| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
1.44 pm
The Minister of State, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Mr. Tony Baldry): It is the custom on these occasions for the Minister to congratulate the
hon. Member concerned on obtaining the debate, and I do so today. I am particularly grateful to the right hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed (Mr. Beith) for giving me the opportunity to respond to his concerns and to explain the support that the Government are giving to the fishing industry by way of grant aid.
As fisheries Minister, I have made it clear on numerous occasions that I have only one purpose and aim: to represent and promote the best interests of the United Kingdom fishing industry and its fishermen. That, of course, includes the fishing communities of Northumberland, who make an important contribution to the local economy through the direct employment of fishermen and through jobs onshore in the marketing, processing and service trades.
I was pleased to have the opportunity to meet fishermen from Northumberland recently when I visited ports throughout the country. I know at first hand, therefore, that the fishing industry between the Tyne and the Tweed is based on a diverse range of activities which exploit a number of different stocks. An example of that is to be found in the right hon. Gentleman's constituency, which has a significant shellfish processing industry. Like North Shields and Amble, it is developing prawn processing facilities based on a growing nephrops fishery. That has undoubtedly helped to mitigate some of the more acute problems which result from the more general over-fishing that affects so many coastal communities today, not just in Europe but throughout much of the world.
As the right hon. Gentleman said, traditionally the Northumberland industry has relied largely on landings of cod, haddock and whiting. More recently, it has developed its catch of nephrops. Like other parts of the UK industry, it has been affected by the pressure on North sea stocks and the need to manage fishing efforts if stocks are to be conserved for the future. In managing fish stocks,a difficult balance must be struck between the fishermen's desire to catch as many fish as possible and the need to avoid stocks being reduced to the extent that they risk collapse. That sometimes means that significant cuts have to be made in quotas. My aim, however, is to ensure that any cuts are kept to the minimum necessary to protect stocks and to allow severely depleted stocks to recover.I am glad, therefore, that in the Fisheries Council last December we were able to agree that only a 3 per cent. cut was needed for North sea whiting, that no cut at all was needed for North sea haddock and nephrops, and that we could have an 8 per cent. increase for North sea cod.
A more local example of the concerns about stocks is provided by the report on salmon net fisheries, which the Government presented to Parliament in 1991. It concluded that the north-east coast salmon driftnet fishery should be phased out to make it easier to manage individual stocks. It recommended, however, that that be done gradually,as existing netsmen left the fishery, so as to avoid any undue hardship. That is what is being done, and we have no intention at present to introduce measures which go beyond the report's recommendations. I do not think that I have been "heavying up" anyone, and I certainly have not been heavying up the National Rivers Authority.
One of the report's recommendations was that the opening date for the driftnet season should be postponed until 1 May to protect spring-run salmon. In the event, no change was made. We recently asked the NRA to look again at that recommendation as part of a wider review of controls on the exploitation of spring-run salmon in the
fisheries for which it is responsible. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland made a similar request to the Scottish district salmon fisheries boards in respect of the fisheries for which they are responsible. Those requests were made in the light of the salmon advisory committee's report on the run timing of salmon, which recommended, among other things, that consideration be given to additional controls in commercial and recreational fisheries.
Mr. Beith:
I have to tell the Minister that he is wrong. The report did not recommend the phasing out of the north-east driftnet fishery at all. The report described the circumstances, and Ministries decided in the light of that to phase out the fishery. The Minister is quite wrong to attribute that recommendation. I ask him to make it clear that on no account will he seek to enforce a partial change in the season time in the north-east driftnet fishery if no change is made in Scottish net and rod times.
Mr. Baldry:
I think that we must agree to differ on the right hon. Gentleman's first point. As for the second, as he knows, any change in the opening date of the season will have to be effected through a byelaw. It will have to be advertised in the normal way, and time must be allowed for objections to be submitted to Ministers.We shall take full account of any objections received in deciding whether to approve such a byelaw. That is not unusual: I spend a good deal of my time trying to reconcile the interests of different users of marine resources. Of course, everyone must be given the opportunity to be heard before any change is made.
I am also aware that shell fishermen in Northumberland have been having a difficult time in recent years. Expert advice about their problems is being made available by the Directorate of Fisheries Research. There have been requests for us to introduce legislation to ban the landing of berried hen lobsters to protect the breeding stock. That is one of the many aspects of shellfish conservation currently being addressed by the Fisheries Conservation Group; in the meantime, this local problem might be better dealt with locally. It is open to the Sea Fisheries Committee to consider whether it would be proper for it to make a byelaw to prohibit such landings, but there are more effective means of protecting the breeding stock,of which the simplest is to increase the minimum landing size for lobsters. I hope that those in Northumberland who are concerned about the matter will lend their weight to any proposals that emerge from the conservation group;I understand that the community involved is reluctant to take that simple step.
While it is vital to operate effective conservation and control policies, which are vital to the long-term future of the industry, it is clear that more immediate help isneeded with both structure and infrastructure. That is why,on 14 February, I announced the launch of four EC grant schemes under the financial instrument for fisheries guidance, which will provide the industry with substantial support. They will help to make the industry safer and to make its processors more competitive, and will help fishery-dependent areas to meet the challenges that they undoubtedly face. Up to £9.6 million will be available under the vessel safety, processing and marketing, port facilities and freshwater aquaculture promotion schemes over the next three years.
The EC vessel safety scheme provides grants for vessels to obtain essential safety equipment that is required under the terms of the Department of Transport's fishing vessel safety certificate. It supplements the existing national scheme, which will provide grant for projects that cost less than £3,000 or are not selected for EC aid. The processing and marketing scheme will provide valuable assistance for those who process fisheries and aquaculture products to enable them to upgrade their premises, increase capacity where that is required and produce added-value products. Projects aided by previous EC schemes include nephrops processing facilities, refrigeration and cold storage facilities, the upgrading of salmon and mackerel smoking facilities and even, I am told, the installation of herring sexing machines. The EC ports scheme will enable ports to improve their facilities for the fishing industry by providing services such as ice plants, or upgrading quays and moorings for fishing vessels.
Up to £6.1 million will be available over the next three years under the marketing and processing and port facility schemes. Awards under those schemes will be made in twice-yearly tranches. The final date for the submission of applications for consideration in the first tranche is15 April. The freshwater aquaculture promotion scheme gives EC produce promotion grants to the freshwater aquaculture industry, mirroring the Sea Fish Authority's work on sea fish products.
I announced on 19 December that the national harbour grant scheme, which provided more than £2.2 million in aid for English ports in the three years up to 1994, would continue. Under that scheme, some £750,000 has been paid for improvements to the fishing harbours and facilities at Amble, Blyth, Holy Island and Seahouses since 1987. Up to a further £18 million will be available under the EC PESCA Community initiative for diversification of industry in English fishery-dependent areas up to the end of 1999.
All the grants that I have mentioned, apart from the PESCA grant, are available to the fishing industry throughout the United Kingdom, and operate on "challenge funding" lines: projects compete for available resources without prior allocation to particular geographical areas. PESCA's aim, on the other hand, is to assist the restructuring of the fisheries sector and help it to dealwith problems of over-capacity and market weakness.It therefore targets a limited number of areas that have been designated as fishery-dependent. In Northumberland, those areas are the ports of Amble and Blyth and their respective travel-to-work areas, which include the smaller ports of Alnmouth, Boulmer, Craster, Newton-by-the-Sea, Beadnell and North Sunderland, Newbiggin, North Seaton and Seaton Sluice.
PESCA will provide aid under the European regional development fund--local and community initiatives that generate enterprise and lead to the development of small and medium enterprises; assistance to firms so that they can improve their business and access to markets; employment training under the European social fund; and specific fisheries measures under the financial instrument for fisheries guidance to help the fisheries industry to restructure.
All those measures should help Northumberland significantly, provided that the necessary projects are forthcoming from local interests. I certainly want to ensure that Northumberland receives its fair share of PESCA funds. My officials are ready to provide help and guidance for potential applicants, who can contact the ministry directly or through local port offices. The schemes are not, however, designed to provide funds to compensate for the loss of fishing opportunities, or to subsidise operations that are not inherently viable.
PESCA will be implemented locally, so that it can directly target the needs of particular areas. To that end, the Government Office of the North East and MAFF are convening a meeting next week with representatives of the North East Fishing Forum, the Northumberland Sea Fisheries Committee, local authorities and training and enterprise councils to discuss how PESCA funds will be used in the north-east. That will ensure that the needs identified by the North East Fishing Forum and in the Nautilus report on reconversion of fishermen can be addressed. I hope that by this time next week some of the right hon. Gentleman's concerns about PESCA funds will have been dealt with.
As hon. Members know, the problems of overfishing that affect North sea stocks are not unique to that sea. For many years the European Community has operated a policy that fleets should not increase in size to conserve fish stocks; over the years, that has changed to a policy of actively seeking reductions in fleet capacity. The current multi-annual guidance programme divides the UK fleet into a number of segments, for each of which capacity targets are set. Segmentation is an important concept, which has had consequences for the Northumberland fleet.
One of the means that we have chosen to meet our targets for fleet reduction is voluntary decommissioning. Last year, we increased the funds available to £53 million over the period from 1993 to 1997. So far we have operated three schemes, which have successfully decommissioned 14,200 tonnes, or 6.6 per cent. of the fleet. Fourteen Northumbrian vessels have been decommissioned: that is equivalent to 64 per cent. of the eligible vessels from the county that have applied during the three years in which the programme has been running. Decommissioning is making a substantial contribution to our MAGP targets, and to our policy of streamlining the fleet into smaller, more efficient units.
Last year, because our figures showed that the target for the nephrops segment had been met, I decided that we should exclude that segment from the 1995 scheme. I am aware that that caused concern in Northumberland and other areas where the fleet is heavily dependent on catching nephrops, but it enabled the available funds to be directed at segments that were short of their target, and I believe that that was right. It is also right that we do not direct taxpayers' money at decommissioning vessels in the non-quota segment, including those primarily targeting salmon, where the MAGP target has been greatly exceeded.
A number of representations have, however, suggested that had I allowed the decommissioning of nephrops vessels that would have encouraged older demersal vessels to transfer to the nephrops segment. I accordingly sought views on that as well in a consultation paper.I urge anyone with an interest in the future of our industry to consider the suggestions carefully on the next round of decommissioning, and to give their views in writing. I will
take all those views into account in drawing up this year's decommissioning arrangements, which I hope to put to the House after Easter. A further £12 million is available this year, and an equal amount next year. We have been generous in the provision of taxpayers' funds for the restructuring of the fishing industry; I am confident that this year's and next year's decommissioning schemes will contribute greatly to that end.
Enforcement is another important way of protecting resources. In 1992, the Northumberland Sea Fisheries Committee received 50 per cent. Community financial assistance, amounting to nearly £300,000, towards the cost of a new fisheries patrol vessel to assist in its fisheries enforcement activities. Those funds were provided under a scheme that allows Community financial assistance to be paid towards eligible spending incurred by public-sector bodies in member states on enforcement of the common fisheries policy.
I, too, saw the press reports to which the right hon. Gentleman referred, although, strangely, we had not formally received the document at that time. It is
commendable that the United Kingdom has been recognised as properly enforcing Community law: that must be in the interests of our fishermen and everyone else. If there are slippages in enforcement in other member states, that clearly needs to be remedied. There is already a European Union inspectorate of fisheries, but I shall study the report closely. I do not want our fishermen to be disadvantaged in comparison with those of other member states.
All the major fishing communities in Northumberland are designated under objective 2 or 5b of the European structural funds. In other words, they are urban or rural areas that will benefit from economic development. Under those provisions of the structural funds, such areas can receive aid--
It being Two o'clock, the motion for the Adjournment of the House lapsed, without Question put.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |