HC Deb 20 January 1977 vol 924 cc613-9
2. Mr. Luce

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he is satisfied with the position of British fishing interests in the light of the latest developments in the EEC negotiations.

4. Mr. Adley

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he is satisfied that the interests of inshore fishermen are being adequately safeguarded in the negotiations in which he is currently engaged.

6. Mr. Wall

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement on the progress in renegotiating the common fisheries policy.

11. Mr. Warren

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement on his Department's part in current international negotiations affecting United Kingdom inshore fishing rights.

14. Mr. Mudd

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is the present position in his discussions on an interim internal fisheries agreement in the Community.

15. Mr. Bowden

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is the present position in his discussions on an interim internal fisheries agreement in the Community.

Mr. John Silkin

Negotiations on a number of important issues are continuing affecting the future of the CFP. Discussion has so far centred mainly on fishing by non-member countries in the waters of Community States and on conservation measures. Good progress is being achieved on the first of these issues. As regards conservation measures, our object has been to obtain agreement to the urgent introduction of specific measures needed to conserve the fish stocks on which the future of the British industry depends. While we have agreed the temporary standstill in catch and not to introduce new conservation measures on [...] national basis in January, it would be dangerous to allow the present situation in which there is no adequate control on fishing to continue indefinitely.

The four most urgent measures are a ban on herring fishing in the North Sea, a restriction of the area in which Norway pout may be taken at the expense of white fish stocks, a stricter control on by-catches, and a prohibition of the carrying of nets of different mesh sizes on the same voyage. We are informing the Commission that these are the measures which we see as the most urgent. We hope to see them introduced on a Community basis, but if this is not possible we are entitled under The Hague Agreement to introduce them ourselves.

Mr. Luce

I welcome what the Minister has said as far as he has gone. Is he aware, however, that among British inshore fishermen there is a deep sense of despair that not only the Government but the Community have not up to now fully understood that the quota system has completely broken down, largely due to abuse by other countries, notably Belgium? In the light of the alarming reports in today's Financial Times that there is a difference between the Minister and the Foreign Secretary, and that the Foreign Secretary may be rather weak in the negotiations in Brussels, will the right hon. Gentleman reassure the House that in the last resort he will be prepared to take unilateral action to conserve British fish stocks?

Mr. Silkin

As for newspaper reports about differences or divergencies between my right hon. Friend and myself, there are differences in the bases of our two Departments, and it is inevitable that there should be. Obviously, my right hon. Friend has to consider the wider aspects of external relations while I consider more technical matters. I suppose it is always possible to say that that is a divergence. I go no further than that, except to say that I agree with what my right hon. Friend said yesterday in his statement.

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that we stand ready to introduce our own national conservation measures if the Community does not do so. I have said that on many occasions, including on Second Reading on the Fishery Limits Bill.

Mr. Jay

Is my right hon. Friend aware that if on this matter of fisheries he continues to do his job, to stand up for British interests and resist appeasement, from wherever it comes, he will have the overwhelming support of almost every right hon. and hon. Member?

Mr. Silkin

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend. I notice that the House is always very alive and awake even after it has had an all-night sitting.

Mr. Adley

I thank the Minister for his statement, as far as it went. Is he aware that many of my constituents are particularly concerned about the activities and methods of Russian and East European fishermen off the South Coast? Can he say something about whether the defence cuts announced recently will hamper or reduce the Navy's activities in doing its best to police the waters around our shores?

Mr. Silkin

I suppose that properly I should say that that is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence, but I am pretty satisfied that our fishery protection measures will be sufficient to deal with the question. I say "pretty satisfied" because we are in a totally new situation and it would be unfair to say how it will all work out while it is still in its early stages, perhaps for a few weeks or a month or two. I warned the House that this was likely to be the case. We shall certainly keep the situation under constant review.

Mr. Powell

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his robust approach to the defence of British interests is appreciated outside as well as inside the House? But will he also tell his fellow Members of the Cabinet that another urgent matter is the entrusting of the enforcement of quotas and limitations on fishing within the British extended waters, by both non-EEC and EEC boats, to licensing by the United Kingdom Government?

Mr. Silkin

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for what he has said. The question of a licensing basis is absolutely vital. It is a matter to which I believe my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs referred yesterday.

Mr. Wall

Is the Minister aware that we have considerably more belief in his negotiating powers than in those of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office? Will he insist on effort quotas rather than catch quotas, a matter which is fundamental to the industry? If negotiations with the EEC fail, is he prepared to recommend to his Cabinet colleagues that we should have a unilateral exclusive zone around our coast?

Mr. Silkin

I know that in the first part of his question the hon. Gentleman was trying to be kind, but he will not be able to insert too much of a wedge be-between the negotiating powers of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and my own very poor negotiating powers. [Interruption.] I freely admit it. The House always likes one to speak honestly. As for the coastal belt, which I think is what the hon. Gentleman is referring to, my position and that of the Government remains exactly as it was. I rather agree with the hon. Gentleman on effort limitation, which is still our aim.

Mr. James Johnson

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the negotiations and the whole atmosphere are completely different from anything that has happened in the past, because for the first time we have a Dane, Mr. Gundelach, negotiating on our behalf? That is contrary to all our history and experience. Therefore, will my right hon. Friend, of all Ministers, be most open about the whole matter and acquaint the House with what is going on as he is doing today? I hope that he will also meet Back Benchers at every possible opportunity, because inside and outside the House there is a feeling of uncertainty. It is a psychological situation.

Mr. Silkin

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for what he has said, and I readily give the assurance that he sought. I have a great deal to learn, and I am not too proud to admit it. Those with fishing constituencies in particular can help me and teach me in the job I am doing.

Mr. Warren

I welcome the first indication that we have had in the House of a more robust attitude towards the negotiations, but will the right hon. Gentleman, while maintaining that attitude, give a categorical assurance that the minimum fall-back he would be willing to accept for conservation purposes and to protect the livelihood of inshore fishermen is an exclusive 12-mile limit around our coast?

Mr. Silkin

The position was clearly stated on 4th May last year by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection when he was Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs. That statement went a long way beyond the hon. Gentleman's 12 miles.

Mr. Mudd

Without wishing to detract from what the right hon. Gentleman has said, which is accepted and appreciated, may I ask whether he will accept that the great fear of the Cornish inshore industry is that violations of fishing grounds are more likely to be carried out by our so-called European partners than by other people? Therefore, will the right hon. Gentleman consider for once enlisting the active support of the EEC, with the setting up of a European Communities fisheries protection squadron, in the hope that, thus involved in protection, the other EEC countries will realise our reasons for prohibition?

Mr. Silkin

There needs to be a great deal of protection against not only our EEC colleagues but even our own nationals. We must conserve the stocks of fish in the sovereign waters around our shores. Obviously, if there were an unlimited supply of fish we should need no quotas and no conservation, and anyone could come and take the fish. Unfortunately that is not the case.

Mr. Bowden

The Minister's honesty in saying that he is willing to learn about the fishing situation will be greatly welcomed by the inshore fishermen in Brighton. Will he take an early opportunity of coming to Brighton and the Sussex Coast to meet those men? They will tell him that the quota system will not work and that almost every day large trawlers are taking the fish out of the seas in their area, and that unless that is stopped their livelihood will be ruined.

Mr. Silkin

The invitation is so attractive that I am almost inclined to conceal from the House that I already knew the facts of what the hon. Gentleman was saying.

Mr. Peyton

May I take the right hon. Gentleman back to the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Haltemprice (Mr. Wall)? Will he accept that catch quotas do not work? They are unenforceable and command nobody's respect, so perhaps he could put that idea away. Secondly, will the right hon. Gentleman consult whichever of his right hon. Friends is most appropriate on how he will put teeth into whatever policy is arrived at, because the problem of enforcement will now be of a very different order and much more difficult than before?

Mr. Silkin

I fully accept both points made by the right hon. Gentleman. I was fairly early impressed by the basis of effort limitation and think that it is the right way of doing things. It is ludicrous merely to draw pretty lines on a chart, say "These are our sovereign waters" and not deal with the question of enforcement. I hope, however, that the House will be a little sympathetic on this matter. This is so new a basis for us that we must treat this as a kind of test period in which we can see how things work. I hope that they will work out all right.

Mr. Watt

The House will welcome the ban on fishing for North-East Coast herring, but does the right hon. Gentleman think that he can make the ban effective on the boats of all nations? Is he aware of the present gross overfishing for Shetland herring and West Coast herring by boats of several nations? Does he know that the stocks are not getting into the Minch, where our fishermen traditionally catch them, because of the fantastic effort of those other nationals?

Mr. Silkin

Like the hon. Gentleman, I hope that we can make the ban effective. That is the whole point of imposing it. With regard to the hon. Gentleman's second question, I hope he understood that I was talking about the first four of the urgent conservation measures. I can think of a number of candidates for a further extension of conservation measures.