Examination of Witnesses (Questions 960-979)
Jonathan Shaw and Mr Lindsay Harris
11 JUNE 2008
Q960 Chairman: You mentioned that
a discard ban itself would be pretty much of a blunt instrument
and clearly one of the problems is requiring fishermen to land
fish which have zero economic value. It would be an extraordinarily
difficult thing to achieve.
Jonathan Shaw: And monitor.
Q961 Chairman: A halfway house would
be a requirement to land all species that were subject to quota.
Jonathan Shaw: Yes.
Q962 Chairman: Is that something
that has been considered?
Jonathan Shaw: We are beginning a Fisheries
Science partnership with the under 10 metre fleet and we will
allow them to keep everything that they catch. This will be 30
vessels around the English coastline. They will be investing around
£280 million—I mean £280,000—that would
be a lot of money, would it not, most of the Defra budget!
Q963 Chairman: I think there might
be some black fish amongst that!
Jonathan Shaw: Yes, thank you, I stand corrected,
£280,000, and because we are using a Science Fisheries Partnership
that will allow the under 10 metre fleet to keep all quota fish
that it catches. We are doing that over one year initially and
then a possible following year. What we will do with that is it
will then assist us with our negotiations with the Commission
because the under 10 metre fleet—and I know there are questions
in this area—will say they do not have the demands on fuel
such as a beam trawler does and they will complain that they have
not got enough quota and they will say that it is a sustainable
fleet. We want to get some evidence on that so that is why we
have instigated this new Fisheries Science Partnership with the
under 10 metre fleet. I am grateful for Lindsay pointing that
out. We are doing that with this particular part of the fleet.
Q964 Viscount Ullswater: Is that
not moving towards relying on effort rather than anything else
with that particular fleet?
Jonathan Shaw: The under 10 metre fleet is very
much governed by the weather so that will often govern this.
Q965 Viscount Ullswater: But that
is effort, is it not, they would not go out if they cannot?
Jonathan Shaw: That is right and they are not
able to go out in the way that the larger vessels are. We are
getting the fishermen signed up to this agreement and we are putting
in this resource. Obviously we have to ensure there is a proper
compliance regime in place so we will be investing in kit, spending
that money on kit for the vessels, so then we have got a good
and accurate picture. I know we are going to come on to talk about
the under 10 metre fleet but that is one of the projects that
we are doing to try to assist them and perhaps it goes some way
to answering your point.
Q966 Lord Brooke of Alverthorpe:
Since this inquiry commenced there has been a dramatic change
in the cost of fuel. I just was wondering in the light of that
going back to the question on discards whether there may not start
to be, if the price of fuel continues to rocket, some different
approaches to discards and to the possibilities of marketing when
one considers just how much it does cost to discard in the light
of increased fuel costs. I was wondering whether generally on
policy the way in which price has been moving on fuel that is
also starting to bring some fresh thinking in a number of areas?
Jonathan Shaw: As has been reported, I have
met with the industry from across the UK to discuss fuel and there
are going to be further meetings with ministerial colleagues on
this, but the industry certainly acknowledge that we are going
to have to make some considerable changes, and it is not just
the fishing industry, if we are going to be living with fuel prices,
they are 139 now, we do not know.
Q967 Lord Brooke of Alverthorpe:
It could be 200.
Jonathan Shaw: We do not know what they are
going to be, my Lord, do we, but we do know they are not going
to plummet; I think that is for certain. We do have to make adjustments
and that will require us to have a discussion/debate both in the
UK and at a European level as well and the industry know that;
indeed they have said that to me when asking for some short-term
finance that I was not able to help them with.
Q968 Chairman: The problem with increasing
fuel costs is that the pressure on discards increases because
you will get discarding for highgrading.
Jonathan Shaw: That is right.
Q969 Viscount Brookeborough: What
is the evidence that the Spaniards are compensating for fuel?
Jonathan Shaw: They are on strike, Sir! Shall
I talk about fuel now if we are here?
Lord Palmer: Your last question was going to
be on fuel.
Chairman: As long as you are not going to give
way, that is all right, on fuel.
Q970 Lord Palmer: I accept the Spaniards
are on strike but have the French not given their fishermen a
subsidy and it is certainly rumoured in the Scottish press—and
I live in Scotland—that the Scottish Executive are going
to give the Scottish fleet various compensations for these very
high fuel costs. I absolutely accept your point that this does
go across every industry, not just the fishing fleet.
Jonathan Shaw: The fishing industry is a very
important integral part of our coastal communities and we want
to see it continue and we want to see it flourish. Up until the
big hikes in fuel, particularly for the over 10 metre fleet, we
reckon that we got the quota and the number of vessels about right.
In the over 10 metre industry, fish prices have been high. An
example of how it has changed, in 1987, 170,000 tonnes of cod
out of the North Sea; last year 20,000, and about the same price.
So huge pain in terms of the decommissioning but getting it about
right in terms of fishermen versus how many fish we can catch.
If we were to go down the road of applying the full maximum that
we are legally able to do, that would provide one month's relief,
so it would give the UK fleet one month at last year's prices,
and then we would not have any more money to spend to help because
once you have gone up to the maximum then it is three years. Now
that is not to my mind even short term, but of course there will
then be many other industries and businesses, and so we are not
in a position to be able to make that type of contribution. I
think that for the English figures that is around £35 million
. It is per business of course, Chairman, not per vessel.
Q971 Chairman: Ultimately and in
the relatively short term cost increases lead to market adjustments
that actually involve price increases as well?
Jonathan Shaw: I think that the industry will
say that it takes quite a while for the prices to come through
and so their argument would be that they needed this assistance
in the short term and, as I say, we are not convinced that that
is the right way. We are putting in place a number of other measures
to assist the industry, for example, the European Fisheries Fund,
which is around £100 million over the next seven-year period,
and we will work with the industry to see how we can best utilise
that. There are other measures as well that we are going to assist
them with but those type of sums for such a short period of time
is not something that we can contemplate.
Chairman: Let's go on to control and enforcement
with Lord Cameron.
Q972 Lord Cameron of Dillington:
Yes, dealing with a specific first before we go to the general,
in your written submission you talk about the importance of consistency
in control standards, which is an incredibly diplomatic way of
saying that you are concerned about the lack of vigour with which
certain Member States pursue infringements of the Common Fisheries
Policy. I realise there are sensitivities about Europe itself
enforcing law and order as it were rather than Member States doing
it, but how do you achieve harmonisation of administrative penalties?
Jonathan Shaw: We have in place a range of tools.
At sea we have in England and Wales three naval vessels and in
Scotland I think there are four vessels and the VMS system.
Q973 Lord Cameron of Dillington:
I am not too concerned about our enforcement; I am slightly more
concerned about how we get harmonisation of enforcement across
other Member States.
Jonathan Shaw: I think we would want again to
lead by example. As I was referring to the cod-avoidance programme,
we want to lead by example. It has not always been the case around
the UK and we certainly cannot be complacent, but reading the
evidence from the fishermen's leaders, I think we concur that
the amount of black fish in the UK now is probably at an all-time
low. It is for the Commission and they have tools at their disposal
to ensure compliance. I think that as we go forward with the Common
Fisheries Policy reform that is the time in which we can produce
evidence of what is effective and have that discussion, because
in order for the public to have and the industry to have confidence,
you are right, we have to ensure that there is a level playing
field. We have to counter that by saying we have not always been
perfect ourselves, but we have learnt from our mistakes and we
need to find ways of encouraging others to do the same.
Q974 Lord Cameron of Dillington:
For instance I gather the EU is proposing to put forward proposals
later this year to amend the EU's control regime. What input are
you having into that process and what changes are you looking
for?
Jonathan Shaw: We will have an input and we
think in terms of some of the changes they are proposing we are
ahead of the game. You are familiar with the regime that we have
in place. I think the other thing is—and I am not sure if
you are aware—that as well as VMS and aeroplanes we have
also, within the MFA, officers who are trained in forensic accounting
as well so we can use the TACs system as well. I think that it
is a raft of instruments and we would want to have the discussions
saying, "This is what we are doing," and ensuring that
all Member States are meeting the same standard. It is, as you
rightly say, difficult and there are sensitivities, but it is
not one that we are going to shy away from. As I said in my opening
remarks, compliance is absolutely key for all of this to work.
Whether it is illegal landings, whether it is discards, or whether
it is the cod-avoidance programmes, you have to have a good compliance
system across the board.
Q975 Lord Cameron of Dillington:
Yes, calling a spade a spade, how are the Commission going to
get Spain to enforce the Common Fisheries Policy? Basically that
is the question. Us leading by example is all very well but—
Jonathan Shaw: A number of states have received
considerable fines.
Q976 Chairman: Poland has been fined.
Jonathan Shaw: Indeed, yes, Poland has been
fined.
Q977 Lord Palmer: Will they pay the
fine?
Jonathan Shaw: There is a regime in place where
they will lose quota. They will have to pay back.
Chairman: The regional advisory councils, Lord
Arran?
Q978 Earl of Arran: I think the school
report will show so far that they show great promise but just
a couple of problems. The first I would like to highlight is the
funding arrangements and some seem keener than others to help
with the funding. How do you view not so much the funding problems
but the different attitudes of different states about funding
in the future?
Jonathan Shaw: I agree with your point. The
UK supports the development of the regional advisory councils.
They are still to some extent in their infancy and some more than
others. One of the more mature is the North Sea RAC. They get
some administrative costs from the Commission but they do rely
on handouts and have to go round with the begging bowl. The North
Sea RAC gets accommodation and support from Aberdeenshire Council—and
good on Aberdeenshire Council. The UK administrations have all
given funding, particularly for research. This is the key thing;
if the regional advisory councils are going to mature and have
the credibility so that those sceptical Member States actually
see the benefit of regional advisory councils, then they have
got to have the funding. I have written and I have met with the
Commissioner Joe Borg and made this point to him. We will continue
to support the RACs financially but they need to be able to call
upon their own resources and determine their own projects with
some confidence that they have got some funding. They have not
got that at the moment but I think that this is part of our discussion
and argument for reform of the Common Fisheries Policy that these
bodies need to have that funding. One might assess them to be
able to have funding in different stages as to where they are
in terms of their maturity and how well they are functioning because
obviously some are functioning more than others. The one in the
Mediterranean is not functioning at all because it does not exist.
Q979 Earl of Arran: Some Member States
are wary about giving them too much management responsibility/executive
responsibility rather than an advisory role. What is your view
on this? Do you think they should, by and large, have more of
a management role?
Jonathan Shaw: At this stage we have not considered
that carefully but we would not rule it out. I think it would
depend upon the point that I have just made, it depends on the
capability of the particular RACs. As I say, some are at a more
capable stage than others. One could envisage a RAC that has a
number of different Member States on it with a range of different
stakeholders that they have to have—30% have to be outside
of the catching industry—and manage it, in real time, with
avoidance programmes, with management programmes. One could see
that happening and with buy-in from everyone that would be highly
desirable. We will see whether we can get there.
| 
