The purpose of today's meeting is to consider the Revised Estimate for the Department of the Marine and Natural Resources. I welcome the Minister, Deputy Fahey, and his officials. I propose that the Minister open the proceedings following which spokespersons will make their contributions.
Estimates for Public Services, 2000
Vote 30-Department of the Marine and Natural Resources (Revised).
Thank you, Chairman, for taking this Estimate today and facilitating the Department in this way. I will summarise my speech following which members may question me on any aspect with which I do not deal.
The Estimate calls for expenditure of £140,775,000 in 2000 on the activities of the Department. This represents a significant commitment by the Government to the marine and natural resources sectors. In the past year, investment support continued under the various 1994-99 programmes and this is most notably reflected regarding BIM, inland fisheries, fishery harbours, coastal protection, forestry and ports.
Under the national development plan, investment support programmes for the marine and natural resources will continue and be increased to significant levels. Investment of over £930 million up to 2006 will support total investment in excess of £1 billion. This commitment will ensure the benefits of economic prosperity reach all rural and coastal communities.
The main components of the 2000 Estimate are divided under several headings. An administrative budget of £19 million will support the salaries and operational costs of the 440 staff in the Department's headquarters and throughout the regions. This year we will pay particular attention to the Department's three year IT development plan which is a priority and for which we recently received approval for ten additional staff. This will deliver a high standard of customer service and organisational efficiency and is one of the priorities I targeted to bring about that greater efficiency.
The Department has an excellent team. These people have often been criticised but I am satisfied that much of that criticism concerns the past and the Department now operates very efficiently. While there are areas in which we still have to improve, the modernisation of the IT structure will allow us to provide a full and efficient service to customers and the general public.
The emergency towing vessel is one of the priorities in the Estimate and the Department recently received Government approval for a final examination of the State's emergency towing needs. We propose to proceed quickly with this examination to see what use we can make of the vessel for other activities such as fisheries protection, rescue operations and so on. In light of the Erika disaster off the French coast we see this as an urgent and very important development. We hope to complete a report on the issues by October this year and we intend proceeding with all haste in respect of the acquisition of this vessel.
Our commercial ports are a very valuable asset. They have served us well in the past and have been key to our economic development. However, it is time to take a step forward in terms of the further development of our ports and the provision of a more competitive, cost efficient and consumer friendly service to customers. We will be examining various proposals on an ongoing basis and will be further investing and encouraging ports to invest in new developments in order to increase efficiency and cost effectiveness.
A significant restructuring of our regional harbours and ports was recommended by an independent review and has been brought to the attention of the harbour authorities and we hope to bring forward some interesting and radical proposals. We must ensure the full utilisation of quite significant assets. I have noted the amount of dereliction and wastage in some ports around the country and we will be encouraging the companies concerned to utilise their assets in the best possible way. I have already told them I do not want them selling assets to the private sector, allowing the private sector make money on the back of a public asset. I would rather see development being carried out by the ports. If it is necessary to sell some portion of land in order to finance other developments within ports, we would not object to that. By and large we would like to see an end to the dereliction evident in some ports and the utilisation of port land banks for continued development.
Deputies will be aware of the Shannon estuary developments and I am hopeful the legislation will pass through both Houses of the Oireachtas before the summer recess. It will be of great significance in progressing the Shannon estuary port authority and will enable us to carry out rationalisation in some other port areas.
Regarding the tourism programme of the Department of the Marine and Natural Resources, Deputies are aware of the new marine leisure division in the Department from 1 January. The national development plan includes a provision of £20 million for marine tourism and leisure over the period 2000-06. Without doubt there is very significant potential in this area which up to now has not been exploited. It is one of the exciting areas in our Department and we will be focusing significant attention on it over the next couple of years. We will see significant growth and great potential for peripheral regions around the coast to exploit our wonderful natural resource. Our greatest challenge will be to ensure we do not in any way destroy that wonderful natural resource.
Coastal protection has been a major problem over many years and has never been adequately funded. Therefore, I am pleased that the total expenditure of £10 million in this regard, supported to the tune of £7.1 million by my Department, is by far the largest programme to date and will start to make a serious impact on the great natural disaster of coastal erosion.
Marine research and development under the auspices of the Marine Institute is undoubtedly one of the exciting areas of work under our Department's brief. We have a young team of highly qualified and motivated scientists in the institute who are doing significant work in exploiting the potential of our marine resource. The first day I took up office the director said to me that we live in a country where 90% of our land mass is undeveloped, undiscovered and under water, a very telling comment. Many other countries are researching our under water land mass and know much more than we do about the potential which exists. We are now getting up to speed in this context and the Marine Institute is doing significant work. We are moving forward by commissioning a further marine research vessel, planning for which is at an advanced stage. Ongoing research is being done on fish stock assessment, fish health and aquaculture programmes, marine environment, monitoring salmon and sea trout management and marine tourism. Some very significant work is being done in these areas.
There are other interesting areas such as a project involving a state of the art facility to generate electricity from wave power and wind energy off the coast. I think the wave power project will give exciting results. Those involved seem to be ahead of most other countries in this regard, having a joint venture with Harland and Wolff, a very appropriate North-South initiative involving our State sector. According to those involved in the project they are at a very advanced stage in capturing for the first time electricity generation from wave power. It is interesting that apart from two other places, our west and north-west coasts have one of the highest wave power potentials in the world, which will be of interest to Deputy Blaney, and it will be some achievement if we can capture that resource.
Regarding sea fisheries and acquaculture development, my immediate strategic priority is to ensure a sustainable, competitive, quality driven and efficient seafood industry in terms of catching, processing, exporting and marketing. Our priority is to prepare our case for the Common Fisheries Policy to ensure a particular focus on enhanced conservation measures, a level playing pitch in terms of enforcement across Europe and increased opportunities for the Irish fleet. Our stocks are seriously under threat and a fundamental review of conservation, with agreement across the EU, is necessary. I am glad the Irish fishing sector has taken a very responsible approach in this regard and already the review group has come up with novel and interesting proposals in respect of mesh size, spawning areas and a number of new initiatives which we will be putting to the Commission and which we hope will produce results.
Nobody is under an illusions that the quota system is difficult for us and will be difficult to change. One must wonder what we were thinking off back in 1972, but I suppose we did not know any differently at that time and, unfortunately, we negotiated a very poor deal which has hampered development since then. That is not to say that no potential or opportunities in the fish sector, which is under quota restriction. There is huge potential in the acquaculture sector and today my colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Byrne, is launching a major initiative in terms of the development of that sector. The Estimate of £37.238 million for 2000 reflects our continuing commitment to support and investment in the seafood sector.
The completion of expenditure programmes under the 1994-99 programme is reflected in the Estimate. The whitefish renewal programme is one of the best programmes I have seen during my time in politics. It transformed from a proposal on paper to the completion of 28 new boats within a two year period. For the public service to have taken a scheme involving an investment of £66 million from the drawing board to completion in that space of time was certainly an achievement by any standard. It is great to see young Irish skippers acquiring boats in which investments of the order of £2 million were made and being prepared to go out to fish new stocks and species. That is very encouraging.
The national development plan provides for £171 million in investment support for the sector, £45 million of which will be provided over the period of the plan to meet the strategic objective of enhanced safety, quality and efficiency of the fishing fleet. We are involved at all levels of the fleet in trying to improve safety through the provision of better boats and equipment and, most importantly, a better understanding of safety in the fishing community. It is harrowing to think that 16 people involved in our fishing industry were lost at sea in 1995. Thankfully, we have witnessed a great improvement in that area in recent years and I hope that with improved standards, training, boats, equipment and caution on the part of fishermen, we will not witness such a tragic level of loss as occurred in 1995.
The national development plan also provides for a new programme of investment support of £25 million for the processing industry. That measure is currently being finalised. A strategic consultancy is reviewing the seafood sector in consultation with the sector itself. I have identified huge gaps in the processing and marketing sectors and we need to make up a good deal of ground there. I hope that this investment will help to improve the processing, adding value and marketing of what is possibly the finest seafood product one would find anywhere in the world. Unfortunately, we have not been as good as we might have been at marketing, selling, handling, processing and adding value to the product. This area will be one of our main priorities in the coming years.
The fishery and harbour development programme is proceeding apace. Deputies will be aware of major projects in key fishery harbours around the coast. A further £60 million is being provided under the national development plan to enable us to proceed with the essential modernisation required in this area. We have also secured some additional funding for small piers and landing places in coastal region. Essential to this expenditure is the fact that local communities will benefit and that there will be a significant return on capital investment from the Exchequer in that such locations will not just accommodate inshore fishing but also acquacultural development and marine tourism. We intend to place special emphasis on ensuring that such capital projects will enable us to proceed with further development across those three areas.
A sum of £14.5 million has been allocated to fishery harbour development for 2000. Capital developments are under way in Killybegs, Castletownbere, Burtonport, Dingle, Greencastle and Cromane. Lower levels of investment are being made in 50 further locations around the coast. We have commissioned a strategic review of the needs of Rossaveal and a similar review is due to get under way in respect of Dunmore East in the near future. I intend to press ahead with organisational and management changes for the five fishery harbour centres and to delegate some of the Department's powers to a more localised structure for the running of those fishery harbours, among which I would expect Dingle to be incorporated.
Funding of £18.5 million is provided for inland fisheries in 2000. A number of new initiatives is due to occur under the national development plan. The National Salmon Commission has recently been established and we are enthusiastic about its ability to make our wild salmon product one of the most prestigious food products in the world. I am very concerned by the fact that wild salmon is almost a depleted species which has lost much of its prestige as one of the finest foods one could hope to eat. To date, we have been successful in convincing the vast majority of people that wild salmon should be tagged, conserved and developed and that it should carry a quality mark distinguishing it from farmed salmon and other types of seafood.
The Fisheries (Amendment) Act, 1999, outlines a new strategic framework for the central and regional boards. Essentially, the regional boards will be given additional powers to develop our inland fisheries and the central board will take a more policy driven, strategic approach. With the additional funding being provided, I am satisfied that significant progress can be made in this area. Catchment management will be central to this initiative. We are finding it difficult in some areas to convince anglers of the importance of catchment management. Unless all the players work together rather than against each other, the progress we desperately require in regard to water quality, pollution, enhanced fish stocks etc. will not be achieved.
We have a serious water quality problem in this country. The quality of our water has decreased significantly over the years and the issue must now be tackled by farmers, local authorities, householders, Government agencies and the anglers themselves. I am satisfied that if the approach we are adopting is pursued enthusiastically by everyone, we can begin to reclaim the quality which has, unfortunately, been lost in some areas. Thankfully, due to good work on the part of the fisheries boards with anglers, farmers and others, it is evident that much success has been achieved in the fight to restore our waters to their former pristine condition.
The fish stocks in some of our rivers and lakes are very low. Fishermen tell me that they caught bag loads of fish in the past but cannot catch any at all now. The Kilcolgan River, which runs along by Moran's of the Weir, in which I fished with my father was a prime salmon river in my youth but, unfortunately, one rarely sees a salmon there now. We must restore these rivers to their original state. The Salmon Research Centre, located in Newport, is a wonderful resource and I urge members to visit it if they get an opportunity to do so. The scientific and technological work being carried out to restore our salmon stocks is worth seeing.
We have a problem in regard to sea trout. I am glad to see that many environmental issues in the areas of acquaculture and angling have been addressed. I am assured that where proper scientific monitoring is carried out and where proper controls are in place, sea trout and salmon can live in harmony. With regard to the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission, we had the first intergovernmental council. We are proceeding with the legislation and hope to meet in Dublin with our Northern counterparts in early July.
On forestry, the Government policy is set out in the strategic plan up to 2030 "Growing for the Future". In 1999, my Department made payments totalling £66 million under the FEOGA guarantee scheme and the operational programme for agriculture, rural development and forestry. Following a tough fight, we managed to get the premia increased. We are still in negotiation with the Commission on back dating but that will be difficult. However, there is continuing potential for the development of the forestry industry. We are not achieving the planting targets we set ourselves but we are renewing our efforts in this regard. We are now studying a report on Coillte which was recently completed. I am satisfied that with a more integrated approach the forestry and timber industry can reach its true potential, which is not happening at present. We are not able to process the amount of saw log coming on stream. There is too much timber imports and we are not exploiting the potential for timber exports, particularly to the UK. There is a lot of potential in this area andwe are working with Coillte and the private sector in all aspects of the industry from planting to processing, marketing, adding value and so on.
In relation to the petroleum sector, hydrocarbons play a significant role in Ireland's energy mix. We have had mixed success in respect of offshore exploration. A lot of money was spent by the exploration sector and we have not had much success, with the exception of the Kinsale field. Enterprise Oil is currently involved in the appraisal well and we have tried at every opportunity to play down the significance if a gas find were to happen. A further gas find would be of great significance for the country. If this happens, it will be a great boost to the west of Ireland. There is no major jobs potential in bringing ashore gas but this would be the case in the area of construction if such a find were to take place. However, once gas flows it flows and there is no major benefit to be gained jobwise. Of course, there will be the significant benefit of natural gas to the west and indeed to the rest of the country. I assure Deputies that we are working hard to ensure that as many jobs as possible are being provided and that services, wherever possible, are being provided off the Irish coast. I am pleased to report that there has been a considerable increase in the amount of servicing carried out by Enterprise Oil and its subcontractors from Killybegs this year as opposed to last year. We are still in discussions with the industry about continuing activity from Irish workers right across the spectrum. I am satisfied we will achieve results in that respect should there be a successful outcome to the drilling which is in progress. It is important to try to encourage as much additional exploration as possible and in that regard, we have tried to be as encouraging as possible to the industry.
Since I became Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources I have been pleasantly surprised by the amount of wonderful work taking place in the Department. There is doubt that it is a small but very effective Department in terms of the amount of economic development in which it is involved at present. Even though I represent a coastal community, I had no idea of the extent of the work being carried out by a relatively small staff who have often been criticised unfairly in the past. A huge amount of work is being carried out right across the spectrum which contributes significantly to economic development in peripheral regions throughout the country where it is most needed. I would like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to the team of people involved in this area. They are the most hard working team of public officials I have come across during my time in this House since 1982. I have been critical of them in the past due to major difficulties that existed in the Department. As I said at the outset, there are difficulties still to be tackled but I am satisfied that the fishermen and all the other customers who deal with the Department will get a great service as a result of the improved IT structures which have been putin place. I hope people will understand that a very spirited effort is being made by the team, from the Secretary General down to the lowest ranking people. I suppose we suffer from a difficulty which is becoming more acute all the time. Given the difficulties of the Civil Service Commission, we have approximately 40 vacancies which we simply cannot fill quickly enough. I have tried to tackle this problem since I came to the Department but, given the current buoyancy in our economy, we cannot get people to take up the good employment opportunities that exist. I hope we will overcome that difficulty as we progress.
I thank the Minister for his analysis. The first point in the report is important in relation to staff. The Minister mentioned a staff of 403 and a targeted staff of 441. I have no doubt that officials in the Department of the Marine and Natural Resources work hard. I have received a lot of co-operation from them, apart from one hiccup to which I will not refer. I have no doubt that the staff in the Department put in a big workload which I find beneficial when teasing out legislation. A classic example was the Fisheries (Amendment) Bill where I was able to tease out many potential amendments during discussions with Sara White. Otherwise the legislation may have been more contentious.
I hope the Minister will sort out the problems in relation to catchment management. I am aware of the problem in the Killarney area at present but whether this is a universal problem in focusing on the improvements that will take place on the salmon issue is another matter. On the regional fisheries board, many of the members were appointed by the various bodies last March but the Minister does not seem to be very enthusiastic about appointing his nominees.
It has been done this week.
That answers my question and pre-empts a potential question for Question Time next week. There was an imbalance in the talent recommended to the Minister but I have no doubt he made the correct choice in relation to appointing members to the regional fisheries board.
I wish to refer to recent pertinent legislation which impacts on my area. I recall when the former Minister for the Marine, Deputy Woods, announced last December that KPMG Consultants were drawing up their report. At the time I said that I could almost pre-empt the findings of the report, which did not surprise me. I want to express my disappointment at the overall tenor and approach adopted in the report. I wish to put on the record that, as a former member of Foynes Port Company, I was aware over many years of the extensive capital investment made within that port. Many of the infrastructural requirements were provided but inadequate resources were made available nationally for that port development.
A classic example is what is happening with the west jetty extension in Foynes - the Minister has seen that at first hand. The report focuses on the financial position of that project and gives no recognition to the contribution and foresight of the board and employees in building up the port to what it is today. It praises Limerick for the computerisation of its system and refers to the fact that Foynes Port had not done so, but there was no reference to other management aspects of a port and how it was possible for the Limerick Port Company to build up a pension deficit of £3 million which the Department of the Marine and Natural Resources will have to address in the context of the amalgamation. The Foynes pension funding was up to date. I share the unhappiness of many of the employees of the Foynes Port Company with the overall tenor and spirit of the report and the lack of merit given to them with regard to their advances in the past.
The Minister and I have had many private discussions on this matter in the context of this report. The history of this merger goes back to the early 1970s. We are at a pivotal point at this stage regarding how we progress. I welcome the Minister's clarification in the Dáil and elsewhere that the operational and administrative headquarters will be based in Foynes. That is a very logical decision given that Foynes is the central port along the estuary with a necklace of private ports surrounding it. That decision sends a very positive signal to Foynes regarding its future.
I hope the development committee which the Minister is putting in place will have as its first priority the task of examining the issue of the extra crane and the dust hoppers for Foynes which is probably the most important requirement. Meeting that requirement would generate a great deal of goodwill within the port. The Bill provides the Minister with an opportunity to provide equity in relation to merging two port entities.
If the Minister were to require Foynes Port Company to find 50% of the funding, as required under the operational programme, it would find it very difficult to do so along with finding 100% funding for the cranes and hoppers which are essential components for developing the west jetty. I hope that will be one of the first areas to be tackled by the strategy committee. I will co-operate as much as possible to ensure this project come to fruition.
The Harbours (Shannon Estuary Development Corporation) Bill, 1988, which dealt with merging the two ports never came to completion because a general election intervened. Any time this issue has arisen a general election has been called, a fact I am sure the Minister and his colleagues have noticed.
It could happen again.
The matter was clearly defined in that Bill. The present Bill is broad-based and the Minister hopes to merge other ports around the country. The Minister and I are well aware of examples of that kind.
It should be possible to insert a provision in the Bill stating that the commercial, administrative and operational headquarters will be located in Foynes. If the Minister does not introduce an amendment to that fact I will move to enshrine what he said publicly and in the Dáil into legislation.
The Minister mentioned the white fish renewal programme which has been very positive. We need only read marine newspapers to learn of new vessels being launched every week. This is a very positive direction for that programme. The Minister has probably not received the title of our local hero yet but it will happen in time. His predecessor has been classified by a certain green columnist as our local hero. I am sure the Minister knows what I am talking about.
It is very hard to follow that.
I am sure the Minister will do so when he goes to Brussels on 16 June.
The report, which comes under the multi-annual guidance programme, recommends that Ireland take a 10% cut in vessels. That would be a dramatic contradiction if it happens. On the one hand we are trying to develop existing vessels, many of which are old, and replacements have to be found by way of existing tonnage yet, on the other hand, we are talking about a 10% reduction leaving a shortfall of 230 vessels, resulting in 1,000 jobs being lost to the industry. Mr. Fischler is enthused about what is being said regarding the objective of conserving fish stocks. Spain, with 24,000 fishing vessels, is being cut by 4%. Ireland is being discriminated against.
As the Minister said, we did not know what we were doing regarding quotas. If we quantify our pelagic and white fish stocks when it comes to the December negotiations, we will find a deficit of 20% as against what we started off with. An insidious attack is being made on existing quotas. While I know the objective of the white fish renewal programme is to target non-quota species - and I am sure that is being achieved - many of new exotic species, such as grenadier, scabbard and orange trout, are alien to the Irish palate and it may be a long haul to attune consumer tastes. The possibility of a further reduction is an appalling vista.
I met with the fishermen's organisations and have been very impressed with their views on conservation measures. It is interesting that the restrictions applied by the Commission in the past reduced days at sea and they are now conceding that that has not been a great success. They are now talking about reductions in the size of fishing fleets at European level. Is there interest at European level in following what the Irish fishermen are saying about preserving spawning areas regarding mesh sizes etc.? Can a uniform pattern be put in place to get worthwhile conversation measures in place? The fishermen I met realise there must be conservation if their long-term livelihoods are to be protected. Is the Commission looking at the easy target in reducing fishing tonnage rather than looking at other more imaginative proposals?
The Minister mentioned the degree of dereliction in some of our fishery harbours. I also raised this matter during our debate on the Estimates last year. I know he has gone around many of them and is probably aware we are awaiting legislation for the fishery harbour centres and enhancement of management in that direction.
Fishery ports.
The Minister will find a certain amount of dereliction in the fishery harbours also if he looks at them. We must look at the image presented to the end consumer. Perhaps there is a restriction on cash for improvements - and I do not want to cite examples - but there is quite a degree of dereliction in Castletownbere.
The sum of £250,000 is being provided for the provision of storage facilities for the Air Corps personnel in Waterford, which is extremely important. I am enthused about the Departments attention to safety matters. There has probably been a certain amount of lethargy and neglect regarding safety in the past but certain improvements are taking place.
The tragic loss of Michael Davies's son, Ross, in Dunmore East was probably the catalyst in our looking at adventure centres. I was glad to move the Private Members' Bill in March 1999 even though it was restricted to marine activities - I know the Minister intends to make the legislation more broad based. I was disappointed legislation was not in place for this summer but I understand it will probably be in place by the end of the year. This is a positive step. It is not good enough to have people operating under a voluntary code of practice as happened in the past. There was no obligation on adventure centres to refer to the Association for Adventure Sports in respect of its guidelines. Therefore, the State had to get involved. Naturally, there is an occupational hazard involved in adventure centres but the parents of young children attending such centres deserve the comfort of knowing their children are well looked after and that the State takes an interest in that regard.
Mr. Michael Guilfoyle has been heavily involved from the outset and I think it is very positive.
The Merchant Shipping (Investigation of Marine Casualties) Bill, 1999, has been worthwhile, particularly as regards jet skis, pleasure craft and life jackets, and it will awaken the consciousness of those involved in marine activities. An aspect of the Bill I was pleased to support was that the Department of the Marine and Natural Resources can allocate funding.
The Minister and I received correspondence on the Arigna mines regarding a commitment was given on the closure of the mines in 1990 and recommended by the task force that assistance would be given towards a museum. I am pleased that there is a provision of £600,000 in that regard.
It was unfortunate in the past that when we talked about marine matters we were talking about marine leisure and tourism and the Department was unable to give grant aid directly for marine activities. It was only when developments were taking place within a harbour that additional funding was spent on dredging and so on. However, at long last, people can now seek assistance towards marine activities, which is a step in the right direction.
Perhaps the officials can clarify the situation regarding Loran C. Reference was made to this matter in discussions on the Estimates for the pervious two years. We signed the international agreement in 1992. I understand it is a binding international agreement with the involvement of other countries. I do not want to go into the history of the matter now as the Minister is well aware of it and it has been dealt with in the Dáil on many occasions. The Minister said recently that he hopes somebody will appear magically with a site for the Loran C mast.
With regard to our financial commitments in this respect perhaps the costs could be clarified. I received a copy of a parliamentary question from Deputy Killeen in 1996 and at that stage the cost to the State was up to £1 million, despite the refunds received. I would be amazed if it has not increased greatly this year. The Minister said he is providing a tranche of money. Perhaps in the latter half of this year he expects developments to take place regarding construction. I do not know if he has magically found a site, whether he is still working at it or if it is a dream at this stage because the consultants employed to study a location for the Loran C mast investigated 40 sites in Counties Clare and Kerry. They said the south west coastline was the ideal location. As everyone is aware, a site was found but there were many local protests about it.
The Minister, Deputy Woods, spoke on this issue in the Seanad in October 1997 and we do not appear to have advanced any further. If one pardons the pun, is the Loran C issue dead in the water at this stage? Will it ever come to fruition? If we renege on our commitment, even though it is under an international binding agreement, what will be the financial costs to the State? Perhaps someone might clarify the financial cost to date on this project? It must be substantial.
I respect that the Cabinet gave permission to purchase an emergency towing vessel. We have all had concerns as there have been many near misses in terms of oil pollution off our coastline. With the type of activity off our coastline, it is regrettable we do not have such a vessel and it is important to purchase one. Did the Cabinet give a commitment to have the vessel in operation in the year 2001?
I am still surprised that £150,000 is being spent on improving a facility in Sandyford where core rock is being stored. I do not know the size of the facility but I know Sandyford is a tremendous location for property and it has a high premium. Is it a small facility or is it the ideal location to keep a rock core for mineral activities? Perhaps it is only a small shed or out-house? I wonder about the logic if it is the case that it is being refurbished.
With regard to forestry, mention was made that £66 million was spent. The Minister and I know the forestry programme has failed miserably. We are talking about a target up to the year 2000 of 20,000 hectares and about 13,000 hectares being planted for this year and last year. I am not sure how the targets can be achieved even consistent with this year. The Minister and I know that if 46,000 farmers are involved in REPS programmes at present and another 25,000 are earmarked for the year 2000 to 2006, at least 71,000 farmers are being taken out of circulation. Even though their farms have potential for forestry they are precluded under the current REPS programme. I wonder about the ambitious targets. Coillte has probably reached its seeding and will be involved in re-planting and so on. How will it push up to the target for the year 2000 of 20,000 hectares? We are way behind in the forestry area.
I welcome the increased funding this year for coastal erosion which was announced recently. We await the coastal zone management Bill which is still under wraps. Is there a comprehensive study of the coastal erosion problem? As we know, certain coastlines are particularly vulnerable to coastal erosion because of their rock formations. Has the problem ever been quantified in terms of the overall cost? Part of our island is vanishing due to coastal erosion.
I am pleased that Quilty has been included under the coastal erosion programme. Two years ago much of our correspondence expressed fears that Quilty would collapse into the sea. With the allocation of £10 million, the Minister has taken a step in the right direction.
Exciting things are happening in the Department of the Marine and Natural Resources and in BIM. I wish the Department and the Minister good luck for the future.
I apologise for the absence of my colleague, Deputy Bell, the Labour Party spokesperson on the marine, who is much more expert in this area than I. I welcome the Minister. This is the first time I have sat across from him. I know his reputation as a man who gets things done. His special knowledge and interest in the area for which he is responsible will lead to the actions which he identified in his statement being taken. He will acknowledge difficulties and mistakes which have been made and the need for action to rectify them. In the west last weekend I heard the Minister being praised by people who were not of his political persuasion. He will be spoken of, not as the best Minister ever but as the best Minister ever for the west.
I know the Newport salmon research facility very well and I fish there occasionally. The north Atlantic salmon is now an endangered species. Iceland and the Faroes have imposed a ban on drift netting, drag netting and fishing for salmon in estuaries and near their feeding grounds. Meanwhile we are sending out boats to catch fish in those waters and this is causing great anger among people who have agreed to stop fishing.
I recently met Dr. Ken Whitaker who is involved with a group of people trying to restore the salmon to the position it held not so long ago. I was very impressed by the case he made. The total income from commercially fished salmon is only £2 million per year. The Estimates include an allocation of £200,000 for a pilot scheme to deal with net fishermen. Rather than putting a pilot scheme in place, someone of the Minister's reputation could tackle this issue, once and for all. I do not suggest confrontation. It is a complex and difficult problem but money could solve it. The people who fish for wild salmon could be compensated for the loss of their income, both in the estuaries and at sea and this would allow for the restoration of the salmon in a relatively short time.
Dr. Whitaker also gave us figures for the value of a salmon caught in a river by a foreign tourist compared with a salmon caught at sea and sold as top class food. The comparative figures were £1,000 and £10. He made the point that Irish people like me, travelling from Straffan to the west to catch a salmon did nothing for the national economy because we merely spend money we would have spent in Straffan elsewhere in the country.
The Minister should examine my suggestion and move towards implementing it. He would have the full support of my party in providing the money and in taking the necessary action. The issue should be tackled on a consultative rather than confrontational basis. Licence holders - some families have held licences for 150 years - now recognise the reducing return on them. They also realise that as salmon numbers decline further the return on licences will decline.
There is, of course, a danger that the activity will become more intensive if there are fewer salmon and that a higher percentage of the existing salmon will be caught. It would be worthwhile spending £10 million on a once-off buy out of commercial salmon fishing. This would lead to a restoration of the primacy of salmon in rivers and lakes throughout the country.
It is wonderful that our capital city has a river running through it which still carries salmon. Where I live in County Kildare we see salmon going over the weir into the K Club grounds quite regularly. They are not playing golf but they are still climbing the weir at Straffan. That could be enhanced and it is something for which the Minister would receive wide support.
I note that the tourism angling programme which has benefited greatly the western lakes, the areas I know best, has been reduced by 56%. Has this been caused by a front loading of the programme and its gradual reduction over a period of time? It appears that there has been a shift of money from this programme to other areas - I refer principally to salmonoid waters. Has money been shifted from this area? I would like an explanation of the 56% reduction in expenditure this year.
Will the Minister examine the question of predator control? As an angler, I am aware of the difficulties arising from predator control, particularly the control of pike in salmonoid waters. I know the Minister is aware of the anxiety this can create. Nevertheless, if waters are designated as salmonoid the case for the control of predators and competitors should be accepted. Pike were introduced into Ireland as a game fish only 150 years ago. Due to the nature of their breeding and spawning they spread to almost all waters within a relatively short time and replaced ferox trout, which were the main predator in the lakes and river systems. It is necessary to control pike if we are to maintain salmonoid waters, particularly for trout.
I ask the Minister to ask his colleague to look at the provisions for predator control in the wildlife Bill. Mink are now practically indigenous in all parts of the country. I do not know any waters in Ireland where mink cannot be found. A system must be put in place to control them legally; the trapping of mink is illegal. We must recognise the reality that these are new predators in our eco-system. They probably do more damage to water birds than to fish and the absence of water birds is noticeable where mink are active. They prey on duck and all waterfowl. There is no legal system for their control and this problem must be examined. Up to recently cormorants could be culled legally by fishermen and the fishery boards. That is not possible now. On small lakes such as Lough Caragh you can see flocks of cormorants and they greatly damage fish stocks. The number of damaged fish caught there and in Lough Mask and Lough Corrib is high. I understand that the cormorants that come into inland waterways are either young ones that have not formed into groups or older ones that have been cast out of the group. They live to a great age. A system must be put in place to control them and I ask the Minister to examine that.
The Minister spoke about sustainable aquaculture. I welcome his remarks. In areas of Connemara sea trout fisheries have been devastated. The connection between the older form of fish farming and the decline of sea trout is well established, though some say there is no connection. The practices in the industry should be examined. As the problem is cause by the industry the State must ensure that the cost of remedying the position is borne by the industry. I know that whoever pays the piper calls the tune but we would not want to have someone on a fish farm on a regular basis knowing that his wages are paid by the fish farm. Such a person would be of little use to the Department.
The Minister published a report recently on pollution in the river Robe. I was nearly reared on that river. It flows from Ballyhaunis through Claremorris, Hollymount and into Lough Mask. The report showed the Robe was the main source of phosphate pollution for Lough Mask and that 68% of the river is polluted to some degree. It clearly pointed out that this was due to agricultural practices, the method of dealing with animal waste and applying artificial fertiliser to the land. I asked people how this might addressed. No farmer or fisherman could think of a solution to the problem. Animal numbers have increased since 1960 by a factor of ten. Farmers agreed such numbers are necessary in order for farms to be financially sustainable though they accepted that it is not a sustainable practice from an environmental point of view. Perhaps the Minister might advise us on how he sees that problem being addressed. I know we have REPS and various other schemes but they do not seem to have the desired effect. The problem is getting worse.
As regards offshore exploration, an area for which I was responsible, while we always sought to maximise the benefit to the economy we recognised there were not many jobs involved. The main benefit was the availability of gas to the economy as another source of fuel and the security that would arise from that. It was unfortunate, given the minimal benefits we could get from the exploration or production periods, that Enterprise Oil in the person of John McGoldrick, decided to service the well in the Corrib Field from Scotland and was allowed to do so. At the time he made that decision the Minister's predecessor should have revoked his licence and prevented him proceeding. The terms of the licence would have allowed for such action to be taken. Is the Minister satisfied that he is getting the information to which he and the Department are entitled? I believe that Enterprise Oil and John McGoldrick are deliberately delaying the assessments that are required and the results so that they will be able to dictate to Government the decision that it will have to make between an interconnector, a Corrib pipeline or a North-South interconnector. I know these decisions are for another Department but the Minister is responsible for ensuring that Mr. McGoldrick complies with the terms of the licence. The Minister has absolute authority to go in person to the exploration rig and find out the position. I presume he has people on board constantly. I ask that the Minister ensures - Mr. McGoldrick gazumped the Government on this - there is a maximisation of the use of goods and services by the offshore industry. The Irish authorities have put together a portfolio of the goods and services available, where they are and at what price. They are competitive. Mr. McGoldrick is deliberately not using them. I say that advisedly having looked at his operation for a long time.
There is a figure of £6,000 for training for the offshore industry. I presume that is a token figure. It is a very small amount. The operatives in Ireland are skilled in offshore work. Most of them are elderly compared to those one sees on rigs. It is necessary to have an increased amount for training so that we will have skilled people available if exploration off the west coast, not just by Enterprise Oil but others, proves successful.
I welcome the recent announcement that it is not intended to privatise Coillte. That is a good decision and one that will help it to stabilise and develop. I support the point made concerning planting targets. They have not come within an ass's roar of being met. Practically none of the UCD forestry graduates for the past two years has been employed in either Coillte or the forestry services. That is extraordinary when one considers the course is designed specifically for employment in Coillte and the forestry services. Most of those graduates are working abroad or have taken up other employment.
We are well able to plant hardwoods but there is no expertise in Ireland on assessing mature hardwoods, their harvesting or marketing. Trees with a value of up to £30,000 each are being left to rot in private woodlands because no one is qualified to deal with that aspect. It does not form part of the forestry course. It is a huge gap. Many hardwoods are now mature and ready for harvesting. They are in isolated stands, not in large forests, but there is a large volume of them, particularly in the older estates. These will fall and rot into the ground and, as they rot, they undo all the work they did while they were growing. They put all the gases they collected when they were alive back into the atmosphere whereas if they were harvested they could be used for expensive veneer wood, for which there is a market in Europe and indeed in Ireland - we import most of it from France. I ask the Minister to examine that. I thank him for his presentation which I found it very useful. Perhaps he might consider some of the points I made.
Many good points have been made. We have made notes of all of them and we will carefully take them into account. I will not go into detail on all of them but I want to go through the main points. Deputy Finucane can take it that we will be making clear our total opposition to the Commission's proposals on freight reduction. It is only part of a review at this stage but I agree it would be devastating and will not be acceptable to us. We will be making that clear when we attend the Commission meeting in Brussels.
On conservation, the committee more or less agrees with what we are saying about that. We take on board the points made in respect of conservation. On coastal erosion and analysis, we will be spending £5 million on research analysis to back up programmes and quantify problems. We are already involved in research surveys and I agree that we have a serious problem of the disappearance of piers. I saw a pier in County Mayo which is now 50 yards off the actual coastline and dipping. It is a tragic sight. We have a serious problem but hopefully, with the extra money and better planning, we will be able to address it more significantly.
I do not propose to go into the Foynes-Shannon issue in great detail today other than to reiterate what I have already said. The headquarters will be in Foynes and I will be stating that in the debate. While it is not quite appropriate to put it into the Bill we will give an absolute guarantee that it will be there. I am a little concerned also that on two or three occasions this Bill was in progress when a general election was called. I want to get it in and out of the House before June so that we can go on our holidays in peace. I know members do not want an election, no more than ourselves.
In respect of Loran C, we will go to Government shortly to endorse our commitment to Loran C. Perhaps Deputy Finucane can look across the bay and help us to convince our Clare neighbours that there is no danger in this facility. The NIMBY factor that is now evident in all aspects of Irish life is crazy. I have discussed the Loran C mast with my French counterpart in France. This is being monitored carefully and there is no danger but it appears we will be unable to convince our friends in Clare. That is the reason we are looking at other sites and I have suggested to communities that they might consider the Loran C location. We are currently discussing that with some communities and I hope to give them an opportunity to see it for themselves in France, if that is one way of convincing them. There is no problem with this facility. There are no health hazards involved and we are committed to putting the mast in place but we have the difficulty of local objection. We will certainly get the figures for the committee in terms of the costs involved so far in the project. I agree that we have an international obligation to which we must adhere. I am told that the cost of the Loran C project to date is £3.697 million, of which the Irish element was £2.173 million. The balance is being provided by the three Governments which sponsored the Loran C project in the first place, but we will confirm all of that for the committee in more detail.
In respect of the store in Sandyford, the Office of Public Works has selected the site and it is funding the project so there is no difficulty with that.
Is it a big site?
Perhaps we can communicate with the Deputy in detail about it.
It might be a good capital asset because I am sure we could store anywhere.
The GSI is the main occupier and it is quite a substantial site.
It is just that if funding were needed elsewhere the project could be located anywhere, could it not?
Forestry was mentioned by both Deputies. We are concerned about the planting programme but with the new 30% increase we are confident that we will get the planting targets back on track. We expect to plant 1,600 hectares this year but there are difficulties with farmers and in terms of competition between SACs and forestry, REPS and forestry and so on. I am satisfied that we can achieve the targets however, although it may take a little longer. We are talking to the agriculture sector in the context of rural development to try to achieve greater integration between REPS in particular and plantations. There is the need also to meet the national greenhouse gas reductions under the Kyoto protocol. We are currently proactive in trying to talk to all sectors, including agriculture, about the need to get back on track as quickly as we can.
Deputy Stagg also mentioned the forestry issue. We will examine the whole question of hardwood and the fact that there are no graduate opportunities in forestry. We are currently recruiting nine people and the total will increase to 28. Marketing of timber needs to be increased and the new forestry development group which, as the committee is aware, represents all people in the sector, is giving a lot of priority to the whole question of marketing. We should have an interim report from them shortly.
I am impressed with Deputy Stagg's interest and knowledge of the angling industry. I did not realise he was that much into angling but I take on board all of the points he made. The banning of commercial fishing is a thorny question. There is a need for a commercial sector and unfortunately some of these people have expectations that they have an asset that is far above my expectations of the value of that asset. While in principle we may be interested in put asides or even some buy-outs, fishermen will have to lower their expectations, particularly those who have not used nets for a long period in the expectation that they will get a windfall. That will not happen but in principle——
In the context of tagging, will that not prove what is their take?
Yes, it will prove what everybody takes but, notwithstanding that, people have expectations and we do not want to heighten those expectations in any way but rather make them understand that there is no pot of gold at the end of the rainbow in this case. We are talking to people around the coast who are realistic and we want to proceed this way but we will not throw taxpayers' money away.
The predator control the Deputy spoke about is interesting. I did not know about the cormorants but we will discuss the issue with the Wildlife Service.
The biggest problem is the issue of seals. There is total destruction of fishery stocks in some parts of the country by seals. It is time to open a constructive debate on how to implement a programme to control them. Everybody has a grá for the seal but we do not want to have an emotional debate. County Mayo is a good example. There is complete destruction of the fishery stocks off the coast of Mayo. I intend to initiate discussions with the Office of Public Works. We should have a political discussion on how to put a programme in place to control seal numbers. I have seen the problem myself and the evidence is available. It is anecdotal but fishermen can show evidence of thousands of fish heads and similar debris on the shores. That issue must be tackled.
On that point, is the Minister aware that BIM commissioned a report a few years ago on the interaction between grey seals, the inshore fisheries and the fishing community? I do not know whether that report was published. Perhaps people were not happy with the findings and hid them. The report is a starting point and it would be worthwhile to look at it.
We will dig it up and look at it.
I do not think it ever saw the light of day. Perhaps the recommendations did not suit.
I do not know if the recommendations were effective. We will certainly dig it up. It is something we could perhaps discuss it at Question Time. We definitely intend to have talks with the Office of Public Works——
It is becoming an issue.
——to see if we can try to get agreement.
There is only one way of dealing with it - shoot them.
Do not say that too loud.
Will the Deputy say that out loud?
Shoot them.
That is the story of the day - shoot the seals.
The Estimate is down because we are reaching the end of one programme. However, we will spend £24 million on the new programme for the tourism angling sector.
When will the Minister announce that?
Sometime between now and the end of the year.
The sea lice management programmes and protocols are under constant review. There are rigorous inspections and many protocols are in place. I intend to take further initiatives on sea trout and its conservation. We will be happy to discuss that with the Deputies. It is necessary. There is agreement on the part of all interests on a proposal for an initiative in that regard.
With respect to the Robe, obviously there are some farmers who are blatantly in breach of regulations. We hope to talk to the Ministers for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development and for the Environment and Local Government about this. We envisage a three pronged approach by the three Departments to a number of catchments and this will be one of them. We hope the Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry will focus some of its grant aid on assisting farmers who want to cure the problem. Most of the farmers wish to do that and so do the organisations, such as the IFA and ICMSA. Some are not interested and we will use the carrot and then the stick with them. I believe we can go a long way towards solving the problem.
The by-laws that are required in that regard have to be made by the local authorities. The local authorities will have difficulty making them because of the number of people who would be adversely affected or appear to be adversely affected. That is a flaw in the system. It might be easier if the manager had the right to make orders.
They are looking at the possibility of coming forward with by-laws and there are proposals for that at present. If we get the type of co-operation and commonsense I have been hearing from the farm leaders, notably the IFA, we might not need by-laws.
I have seen photographs of some farm developments in that catchment and the total neglect is disgraceful. I do not know how anybody could work in the conditions shown in the photographs. They showed silage pits, muck and dirt flowing into rivers. That is simply not acceptable. Our approach will be to encourage those farmers and to involve the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development in grant aid through the existing programmes. If that does not work, we will have to take the other option.
With regard to the gas development, I did not read John McGoldrick until I was appointed Minister. Given that the Deputy has personalised the debate to John McGoldrick, I must point out that I found him to be a reasonable person to deal with. We put our position forward clearly. As of now, he is not delaying progress. In fact, he is pushing for decisions to be speeded up in respect of pipelines and so forth. We have a constructive arrangement with him. We discussed the issue of SIPTU and the need for Irish employment and we got a positive response.
There was bad blood there in the past and I have endeavoured to get both sides to see that they cannot go forward in such a situation. There are reasonable people on both sides and I am confident there will be an improvement in that regard, especially if there is success and there is the possibility of a construction project. I am absolutely satisfied that we have the same real time information about what is happening on the rig as the Enterprise Oil management in London. We are lucky to have an exceptionally talented group of people in the petroleum section of the Department who are able to give me up to the minute information on what is happening. There is no question of the Irish taxpayer being fooled about what is or is not there. Time will tell whether it is commercial.
How soon do they expect a decision on the assessment?
They are saying it will take until next December to have a complete assessment of commerciality.
They keep putting it back.
We hope that by the end of the drilling season they will be able to outline what the indications are. There is no indication that they are putting anything back and we are up to speed with what is happening, right up to this morning. There is no difficulty on that score.
Enterprise Ireland and FÁS are satisfied with the response from Enterprise Oil in respect of Irish workers. There is £6,000 for training, a small budget to ensure that if it is necessary there is an allocation of money for training.
I thank the two Deputies. We will be happy to forward more specific information on some of the points they raised.
I thank the Minister, his officials and the Deputies for their attendance.