I am accompanied by Dr. Cecil Beamish and Ms Josephine Kelly, officials from the Department. I thank the committee for the invitation to appear before it. It is the first committee that I have attended since my appointment to this position eight months ago and I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak to the Joint Committee on European Scrutiny on this important matter.
The committee has looked closely at European matters previously and I acknowledge its work. Its report No. 19 related to Celtic Sea cod on which, fortunately, we had a good outcome at Council in November and December last. Certainly, we value the input of the committee. I very much welcome the Chairman's remarks at the start of the meeting about officials.
As the committee will be aware, the fishing industry went through difficult times during last year. High fuel prices in the summer had an especially hard impact on the sector and while the price of oil has reduced considerably in recent times, fluctuating oil prices have the potential to undermine the profitability of the industry any time in the future.
However, in my view the most critical issue for the sector is the impact of progressively reducing quotas, which has been the pattern for a number of years. This reflects the reality whereby many important fish stocks around Ireland and elsewhere are under a great deal of pressure and some are over-fished.
The scientists have detected clear evidence of the decline to dangerously low levels of many important fish stocks, and in that respect the species that has attracted most headlines has been cod. However, many other important stocks such as whiting, sole and herring are in need of rebuilding.
The International Council for the Exploration of the Seas, ICES, has determined that stocks of haddock, cod and whiting north west of Ireland and Scotland are in poor shape and need time to recover.
The Commission came forward with proposals to ban all whitefish fishing in the area to provide breathing space for these whitefish species to recover. I was not convinced that this was necessary or appropriate and fought for a regime that would allow fishing to continue with gear that would reduce catches of the threatened stocks and allow them to rebuild.
Many of the stocks in the Irish Sea are also in very poor shape. In both areas we are implementing restrictive limits on the number of days fishing vessels will be allowed to fish each year. This is the stark reality we face today. If we do not ensure that conservation measures are respected for all fisheries of importance to Irish fishermen by all vessels fishing these stocks, we will face continued and more restrictive fishing practices in response to declining fish stocks.
I firmly believe that if we do not take strong action now and ensure that the agreed conservation measures are respected by all, we will face the closure one by one of the fisheries around the coast on which our coastal communities are so dependent. Even if this eventuality is not forced on us by EU Council decisions, depleting fish stocks will pretty quickly lead to a situation where the level of fishing effort required would not justify continued activity in view of the small catches which would result.
There is a considerable body of evidence that the conservation measures put in place at EU level are not being respected. The European Court of Auditors published a report in December 2007 which found that there are three main types of failure in the Common Fisheries Policy catch limitation system: there is widespread under-reporting of fish captured and the control systems in place in the member states fail to detect and correct these false declarations or fraud; sanction regimes in member states are of variable effectiveness and levels of sanctions are generally not dissuasive; and regulations at EU level and the inspections and other actions carried out by the Commission do not amount to the decisive action required to remedy these weaknesses.
The Court of Auditors investigations were based on how the CFP rules were actually applied in six member states — Denmark, France, the Netherlands, Spain, the UK and Italy. The auditors found multiple shortcomings in the systems which called into question whether the various measures for fishery resources management and the total allowable catch system, in particular, are operating effectively.
In response to the Court of Auditors report, the Commission reviewed the current system and brought forward a proposal to substantially change control and enforcement under the CFP. The Commission's proposals for a new control system are aimed at tackling over-fishing. I will now outline the main themes of the new approach.
First, there will be a new common approach to control and inspection. This involves a strong focus on inspections on shore-based links in the supply chain whereby the owner of the fish must be able to produce documents proving that the product was caught in conformity with the rules and that it observes a principle of product traceability. It involves using best practices such as risk analysis and concentrating control on problematical fisheries and periods. It also involves the use of new technologies to ensure the maximum effective delivery.
The second theme involves the promotion of a culture of compliance with the rules. This involves a proposal for dissuasive and harmonised sanctions whereby a list of infringements is established together with a minimum fine applicable in all member states. It also involves a points-based system which may lead to the suspension of a fishing licence or its permanent withdrawal.
A third theme is the promotion of enhanced co-operation between member states involving systematic exchange of information involving a common website where all relevant information and control data is available to the control authorities of all member states, the Commission and the Community Fisheries Control Agency.
The proposal also strengthens the Commission's powers to guarantee common implementation of the regulations and to intervene in cases of poor application of control measures on the ground.
I am, in principle, supportive of these measures. I am convinced that if we do not have a common approach to fisheries control across the EU it is grossly unfair to fishermen and will result, despite all our best efforts in Ireland, in the further decline and eventual closure of the fisheries that our fleet rely upon for their economic survival.
In Ireland we have made strong efforts to put in place strengthened control to address illegal fishing. I consider that it is grossly unfair to our fishermen if we do not take the opportunity before us to require others to also deliver effective controls.
Our fishermen have nothing to fear from the scope of this proposal. There are of course elements within it that I consider must be changed. These include the application of the VMS system and electronic logbooks to all vessels of 10 m and upwards in the fleet.
I consider that we need to focus our attention on the activities of the larger vessels in the international fleets which have the potential to do the most damage. Additionally, I would not support the reduction of the margin of tolerance in logbooks to 5%. This means that fishermen at sea must record the fish on board in their logbook and can only be outside that record by a margin of 5%. This is impractical and does not take account of the realities on board vessels. While I am supportive of the requirements for the designation of ports of landing for certain fisheries, and we implement this system in some of our fisheries, I do not accept that there must be a mandatory requirement on landing times and full inspection coverage.
There are other elements in this proposal that I will be seeking to change to take account of the impacts of the new arrangements on fishermen and I will discuss these issues with the Federation of Irish Fishermen with a view to delivering a balanced control regime that both delivers sustainable fisheries and is not overly burdensome on fishermen.
From a media perspective, the main issue that has received coverage in this proposal relates to the proposal to count catches of recreational fisheries against TACs and quotas. From a stock conservation perspective, the outtake by recreational fishermen in other member states can be significant and at present is not recorded or assessed.
I am consulting my colleagues in the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism and the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs for their views which I will take into account.
I should advise that at this point my view is that any measures in this regard must be subject to full consultation with all stakeholders and, if necessary, appropriate measures introduced. I would not support the simplistic approach taken by the Commission in this proposal and believe that it should be excluded from the regulation at this time.
I also want to address specifically the Commission's proposals on sanctions and a penalty points system. The proposal allows for the application of administrative action or criminal proceedings in conformity with national law.
The possibility of introducing administrative sanctions for fisheries offences in Ireland was comprehensively considered, including an examination of practices in other member states, at the time of the passage of the Sea-Fisheries and Maritime Jurisdiction Bill through the Oireachtas. The position taken by the Minister at that time was based on legal advice from the Attorney General. Under this proposal, there is a possibility of introducing administrative sanctions and a penalty points system for Irish vessels and I have sought legal advice to determine if the current Commission proposal could accommodate their introduction in Ireland. It is worth noting that the proposal from the Commission envisages penalties up to a maximum of €600,000 for repeated serious infringement and, under the penalty points system, the suspension of a fishing licence for prolonged periods and even the permanent withdrawal of a licence. These penalties are substantially higher than the level provided for in Irish legislation. It is important to remember that I and my predecessors as Ministers with responsibility for fisheries pushed strongly for a level playing field on control.
As a coastal state with responsibility for protecting some of the richest fishing grounds in the EU and with a fishing industry almost completely dependent on sustainable fish stocks in our own waters, it is our highest priority that there are effective control regimes in place across all member states.
Our industry in Ireland strongly believes that it is on its own in being subject to controls and that operators in some other countries are not detected or when they are, they face low penalties. I consider that this proposal offers the best opportunity to introduce a level playing field on control.
I will be seeking certain amendments to the provisions where they are excessive or impractical. In particular, I will seek strong powers for coastal member states to effectively police waters under their control. I firmly believe that we must seize this opportunity to put a stop to illegal fishing which, if left unchecked, will destroy fish stocks and the livelihoods of coastal communities dependent on fishing.
I look forward to the input of the committee, as one of the stakeholders, in reaching final determinations in this regard.
