HC Deb 12 February 1981 vol 998 cc991-9
The Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Mr. Peter Walker)

With permission, Mr. Speaker, I wish to make a statement about the Council of Fisheries Ministers in Brussels on 9 to 11 February.

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 the meeting of the Council of Fisheries Ministers which lasted from 9 to 11 February. In spite of intensive and sustained negotiations, the Council failed to reach agreement on a revised common fisheries policy. Discussions will be resumed on 9–10 March.

In the course of the three days, my right hon. Friend, my hon. Friend and I were able to have discussions with representatives of the industry on the problems which they are currently experiencing. The Government have already announced their decision to bring forward the review of the fishing industry's financial position. The Government have now fixed a meeting with the industry for next Tuesday, 17 February.

The object of the meeting will be to receive from the industry an analysis of its current financial position and to listen to any constructive suggestions it wishes to make. The analysis and the suggestions will then be urgently considered by the Government.

We also discussed the adverse effects of cheap fish imports, and it has been agreed that a team of industry representatives and Government officials will immediately examine all allegations of illegal and unfair imports of fish.

During the Council meeting, we brought to the attention of the Commission the fact that the system operating to prevent cheap imports from entering our market from third countries was not working effectively. We have obtained a firm undertaking from the Commissioner that he will urgently examine the problem in order to make the system more effective.

Mr. Roy Mason (Barnsley)

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his statement. Is he aware that he will continue to get our backing as long as he stands firm within the Council of Ministers for the British fisheries proposals, as agreed by all the industry and by this House of Parliament?

It would appear that some progress is being made, especially on conservation, on inspection and on total allowable catches, but is the Minister aware that, in spite of French intransigence, he must still stand firm on two of the cardinal points—the 12-mile exclusive belt and our dominant preference up to 50 miles? During the course of the past three days he has resisted the German agreement with the Canadians, the Danes on the Faroes, and the French on fishing up to our beaches. He is right to hold up these agreements until we have managed to obtain a satisfactory package.

Will the Minister say what proposals were put forward by the EEC on financial aid to the industry—I understand that these were discussed—and also how the United Kingdom might be assisted?

Meantime, at home, apart from the committee of inquiry by the industry and Government to establish the fiddles in cheap fish imports, what real action has the Minister in mind now to stop cheap fish imports? He has not given an indication to the House as to how long it will take the Commissioner to examine this matter. What, therefore, has he in mind about doing something positive now?

Will all sections of the industry be represented on the committee of inquiry? There are differences of view being expressed by those in the deep-sea fleet and the inshore fishermen.

Finally, in view of the further delay in regard to the common fisheries policy, may we expect a statement next week on financial aid to the industry?

Mr. Walker

One of the strengths in the negotiations is the basic unity between the Government, the industry and the House of Commons as a whole. Therefore, I am very grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his remarks.

At every stage and every step and in every counter proposal in Brussels, we have the representatives of the industry in to discuss them, and we agree our tactical position and our major objective. That policy will continue until we reach a final agreement.

With regard to the Canadian agreements and the Faroes, the right hon. Gentleman will understand that I regretted that the decision that we had to make on the Canadian agreement has had an adverse effect on the German fleet, which was not my objective. But the whole Community must understand that there is no way in which Britain can accept an agreement which will result in an increase of cheap imports into our markets in return for fishing facilities for another European country until we receive an overall agreement satisfactory to Britain. That remains the firm position of the British Government.

The right hon. Gentleman asked me about aid to the industry and whether a statement will be made next week. I shall be having a meeting with the industry on Tuesday next. The representatives of the industry will then analyse what they consider to be the financial position and make their suggestions. Until I have that meeting on Tuesday afternoon I shall not know the nature of the suggestion. I shall then have to consider my proposals, together with my Government colleagues, and I shall then be able to make a statement. I consider the matter to be urgent. Although I cannot promise to make a statement next week, following next Tuesday's meeting urgent decisions will be taken in Whitehall, and an early statement will be made to the House of Commons.

With regard to imports, in the month of January my Department analysed 22 reports of imports that we considered should be looked at urgently by the Commission. As the right hon. Gentleman will know, due to the death of Mr. Gundelach we have a new Commissioner who has taken charge of the portfolio. I discussed these cases with him this week and he has personally undertaken to look into them urgently.

Mr. Peter Mills (Devon, West)

I congratulate my right hon. Friend on the very firm stand that he has made, which will be particularly welcome in the South-West of England. Will he agree that, bearing in mind his very firm stand, the fishermen should now go back to sea?

Does my right hon. Friend agree that if the nonsense and the difficulties that he is having with the French continue we may have to take unilateral action in order to help our fishermen and our consumers?

Mr. Walker

I have been with the leaders of the industry for the last three days in Brussels. They made it clear that the action that was being taken by the fishermen was not intended to mean that the British Government should come to a speedy settlement, irrespective of the terms. Indeed, they very much supported our negotiating position. I am glad to have received this morning from ports throughout the United Kingdom reports that our fishermen are going back to sea.

I understand from the leaders with whom I have been in Brussels that they appreciate the financial aid to the industry, which is a form of unilateral action. There was no pressure on the Government for us to take earlier action, having promised to review the matter at the end of March, and it is appreciated by them that the Government on their own initiative decided to review the financial position ahead of the time that was agreed for that review. That action was appreciated, and they have agreed on the procedure that we are following with regard to imports.

Mr. J. Enoch Powell (Down, South)

Now that the Minister has encountered, and rightly resisted, intransigence on fundamentals which have not previously been brought into the issue, will he take the opportunity to review the position on catch quotas and zones, where we have made compromises which were not really satisfactory from the point of view of the industry? If a matter is to be opened up by other parties, it ought to be opened up by us as well.

Mr. Walker

May I say to the right hon. Gentleman—in terms which I know affect his constituents—that there was a discussion in the course of the three days about the possible opening up of total allowable catches for herring in the North Sea, and we made clear that if there were to be such a consideration the TACs and the Mourne fishery should be considered at the same time.

Sir Walter Clegg (North Fylde)

I congratulate my right hon. Friend on the great fight that he is putting up. Will he say whether there was any discussion at the meeting of an increase in EEC reference prices, which would undoubtedly help? Also, was anything said about exploratory or training voyages?

Mr. Walker

No, Sir. I have said "No", but in terms of discussing the marketing arrangements and in our talks with the Commission and with other Ministers we continued to put our view that the withdrawal prices, in spite of the increase that we have recently obtained, have little relationship to the economic cost of fishing, so we continued to press that point.

There was a general discussion on the future nature of a structures package, and on this question a number of nations put differing views as to the value of exploratory voyages. As my hon. Friend knows from the national aid programme that we announced last year, in terms of our own industry, we considered that these have a role to play.

Mr. A. J. Beith (Berwick-upon-Tweed)

Did any country other than France at the recent meeting seek to claim access within our 12-mile limit? Will the Secretary of State resist any attempt to cut into that limit? Does he recall Minister after Minister saying that the question of imports would be looked into with great urgency? How can we have any confidence that these imports will be stopped or abated?

Mr. Walker

One can have no confidence at all, judging by the performance of previous Ministers. As my predecessor knows, it is difficult to judge whether an import is dumped where auction markets prevail. We can make effective investigations into the allegations of illegal practices and ensure that action is taken.

Varying views about the historic rights were expressed in the talks about the 12-mile limit by a number of member countries. The major discussions about access took place on the principle of the importance of certain countries having a preferential area outside the 12-mile zone. The talks came to an end because it was impossible to find an acceptable proposal in that regard.

Several Hon. Members rose—

Mr. Speaker

As the House can see, a large number of right hon. and hon. Gentlemen are seeking to ask questions. If right hon. and hon. Members will be as brief as possible in their questions and replies, I hope to call everyone, at least those with a constituency interest.

Mr. Michael Shaw (Scarborough)

Is my right hon. Friend aware how much we appreciate the fact that he and his colleagues are seeking a fair and enforceable fisheries agreement and, in reaching that agreement how necessary it is to stick to the 12-mile exclusive limit and to bear in mind our experience that any exceptions to the 12-mile limit have been disastrous for the fishing industry, particularly on the Yorkshire coast?

Mr. Walker

The advantage of having at these negotiations the leaders of the industry in my room in Brussels discussing the detail is that it is possible to discuss details with the fishermen who know the problems of the locality and who know what is acceptable and what is not acceptable. They know that we will not deliver a fishing agreement that is unacceptable to the British industry.

Mr. James Johnson (Kingston upon Hull, West)

May I congratulate the Minister on taking a firm stand against his Gaullist opponents in the Fisheries Council? We welcome his statement about the need for an inquiry into the dumping of fish in this country. In that connection, is he aware that a boat has just left Hull on its way to Arctic waters off the coast of Norway? It is on a hiding to nothing; it is a sheer gamble. It can catch cod at £70 a tonne, but cannot sell cod at above £60 a tonne when it returns. Unless the Minister can stop these cheap imports—this dumping—the industry will be in a most unholy mess.

Mr. Walker

I recognise the frustration of any fishermen who go to sea for a couple of days, come back with a good catch and then find that they have lost money and earned nothing. In fact, cod is one of the prime reasons why I resisted the Canadian agreement, because it would have made cod prices in this country even higher than they are at present. The hon. Gentleman knows that the fishing industry was relieved when, at the last Council meeting, we were able to reach agreement on the Norwegian waters, as a result of which ships such as the one that he mentioned are able to go there. I trust that the market will firm up in time for the trip to be a success.

Mr. Patrick Wall (Haltemprice)

I congratulate my right hon. Friend particularly on his stand on the 12-mile limit. It appears that there will be no settlement in that regard until after the French presidential election. I put two questions to my right hon. Friend. The first concerns imports. I know how difficult it is to make decisions about dumping, but if the heat is to be taken out of the situation, can something be done about imports immediately, and financial aid can be given to the industry as soon as possible? Can my right hon. Friend give us more assurance that there will be action, not talk, on these two issues at the earliest possible moment?

Mr. Walker

My hon. Friend mentioned the difficulties connected with imports. Let me give the example of Lowestoft, where much plaice is caught and where, clearly, the price of imported fish has an effect. If Dutch vessels, whose primary interest is sole, catch plaice as a by-catch, they get their reward on the sole catch and are not too concerned about the price that they obtain for plaice. That is a factor that adversely affects ports such as Lowestoft, and it is a factor that is difficult to control. All that I can say is that I have told the industry that we shall meet it next Tuesday to discuss the financial arrangements, and we shall discuss any creative arrangements that it wishes to make.

Mr. Austin Mitchell (Grimsby)

Does the Minister agree that what will do most to get the Grimsby fishermen back to sea is emergency action on imports? We welcome the inquiry that the right hon. Gentleman has initiated, though the facts are reasonably well known because it is a repetition of last year's crisis. Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that the industry wants action now, particularly on cheap imports from the EEC?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the breakdown in negotiations gives him the chance not only to strengthen our negotiating position—we have already given too much away—but to fulfil the commitment in the Conservative Party manifesto that in the absence of an agreement the Government will not hesitate to take the necessary measures on their own? When will the right hon Gentlman take those measures?

Mr. Walker

I am somewhat surprised by what the hon. Member says. It was most encouraging that the Grimsby fishermen were the first to go back. At least they are encouraged by the action that we took. The Grimsby fishermen know that already this year the Government have given double the aid of any of their predecessors in any one year. He knows, too, that we have tackled immediately any problem that they have raised with us.

Mr. Iain Sproat (Aberdeen, South)

May I add to the warm welcome that my right hon. Friend has already received for his strong defence of the interests of British fishermen? I welcome also the setting up of the committee to look into allegations of the dumping of cheap foreign fish. Will my right hon. Friend tell us more about the composition of the committee from the point of view of the fishing industry, and also give us details of the 22 cases of irregular imports from third countries? Which countries were they?

Mr. Walker

Obviously I do not have the details of the 22 cases to hand, but a substantial number of them came from North American countries. We have given the details to the Commission.

On the composition of the committee, in the small negotiating group that acts in an advisory capacity to me in Brussels, I consult the industry to try to arrange representation so that all sectors of the industry are satisfied that they have a voice. I shall do the same in the case of this committee.

Mr. Robert Maclennan (Caithness and Sutherland)

Will the Minister make clear that whatever the outcome of the Commission's investigation of the 22 cases of alleged irregular imports, the practicalities of compensating the industry for the losses that it has incurred are almost impossible? The drying up of markets over a long period has led to grave financial losses, and it is not practical to compensate for that. Following the investigations, what steps does the right hon. Gentleman hope will be taken to prevent a recurrence? That is what is worrying the industry.

Mr. Walker

We have referred to the Commission our view that the concept of having a reference price by which third country imports cannot come into the Community—a basic principle accepted by the Community—has not operated properly. I am grateful to the new Commissioner for taking this matter seriously and for undertaking personally to look into it. I hope that he will come forward with proposals to tighten up the position. I agree with what the hon. Gentleman said about the damage done by cheaper imports during the past year. That is why we have doubled already the amount of aid given to the industry previously.

Mr. Kenneth Warren (Hastings)

Will my right hon. Friend give more details about the representation of the inshore fishermen on the committee, bearing in mind that the variations of grounds around our shores are substantial? Secondly, may I say how much I admire the way that my right hon. Friend has combated the audacity of the French? We do not want them wrecking our grounds legally when they have already wrecked their own.

Mr. Walker

I hope that the composition of the committee will be such that the industry will have confidence in it. I think my hon. Friend will agree that if we have a committee in which every port, locality and district are represented it will not be effective in taking the type of action that is necessary. Therefore, I want a small, compact committee of leaders of the fishing industry which is respected by the industry as a whole.

Mr. Douglas Jay (Battersea, North)

Does the Minister feel that throughout the talks the French showed a Community spirit?

Mr. Walker

A French Deputy could perhaps ask the French Minister the same question about the British. There is a dialogue between countries on a number of questions. Naturally, countries pursue their national interests. An examination of the history of the Community reveals that, as a result, decisions are made to the benefit of Europe as a whole.

Mr. David Mudd (Falmouth and Cambourne)

My right hon. Friend will get, but hardly expect, extra congratulations on the positive steps that he has taken. Will he bear in mind that the West Country mackerel industry, particularly that of Cornwall, has borne the brunt of the absence of a CFP? Can he assure us that interim steps will be taken so that Cornish mackerel are left for Cornish fishermen to catch when sanity prevails in the EEC?

Mr. Walker

Yes. My hon. Friend knows the interest that my Department and, in particular, the Minister of State have taken in the detailed problems of the Cornish mackerel fisheries.

Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover)

Why is it necessary for the Minister to take part in the exercise of setting up a quango-ACAS-type body when there is plenty of evidence on television film and in other forms in the media to prove that fiddling and dumping take place on a massive scale, to the detriment of this country? Is it not more true to say that this delaying tactic, this buying of time, has more to do with the attempted re-election of Giscard d'Estaing than with saving the jobs of British fishermen?

Mr. Walker

In view of the hon. Gentleman's detailed knowledge of the fishing industry, I think that he will know that his fishing constituents require more than anything else a system of control which does not exist because we do not have a common fisheries policy.

Several Hon. Members rose—

Mr. Speaker

Order. If hon. Members will co-operate and be as brief as they can, I shall call those who have been rising.

Mr. Albert McQuarrie (Aberdeenshire, East)

I add my congratulations to my right hon. Friend the Minister, the Secretary of State for Scotland and the Minister of State on the tremendous stand that they made. Hon. Members might not realise that they worked through the night until 4 o'clock this morning to try to agree a common fisheries policy.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the main reason behind the fishermen's dispute was not necessarily the common fisheries policy but the collapse of prices at the quayside due to the high import of fish, which last year amounted to 234,000 tonnes and was worth £18 million? Will my right hon. Friend therefore take urgent steps with the new committee to control imports of fish that is not required for the processing factories?

Mr. Walker

The processing factories are of great importance to our fishing industry and to the consumers. They are an important part of the market. All are agreed that there has been unfair competition and perhaps illegal practices. We have tried to set up the best instrument to discover such practices and to take action against them.

Mr. James Kilfedder (Down, North)

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that the only way to save from further harm fishermen in Northern Ireland, and in areas in England, Scotland and Wales which border the Irish Sea, is to exclude all foreigners, particularly the French, from that area?

Mr. Walker

Over the years British fishermen have fished in many parts of the European seas. That has been to the benefit of our fishing industry. Northern Ireland has a particular problem because under The Hague agreements of 1976 the Irish Republic was granted double quotas. That has a great adverse effect on the fishermen of Northern Ireland. That is why I am intent on ensuring that an arrangement for Northern Ireland is made to compensate.

Sir Albert Costain (Folkestone and Hythe)

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the fishermen of South-East Kent have seen the French ruin their own fishing grounds and are particularly anxious that he should persevere with the 12-mile limit? Will he arrange for the committee to examine the price of imported fish and follow it to the shops to discover why fish is not cheaper there?

Mr. Walker

I originally appointed five people to advise on marketing in the food industry in general. Two of them are examining the question of the marketing offish in Britain. I look forward to their report with interest.

Mr. Teddy Taylor (Southend, East)

In view of the importance of the fishing industry in Southend, may we have a clear assurance that no concession was or will be made on the principle of the 12-mile limit? In spite of the worrying speech by the German Foreign Minister, did my right hon. Friend receive an assurance from fellow members of the Council of Ministers that the lack of an agreement will not be used as a device to delay the payments due to Britain by 31 March?

Mr. Walker

As my hon. Friend knows from his great interest in European matters, some people suggested that the Community payments would not be made. I know that my hon. Friend rejoices that the payments have already been made under the budget agreement. No pressure of any description was put upon me by any member of the Community on that question.

Mr. Taylor

What about Southend?

Mr. Walker

The details of the agreement that is eventually made on access and quotas will have the support of the British fishing industry.

Mr. Peter Fraser (South Angus)

Whatever else has been said in the House in the last 24 hours, will the Minister convey to the Secretary of State for Scotland the fact that the Scottish fishermen appreciate his commitment to their cause and his presence in Brussels? I welcome what my right hon. Friend has said about question of financial aid, which he is reviewing, but has he determined the volume and form of that aid? Does he accept that in the two other instances criticism was made of the form of aid?

Mr. Walker

Throughout yesterday we discussed the major access requirement for Scotland. I have no doubt that if my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland had been absent from Brussels he would have een criticised by the Opposition. I took a leading part in the negotiations and I was grateful for the presence and activity of my right hon. Friend during the talks. No commitment and no decision of any description has been taken about the financial arrangements. Decisions will not be taken at next Tuesday's meeting. The fishing industry will give us its analysis of the position and its suggestions about how the Government can help.

Mr. Alex Pollock (Moray and Nairn)

May I extend my sympathies to the Minister at this anxious and frustrating time? Pending settlement, will he give serious consideration to the possibility of either a fuel subsidy or an interest relief grant?

Mr. Walker

I recognise that both those suggestions are of great importance industry will give its analysis of the financial position and make suggestions about their priorities. We shall then consider them urgently.

Mr. David Crouch (Canterbury)

I hope that my right hon. Friend will not say to me, as he said to the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner), that I do not have a considerable knowledge of the fishing industry. Everybody is worried about the fishing industry. Is my right hon. Friend aware that from Whitstable we export by the millions to France oysters in the form of spat?

Mr. Walker

First, I certainly did not say that the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) has no knowledge of the fishing industry. On behalf of his constituents he has considerable knowledge and interest in that subject. That is the opposite to what my hon. Friend the Member for Canterbury (Mr. Crouch) said. I am sorry if my hon. Friend thought that I was being sarcastic. I am delighted to hear of the enormous export trade in oysters to France. I hope that a few will remain in Britain.

Mr. Gavin Strang (Edinburgh, East)

Does the Secretary of State see any prospect of agreement on the common agricultural policy before the French presidential election? May we be assured that there will be no trade-off between the fishery negotiations and the negotiations that are shortly to start on the agricultural prices package?

Mr. Walker

On the last point, I think that the hon. Gentleman knows that on budget, agricultural and fishing matters we have never accepted the principle of linkage. It is not the intention of the Government to link any of those matters. The question about the prospect of agreement before the French election would be better put to the French Minister, not to me.