the national development plan is being introduced to ensure that the £200 million is found for the industry for the next seven years.
We must move on to Question No. 10.
I agree with the Deputy in relation to the ESRI. It is unusual for it to come up with such a flawed report.
