FISHING VESSELS (ACQUISITION AND IMPROVEMENT) (GRANTS) (AMENDMENT) SCHEME 1973 (Hansard, 5 February 1974)

EARL FERRERS
My Lords, I beg to move that the Fishing Vessels (Acquisition and Improvement) (Grants) (Amendment) Scheme 1973 be approved. This Order does no more than continue, for another year, the rates and conditions of grant for fishing vessels, and for improvements to them, which the industry already enjoys. These capital grants cover 30 per cent. of the cost in the case of vessels under 80 ft. in length, or 25 per cent. for longer vessels, and are administered by the White Fish Authority and the Herring Industry Board.
It might, however, be useful if I were to summarise what was announced in another place by my right honourable friend the Minister of State on December 13. The acceleration in 1973 in the rate of application for these grants has shown an encouraging determination by the industry to create a modern and efficient fleet. This means, however, that the number of approved proposals and new applications is now so great that in many cases the actual work will not be carried out for months or even years ahead. The problems this creates, not least for the forward commitment of public funds, have led my right honourable friends, after consultation with the Authority and the Board, to impose a temporary moratorium on new approvals. There is, however, an exception for any improvement which is essentially directed to the safety of the vessel or crew. This, as my right honourable friend said, is temporary. We are working out acceptable arrangements in consultation with the Authority and the Board, and will bring industry into consultation as soon as we usefully can. The powers which I invite your Lordships in this Scheme to continue for the whole of 1974 will then again be available.
I should make it clear that although a proposal to harmonise national aids of this kind throughout the E.E.C. was recently submitted by the Commission to the Council we are still some way from a decision whether there will be a ceiling, and if so at what level. My right honourable friends will be discussing the Commission's proposal with the British 741 industry before they take a position, and the European Parliament will also be giving its opinion. In the meantime it is clearly right for us, in the United Kingdom, to continue for 1974 the domestic arrangements we have had in 1973. I beg to move that this Order be now approved.

§ LORD HOY
My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for explaining this Order to us. I do not complain about the brevity of his speech although I was interested to hear him say that it might he months or even years ahead before the applications that are in now are in fact completed. This Order is to operate for 12 months. I cannot understand what is to happen after this year. I have no doubt that the noble Earl, Lord Ferrers, will be able to assure your Lordships that next year he will be moving another Order extending the Scheme for a further 12 months.
I understand that the applications in regard to these vessels this year are more than double what they were last year. I should like an assurance, and I am certain the House would, that these applications are in fact firm, and that there are not certain people who want to get in in the hope that they may have an allocation out of what is available. I believe the amount given in grants last year was some £4½ million, covering both the larger and smaller types of vessel; while the loans came to roughly £2½ million, and of course these are only applicable to the smaller vessels. Perhaps the noble Earl could tell us—and he said that they have more than doubled—whether these are hard applications. If this is so and the demand is so great, I think we should be very happy to know also when the Government propose to approve the grants.
As I understand it, the whole industry is held up at the moment, and the noble Earl must be aware that if in fact we are to have a flood of orders for vessels then this can only be met by what the shipyards can afford to take. I am sure we have all had sufficient experience to know that when there are delays of this 742 kind, and then suddenly there is a flood of approvals, the consequences industrially are not all that good. I am certain that if he inquires, the noble Earl will find that this has happened on previous occasions. If you hold up the whole industry and then suddenly approve grants and loans, while the shipyards are responsible for producing these fishing vessels unless you can put the matter through in an orderly fashion you can get into considerable difficulty. As we have found in the past, to get into this position can also be fairly costly; indeed, the cost can be much greater than was anticipated. So I would hope that before we finish this short debate—and I hope it will be short—the Minister will be a little more forthcoming about the number of applications that have been made and how the Government propose to deal with them. This will assist in ensuring that they are dealt with in a fairly orderly fashion and without causing undue disturbance at the building end.
Arising from that is the question of what we are going to do inside the European Economic Community. The Minister said a word or two about that. I do not think I exaggerate when I say "a word or two", because he was not prepared, apparently, to go much further than the few words he said this afternoon. But this is an extremely important matter to the fishing industry. At the present time we have grants at the rate of 30 per cent. and 25 per cent., depending on which section of the industry one is engaged in, while inside the European Community the grant, as I know, can vary between 15 and 30 per cent. If you are building a vessel today, it does not matter how small or large it is, it is a very costly item, and it is important for those who are going to invest their own money to know how much they will be able to secure from central Government. I do not think the Minister would demur to that. It is important therefore that they should know at the earliest possible moment our own Government's intentions, because whatever happens inside Europe it seems from the Minister's introductory statement that we are still going to have our own Scheme for a considerable time ahead.
Has the Minister any information about the industry in general? Rumour 743 has it that a fairly large and comprehensive meeting took place quite recently, attended by people influential in all sections of the industry. I do not think it is any secret to say that this was reported, if I remember correctly, by Mr. Chapman Pincher in the Daily Express. According to the report, what had been agreed was that we would be forming a European fishing pool, and it was then suggested that we might have limits of up to 200 miles. The consequences of such an arrangement, of course, can be tremendous, because the Minister and the Government are bound to know that this year we shall have to face up to the Law of the Sea Conference. If we suggest at this moment what the limits as they affect us are going to be, quite obviously there are many people in other parts of the world on whose grounds we are at present depending who are going to say, "Well, if this is good enough for them, it is good enough for us". I would have thought that the Government must have had some thoughts in this connection. I say that quite seriously; I am not disparaging them in any way; they are bound to be facing up to this situation at the present moment, because very soon the day will arrive when decisions have to be made. But when we have talk of this kind—and it seemed to be fairly substantial—we have got to face up to it. If this is what is proposed, surely it is for the Minister to tell us what is going to be the position of the British fishing industry inside this so-called agreement, because we have fairly extensive fishing waters, whereas some inside Europe have nothing to offer in return. Indeed, they would merely be agreeing with great acclamation that we should have this limit, because then our waters would be free to them.
I am not suggesting that we should be "hogging it" all the way, but I am suggesting that we must take steps to protect our own fishing grounds and our fishing rights. With the price of fish to-day to the housewife in this country somebody has got to look after the situation. One read last week forecasts of falling prices, but they are simply not borne out by the evidence. When we get fish selling at the price it is at the present moment, who would have believed a few months ago that those engaged in agriculture would be saying that people can well afford the 744 price of beef in view of the price of fish? For long enough it was the other way round. So from all points of view the matter is important. I am not objecting to the Order at all, but these are questions of considerable significance and importance to the country, to the Government and to the consuming public, as well as to the industry, and I am sure your Lordships will be very grateful if the Minister makes an attempt to reply to some of them.

EARL FERRERS
My Lords, I am very grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Hoy, for what he has said and the points that he has raised. With regard to the applications for grants which have been received, I can tell him this, that the expenditure which the White Fish Authority and so forth have been involved with has in fact increased over the last few years quite considerably. In 1970–71 it was £2.7 million. In 1971–72 it was £3–5 million and in 1972–73 it was £6 million. The Authority began the current year, 197374, with commitments, in other words approvals in respect of which no expenditure had yet been made, amounting to £5.8 million; and up to December 13 when the moratorium was imposed they had added a further £5.8 million of new commitments. In addition to these two figures, applications totalling some £5 million had been received but had not been approved when the moratorium was imposed.
The arrangements which we are in process of working out will have to settle the way in which we can allow the Authority to handle these, plus, of course, the current and future applications made after December 13. I explained—and I know the noble Lord, Lord Hoy realises—that there has been a substantial increase in applications for grant, and this has meant among other things what one might describe as a queue at the yards for building. It was considered prudent that there should be a moratorium so that the Government, with the statutory bodies and later with the industry, should work out how best these matters can be dealt with.
It is possible for applications still to be put in and to be processed, but in fact approval of them will not be given until the moratorium is lifted. I can assure the noble Lord that that will be just as soon as this matter can be worked out. When 745 he asked whether these are hard and fast applications, I am bound to tell him that to my knowledge they are; but of course one can only say that they are applications, and if the person putting in the application is not genuine but merely wishes to stake his place in the queue, I do not think that there would be any easy way of determining that.
The noble Lord also referred to the European Economic Community. There have been proposals from the E.E.C. to try to harmonise all the aids which are given. I really do not think that I can go much further than to say that we are considering the proposal which has been put forward. We are considering it with the industry and with the boards concerned, and when we have had time to come to conclusions there will be the opportunity to take this up with the Commission, and indeed the European Parliament can do so as well. I do not think that I can say more than that at the moment, because we are still at the stage of trying to consider the proposals that have been put forward and how they may affect us.

§ LORD HOY
My Lords, I am grateful for what the noble Earl has said so far. When he says, "We are consulting the industry", does he mean the whole industry: the employees as well as the employers?

EARL FERRERS
My Lords, I was referring to the industry as a whole. I should not like to state specifically what parts of it. Before the Government were to take a view with the Commission, clearly they would wish to know the views of the industry and, I would assume, of all parts of the industry.
The noble Lord also referred to the report that he had seen about the 200-mile limit that some people have suggested might emerge as a result of the Law of the Sea Conference. It is true that the British Trawler Federation have said that they would like a 200-mile limit. The Government are aware that that is their view, and they are considering the implications of it; but the Government do not necessarily go along with that view.
With regard to the Law of the Sea Conference at Caracas, a very important Conference at which both fishing limits 746 and other limits will be discussed, I would only tell the noble Lord that the Government want to see as a result of this Conference a system which will be acceptable to as many States as possible and which at the same time ensures that our own interests are protected. We believe this to be very important, and it is in that spirit that we intend to take part in the Conference. What the outcome will be, time alone will tell. But, I repeat, in our view it is going to be a very important Conference and we want to be quite certain that the outcome is as reasonably acceptable as we can make it, and certainly one that safeguards the interests of the British fishing industry.
I would say to the noble Lord, in conclusion, that I am grateful to him for what he has said. I will certainly study it with care. The British fishing industry has shown a considerable advance over the last few years, and we believe that is why opportunity has been taken to improve vessels and take advantage of the grant schemes which are operative. We hope that before long the moratorium which is applied at the moment will be lifted, and that the industry will then be able to continue to take advantage of these Schemes, as it has done in the past. My Lords, I hope that I have answered the noble Lord's questions.

§ LORD HOY
Except about prices.

EARL FERRERS
My Lords, prices are always volatile things.