§ Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn—[Mr. Bates.]
10.28 pm§ Mr. Denzil Davies (Llanelli)The object of this short Adjournment debate is to impress on the Secretary of State for Wales—I am glad to see the Under-Secretary of State in his place—and the Government the need to give serious consideration to bringing an order before the House, which can be done under the sea fisheries legislation, to designate an area that encompasses the estuaries of the Gwendraeth, Towy and the Taff rivers, and the Under-Secretary will know the area well, as a regulated and licensed cockle fishery. The estuary of the Gwendraeth river, which comprises the Gwendraeth Fawr and the Gwendraeth Fach, runs into the sea at Kidwelly in my constituency.
The estuary of the Towy river runs into the sea between Ferryside and Llansteffan, in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Carmarthen (Mr. Williams); the estuary of the Taff runs into the sea around Laugharne, which is also in my hon. Friend's constituency. To the east of the three rivers lies the Burry estuary, which extends west of the Gower peninsula and almost towards Kidwelly and the estuary of the Gwendraeth. Most of that area is covered by my constituency.
The Burry estuary is a licensed and regulated cockle fishery. That means that the south Wales sea fisheries committee is empowered by legislation to grant licences to individuals to gather cockles in the area. The committee can ensure that such licences are granted to those who have a substantial interest in the industry, and that the number of licences granted to gatherers can be controlled according to the stocks that are deemed to be available. The quantity of cockles gathered by licensees can also be controlled for purposes of stock preservation.
Unfortunately—this is where the problem arises—there is no licensing in respect of the estuaries of the three rivers west of the Burry estuary, extending right around Carmarthen bay and down to Laugharne. The South Wales sea fisheries committee tries to control that area by making byelaws; the trouble with byelaws is that, at least in this regard, they are a very blunt and cumbersome method of control. They do not apply to the individual: all that they can really do is close a fishery for a period, should the sea fisheries committee deem it wise. Then the fishery is opened again, and when it is opened large numbers of what have been described as vagrant gatherers descend on the area—not only local people, but people from other parts of Wales—to extract as many cockles as they can before the committee closes the cockle bed again for a few weeks or months.
There were real problems in the summer of 1993, especially at Ferryside. There was considerable violence as local groups fought with groups from outside to extract the cockles; the police had great difficulty in controlling and ending the violence, and there was a danger that deaths would occur.
We are not talking about small sums. The cockles find markets not only locally or in the United Kingdom, but abroad. Many are sent to Spain, presumably to be 1324 put into Spanish dishes such as paella; I understand that the Dutch—who are well-known pirates and predators—are now moving around the coast and may well be acting as middlemen, taking the cockles all the way to Spain.
Without licensing and control, there is a danger of violence and intimidation. A good deal of intimidation is occurring locally between different groups wishing to gain the greatest possible advantage. Moreover, experts in the industry tell me that, unless something is done, few cockles will be left, and the community may lose a small but important economic asset for ever.
I have written a number of letters to the south Wales sea fisheries committee. It is a splendid committee. It produces marvellous reports which are extremely interesting to read, and it is diligent in its work. However, when it comes to the question of agreeing to licence or to draft an order for the purposes of licensing the area, the committee seems to have a blind spot. It has failed to come up with any constructive reaction whatever to the letters which I have written.
It may be that the committee does not have the resources to operate a licensing system. It may be that it is concerned about the way to make a licensing system fair in the new environment. Indeed, there are instances on the east coast of England where licensing systems for fisheries have been announced by order. I do not think that the problem is an insoluble one. Whatever the reason, it seems that the South Wales sea fisheries committee does not want to do anything.
Letters to the Welsh Office on the subject usually elicit the Pontius Pilate reaction that it is nothing to do with that office; it is all to do with the south Wales sea fisheries committee. However, that is not the case. As I understand it, the Welsh Office—if it is not the Welsh Office, it is the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food—has the power under sea fisheries legislation to bring forward, after consultation with the sea fisheries committee, an order to establish a licensed and regulated fishery in that area. That is what I want.
In conclusion, I simply ask that the area west of the Gower peninsula encompassing the Burry estuary, which is already licensed, and extending round the Gwendraeth from the Towy and Taff estuaries, be a proper licensed and regulated cockle fishery, so that, first, we can ensure as far as possible that public order is not breached in the free-for-all for the cockles; secondly, an economic asset is maintained and is not lost in a few years; and, thirdly, the balance between economic exploitation and the need to conserve stocks is maintained. I suggest that that can be done only by having a proper licensing system.
I hope that the Under-Secretary will not read out one of those tired briefs that has been written for him by the South Wales sea fisheries committee.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Wales (Mr. Rod Richards)indicated dissent.
§ Mr. DaviesI am pleased about that. The Under-Secretary knows the area well. I hope that we will get a positive response from him, and that he will tell me that before long we will have an order properly to regulate the fishery.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Wales (Mr. Rod Richards)I welcome the opportunity to debate the cockle-gathering industry in west Wales. Cockle gathering holds a unique position in the life and history of west Wales. As the right hon. Member for Llanelli (Mr. Davies) said, I have first-hand experience of that part of the world. I was born and brought up there. I swam and walked in the Burry estuary. It is a dangerous place to be when the tidy is out, but I survived that part of the world.
My recollection of that part of the world is as a youngster and, indeed, as a student. Some of my happiest days were spent in that part of the world. I can remember as a young man spending the afternoon in Stradey park watching the Scarlets play and then having a pint of the local brew a little later. Sometimes it was Buckleys, sometimes it was Felinfoel. Inevitably, I would also have a jar of cockles. I understand the feeling locally for having a pint of beer and a jar of cockles, as the right hon. Gentleman well knows.
Many hon. Members will be familiar with the evocative images of weather-beaten men and women with their horses and carts returning from a day's cockle gathering on the west Wales sands, sometimes from the southern part of the Loughor estuary and sometimes from the northern part of the Loughor estuary. Perhaps Penclawdd has received more notice than the northern side—I do not know.
Few, however, will be aware of the vibrant industry which lies behind the imagery, an industry which for many generations has offered important employment opportunities in the area and one which has contributed greatly to the economy of the local communities on which the fisheries are based.
Responsibility for managing the west Wales cockle fisheries, including the licensing of cockle pickers, rests not with the Government but, as the right hon. Gentleman said, with the South Wales sea fisheries committee. Sea fisheries committees, of which there are two in Wales, are responsible for the management and conservation of coastal fisheries, including shell fisheries, in England and Wales out to six nautical miles. They are statutory bodies of local government set up under the Sea Fisheries Regulation Act 1966.
They manage the coastal fisheries by means of local byelaws which they are empowered to make—subject, of course, to ministerial confirmation. Their powers include regulating the method of fishing, restricting the taking of fish from specific areas or at specific times of the year, and setting minimum landing sizes and protecting breeding shellfish. Sea fisheries committees are responsible for enforcing their own byelaws.
The South Wales sea fisheries committee has 20 members: 10 councillors appointed by the constituent county councils of South, West and Mid Glamorgan and Dyfed, one appointed by the National Rivers Authority and nine appointed by the Secretary of State. Ministerial appointees are chosen from a list of nominees provided by industry representative groups. The Act requires that ministerial appointees shall be
acquainted with the needs and opinions of the fishing interests of that district.1326 My Department liaises closely with both Welsh sea fisheries committees, and the committees regularly seek advice from the Department on a range of fisheries issues, including the management of cockle fisheries. However, the Department has no role in the management decision-making process or the Committees' operational activities. The liaison process includes the exchange of information. In the middle of last year, the South Wales sea fisheries committee kept the Department fully appraised of the circumstances surrounding what became known as the cockle wars at Ferryside.
There are several cockle fisheries in the west Wales area. By far the biggest is the Burry inlet fishery. Entry to the fishery is restricted to licence holders. Licences are free and anyone may apply, but the number of licences is restricted to ensure that the stock is not overfished.
The Burry inlet cockle fishery is steeped in history, as I have already outlined. In its heyday in the early 1900s, there were an estimated 250 gatherers in the Burry inlet. They were mainly women. Each gathered some 200 to 300 cwt a day, while the menfolk were at work in heavy industry locally. The women placed the loads in sacks across the backs of donkeys and sold them to the local community.
Cockles were sold either shell-on or, more usually, as boiled meats produced in local cooking plants close to the gatherers' houses. The markets at Llanelli, Swansea and Neath were famous for their produce. As I call back there fairly regularly, I can confirm that they still sell cockles at markets in Llanelli, Swansea and Neath.
In the 1920s, development took place with the introduction of the horse-drawn cart, which enabled an individual to gather as much as 10 cwt per day—a considerable growth in productivity—and to return the catch to shore. Men were now drawn into the industry to gather those enhanced loads, and production took place on more of a commercial basis.
In 1921, a minimum landing size was introduced by the South Wales sea fisheries committee to protect the breeding stock. In 1952, so many cockles were being taken that the committee was forced to set a limit to control the amount taken in any one day.
The Burry Inlet Cockle Order 1965 was established to license the fishery and limit the quantity of cockles removed according to number of licences issued and daily quota. Since then, the number of licences issued has ranged from 43 to a maximum of 67.
Cockle landings have stabilised at around 2,000 to 2,500 tonnes a year, but obviously are still subject to much natural variation. The licensing regime appointed by the committee has been aimed at ensuring maximum stability in the local industry. That has led to the most consistent cockle fishery in the United Kingdom, despite some wastage of cockles because of collection levels below theoretical maximum sustainable yield. That stability has placed the Burry inlet at a consistent third position in terms of cockle production, on a United Kingdom basis—behind the more intensive, but more variable, industries in the Wash and Thames estuaries.
The Dee and Morecambe bay fisheries have occasionally crept in at third place. In those fisheries, vessel suction dredging and mechanical harvesting using tractors have been allowed, whereas in the Burry inlet, hand gathering, using rake and sieve only, has been the order of the day. The industry today is precisely as it was 1327 in the 1700s, except that donkeys were replaced by horse and cart, which were in turn replaced by motor vehicles and trailers in 1987.
In recent years, the pace of change has increased. Since 1983, European Community legislation —or European legislation, as we now describe it—and markets have naturally become more important. The Europeans are great shellfish eaters, as the right hon. Member said. Vast quantities are consumed, especially in France, Spain and Portugal. Consequently, markets have increased and extra demand has fuelled higher prices.
At the same time, new EC directives on bathing waters, municipal waste waters, molluscan hygiene and fish hygiene have meant huge changes to waste regulatory practice, pollution control and—for gatherers and merchants—new standards governing quality control and health requirements. Those changes have lead to recent requirements for investment to meet new standards.
The benefits, however, have been top prices for quality produce and increased markets. No longer is the industry purely local in terms of gathering or selling. The licensing system has so far meant that the Burry inlet licence holders are still very much the same people and families who prosecuted the fishery tens of years ago.
I congratulate the sea fisheries committee on its good management of the Burry inlet cockle fishery over the years.
§ Mr. Denzil Daviesindicated assent.
§ Mr. RichardsI am delighted to see that the right hon. Member agrees with that remark.
The three rivers cockle fishery comprises a number of fisheries along the estuaries of the Rivers Tywi, Taff and Gwendraeth near Carmarthen in south-west Wales. It is an opportunist fishery, which occurs on average once every ten years. Consequently, the South Wales sea fisheries committee, which manages the fisheries, has not considered it necessary to introduce a licensing scheme to restrict the number of individuals who may take cockles.
Because of the opportunist nature of the fishery, local fishermen do not prosecute it regularly, and very few of them rely on it for a living. The fishery may therefore be prosecuted by any member of the public, subject to their observing the SFC byelaws, which restrict the times when cockles may be gathered, and set a minimum landing size.
Last year, however, there were signs during the winter months that a very good spat fall—that is, entry of young cockles into the fishery—had occurred during 1992. In anticipation of a good harvest, a number of local fishermen linked up with a Dutch-owned, Merseyside-based processing company which was eager to supply the Dutch market.
Once news of the extent of the fishery became common knowledge, a large number of cockle fishermen from other local cockle fisheries moved into the area. This 1328 influx of outsiders, or "offcomers", angered the Ferrysiders, who saw the fishery as "their" fishery, and a number of scuffles took place. The violence increased with the arrival of cockle gatherers from as far away as the Dee estuary in north Wales, and the police, who had been closely monitoring the situation, were called upon to deal with several serious breaches of public order. The situation improved, however, when an officer was assigned to patrol the fishery on a regular basis.
The SFC continued to enforce its byelaws and to monitor catch uptake, but it concluded that, as there was no threat to stock levels, it had no grounds for restricting access to the fishery. SFC byelaws can only be made on conservation grounds, and any breach of the peace was and is the responsibility of the local police. At the time of these disturbances, it was also reported that the Department of Social Security and the Inland Revenue had been alerted to the possibility that some of the outsiders might be in receipt of unemployment benefits.
As the Ferryside fishery thinned out, the gatherers moved to the neighbouring fisheries at Laugharne and Llanstephan, as the right hon. Gentleman mentioned. But with the onset of winter, activity decreased markedly, although some individuals continued to gather through to the spring. By this time, the South Wales committee were becoming concerned that juvenile cockles were not being allowed to mature, and the fishery was closed in April. It was partially reopened in August this year, with gathering being allowed on only two or three days a week, depending on the circumstances within each fishery.
The SFC, with its mix of local authority representatives and fishing industry nominees with their knowledge of the local industry, is, I believe, well placed to manage the fisheries within its district. It has, over many years, responded positively to changing circumstances to maintain cockle stocks at suitable levels to the benefit of the local industry.
I am confident that the committee will continue to meet its responsibilities effectively. Cockle stocks are monitored constantly and, if the committee identifies a need for any new management byelaws, I can assure the House that the Welsh Office will give them careful consideration. I shall ensure that this evening's debate is conveyed to the committee.
I listened carefully to the right hon. Gentleman, and he seemed to suggest that central Government should interfere with a local authority in the prosecution of its statutory duties. I am rather surprised by that, because I know that the right hon. Gentleman is an advocate of devolution.
§ Mr. Denzil DaviesThe SFC is not a local authority. An order has been made to regulate the fishery in the Wash and, in 1965, the Welsh Office introduced an order to regulate the Burry inlet. All I am asking is that the Welsh Office should make another order to regulate the fishery. That has nothing to do with imposing on local authorities.
§ Mr. RichardsI most grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for clarifying his position. As he knows, and as I have already said, the Welsh Office is more than ready to listen to what the SFC wants. It would be for it to decide whether it felt that new byelaws were needed.
§ Mr. Nigel Evans (Ribble Valley)In common with the right hon. Member for Llanelli (Mr. Davies), I have had the benefit of tasting those cockles. I was born in Swansea, and I regularly went to Swansea market to buy cockles, so I can speak for their high quality. Surely my hon. Friend is absolutely right. If, at any stage, the SFC felt that either the quantity or the quality of the cockles 1330 available to the local, or even the export market were being damaged, it would recommend the Welsh Office to step in immediately to regulate the industry.
§ Mr. RichardsMy hon. Friend is absolutely correct.
All three of us have expert knowledge of the local cockle industry, and we all have its interests at heart. I would not wish anything to happen that threatened employment opportunities in that industry or impaired the taste of cockles that are enjoyed by thousands of people.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Adjourned accordingly at four minutes to Eleven o'clock.