Vol. 562 No. 4
119 Mr. Ferris asked the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources the reason the system of quota allocation management by monthly statutory instrument differs here from the system in place in other EU states such as Britain, France and Spain. [6097/03]
Once total allowable catches are established and allocated at EU level as national quotas between member states, their subsequent management is a matter within the sole responsibility of each member state. Such a division in responsibility is appropriate and enables member states to manage their national quotas to take account of the specific characteristics of their fisheries. Accordingly, it is to be expected that differing quota management systems will operate in different member states.
Our existing whitefish quota management system is designed to ensure, having regard to fishing patterns and market conditions, the best possible spread between fishermen and also in terms of take-up of quota during the year. A key objective is the avoidance of early closure of fisheries through rapid exhaustion of quota. Under the current arrangements in Ireland, fishing industry representatives are invited each month to an advisory committee on whitefish quota management and their views are taken into account in the determination of monthly regimes for particular stocks.
To date Ireland's whitefish quotas have been regarded as national assets and, as such, they are treated as a public resource that is available to all fishing vessels which are licensed to fish the particular stock. In contrast, in some other member states, systems have evolved whereby quotas have become a commodity and are purchased by vessel owners. It is, effectively, a privatisation process, with which the Deputy would not agree.
My Department is currently examining quota management generally and I expect to receive a report shortly. Any future quota management system must be consistent with the need to fulfil the various legal requirements on member states to manage and respect their national quotas. It also must be capable of ensuring a fair and equitable distribution of quota among Irish fishermen.
I am delighted the Minister is examining quota management and the allocation of quota. Does the Minister agree that the system which operates in other EU countries, where there is a direct input from fishing industry representatives, is a better way of establishing a more harmonised approach by both the state and the people involved in the industry? If so, what steps does he intend to take to achieve that?
Does the Minister agree that the system of penalties in this State is far more severe than in other EU countries? The penalties in this country for serious breaches are almost twice the EU average. The average penalty fine in this country is more than €7,000. In other member states, it is less than €1,000 and as low as €600 for similar offences. Does the Minister not consider that unfair since 50% of the fishing vessels boarded within our waters and brought before the courts are Irish vessels? There is disillusionment among the fishing organisations that on most occasions serious breaches are brought before the Circuit Court whereas other EU vessels are brought before the District Court. That makes the fine and bond involved far more difficult.
With regard to the conservation box, will the Government ensure, in the negotiations under the western water agreement, that the Irish conservation box will be preserved and not allowed to be exploited by other countries which have that design at present?
Absolutely. The conservation issue in the Irish box is what I am fighting for on behalf of the Irish people. With regard to quotas, the stocks of all whitefish species have fallen by an average of 50% over the past three to four years. Take Celtic Sea cod as an example. The catch limitations in 1999 would typically have been four to five tonnes per month for vessels over 55 feet in length and about two tonnes per month for vessels under that length. There is a stark contrast in 2003. The corresponding limitation is about one tonne and half a tonne respectively. Unfortunately, there has been a dramatic drop in the stocks available.
The Deputy asked about consultation with the industry. Every month fishing industry representatives are involved in an advisory group which looks at the available quota over the year. There is strong opposition among the main fishing industry representative organisations to the quotas becoming anything other than a public national resource. A number of countries have a different system which, in effect, allows the quotas to become commodities which can be bought and sold by vessel owners. That is a privatisation process—
That is not the question I asked.
—and I doubt that the Deputy would agree with that.
I asked about management of allocation and a harmonised approach by fishing organisations and the Government in regulating it.
Everything we do is done in consultation with the fishing industry organisations. There is constant contact but one cannot get away from the fact that the resource is diminishing and, obviously, the quotas must be dictated on that basis.
