§ Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Cope.]
§ 12.2 am
§ Mr. David Penhaligon (Truro)I welcome the opportunity of the Adjournment debate because, once again, I wish to raise in the House the plight of the Cornish mackerel fishermen. The Minister will be aware that it is not the first time that I have used the various opportunities available to hon. Members in the House to present local fears.
The current concern of the mackerel fishermen in Cornwall is a recommendation by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea, which has recommended that a regulation should be made and enforced that the catching of mackerel of less than 30 cm. in length shall stop. I am not sure whether that means catching or landing the mackerel of less than 30 cm. However, in reality I understand that the regulation is to ban the landing of mackerel below that size.
As the Minister will know, concern has long been felt by the fishermen in my part of the world about conservation of stocks, and they have chided successive Ministers for not doing more. It is disappointing that I am forced to point out to the Minister that this particular regulation could make the matter worse.
The belief locally is that, if the regulation were enforced, hand-lining——the traditional form of catching mackerel in Cornwall—would become uneconomic and cease, Secondly, and ironically, there is a fear that it could result in more mackerel being caught than hitherto.
Hand-lining, or feathering, as I used to know it, is the backbone of Cornish fishing. In essence, the method consists of a man on a fairly unsophisticated boat holding a line over the side of the boat on which there are about 20 or 30 hooks, slightly disguised by feathers. The mackerel, not being desperately bright, try to eat the feathers and are thus caught.
Mackerel are caught in that way in fairly large quantities. The hand-liners sell their catch to the better end of the market for processing into smoked fish and some of the rest of their supply—this is by no means unimportant—are sold to the long-liners, the other half of the Cornish fishing industry, for bait. That process has existed for some time and been quite satisfactory.
The problem is that over 70 per cent. of the fish now caught by hand-lining are less than 30 cm in length. Presumably, that means that, if the regulation is enforced, all those mackerel will have to be thrown away. Hand-lining will become uneconomic. All the vessels designed to operate in that way will cease to function. The long-lining people will be short of bait and during the peak of the mackerel season, when the long-liners join the feather fisherman in chasing the mackerel off Cornwall, they will find themselves in the same difficulty.
For six months of the year—in winter—the fishermen have nothing other than unemployment to look forward to. If the Minister checks the statistics he will see that male unemployment is now higher than 20 per cent. In addition, the hand-liners may be tempted to compete for shellfish. Some people believe that the only shellfish remaining in Cornwall are those that are stuffed and sit in a museum. The stocks of shellfish are under severe pressure and will not stand more. Several thousand jobs are at stake. Newlyn 274 is not in my constituency, but it is affected to the greatest extent. Looe, which is not in my constituency, and Mevagissey, which is, will also be affected. Shore jobs such as boat repairs, fuel supplies, radio services, ships' stores, chandlery and other supply companies will be squeezed to a greater or lesser extent. If the regulation were enforced it would make hand-lining or feathering uneconomic and a large slab of the Cornish fishing industry as we know it would disappear.
I am sure that the Minister is aware that mackerel is the keystone of Cornish fishing. Pull out that key and the whole industry will begin to crumble. I am asking the Minister to say that, if the regulation is presented to the Commission, he will argue for an exemption for the hand-liners. It cannot be seriously argued that such an exemption would affect conservation programmes. The percentage of mackerel caught by this method is small. If mackerel had been caught only by hand-lining, there would not be any conservation problem in my part of the world.
If the hand-liners had had the monopoly rights to local mackerel, there would have been no problem. They produce a high-quality, hand-sorted fish. They use very little fuel. The industry is light on capital requirements, and that is unusual for the fishing industry. It is a whole way of life for those in the small coves and little villages that sneak in and out of the valleys that make up the Cornish coast that so many find magnificent during their summer visits. A whole way of life is at stake because of a regulation. An exemption would cost very little in terms of conservation.
The second fear is that the change in regulations could result in more mackerel being caught. That sounds ironic and silly, but it is feared that the amount of fish that can be landed by the armada that arrives in January from the North-East to supply the Soviet factory boats will be similar to that allowed in recent years. However, if they have to throw 70 per cent. of their catch away because the fish are less than 30 cm, the amount of fish caught—if not landed—will increase substantially. Indeed, if 70 per cent. is the right figure, it will treble.
We all know what happens. The net is pulled in and the men inspect the fish. If the size is not right they slip it, or slip the net and let the mackerel return to the sea. It is now accepted that that process kills virtually all the mackerel in the net. It is crazy to have a process which, in the aim of conservation, ends up with keeping one fish and throwing two away. There is a real fear that if the regulations are fully enforced this could result in more immature mackerel being caught. I am sure that the Minister does not wish that. I know that the Cornish fishermen do not wish it.
Some fishermen believe that one way of overcoming the dilemma is for the Ministry to take a sample in the shoals—it has the equipment to do so—and if at least 80 per cent. of the fish are more than 30 cm long the use of a net to catch mackerel should be banned. That is put forward as a serious proposition and I ask for the Minister's view on it.
My view on the method of conserving fish is no secret to the Minister. I could be described as a Luddite about fishing. The only way in which we can conserve mackerel stocks is to ban technique. Tons per man, tons landed at the quay or the other measures tried by successive Governments will not succeed. The fishermen will find ways around them by forgetting how many pounds there 275 are in a ton or how often they came to the quay. If we cannot ban technique, perhaps the Minister will consider my suggestion about sampling the mackerel.
The Minister and I are not in the same party, and we represent different parts of Britain and, in some ways, different interests in this argument. However, the Minister has a reputation in Cornwall for having done more than most of his predecessors to preserve the Cornish mackerel fishing industry. Great damage has already been done. Mackerel hand-liners say that a decade ago they could catch 40 stones of mackerel and that they would be unlucky if the fish in one tray were less than 30 cm long. They do not argue that conservation is unnecessary. Their argument is that hand-lining catches so few fish that to exempt them from the regulation cannot seriously affect the conservation that the Minister wishes to succeed in Cornwall.
Will the Minister guarantee tonight that he will promote the exemption for hand-line fishermen, as he has promoted exemption from some other regulations on size and length, each time on the basis that the number of mackerel caught is so small that it makes little difference to the total stock?
§ The Minister of State, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Mr. Alick Buchanan-Smith)I thank the hon. Member for Truro (Mr. Penhaligon) for raising this matter on an Adjournment debate. I know that it is of considerable importance to him and to his colleagues with constituencies in the South-West, and I freely acknowledge that it is vital to the hand-liners, whose livelihood depends on fishing.
The hon. Gentleman said that I represent a constituency at almost the opposite end of the country to his. I know that some of my fellow countrymen are not always welcome when they fish off Cornwall, but my constituents are not among them. When I first represented my constituency, hand-lining for white fish was a main activity of fishermen there. My constituency contains one of the few remaining hand-lining ports. I have been out with the hand-liners and have seen how they do it. I acknowledge what the hon. Gentleman said about the quality of the fish that are caught. I acknowledge, too, the conservation aspects of what he said and his genuine concern on that matter. Therefore, I hope that I can give the hon. Gentleman some assurances before I conclude my remarks.
We do not have any firm proposal from the Commission at this stage. There can be confusion, and people are rightly alert—they are alert because we have informed them. We have consulted the fishing organisations, but, at the moment, we do not have firm proposals. Certain proposals have been put forward by various advisory organisations, but we are still awaiting firm proposals from the Commission.
The reason for a 30 cm. minimum landing size for mackerel is to try to make more effective the existing measures for conserving the mackerel stock. The suggestion for a 30 cm. minimum landing size came from the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea—ICES. It is a scientific organisation that endeavours to give advice to Governments and to organisations such as the European Economic Community on fisheries conservation and management in the waters of the North 276 Atlantic. Its function, in making recommendations, is purely advisory. In its 1981 report, ICES drew attention to the decrease that had taken place in the North Sea and Western mackerel stocks in recent years as a result of over-exploitation. I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for acknowledging some of the measures that I and my Department have sought to promote not only domestically but in discussions in Europe.
On this occasion, ICES pointed to the importance of ensuring that spawning stocks are maintained at an appropriate level. If all the young mackerel are killed, there is no recruitment into the older age groups, which are more economic to exploit, and so the seed corn is destroyed. We wanted to try to restrict fishing on young mackerel below the age of three years. The 30 cm. size was arrived at to preserve the seed corn and to ensure that the stocks would recover, thereby improving the commercial fishing of larger size mackerel for the future. ICES accordingly recommended a minimum size of 30 cm. in all areas. The recommendation was subsequently endorsed by the European Community's scientific and technical committee for fisheries, subject to an allowance of up to 10 per cent. of undersized mackerel in any landing of mackerel.
The revised conservation regulation that was discussed at the meeting of the Council of Fisheries Ministers last week did not include any provision for a minimum size for Western mackerel. Therefore, we have no formal proposal as such before us.
The hon. Gentleman is correct to raise this subject in the House at present. Once the Council of Ministers has adopted a regulation for conservation, the European Commission could introduce proposals. We are alert to that. I am grateful for the support and interest which has been expressed by the hon. Gentleman.
Before such a proposal could come into effect, it would be discussed in the Fisheries Council, so that there would be an opportunity for discussion. Once we have adopted the main regulation and the Commission bring forward further detailed proposals, we will have the opportunity for discussion. I shall welcome the opportunity to discuss the proposal first in the House of Commons, which is proper and right.
We are at a stage where, although proposals are made, there is no regulation. We took the initiative in my Department. We wrote to all the fishing interests alerting them to the possibility of the proposal of the 30 cm minimum size. We invited views from them. We are well aware of the impact that such a measure would have on both fishermen and processors. As the hon. Gentleman fairly said, we are talking not only of the fishermen who go to sea but of the many on the shore, particularly processors, who would feel a severe impact if the proposal were put into effect.
We are conscious of the serious effects that the proposal would have on the hand-line fishermen, about whom the hon. Gentleman is particularly concerned. We have received a number of representations from them seeking a derogation from any minimum size measures for hand-liners. I assure the hon. Gentleman that in discussing any further legislative measures in the South-West mackerel fishery, we shall take full account of the special problems that face the fishermen and the processors.
However, I must also make if clear to the hon. Gentleman that in doing so we must strike a balance with the legitimate and correct objective of those who have 277 made the proposal, who are trying more effectively to conserve the mackerel stocks and therefore improve the fisheries for the future. Thereby we should take into account properly the scientific advice and at the same time the special needs that the hon. Gentleman has fairly and properly described.
As we do not have any proposals from the Commission at this stage, it is premature to say precisely what the reaction will be or how we should attempt to assess the outcome. However, I assure the hon. Gentleman that it is our concern to ensure that we take into account the social and economic effects of some of the measures, also given the fact that the quantity of the fish taken by that method is not great in relation to what is taken by other methods of fishing. We shall take that into account. I accept that those fishermen cannot move from place to place like others and exploit other fisheries in other areas. If they are stopped from using this method of fishing, they may divert to other stocks, such as shellfish, and create problems for other fishermen.
We have already alerted the Commission to our intention. When the discussions take place, we will have to look at the special case of the hand-liners. I give the hon. Gentleman an undertaking that in any negotiations, either with the Commission or in the Fisheries Council, we shall bear in mind the needs of the hand-liners and do what we can to ensure that their livelihood is not affected by the proposal.
In the past we have not been deaf to the needs of that section of the industry. We have excluded smaller vessels, which included those of the hand-liners, from the licensing system for mackerel. We did that because we did not think that those smaller vessels were so dangerous to stocks as some of the larger vessels. When we negotiated the South-West mackerel box, which closes the season for mackerel fishing with certain types of nets, we excluded the hand-liners from that restriction. We have demonstrated in a practical way that we are aware of their problem and needs.
278 If the regulation came in and was applied—because of the discards—one could finish up with a measure that would not be as effective as those who originally proposed it or we would like it to be.
§ Mr. PenhaligonThe Minister is encouraging, but my good Cornish folk are blunt-speaking people. Will the Minister argue for an exemption for hand-liners?
§ Mr. Buchanan-SmithI shall certainly argue for that. I cannot say what the outcome will be. We shall argue the position of the Cornish hand-liners both in the Commission and in the Council of Ministers. I cannot tell whether it might be a derogation of something else that could be negotiated. I should not like to pre-empt my negotiating position by saying that if I do not get one thing that will be a disaster. I give an undertaking that I shall explore every avenue, although I cannot give an undertaking as to what the outcome of the discussion will be. The case of the Cornish hand-liners will be put forward and the hon. Gentleman can give that assurance to the fishermen in his area.
There will be those who will argue strongly and purely from a scientific point of view, and others who will say that the regulation should be applied to everybody and that exceptions cannot be made for one area. The hon. Gentleman knows that I tend to be fairly blunt in fishery matters, as I have had to deal with fishermen for a long time. I believe that it is better to be blunt with them. They are often blunt and outspoken to me. I never look forward to an optimistic outcome. I make a realistic assessment of the position. There will be others who will argue contrary to us, but I assure the hon. Gentleman that we shall argue the case as strongly as we can to ensure the best possible outcome. I hope that with that assurance the hon. Gentleman may go to bed and sleep slightly better.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Adjourned accordingly at twenty-eight minutes past Twelve o'clock.