HC Deb 04 December 1979 vol 975 cc243-50
The Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Mr. Peter Walker)

With permission, Mr. Speaker, I should like to make a statement about the Council of Fisheries Ministers in Brussels on 3 December. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland, my hon. Friend the Minister of State in my Department and I represented the United Kingdom at this meeting.

The Council agreed in principle to decide on total allowable catches for 1980 at its next meeting in January in the light of the latest scientific and other relevant evidence. Work will also go ahead on drawing up a catch reporting scheme with the objective of a decision being taken at the same time as that on TACs. I made it clear to the Council that we would agree to catch reporting only if a satisfactory agreement was reached on TACs.

The 1979 framework agreement with Canada agreed to by my predecessors was ratified. I retained the United Kingdom reserve on agreements with third countries. It was agreed that the Council would meet again in January when it is hoped that further progress will be made towards a common fisheries policy.

Mr. Mason

I am obliged to the right hon. Gentleman for that brief statement. First, I hope that he has no intention of allowing this issue to be trawled over, or caught up, in the budgetary argument and that it is still an issue that must be dealt with on its own merits. Secondly, is he aware that catch reporting is extremely important in the light of the Germans taking more than 40 per cent. above their quota in the last year? Although I note that he is to maintain pressure on total allowable catches to ensure that Britain gets her fair share, we shall watch with interest his use of the veto if, next January, he is not satisfied on both catch reporting and total allowable catches.

Although the right hon. Gentleman has had a number of bilateral talks on fisheries policy with the Council of Fisheries Ministers, I hope that he can assure the House that he is not giving way on our plan on a piecemeal basis. Finally, is he still confident and optimistic that in the coming months he will be able to make progress towards a fishing agreement that will be acceptable to the whole of the British fishing industry?

Mr. Walker

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman, first, for the opportunity of making absolutely clear that the negotiations on fishing will be conducted totally on their own merits. Certainly the objectives of the negotiations are still, I believe, totally shared on both sides of the House, and that remains the Government's objective.

I agree with the right hon. Gentleman about the importance of catch reporting. In fact, there is no point in having TACs if one does not have catch reporting and if other countries are avoiding them. I discussed this matter with the industry before the meeting, and I met its representatives again after the meeting yesterday, and it was satisfied with the progress that was made. I assure the right hon. Gentleman that if we were not satisfied with the TACs we would certainly veto the TAC arrangements, which would automatically mean that we did not have catch reporting. As to the right hon. Gentleman's comments with regard to a piecemeal basis, it is absolutely vital that we move towards a position where we agree the individual aspects of the policy while keeping our reserve upon them until total agreement is reached.

Mr. Wall

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Is he aware that there is anxiety in some sections of the industry about the piecemeal approach to the CFP? Will he give an undertaking to negotiate on a satisfactory total allowable catch, national quotas and the protection of the interests of British fishermen?

Mr. Walker

I willingly confirm all those points. With regard to the question of a piecemeal approach, as I think my hon. Friend knows, we are working very closely with the industry. We meet before each Council meeting and again at the Council meetings. In fact, the last point raised by the right hon. Member for Barnsley (Mr. Mason) concerned the bilateral talks that we have had with other European countries, and he asked whether I was confident that we would reach agreement next year. I am sure he appreciates the complexity of this matter, and that one could not possibly express confidence before one had entered the more difficult parts of the negotiation. However, I think that the atmosphere at yesterday's Council meeting was the best that there has been recently, and there is a genuine determination to get a sensible agreement.

Mr. Prescott

The right hon. Gentleman will be aware that the value of fish around the coasts of EEC countries is about £1,000 million. Can he confirm that he rejects the last EEC offer made to my right hon. Friend the Member for Deptford (Mr. Silkin) that Britain be required to give up £150 million worth of its own fish to the EEC for the privilege of retaining £100 million worth—50 per cent. less? Can he inform the House what is the minimum value, or the percentage of total, that is acceptable if Britain is to accept an EEC fishing policy?

Mr. Walker

If I may say so, that would be an absurd thing to do because the scientific assessment of fishing stocks is changing all the time. For example, the assessments made in these TAC proposals are totally different from what they were when the right hon. Member for Deptford (Mr. Silkin) was negotiating. I do not think that there is any disagreement on either side of the House as to Britain's basic objectives in obtaining a fishing agreement. The hon. Gentleman knows full well from his considerable experience in this sphere that the fishermen of this country desperately want an agreement to be obtained, because they know that it is in the interests of fishing in this country as well as of Europe as a whole.

Mr. Robert Hughes

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that yet again after a meeting on fisheries there has been no visible progress whatever towards a common fisheries policy? Is he aware that during the period when my right hon. Friend the Member for Deptford (Mr. Silkin) was in office we continually had meeting after meeting with no decisions arrived at? He now appears to be following precisely the same pattern. I do not accuse him of delay, but is it not the case that the objective of all the other member States is to delay agreement until the eleventh hour because 1982 is rapidly approaching? I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will excuse the allusion, but what can he do to get his skates on?

Mr. Walker

I do not think that that assessment is correct. I believe that all the members of the Community wish to reach an agreement on fishing. I think that there are a number of reasons for that, one of which is the depletion of stocks which is taking place and the lack of a conservation policy. Secondly, all the other countries are suffering from uncertainties in their own industries. Thirdly, I believe that they want an agreement before other countries that are currently applying join the Community. For all those reasons, I believe that there is a desire to reach agreement.

What we achieved yesterday was to get off the hook inasmuch as the Eight had agreed to a fishing policy in the absence of the right hon. Member for Deptford in Berlin, and we were still negotiating on that basis. We are now negotiating on the basis of the latest TACs, and that is a much more healthy foundation upon which to make progress.

Mr. Sproat

Did my right hon. Friend manage to get any confirmation that the French Government were subsidising the fuel costs of the French fishing industry? Did he find out by what system of subsidy it is possible for Dutch vessels to land fish in Dutch ports and then have it carried mainly overland to Aberdeen where it is offered at a cheaper price than fish landed at Aberdeen?

Mr. Walker

We did not discuss subsidies yesterday. The French have subsidised the cost of fuel to their fishermen for a long time, and I hasten to add that quite a few English fishermen have taken advantage of that.

Mr. Bowden

I congratulate my right hon. Friend. He is moving in the right direction, though very slowly. Is he aware that time is running out for my inshore fishermen, who see their catches dropping year by year? We have been talking for 10 years. Will my right hon. Friend say that he will ban beam trawling if an agreement has not been reached by the beginning of next season?

Mr. Walker

We are at present reviewing the position of beam trawling. I assure my hon. Friend that we are anxious to reach agreement on inshore and long distance fishing and at last we are making progress towards that end.

Mr. Grimond

Will the Minister tell us whether there have been any discussions about regional schemes, which are of great importance to my constituency, and parts of the Channel? Secondly, when will the limits be discussed again?

Mr. Walker

Many members from the right hon. Gentleman's constituency were present in Brussels yesterday and obviously we discussed the position with them. I believe that they were in agreement with the attitudes of Scottish fishermen in general and shared the pleasure that some progress is being made in this sphere. As to the nature of the final agreement in terms of quotas, fishing plans and so on, that will come at a later stage of negotiations. We shall, of course, keep in close touch with the industry.

Mr. Donald Stewart

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there will be general approval of his intention to deal with fisheries as a separate issue? Is he also aware that, as regards the Scottish inshore fishermen, the agreement, when it is arrived at, should be based not on quotas but on limits that are properly policed?

Mr. Walker

Yes. Limits and enforcement of those limits are combined, and, in a wider context, obviously, quotas. I agree that enforcement is absolutely vital, and within our own limits I think that there should be enforcement by the British Government.

Mr. James Johnson

I compliment the Minister on his pledges and determination so far, but is it not a fact that in all the negotiations our so-called partners in the EEC have so far displayed nothing but naked, political self-interest? On the vital question of total allowable catches, can the right hon. Gentleman confirm that about two-thirds of the total stocks in the EEC fishpond are round our shores, yet we have never been offered anything more than about 25 per cent.? That means that, allowing for discrepancies and inaccuracies in the calculations, well over a quarter of a billion pounds worth of fish is caught in our waters by our so-called partners.

Mr. Walker

Yes. That is why in the bilateral talks that I had with all the member States—with the exception of Luxembourg which, as far as I know, has no great fishing interest—I made clear the current position of the British Government, and the attitude towards those fishing stocks is not the view of one particular party but a view that is shared by the whole House of Commons.

Mr. Austin Mitchell

To offset any impression that the Prime Minister's newfound willingness to compromise on Britain's just demands might extend in any way to fishing, will the right hon. Gentleman affirm both that the ability to impose national conservation measures is an essential part of any settlement for this country, and that in the event of any of our national conservation measures being struck down by the European Court he will take steps to exempt those measures from the provisions of the European Communities Act 1972, and that in the interim he will conform with the Court's ruling with as much alacrity as France has done on lamb?

Mr. Walker

No, I would not give that confirmation. If the Community is to operate, it will not operate on the basis of each individual country deciding to ignore the law. We cannot deplore the illegal actions of the French Government and then take the same action ourselves.

Several Hon. Members rose—

Mr. Speaker

Order. I will call the three hon. Gentlemen if they feel that their questions are vital, but it will reduce the time available for debate on immigration.

Mr. Dalyell

What was said about the effect on fishing stocks of the grey seal, which is the right hon. Gentleman's responsibility and not that of the Scottish Office or the Home Office?

Mr. Walker

Nothing.

Mr. Mark Hughes

Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that consistently it is not the setting of quotas, TACs and the reporting of catches but the need to insist upon an adequate licensing system that alone provides sufficient support for conservation? Where has this decision left successive and successful licensing?

Mr. Walker

I think that the hon. Gentleman knows that we have currently had consultations with the industry about the possibility of a licensing system. But when we have a common fisheries policy with quotas we have to decide with the industry a sensible and sane system of licensing.

Mr. Leighton

Is it not true that one of the reasons why the meeting was convivial was that the Minister gave way on a number of issues? Previously the right hon. Gentleman told us that he would not deal with any of these matters piecemeal and would block every issue until there was a common package. Yet at this meeting he agreed to the EEC making agreements with third parties which previously were to be blocked until we had a common fisheries policy.

Mr. Walker

I wish that the hon. Gentleman had listened to my statement. I shall read it out to him again, as he apparently did not hear it. The appropriate line was: I retained the United Kingdom reserve on agreements with third countries.

Mr. Leighton

Not for Canada.

Mr. Walker

Not for Canada, no. What I did was to ratify the agreement made by my predecessor. So the hon. Gentleman is actually criticising my predecessor for having made an agreement with Canada, and I will pass his criticism on to my predecessor. However, as that agreement expires in two weeks, it was not a very big concession.

Mr. Strang

Does the Minister accept that British fishermen have suffered dis-proportionately as a result of their respect of conservation and their control of fishing effort? Furthermore, will he make it absolutely clear that there will be no question of his agreeing to national quotas in advance of agreement on all the other elements of a common fisheries policy?

Mr. Walker

Yes.

Forward to