HC Deb 21 February 1979 vol 963 cc585-94

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Tinn.]

11.41 p.m.

Mr. James Johnson (Kingston upon Hull, West)

Tonight I am pleading the cause of many hundreds of fishermen and their families. These men have fished in the Arctic for decades, as have their fathers and forefathers. They now see the world as they have known it, and their livelihood, disappearing, so that this is a very serious matter for the people in Hull.

I can only begin with a gloomy catalogue of history, which I will cover as quickly as possible. It is not pleasant, but it is not made any better by the continuing deadlock at the EEC Council of Ministers. There is no settlement there and this denies us even a meagre share of any quotas which may be negotiated with third countries, such as Norway and the Soviet Union.

Before I come to the position in the dock in Hull, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I ask the Minister—I do not intend to argue or to say anything more than this about it—whether he will be kind enough to say something about decasualisation. I am informed by my local union members and others that things have moved of late a bit more than they have for some months past. As he knows, this is a delicate and a sore point with the fishermen.

I came to Hull about 20 years ago and found well over 130 boats in the dock, with well over 600 bobbers or dockers to unload the fish. This was a place of cheerful noise and jolly activity, despite the low wages that the men received. The landings were well over 200,000 tons, mainly of cod and haddock. Today, there is one vessel landing in the dock in a fortnight. The "Lord Nelson", earlier this month, was a classic example.

Five years ago there were 2,000 fishermen on the deck. Today there are just over 1,000 on the unemployment register, and well over 50 per cent. of those are unemployed. The decline is continuous month by month. The freezer fleet has exhausted its meagre quota off Norway and is moored peacefully in Albert dock. Some have been exported to the Third world. Some, alas, will find their way to the yard to be smashed in pieces.

Where can our men fish now? There are at least eight wet fish vessels operational, but where can they go? There is nowhere for them to go. They are barred off Iceland, they are barred off Norway, and they are barred in the White Sea. It will take time, as a long-term objective, to establish fishing in, say, the South Atlantic. We are barred, of course, from the North Atlantic.

This scheme was put before the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, who sent me a most helpful letter saying that he will set up a desk study to find out the possibilities, after consulting the work and findings of Polish, German and other fishermen who have been in the waters around the Falkland Islands.

Yet there is money in Hull for new vessels. In Fishing News International I read about a vessel, a purse seiner, 225 feet long, which is due to be completed this month. This ship, which is for Thomas Hamling and Son, of Hull, is at present at a shipyard in Norway and will cost over £4 million. This company may be in league with the Norwegian consortium, but nevertheless that is the position.

I shall quote from Fishing News International: Signs that the Humber is set for a big investment in new boats also came from Boston Deep Sea Fisheries at Hull…. The 105 foot vessel…will be one of the most sophisticated ever built in this class. So there is money in Hull, which was made in the past, but it will not be spent in a way that some of us would like. The owners wish to be on to a good thing, and we now conclude that they are counting on a middle water fishing fleet, unlike that of the past. Even so, that fleet may not fish out of Hull, because if much of this money is Norwegian it may have a Norwegian base to fish for blue whiting or whatever off the north coast of Scotland.

Topsy-turvydom continues in our dock. This month, three Icelandic vessels came in and made about £150,000 with about 5,000 kits, while our own boats were catching colossal amounts of mackerel off the Cornish coast.

I am not a lover of industrial fishing, but I accept the common sense of our men fishing in our waters for our fish and making money by selling them to Communist States that have their boats anchored outside Cornish ports, such as Falmouth. Why should we not catch this mackerel and fetch it back to Hull for processing in famous firms such as Birds Eye and Findus, so that we can have it for food later?

What can the Government do in this appalling mish-mash? Can they help us with finance? For example, the new Albert dock, into which we moved from St. Andrew's dock, was always a source of misgiving, and many men thought that this would be a millstone—as it is undoubtedly proving to be, because of the expensive dues in the new dock—round the necks of the firms.

There are massive capital services here, possibly—I stand to be corrected—£1 million per year. These dues are expensive, and the fewer vessels that go into the port, the more each vessel must pay as a charge for entry to that dock. The only area that benefits from this is the Grimsby market further down the estuary. If there are no boats there in 12 months' time—which many local people believe will be the position—why not examine the debt charges now and ask the Docks Board to do something about it to help us?

The distant water fleet as we have known it is now finished. There are waters into which our boats could go, but here again we need Government help. Our boats could fish off West Africa and, as I said a few moments ago, in the South Atlantic off the Falklands. But undoubtedly we shall not get into Norwegian or Icelandic waters because one reads in all the periodicals that the Norwegians are cutting back on their own quotas. They are anxious about their own stocks, as are the Icelanders.

No fisherman that I meet in Hull, be he skipper, deckhand or owner, thinks that Iceland will allow us back. I cannot see the Icelanders giving away their stocks, because they are cutting back on their own domestic cod fishing. The best that we can hope for is middle water fishing. Where do we go? I have here a publication of the Lowestoft laboratory, in which we are told about the blue whiting stocks off the west coast of Scotland. I should like to quote from page 6, which says: Not only is this species virtually unexploited, but the spawning aggregations to the west of Britain are accessible to large trawlers and are mostly contained within the EEC 200 mile limit. Further on, it says that there is in excess of 10 million tonnes of blue whiting in the area at the peak of spawning. It goes on to state that 95 per cent. are between 27 and 35 cm. in length, with a mean of 30 cm. These are not sprats, they are good fish. Hull firms such as Boyd have been to these waters. They tell me that they lost £250,000 because of worms inside the fish. Does my right hon. Friend believe as we do, that it is commercially viable to fish in these waters? Skippers tell me that there is such a density of fish that they must get them on the move. Such a thinning-out process does the fish good, in the sense that these specimens are not worm-infested.

I want to say a few words about industrial fishing. I am not a lover of it. I would much sooner see us catch fish for the table or which went to Birds Eye and other big firms to be made into fish fingers. This would give work to my own constituents—members of my own union, the General and Municipal Workers—who man these factories. Therefore, I would sooner have us catching fish for consumption.

Three-quarters of the fleets of Norway and Denmark are engaged in industrial fishing. Fishmeal is vitally important to us, because it helps our balance of payments and is invaluable for our farmers. I ask my right hon. Friend to think seriously about giving the Hull boats a transport subsidy to go fishing for blue whiting off the north-west coast of Scotland. Boats would then be at sea, men would be on the decks, and fishmeal and fish fingers would accrue. I hope that he will consider this suggestion seriously.

I should like to supply my right hon. Friend with some figures. Last year, the Norwegians caught 100,000 tons of blue whiting. I understand that this year they are aiming at 200,000 tons. If our Government were to give a subsidy of, say, £8 or £10 a ton, and we caught 100,000 tons in an eight-week season, about 10 vessels could catch 10,000 tons each. If 200,000 tons was the target, 20 vessels would be able to fish. Simple arithmetic indicates a £1 million subsidy for a catch of 100,000 tons, and £2 million for the larger catch of 200,000 tons.

Something must be done soon. If not, no boats at all—not even the "Lord Nelson"—will be coming into the dock in Hull in 12 months' time. Owners whose object in life is to make profits say that they cannot fish economically in these waters without a subsidy. They will have no compunction about leaving Hull and fishing from another port, or even fishing out of Norway with Hamling's big purse seiner. It will leave 600, 800 or 1,000 fishermen in Hull unemployed. There will be a diminished income in docks because there will be no boats to pay dues.

What are fishermen worth? We subsidise and help other industries. In the past we have subsidised fishing in the Arctic, though we did not pay so much per ton. We had an operational subsidy on days at sea. Past Labour and Conservative Governments have given aid. Can we have help, so that we can fish off the Hebrides or West Africa, or in the future have a long-distance South Atlantic fleet fishing with a base at Stanley, in the Falkland Islands?

11.57 p.m.

The Minister of State, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Mr. E. S. Bishop)

The advocacy of my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull, West (Mr. Johnson) on behalf of his constituents and Hull's fishing industry is well known and appreciated locally and nationally. It is nearly midnight, and I am pleased that my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland is present, indicating his concern and interest on behalf of the Scottish industry. It is unusual to have two Ministers listening to such a debate.

I am grateful for the opportunity to detail the action being taken and anticipated to be taken to help the United Kingdom fishing industry and to assist the local situation to which my hon. Friend refers. I know of his long and continued concern for the well-being of the fishing industry.

I shall begin by commenting on the assistance that my Ministry has provided and is continuing to provide to the Indus- try. I make special mention of the expenditure on research and development, the grants and loans for the construction and modernisation of fishing vessels, and the assistance towards enforcement costs. My hon. Friend referred to the publication from the Lowestoft laboratory and the research into blue whiting. We are spending about £20 million per annum on this aid to the industry, largely to sustain it during the review of the common fisheries policy.

Additionally, the Government have recognised the special difficulties of the deep sea sector at Hull, Grimsby and Fleetwood. On 7 December 1978, in reply to a parliamentary question, the Minister announced a temporary scheme of assistance towards the dock charges incurred in 1978.

My hon. Friend will be aware that the Minister referred to changes in the traditional pattern of fishing which have had serious repercussions on the dock and landing charges payable to the British Transport Docks Board by fishing vessel owners in Fleetwood, Grimsby and Hull and he proposed, as an exceptional and temporary measure, to seek the approval of Parliament for a scheme of financial aid to cover about half the charges for 1978 in respect of vessels of 80 ft. registered length or more, based on those three ports. That is an indication of our concern and willingness to help the industry.

My hon Friend rightly referred to the state of the industry at Hull. The Government are well aware of the substantial decline which has taken place in landings at Hull. That is one reason why the Minister announced the dock charge subsidy. The Government will also have the situation facing the deep water sector and the labour-related problems very much in mind during their consideration of the proposals submitted by the fish catching industry.

As to whether there will be a dock charge subsidy in 1979, I can only say that the scheme was clearly related to dock charges incurred in 1978 and was described by the Minister as an exceptional and temporary measure.

We have been asked why there was no help for vessels of less than 80 ft. in length. The subsidy scheme was limited to vessels of 80 ft. and more and it has been explained to those who have queried our decision that my right hon. Friend is prepared to consider any well-founded case. So far, no detailed proposals have been received.

It would be dangerous to be precise in advance of receiving claims, but it is estimated that about 40 per cent. of the aid under the subsidy scheme may go to the Hull owners. We have also been asked about the modernisation of the docks at Hull, and the possibility of the Government writing off the capital debt in respect of the modernisation of the fish docks there has already been raised by some vessel owners. The same possibility has also been raised in respect of Grimsby and Fleetwood, but during the informal discussions with the vessel owners they formed the view that, in the short term, such relief might be insufficient.

If fish catching is affected, the processors are also affected, and the Government are conscious that changes in the pattern of supplies have affected the processing industry. Imports have helped to maintain supplies and the market has also obtained overlanded supplies from other United Kingdom ports and some landing from Icelandic vessels, albeit at irregular intervals.

My hon. Friend mentioned the plentiful supplies of blue whiting. The Government have given assistance to encourage vessels to catch blue whiting. The British Fishing Federation asked my right hon. Friend for aid for the deep sea sector in the autumn and has recently sent the figures in support of its case. The matter is being discussed with the federation at official level. Specific aids in connection with the catching of blue whiting might be one means of directing assistance to the deep sea industry if it can be justified, but I cannot anticipate any decision by the Government.

Blue whiting is plentiful, but my hon. Friend realises, as do we all, the problems involved in the filleting, processing and marketing of the fish. The Government are already making a significant contribution to research on blue whiting through their own laboratories. My hon. Friend referred to the Lowestoft laboratories and their contribution to the research and development carried out by the White Fish Authority. I have per- sonal recollection of the research into the catching of blue whiting by the "Arctic Privateer". I remember seeing it coming in, I think at Easter 1976. Now, of course, the "Privateer" is the "G. A. Reay", and I was very pleased to attend its commissioning not long ago.

All this is basic to the eventual exploitation of the blue whiting stocks.

Mr. James Johnson

Can my right hon. Friend confirm that firms such as Findus and Birds Eye have modem German filleting machines which can cope with blue whiting? They can make and are making fish fingers, but they are importing the blue whiting. I want my people to catch them, so that we can use our own stocks.

Mr. Bishop

I note what my hon. Friend says, but he will be aware that research into processing is also taking place at the Torry research station in Aberdeen, which is run by my Ministry. But I am also aware of the research done by other companies, including those to which my hon. Friend referred.

My hon. Friend's concern for the industry has, of course, brought him into various other activities. I am aware of the suggestions, for instance, about the establishment of a European fishing centre at Hull. I think that my hon. Friend was one of those involved in this. I am aware, of course, of the suggestions which have been made, and they have been noted. I recollect that this suggestion was one of many in the admirable publication "Fishing into the Eighties" for which my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull, East (Mr. Prescott) was responsible. It will be interesting to see whether any further support for a European fishing centre emerges from the proceedings of the fishing conference which takes place at Hull next week.

My hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull, West referred to the decasualisation of the trawling industry. The Government remain very keen that progress should continue to be made with a scheme of decasualisation, and are doing all that they can to encourage the industry to reach an agreement on a scheme of decasualisation, and I myself have attended meetings recently with both sides, chaired by my hon. Friend the Minister of State, Department of Employment. I stress that it is the Government's earnest hope that the industry will be able to reach a firm agreement.

With regard to the structural proposals of the Community, it is known that all Community fishing fleets face unfavourable structural arrangements to some degree. That is why the European Commission has produced proposals with financial incentives aimed at encouraging desirable changes in structure. Recently, the Council instructed that they should be examined further at technical level and that a further interim measure for the inshore fleet should be examined. This is under review at present.

As for the possibility of further interim assistance to the deep sea sector, the British Fishing Federation raised the possibility with my right hon. Friend some time ago, and he asked its representatives to present a detailed case for examination. Recently the federation has supplied some information, and this is being looked at quite urgently.

With regard to long-term aid associated with restructuring, the Minister has received proposals from the fish catchers and the fish processors, and these are being evaluated by officials both in his Department and other Government Departments concerned. It will be appreciated that proposals designed to have long-term effect need very careful examination.

My hon. Friend made some reference to the prospects for Hull vessels in South Atlantic waters. Again, the Minister has written to my hon. Friend to advise him that the Government have now commissioned the White Fish Authority to undertake a desk study of the resources aspects of South Atlantic fisheries, and it is hoped that results will be available in April. In the meantime, I do not wish to speculate on the commercial prospects of these waters for United Kingdom vessels.

The Government have taken careful note of the views expressed by my hon. Friend. It is a matter of public record that the Government have continued to receive solid and united support not only from the industry but from all parts of this House in their approach to the common fisheries policy negotiations. This support has been of great help in our negotiating position in Brussels.

My hon. Friend made some point about the prospects for fishing in other waters. In 1979, the Community has reached agreement on reciprocal fishing arrangements with Norway and Sweden, although the arrangements have yet to be approved by the Council. Discussions with the Faroe Islands and Canada are continuing, and it is the Government's aim to seek a fair balance of reciprocal fishing opportunities and an improvement in the United Kingdom's share of those opportunities in the Community. Our chief interest lies in obtaining a satisfactory share of Community quotas in Norwegian and Faroese waters, and we have said that we are prepared to agree limited quotas for Sweden in the North Sea, although we have not fished on Swedish waters, on consideration that the Norwegian and Faroese agreements are dealt with to our satisfaction.

The Government hope that the next round of the CFP discussions, probably towards the end of March, will enable the current uncertainties facing the industry to be resolved as soon as possible. I can assure the House and the wider audience beyond our shores that there is no wavering in our determination to secure a fair settlement that takes account of the extent of fishery resources in waters under our sovereignty and jurisdiction and the extent of the losses of our fishing opportunities—

The Question having been proposed after Ten o'clock on Wednesday evening, and the debate having continued for half an hour, Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant ot the Standing Order.

Adjourned accordingly at eleven minutes past Twelve o'clock.