Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine debate -
Wednesday, 19 Jun 2024

Deputy Padraig Mac Lochlainn will substitute for Deputy Claire Kerrane. Before we begin, I remind members and witnesses to turn off their mobile phones. I bring to your attention that witnesses giving evidence within the parliamentary precincts are protected by absolute privilege in respect of the evidence they give to a committee. This means that witnesses have a full defence in any defamation action for anything said at a committee meeting. However, witnesses are expected not to abuse this privilege and may be directed to cease giving evidence on an issue at the Chair's direction. Witnesses should follow the direction of the Chair in this regard.

Witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that, as is reasonable, no adverse comments should be made against an identifiable third person or entity. Witnesses who are to give evidence from a location outside of the parliamentary precincts are asked to note that they may not benefit from the same level of immunity from legal proceedings as a witness giving evidence from within the parliamentary precincts and it may be considered appropriate to take legal advice on this matter. Privilege against defamation does not apply to the publication by witnesses, outside of the proceedings held by the committee, of any matters arising from the proceedings.

The purpose of today's meeting is for the committee to examine the implementation of the Irish onshore fisheries sector strategy 2019 to 2023. The committee will hear from the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Deputy Charlie McConalogue. The Minister is accompanied by Ms Sinéad McSherry, assistant secretary, marine division, Ms Geraldine O’Donovan, assistant principal, marine division and, joining us remotely, Ms Suzanne Brennan, principal officer, marine division. They are very welcome to the meeting. I will allow the Minister five minutes to read his opening statement and we will then proceed to a question-and-answer session.

I thank members for the invitation to discuss the implementation of the strategy for the inshore fisheries sector 2019 to 2023. In 2014, six regional inshore fisheries forums and the national inshore fisheries forum were established in order to provide a platform for dialogue between the sector, defined as those using vessels under 12 m in length, the State and other stakeholders operating within six nautical miles. The development of the strategy for the inshore fisheries sector was initiated by the national inshore fisheries forum in 2017, and its purpose was to set out its vision for the sector. While my Department and Bord Iascaigh Mhara, BIM, supported the development and implementation of this strategy, it is important to note that this was very much an industry-led strategy.

The strategy was published in 2019, and represented the first time the inshore fisheries sector developed and set out its own aspirations and objectives for the future of the sector. The majority of fishing vessels registered in Ireland are inshore fishing vessels under 12 m in length. There were 1,642 such vessels on the national register at the end of December 2023, representing almost 88% of the total number of vessels registered in the Irish fleet, which totalled 1,868 vessels. However, based on sales notes and logbook declarations, we estimate that approximately 1,000 of the 1,642 inshore vessels are actively fishing. The remainder are likely not engaged actively in fishing.

Given their size, however, inshore fishing boats represent 10% of the registered fishing fleet’s gross tonnage capacity, as of December 2023, and 31% of its kilowatt capacity.

Inshore fishing boats accounted for 9% of the landings by volume by Irish fishing boats into Ireland in 2023.

Implementation of the strategy has been led by Bord Iascaigh Mhara, Ireland's seafood development agency, in partnership with the National Inshore Fisheries Forum, NIFF, and the National Inshore Fishermen's Association, NIFA. The Department supported the implementation process, as did the Marine Institute, the Sea-Fisheries Protection Authority and other agencies.

I understand that implementation of the strategy began following its publication in 2019. BIM formed a strategy implementation group to monitor and drive the implementation process. The implementation group included representatives from NIFF, NIFA and relevant State bodies. As such, the industry has had an integral role to play in the successful implementation of the strategy. The implementation group held a number of meetings at which the members agreed on several issues to be progressed as priorities, including the development of an inshore sector profile, building the capacity of the sector to engage with policy development and increasing the sector's understanding of inshore fisheries management.

Unfortunately, as members are well aware, the Covid-19 pandemic began to affect Ireland in March 2020. At that point, BIM's focus necessarily shifted from strategy implementation to dealing with the impacts of the pandemic and its consequences for the seafood sector. Additional challenges arose for the sector related to Brexit and the start of the war in Ukraine. Responding comprehensively to these issues was a priority for the Department, BIM and other marine agencies.

I understand that while the activity of the implementation group was technically paused during these crises, this does not mean that engagement with industry stopped or that actions set out in the strategy were not progressed. Deputy Creed, who was my predecessor as Minister, and I continued to meet inshore sector representatives through various other avenues, as did Department officials, including through structures such as NIFF and the seafood task force. As such, there was ongoing engagement between the Department, BIM and the industry throughout the period from 2020 to 2023.

Funding in excess of €11.4 million was provided in direct payments to inshore fishers with vessels under 12 m in length under the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and Brexit Adjustment Reserve-funded schemes over the lifetime of the strategy. Actions set out in the strategy continued to be progressed by BIM and the Department. For example, the strategy focused on improving the facilities available at piers and harbours used by inshore fishers. During the lifetime of the strategy, local authority marine infrastructure projects received more than €45 million in funding from the Department, with €7.3 million under the fishery harbour and coastal infrastructure programme and €37.8 million under the Brexit adjustment local authority marine infrastructure, BALAMI, scheme. In the same period the Department invested more than €139 million in the six fishery harbour centres it manages.

The strategy also included an objective to improve the inshore sector's capacity to engage with policy and other issues important to the sector. During the period of the strategy, the Department worked with industry to enable formal recognition of two new producer organisations for the inshore sector, which now provide additional representation for inshore fishers and give them a stronger voice. The National Inshore Fishermen's Association is a producer organisation focused on representing inshore fishers with vessels up to 18 m in length. Our most recent records show it had 115 members as of 1 January 2024. The Irish Islands Marine Resource Organisation, IIMRO, is a producer organisation dedicated to fishers from our offshore islands and it has approximately 46 members.

Another objective of the strategy, to improve the management of inshore stocks, was implemented through actions such as the development of a revised protocol for opening potential new fisheries for wild bivalve molluscs. This was developed with the industry and published in November 2022. Other objectives were actively supported through schemes funded under the Brexit Adjustment Reserve and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund, such as lobster v-notching, completion of BIM's inshore census, business skills training for fishers and the young fisher scheme which supports young fishers acquiring their first vessel. BAR funding of €1 million also was made available to Bord Bia for inshore marketing schemes to promote sales of stocks of particular interest to the inshore sector.

Looking forward, the challenges facing the inshore sector now are, in many respects, very different from those in 2017 and 2018, when the strategy we are discussing today was developed. NIFF has already begun discussions on the development of the new strategy for the sector. This will provide an opportunity to address matters of concern to the sector. The inshore census conducted by BIM in 2023 will provide valuable information to inform this process. These results, along with other relevant and available data and evidence, will support us in clearly identifying the nature, scale and scope of the challenges currently faced by the inshore sector, and in identifying effective measures which will support the industry in adapting to these challenges. The Department and BIM will be fully engaging with all representative groups in the inshore sector as this work is progressed.

Funding will be available under the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund to support the implementation of relevant measures to support the sector in coming years. The inshore fleet is of significant economic, social and cultural importance to our coastal communities. The sustainability and viability of the fleet must be at the forefront in considering the way forward, and setting out a longer term vision for the inshore fleet.

Supports for the inshore fleet in terms of funding and services are provided by BIM, which is the State agency responsible for development of the seafood sector. It works closely with the industry and all of the recognised representative groups, actively supporting the development of the sector as a whole, and the inshore fleet in particular. BIM will receive funding in excess of €22 million from the Department this year to support its work.

I assure the committee that the development of a new strategy is something to which we are very committed to supporting. We are also committed to supporting the sector as we go forward. I want to touch on the particular challenges in the sector. It has been a difficult few months from a markets point of view. The sector has been under a lot of pressure. I have had a number of engagements with it on this recently. I am in the process of finalising a support scheme for the sector this year from a markets point of view, particularly with regard to crab and lobster. Both markets are quite depressed. Volumes going to sale are down on what they were and prices are down also. This has impacted significantly on incomes. While we cannot remove these market challenges, I recognise the sector is under pressure with regard to incomes. I am in the process of finalising a support scheme to deliver some support this year in recognition of this fact.

I thank the Minister and the officials for coming before the committee. The Minister said that BIM works closely with the industry and all of the recognised representative groups in actively supporting the development of sector as a whole and the inshore fleet in particular. There has been no meeting or contact with members of NIFA regarding the implementation of the inshore strategy. Exactly one week after NIFA appeared before the joint committee a meeting was held with BIM. NIFA came before the committee on 24 January and a meeting was then held with BIM at its head office in Dublin. There has been no further meeting or update from BIM since that meeting on 31 January. I cannot see how it is working closely if it has not met or spoken to anyone since 31 January. Does the Minister have any comment on this?

I have some details on meetings in a note. The Department and BIM have met inshore representatives on 29 occasions over the period of the strategy. I met NIFF, NIFA and IIMRO on 18 April. The Department has also met separately with NIFF on two occasions to date in 2024. There was also an online meeting with NIFF, NIFA and IIMRO on 7 May 2024. I do not have the detail on the most recent meeting between BIM and NIFA.

I will not question that. If the Minister says the Department has had those meetings, that is good enough. However, BIM has not met NIFA. The Minister in his statement said BIM works closely with the industry and all of the recognised representative groups in actively supporting the development of the sector including inshore. We would expect a meeting would have taken place since 31 January if it were actively communicating with NIFA, which is one of the main inshore organisations. The Minister's statement is contradictory.

As the Minister is aware, all inshore crew in Ireland have faced unprecedented hardships since the Covid pandemic through various market collapses, with losses of at least €10,000 each.

Since last November, things have got much worse with several processors closing their doors. When does the Minister plan to give financial aid to the inshore sector, as it is struggling to keep its head above water?

I have had a number of meetings with that sector. It has been a very challenging time, particularly as regards markets this year. There were also wider challenges in the sector as a result of Brexit over the past couple of years. Last year and the year before, the Department ran Brexit business adjustment schemes with significant funding. Approximately €4,500 was available for boats more than 12 m and €2,700 for those under 12 m. I had a number of meetings this year with those working in the sector to discuss the particular challenges that are there. I am in the process of finalising, and expect shortly to be able to make an announcement on, a scheme that will support them this year. We cannot make the market issues go away. They are there. Some of the signs on the horizon and some of the information I have indicate that over the months ahead it looks like matters will improve but that remains to be seen. In recognition of the challenges the sector is facing, I have been working with my team on a potential support scheme. That is something I hope to make an announcement on over the next two to three weeks.

I appreciate that because some people are struggling severely. Mortgages have to be paid and banks are knocking on the door. There is a serious worry there.

The Rural Independent Group brought a motion before Dáil Éireann on 25 January 2023 regarding inshore fishing. It asked for funding of €12 million at the time. That figure that was well researched. To date, only €3.5 million has been given to the inshore sector. People working in the inshore sector now find themselves in a far worse predicament with the pollock fishery also closing. The Government voted in favour of €12 million at the time, but the state of inshore fishing sector now compared with January 2023 means that €12 million is not anywhere close to a figure that would help. While the Government agreed to €12 million at the time, it seems only €3.5 million was given. If the Government agreed to that motion, is it willing to carry out what is stated in it, namely, €12 million?

As the Deputy knows, if we were to add up what was in all the Private Members' motions that come before the Dáil over the course of the year, we would double our national budget. Thankfully, we have managed the State's finances well over the past period, but it is the choices made at budget time that decide what funding might be available. That is not until next October. I am looking at the options available, however, because I recognise the need for short-term support for the inshore sector. I have been looking at options for how I can facilitate that support. That is what I am finalising the detail of at present.

We worked closely with the sector as part of the seafood task force. The inshore sector sat on that, as did all other representative sectors of the industry. The task force came forward with 16 proposals for schemes across the sector, one of which was the business adjustment scheme for the inshore sector, which I delivered. I delivered all the other schemes too. As I said, I am making final preparations for a scheme this year.

I respect the Minister is right in saying the Government would probably have to double its budget if every request were acceded to, but the Government agreed to the motion that included a figure of €12 million. If the Government disagreed with the motion, it would have been honest and straight to state it could not afford the funding. We agreed to that motion but the Government has fallen back on giving the money.

The NIFA asked for a seat on the Celtic sea herring committee, as its members are involved in the fishery, on 13 February 2023. The Minister said he is still considering that. Will he confirm if the NIFA has a seat on the Celtic sea herring committee?

We do not have it nationally. It is something I have been pressing at EU level. I would dearly like to secure it. I raise and press for it regularly at EU Council level. It is not something Ireland has a national quota for. In order to secure a quota for it, we need to have the support of two thirds of other member states to be able to get a slice of it. That is a tall order because we are dealing with one pie. If we start to get a percentage share of that pie, it means that others' share of the pie will diminish somewhat. As the Deputy will understand, any change in quota at European level is difficult considering two thirds of other member states are needed to vote in favour of that in order to have it. It is something I continue to pursue but, this year, as in previous years, we do not have a national quota for bluefin tuna.

As with the Common Agricultural Policy, we also work within a Common Fisheries Policy at European level. An annual scheme has never featured as part of the Common Fisheries Policy. I look to see where I can support the sector, however, and have done so over the past couple of years through the business adjustment scheme. An annual scheme is not a feature of the Common Fisheries Policy the way it is a feature of the Common Agricultural Policy. We will very shortly confirm the new schemes under the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund for the next four years, which is the equivalent of CAP in terms of our national plan. We will look to see how we can provide supports for the inshore sector as part of that.

The pollock ban has had a real impact and been a real loss to the inshore sector in particular. The pollock fishery was closed due to scientific advice to allow time for pollock numbers to recover and strengthen again so that they do not get undermined. All commercial pollock fisheries have been closed in all of areas 6 and 7, which are the areas west of Scotland, down the Irish Sea, waters across the south of Ireland and the north of France and Spain, and across the west coast of Ireland. There can be recreational angling for pollock, which is available to anyone. This is only recreational angling and not commercial sale.

The old European Maritime Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund, EMFAF, has finished. I plan to very shortly announce the schemes under the new European Maritime and Fisheries Fund, which will include the v-notching scheme. It has been a successful scheme in terms of conservation for the species and providing income. It will form part of the new EMFAF. I expect to announce that very shortly.

The Minister reported to us in his opening statement that 1,642 vessels under 12 m were on the national register as of the end of December 2023. He also reported that approximately 1,000 of those vessels are actively fishing. That means 642 vessels are not actively engaged in fishing. That appears to leave out a lot of information as to why that is the case, and whether those vessels were actively fishing at a certain point in time. How many boats have left the industry or stopped actively fishing since Covid restrictions were lifted? Prior to Covid and the war in Ukraine, how many boats were actively fishing? How many are actively fishing now? There are linked questions. What was the annual turnover of the inshore sector pre-Covid? What was the turnover in the last reportable year of 2023? What volume of produce was landed by the inshore industry?

I want to get a sense of the number of boats, the turnover and the volume according to the Department. Will the Minister let me know what his assessment of that is?

I do not have the specific drill-down detail the Deputy is asking for there but I can get my team to send it to him. There are 1,642 inshore vessels which are on the national register, approximately 1,000 of which are actively fishing. A good benchmark for where we might be at with active fishing is the number who applied for the business adjustment scheme I ran last year and the year before. To qualify for that, you had to show you had 30 days' active fishing or else sales notes for more than €1,000 worth of fish sold. That was the threshold for qualifying. The payments to fishers for that were if your vessel was under 12 ft or 10 m, it was €2,700, and if your vessel was under 18 m, it was €4,700. You would expect anybody who could qualify to apply for that. Just under 800 vessels - 780 or around that mark - last year and the year applied for that. That would be boats that had fished more than €1,000 worth of fish in the year or had 30 days' active fishing, one or the other. That gives the Deputy a sort of threshold of how active those 800 boats were. Any that were under that obviously would not have had €1,000 worth of sales or the 30 days' active fishing, and because of the funding that was being offered, you would be expecting those who would have had it to have applied.

The reason I ask the questions is that the view of the sector is that there is a very significant decline in that period and we need to be able to measure that. I appreciate the Minister does not have the information but I ask that it be sent on to me so we can measure the scale of the problem that is there. Of course, as the Minister has acknowledged, the prices for crab, lobster and right across the shellfish sector are quite devastating. I imagine it is even worse in the past while.

As the Minister said in his statement, Bord Iascaigh Mhara has responsibility for the inshore strategy. In fairness, there is a very detailed response from it to the testimony of the NIFA representatives at a previous committee hearing. We have that here. However, my understanding is that the implementation committee last met about five years ago, or just under that. To me, the best way actions can really be measured is to have an implementation committee. Is there any response as to why that has been allowed to happen? I appreciate BIM is drafting a new strategy right now but will there be a commitment to have these regular implementation committee meetings? First of all, is it correct that the last time that implementation committee met was in 2019? The date I hear is 25 November. How is that going to be addressed moving forward?

I believe the implementation committee had three meetings in 2023. Obviously, things would have been impacted by Covid-19 and by Brexit. About this time four years ago we were in the throes of Covid and that disrupted normal strategies and required specific responses. Alongside that, both BIM and the inshore association would have been participating in the Brexit seafood task force as well. That would have been going on during that time. As I said in the opening statement, certainly there was significant disruption to the implementation of the inshore strategy from Covid times onwards. The strategy was due to conclude at the end of last year, there were three meetings last year of the implementation committee, and we are now very much looking towards the development of a new inshore strategy, which would be our second ever. That strategy was our first.

In the development of this new strategy, can it, or would it have the permission, to examine this issue of dedicated European funding? Deputy Collins has talked about how, in the agriculture sector, we have a form of subsidy in place over many years through the Common Agricultural Policy. Measurable demands are made of farmers regarding environmental measures and so on. Can this next phase consider a similar support for our fishermen all around the coast?

It would be open to it to consider and purpose measures it feels are appropriate in the strategy. Regarding the schemes within the strategy in terms of funding, they would have to fall within the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and the wider Common Fisheries Policy. There has been a lot of consultation over recent months in the development of those schemes, which I plan to announce in the next few weeks, and they will run for the next four to five years. Therefore, it is open to be considered but, the same as the Common Agricultural Policy, it has to fit within the overall agreed fisheries policy. The basic payment scheme within CAP is not unique to Ireland. It is across all 27 member states. Likewise, the different streams for many Pillar 2 schemes that are run would be the same across members states. The same would be true for fisheries.

The Minister will know regarding issues such as fuel subsidies that the Government was criticised for not bringing in measures that were brought in in other European member states. Has the Department carried out an examination of the supports available in other member states, both looking back and in recent times? Obviously, there has been profound market disturbance. The Covid pandemic and the war in Ukraine have had very serious impacts on the market. There has been huge market disturbance. If the Department has not done so, will it examine what has been done in other member states to see if we can replicate some of that in this country?

It is something of which the Department and I are aware. I know over the past two to three years some other member states had fuel subsidy schemes. It is not a route I chose to go down. We did other schemes that were not available in other member states and which we very deliberately put in place to support the various sectors. I referred to that Brexit adjustment model scheme, the one in which boats had to have been fishing at least €1,000 of fish in a year or to have been actively fishing for 30 days. That was one scheme I ran last year and the year before. It is not something that would have been available in other member states. Tie-up schemes were available for those fishing quota species last year and the year before too. Again, that is not something that would have been available in other years. There is no doubt that, post the invasion of Ukraine, there were massive spikes in fuel prices and we put supports in place for wider society for these as well, which have been removed gradually over a period. Fuel prices today and just in the past short while are similar to and in line with what they would have been prior to the invasion of Ukraine. They are back to where they would have been. The heaviest part of the heavy fuel hikes have been over the past year or two.

Speaking generally on the fuel subsidy as a mechanism of support, once you start doing that, it is a very difficult process to step away from because fishing takes place that is totally dependent on it. It is a route which is a challenging one to then step away from. Other members states that went down that route are finding that as well. We provided other supports instead, particularly the tie-up scheme for the inshore fishers fishing for quota species, which was a much more appropriate way to do it. The way that worked was that one third of boats could be tied up at any one time but the same level of quota was available. For every three boats, one would tie up but the other two went out and caught the full amount of fish. They caught the fish the boat that was tied up would have been fishing but the boat that was tied up got paid for staying in the harbour for that month. It went in three-month rotations and the next month other boats were tied up.

It meant that if you had been out and were catching more fish you had more income, which covered your costs. It probably would have been a better way to address the fuel challenge at that time.

The difficulty is that the tie-up scheme would not have been available to the inshore sector. It would have been available to offshore fishers. The criticism from the inshore sector was in terms of the overall BAR, about which the Minister has responded in respect of parliamentary questions. There was a significant amount of BAR funding that had to be returned. Their argument is that they got a small percentage of the overall BAR fund allocation and were facing serious challenges. Many things were happening. We have talked about the pandemic, Brexit and the war in Ukraine. There has been hit after hit on the sector.

I appreciate that Bord Iascaigh Mhara felt the need, as was its right, to respond to criticism. It is a welcome and substantive response. The issue, as the Minister knows because he has engaged directly with the sector, is that it is in real financial crisis. They do not only need funds or grants to upgrade their vessels, which they always need, at this stage. We are beyond the point where they are looking for grants to upgrade vessels or for training. As the Minister alluded to, the landscape has changed in terms of everything that would have been planned for implementation of the inshore strategy. We are now in a space where the sector will need ongoing financial subsidy per active boat. I am saying that is where we need to be, and that is the reality. I asked about the volume landed, the capacity and the number of boats. It is clear from speaking to inshore fishermen all around the coast that we are in an unprecedented and existential crisis. I do not get a sense that is fully appreciated, from the Minister's response to parliamentary questions and his evidence today. We need a swift response and intervention.

If what is happening in the fisheries sector were happening in agriculture, I do not believe there would be the same delay in responding. Maybe it is about the number of fishermen versus the number of people involved in farming and is a political calculation. I believe the Government's response is not at the level required. I read through the Minister's statement in advance. I also read a reply to a recent parliamentary question. There is no reference in either to market disturbance or a major drop in income. It does not capture how serious the position is. Reference is made to supports for capacity building, upgrading and ongoing stuff people do with their vessels, which was always there through Bord Iascaigh Mhara. I ask the Minister to reflect on that. I have more questions, but I will give way because colleagues are waiting. I will come back at the end. Like me, the Minister represents a coastal community. It is what we have known all of our lives. We are surrounded by it. Not just in government but also in the media, there seems to be a complete lack of awareness. I know that these inshore fishermen have reached out to national media outlets, but the latter did not cover it. They did not want to know. I do not believe that would happen in any sector of agriculture. It is almost as if our fishing and coastal communities do not matter to this island nation. I do not exaggerate, and other Deputies here engaged in this sector will confirm it. This is an unprecedented crisis and every fisherman needs financial assistance at this stage, but I do not see that being on the table.

The opening statement deals with the topic of today's meeting, which is the inshore strategy from 2019 to 2023. That is what the committee asked me to come in to discuss, not the current state of fisheries. The statement the Deputy received specifically deals with that. When I finished dealing with that, I dealt with the most urgent issue at the moment, which is the market situation, and I outlined how I am finalising the details of the supports for this year. I am hoping to announce that within the coming three weeks. I understand that it is needed this year and that the sector is under particular pressure.

On the various schemes and the spending of Brexit funding, I brought all fisheries representatives together in the seafood task force to look at the terms of the Brexit adjustment reserve funding, and to propose what schemes I could do to support every sector. All fishing representatives in that unanimously signed off on that task force report and put those proposals to me. There were 16 schemes proposed. I delivered on all 16 to the full extent of the funding requested. One of those was the inshore business adjustment scheme, which delivered €2,700 for boats less than 10 m, or €4,500 for boats less than 18 m. That was delivered last year and the year before. To qualify for the latter with a boat of less than 18 m, you had to show that you were selling at least €1,000 worth of fish in one year. That was the support put in place. The representatives gave me any ideas that could meet the criteria. I delivered on all 16 that were brought forward. I wish the criteria might have been looser in other ways, but we tried to examine it and pull funding out in any way we could for as much of the sector as we could. We delivered on that. That was last year and the year before. This year I will be coming forward within three weeks with a support scheme for this year. That will not do away with the bad market situation, or the challenging income situation, but I hope it will be a help.

I read the Minister's report and the response from Bord Iascaigh Mhara. The strategy was set up and everybody thought this would be great, but it does not seem to have worked. As the previous speakers indicated, the inshore fishermen have got a raw deal. You see big boats coming into this country's waters and sweeping up fish, and our small guys in rural Ireland are not getting what they deserve. In fairness to the Minister, he has dealt with many of the issues raised and has tried to support them in whatever way he can. However, the biggest way he could support these guys is by giving them more quota. Let them go out and fish for what they want. It is a hard job and a hard life. It is difficult to make money out of it. This is traditionally the job they do, the only thing they know, and they want to stay in it. We have sacrificed the fishing industry for agriculture over the years. It is time these small guys were given a break by the Department. There seems to be a hole in the Department in recent years, especially in the context of the quota, whereby it was not prepared to give more quota to the small guy. A bit of quota to the small guy would mean a lot to them, not like the big fishermen.

We talked about the fuel prices, which I have raised on a number of occasions with Ministers. The Government has allowed these increases in fuel prices so many times when people already had a problem with the price of fuel. It may have come back a bit, but fuel is still expensive. That is creating a major problem. At Government level, I was surprised that the Minister, and colleagues in my party, did not stop what has been happening for the past two years. Rules were brought in for the green issue and putting up fuel prices. That was fine when we were not in the climate we are in now. We did not have the war in Ukraine when these people sat around in committee meetings and decided they were going to put up fuel every few months. That is not the way to deal with small businesses and small fishermen who are finding it difficult.

Is there any way the Department can give the small fisherman more quota? They have said that if they get the quota and do not use it, they will give it back, but they will not do that because they will work it. Giving them more quota will be the best economic way to support and help them. I know the Minister has been asked and has rejected it, but I am asking him to look again at giving them more mackerel and other quotas. It is shocking to see big boats come in from all over the world and sweep up the fish in our waters.

The few little lads and women in the inshore sector, particularly those in small rural communities, are not able to go out and get more quota that would allow them to fish, that they could sell and make a bit of money on. I have a straight question for the Minister. Will he consider giving them more quota? It is something that has been raised here on many occasions. It has been raised with me and other Deputies to try and see what can be done to help them. What is the resistance within the Department to doing this?

I thank Deputy Ring. The national quota we have is fixed but it can go up and down each year for different stocks depending on what the scientific advice is on how much of a stock can be sustainably fished in that year without undermining its breeding and future strength. The actual percentage of the stock is fixed at national level. It has also been fixed for many years on the basis of the different segments, namely the size of the boat, etc. What is more important than the size of the boat has been the historic track record of different vessels as well.

Deputy Ring mentioned resistance. The most resistance will come from within the fleet itself because no more than at European level where it is a very difficult battle to get any change to quotas because it requires two thirds of members states to agree, at national level it is fixed as well. Deputy Ring makes a very fair case for the inshore sector but if one segment is getting some more quota then it means other segments of the fleet are giving up that quota at the same time. There is always resistance to that, which is no more than what you would expect.

There has been some change to the mackerel share in recent years. A number of years ago, 400 tonnes of mackerel were set aside to be fished by hook and line, which is primarily the inshore fleet. There was some reallocation but, incidentally, reallocation is still the subject of a legal challenge in court because it was contested by some fishers who did not agree with the way it was allocated. Requests have been made, and it is something I am looking at. It is under consideration now as to whether there is a case for reconsidering the allocation of quota. Last year, as a result of a long battle at European Council level on securing extra mackerel quota, which had previously been fished by Denmark, we secured a permanent increase in the quota. That was the first permanent increase we secured since the allocations were set in the early 1980s. I accept that this does not negate the impact of Brexit but it was a permanent increase on where we were at the previous year. On the back of that, the inshore sector in particular has asked, since we got that bit extra, if we could look again at whether the 400 tonnes quota for the hook and line could be increased. That is something that I continue to consider. I take the point Deputy Ring makes in terms of his advocacy. I am aware that the hook and line fishery has been particularly important in Mayo because it is the area that has been most actively fished.

Deputy Ring makes a valid point about fuel costs. For marine gas oil generally, there is no tax on it other than VAT, which is reclaimable. It is not like other fuels where there is excise. There is no excise on marine gas oil. I accept that it is an issue for some in the inshore sector who do not use marine gas oil. The two schemes I ran last year were a way of trying to get additional income to them to reflect the additional pressures that were there. I take the Deputy's point and his advocacy in regard to that.

I am glad to hear the Minister is going to review the quota. I am here long enough to remember when the quota was given to the fishermen with the big boats. I remember the controversy about the allocations that were made and where it went and where it did not go. To be fair, a small quota for the inshore fishers would make a great difference. As far as I am concerned, the big boats have enough quota, but I know they will disagree with me. We are trying to keep rural Ireland alive. We are trying to keep jobs in the sector. We are trying to keep people alive in rural Ireland. To be fair to the Minister, he dealt with some of the issues that arose in the task force. One thing that he could do, which would send out a very strong message, would be to give a small bit of quota to the small inshore fishers. It would be a strong message to come out. It would show that the strategy is working. It would also show that the Minister is listening. To be fair, he is listening. I know he comes from a similar area to me and that the same problems exist in Donegal. I ask him to look again at the quota. It would make a massive difference to the small guys if they got a bit more quota. They would use it and fish it. They have said very clearly that if they do not use the quota, they will give it back. The Minister should test them now by giving them some quota and a chance to survive. I hope that is something he will do because it is like every other area of business, the bigger guys always survive but the smaller guys need support. They need more help now than they ever needed before. They have suffered in recent years between Brexit, Covid and the fuel and energy crises, which are hurting them big time. This evening, the one issue I want to ask the Minister to try to deal with is the quota.

I have listened to what the Minister said. The one word that comes up the whole time is "considering". Everything is being considered. The shrimp market was gone in 2022. The crab market went to the floor in 2023. Within a month, pollock was gone. This is serious stuff. That is how these people make their living. We cannot emphasise that more.

Deputy Mac Lochlainn and I were in Kilmore meeting the inshore fishermen. A fisherman wrote a heart-rending letter to us. His friend had sent him a letter to say he was going to pick up a coffin because he was gone - he could not survive any more, as he could not fish. That is the seriousness of the situation.

The Minister spoke about the fuel. I cannot see anything wrong with giving a fuel subsidy, in the sense that a time limit could be put on it. He could say it is for six months or nine months and that is it. Will there be a compensation scheme? We hear about all the stuff that is going on with little titbits here and there. These people are in a serious situation. They are in trouble. I know the Minister is not responsible for the market, but it has gone. In May, for instance, lobster was €32 per kilo and now it is €14.50. That is completely unsustainable. A fisher will not make a profit or feed a family on that basis. It is a difficult situation.

The Minister mentioned the BAR. The inshore fishermen are the ones excluded from the BAR. Some €120 million was returned unspent, yet we have this situation here now. I invite him to make a statement in that regard.

I thank Deputy Mythen. When I said I was considering, I was specifically referring to Deputy Ring's request for a review of the mackerel allocation. What I said is that I had received requests and I was considering them.

On the need for some support for the inshore sector, what I said is that I am finalising the details of a scheme in relation to that. I plan to make an announcement on it in the next two to three weeks because I recognise the pressure the sector is under. Deputy Mythen has outlined that clearly. He also clearly outlined that the situation is very much market related. He outlined a halving in prices in one instance. No matter the sector, we cannot mitigate that as a Government, but it is important to try and support business where we can. I am looking to finalise what can be done in regard to that. There is no getting away from the fact that recent months have been very difficult number and income in the sector has been hammered.

On the wider issue of pollock, I have worked in every way possible to try and support the sector in terms of reopening fisheries as well. Pollock was closed this year, for the first time in a long time, on the basis of scientific advice.

We have, over the past two to three years, seen a couple of fisheries reopened for the first time. Spurdog was reopened, for which the sector had significant hopes. While it has proven challenging to identify market opportunities for it, we have succeeded in getting it reopened. North-west herring also has been reopened to a commercial fishery for the first time and that has followed on from significant steps taken by all in the industry to try to see the stocks rebuilt. That is something we have to try to build on too.

The Deputy mentioned the Brexit adjustment reserve and inshore fisherman being excluded from that. The inshore representatives were fully part of the process of looking at what was possible under the Brexit adjustment reserve and were able to propose schemes. I followed through on and implemented every suggestion that came to me. I did not get anything from any party or from anybody here either, such as a proposal as to what I could do with the Brexit adjustment reserve. Nothing came forward from anyone. I put everybody into one room with the task of looking at this funding and coming up with any ideas they could. I told them if they came up with any schemes that fit its terms and criteria, they were to come to me and I would seek to implement it. I did that with all 16 and everybody in the industry was part of that.

The challenge for the inshore sector was that for many of the smaller boats that did not have quotas and that fished non-quota species, it was much more challenging to identify ways to spend the Brexit adjustment reserve on them. For crab and lobster in particular, which is the bread and butter of the smaller boats, there is no quota for those species. As long as you have a licence, you can catch as much as you can catch. Therefore, Brexit did not have an impact on lobster or crab fishing because it did not impact their quota directly. We did, however, run those two business adjustment schemes to try to get funding to them but because they were not directly quota-related species, it was more challenging to find ways of getting funding from the Brexit adjustment reserve to them.

Those inshore boats that did fish the likes of pollock or other quota species were able to avail of the tie-up schemes under the Brexit adjustment reserve. If you did not have a quota, however, and you fished non-quota species such as crab or lobster, then there was not any tie-up because there was no change to your quota. Whenever you do not have quotas, that brings other challenges in terms of how you manage stocks sustainably to make sure you are fishing them in a sensible way to ensure they do not get depleted. That is one of the challenges with the inshore industry at the moment because there are fewer other species. North-west herring, for example, was closed for a long time and spurdog, which had been a traditional species, was closed. Thankfully both of those have reopened, but pollock closed this year. Salmon was a massive species for the inshore sector and that has been gone for a long time and was closed. Once they were closed, the gravitation of all of those boats, which all traditionally fished salmon, naturally has shifted. For example, they would have given the likes of lobster and crab a rest when they were doing that but those boats are now putting more pressure on crab and lobster stocks because they are the only stocks available to fish. That is something we have to keep a close eye on too because we do not want to see those stocks depleted in a way that means they do not remain sustainable. That is the background to the BAR funding piece.

To focus on the salmon, the problem with most of the things the Minister mentioned is that they are seasonal. If you miss a season, you cannot go back again. That is a major issue here, which is what we really want to get across. It is the speed of the thing that is going to matter. We cannot reiterate enough how it is on its knees. I suspect, as Deputy Mac Lochlainn has mentioned, that a lot of the 642 boats are for sale. These people have nowhere to go. They only have a boat. That is all they have and they have to sell it. We cannot emphasise enough the severity of the situation they are in. The Minister should please speed up the whole thing, because it is also a national asset. Our quotas are a national asset. I thank the Minister.

The estimate is that out of the 1,600 or so inshore boats on the national register, probably about 1,000 are active. A good benchmark is the number that applied for the two schemes last year and the year before, which was around 800. The threshold for qualifying was €1,000 of fish sold in the year. As I say, there was a good €2,700 or €4,500 available for those who applied for that. It is probably fair to assume that out of the 1,600, just under 800 applied for it. I think it is a fair assumption that the other 800 are either fishing less than 30 days or did not fish to a total of €1,000 of sales in the year. They are not fishing or are fishing very small amounts.

No. The tie-up scheme was available to the inshore sector where people had a quota and where they had a quota for Brexit-affected species. In the case of crab and lobster, which are the bread and butter in terms of the species that are fished for the inshore sector, they are non-quota species. They were not impacted by Brexit in respect of the quota. I did run those two schemes, which I have outlined a couple of times, with regard to €2,700 for boats under 10 m and €4,500 for boats between 10 m to 18 m in length. Tie-up schemes were available for the whitefish fleet for whitefish quota. There also was a decommissioning scheme available for those boats in the whitefish fleet. That was recommended to me by the task force. As for how the decommissioning worked, although the level of quota stayed the same, adjusted for Brexit, by decommissioning a number of boats which came out of the system, it meant the remaining boats got to utilise the quota that was there. It kept their quota in a sustainable position.

That is how the whitefish fleet was addressed under the Brexit adjustment reserve. In the pelagic fleet, which includes species such as mackerel, horse mackerel and blue whiting and which has much larger boats, no decommissioning scheme was recommended for those boats. A liquidity scheme was, however, recommended for them and so liquidity funding was paid to those.

It was all dealt within the seafood task force looking at the criteria under the Brexit adjustment reserve. There were three segments, namely, the inshore fleet - the smaller boats -that does not have any quota and therefore did not lose quota, the middle segment where there was decommissioning and tie-up and then the larger segment, where there was liquidity in recognition of the fact that, for example,in relation to mackerel, we lost 25% of our national quota. That was all fully considered as part of the task force as to what would qualify for the Brexit adjustment reserve.

There is no doubt but that boats in the middle segment, that is, the whitefish fleet and in the pelagic sector, which is the larger sector, got a lot more Brexit funding because they were fishing stocks which were quota species and saw the quota being permanently cut. When you come to the inshore sector, however, which is primarily based on non-quota species such as crab and lobster, there was no basis for paying funding directly there because it did not impact them. They could catch as much as they could catch as long as it was available.

In response to Deputy Mac Lochlainn, that is correct. That should have been established by now, but I have asked Bord Iascaigh Mhara to expedite its establishment. It is an important piece of work and I absolutely accept that it has not been but should have been established. It is fair to expect that work would have been well expedited by now but I have sought for that to be set up and organised very quickly.

There are a couple of representative bodies, such as the SFPA consultative committee and the Celtic Sea herring committee, that the inshore sector is not yet on. As the Minister knows, there are issues with the north-west herring committee. There is conflict there which hopefully can be resolved. We all want to minimise conflict within the fisheries sector and to try to get agreement. Points were raised earlier about quotas and there is no doubt but that the inshore sector needs to get a bigger share of the likes of mackerel and herring quotas. We want to do that in a way that is agreed and of course we want to unite the industry to try to secure more fish at European level, in terms of the Common Fisheries Policy. There are two objectives that I think need to be shared. The Minister might talk about his vision in respect of how we can include the inshore sector in all of those forums to give it its fair place at the table and to get fairness.

I will check where we are at with the SFPA consultant committee and will revert directly to the Deputy on that. As I said to Deputy Collins earlier in relation to the Celtic Sea herring committee, I have a request for inshore representation with regard to which I will be in touch with them. I take on board the Deputy's representation and advocacy as well. More broadly, I agree that the right way forward is to give more consideration as to how quota can be used in the best way possible. Generally, that works very effectively because the QMAC, that is, the quota management committee that has all the fishing representatives on it and which my Department services, decides each month how to share out and manage our national quota to keep boats as active as possible over the course of the year. Generally, it is a place for thorough discussion and consensus as much as possible and that then comes to me for sign-off. It has come to me where there have been differing views and where that is the case, I make a call but that is the minority of times. In the four years I have been Minister, there has only been one occasion when I have gone against the view of the QMAC and that was when legal advice meant that I could not go with what was being recommended. That shows that generally, it works in a collaborative way in terms of the management of the quota. Of course everybody would like to have more but in terms of managing what we have, that is the approach taken.

As for the north-west herring advisory committee, there have been challenges there and I want to work through those. A couple of organisations have left and I want to try to get everybody back together to find as collaborative a way forward as possible in terms of how we manage that fishery now that it is a good news story and has reopened. It took hard work to rebuild the stocks and there is some disagreement as to how they should be managed but I want to get people back together to advise me on that.

I have two final issues and thank the Chairman for his forbearance. I have been asked about a safety grant where money was taken back. I seek clarification on that, if that makes sense. The final question is around the issue of bottom mussel seed. The sector has zero mussel seed available and that means it will have zero sales in the year ahead. If the Minister does not have a ready-made answer on that, he could come back to me. I appreciate that is not the specific issue he is here to talk about today.

On the safety grant, I will need to take that away as I am not quite sure what the Deputy is referring to. On the bottom mussel seed, my understanding is that the surveys have shown there is not sufficient mussel seed there this year to harvest. That is something that has happened at different times and I believe that is the advice in relation to it. It is not unusual; it does need to be surveyed every year to see if the mussel seed is there to harvest in any given year.

First, I apologise to the Minister for missing his presentation, I got caught up in another meeting. I welcome his officials. I will be brief and have one minor question. It is about infrastructure and making sure that inshore fishing has the infrastructure required to ensure it is suitable as an entity moving forward. I raise the issue in Castletownbere at present where there is a conflict on whether we have the ability for inshore fishermen to get access to the appropriate pontoon or pier. A pontoon was taken away in the last few months, there is none available and there is a clash there about making sure that inshore fishermen can safely get their fish onto the shore itself. While I have spoken to the Minister and his officials about this issue and I am aware that they are involved, we need to establish an understanding of how the big fish fleets and the inshore fisherman can work together.

Power is another issue below in the harbour itself. The inshore fishing fleet now has an issue in trying to ensure their fleet is powered. I am worried about the infrastructure. The Minister left a meeting of this committee a few months ago to visit Castletownbere in respect of a multimillion euro investment, which I fully welcome. I believe, however, that we need to have an investment policy to make sure the inshore fishermen have the same access to the infrastructure required to be sustainable going forward. The Minister might give me his view as to how we can have a shared space that can work well for both sides of this argument. It is a significant issue and having met the fishermen down there, they are fearful about the safety issues that are there at the moment. The Minister might give me an update at some stage, not today, as to how we can progress this issue.

I thank Senator Lombard and will come back to him directly with a response. There are harbour user forums in each of the fishery harbour centres, to consult on how best to use the facilities in place, but I certainly will come back to him directly with a specific response on the question he has raised.

I thank the Minister for coming in today and giving us an update on where the strategy is at. It is obvious from the discussion that inshore fishermen are under a lot of financial pressure and hopefully their times will improve. The next public meeting of the committee is on Wednesday, 26 June at 5:30 p.m and the committee will examine the welfare and treatment of horses and their traceability.