§ 3.52 p.m.
§ Lord HUGHESMy Lords, with the leave of the House I should like to repeat a Statement which is being made in another place by my honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland about the blockade of ports last week by inshore fishermen. The Statement is as follows:
"With permission, I should like to make a Statement about the blockade of ports last week by inshore fishermen.
"A blockade of ports throughout the United Kingdom organised by an action committee based in Scotland started on Monday, 31st March. The men claimed to be still worried about the arrangements relating to imports of frozen fish. In addition they were concerned about the Common Fisheries Policy of the EEC and to press their 105 view that the United Kingdom should extend her fishing limits urgently, irrespective of the outcome of the United Nations Law of the Sea Conference, if other countries in the North Atlantic Area do so. Other points concerning them were the proposed extension of the National Dock Labour Scheme and what they felt to be the inadequate coverage of the Government's temporary aid for the fishing industry.
"I had previously arranged to meet the Scottish Trawler Federation and the Scottish Fishermen's Federation, each of which had already raised these issues, and neither of which was associated with the blockade. I took the view that it was inappropriate to meet the action committee, but I had no objection to the attendance of members of the committee who were on the executive of the Scottish Fishermen's Federation, and two others who were invited as guests of the Federation. This meeting was held on 2nd April. All those who spoke, whether or not they condoned the blockade, took a virtually unanimous view on the issues which had led to it. I emphasised the value to our industry of the measures with regard to Norwegian exports of frozen fish announced by my right honourable friend on 26th March and described the Government's policy with regard to the other issues. I do not think the fishermen had properly appreciated the assurances given by my right honourable friend in the House on these issues in answer to questions following his Statement. These were incorporated in a Statement released after the meeting. With permission, I will circulate a copy in the Official Report. On the basis of this Statement, the action committee decided to terminate the blockade early on 3rd April.
"The Government cannot condone the blockade, which caused loss and inconvenience to many who were not otherwise concerned, but I must express approval of the action of the fishermen in ending it so quickly after hearing the assurances I was able to give them. These included an undertaking to reconvene a similar meeting as soon as possible after the discussions of the Council of Agricultural Ministers of 106 the EEC to which my right honourable friend referred in reply to supplementary questions on 26th March, and the relevant discussions on fisheries limits at the Law of the Sea Conference."
My Lords, that concludes the Statement.
§
Following is the Statement referred to :
I was greatly impressed with the sincerity and unanimity of the fishing industry today. As regards the chief points they raised, the Government intend to seek changes in the Common Fisheries Policy of the EEC in the light of the UN Law of the Sea Conference and the subject will be raised at the meeting of EEC Agricultural Ministers later in April.
As regards limits, in the event of unilateral action by other countries we should consider the situation urgently with a view to protecting the interests of our fishermen.
The question of imports from non-EEC countries is being studied by EEC and early progress is expected. A ban on imports would be against our worldwide trade relations, but we will keep the situation under review for evidence of dumping and we will also keep under review the economic state of the industry.
As regards subsidy for boats under 40 feet and shellfish boats I cannot make a commitment but we will review the position fairly.
As regards the dock labour scheme the Government do not envisage any extension to operations by crews of inshore fishing boats and will welcome detailed comments on this.
I undertook to discuss all the points raised by the meeting with my Ministerial colleagues and to reconvene a similar meeting, if possible on a United Kingdom basis, within about 10 days of the relevant meetings at Brussels and at the Law of the Sea Conference. On this understanding I appealed for an end to the blockade.
Lord CAMPBELL of CROYMy Lords, do the Government recognise that our fishermen's worries about the future of their industry are understandable? While it is important to revise the EEC Common Fisheries Policy by 1983, some years ahead, as was always anticipated would be necessary following the major changes expected at the Law of the Sea Conference now in session, and in particular the 200-mile economic zone, is the noble Lord aware that both the dumping of fish on our markets and the over-fishing of the seas around us are caused mainly by countries outside the EEC, such as Norway and the Soviet Union?
On the question of the extension of the Dock Labour Scheme, will the Government ensure that our inshore fishermen 107 are not forced to depend upon dockers to unload their catches and to pay them as well, as traditionally this has always been an operation which they have carried out themselves?
§ Viscount THURSOMy Lords, I thank the Minister for making this Statement and assure him that we on these Benches do not condone the action which was taken by the fishermen in blockading the ports. On the other hand, we do not condone the lack of communication which must have existed between Her Majesty's Government and the fishermen of these Islands, and we hope that now that it has been seen to what an extent the frustration felt by these fishermen reflects the lack of action on the part of the Government, Her Majesty's Government will be expeditious in carrying out the assurances which have been given here. Those assurances will hold only for a certain length of time. Action will be needed and, in particular, we are concerned about the limit on fishing boat lengths which is part of the regulations complained about by the fishermen. We are also concerned to make sure that conservation, particularly of what we regard as our own waters around these Islands, should be vigorously pursued.
§ 3.58 p.m.
§ Lord HUGHESMy Lords, I should first like to thank the noble Lord, Lord Campbell of Croy, and the noble Viscount Lord Thurso, for the way in which they have received the Statement. As regards the first point made by the noble Lord, Lord Campbell of Croy, about the fishermen's worries being understandable, I can assure the noble Lord that we do understand that they were worried, though, as the Statement indicated, my honourable friend was able to point out that some of their worries were, if not unfounded, at least premature. This may be due to the point raised by the noble Viscount, Lord Thurso, that in these matters communications have not perhaps been as good as they should have been. Some of the things about which my honourable friend was able to satisfy the fishermen had already been said by my right honourable friend, but the fishermen had not been fully apprised of what has been said. I can understand the possibility of lack of 108 communication in view of the third point made by the noble Lord, Lord Campbell of Croy. It would seem that our means of getting such information over are not as good as they might be because, in the consultative document which was issued on 21st March by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Employment, he proposed to exempt from the new extended definition of port transfer work any operations normally carried out by the crews of inshore fishing vessels. Such an explanation, together with a satisfactory definition of an inshore fishing vessel, should go very far indeed to meeting the fishermen's points.
On the matter of aid for vessels under 40 feet in length, this is being looked into at the present time. The fishermen themselves are being helpful in this matter because they have offered to accept a reduction in the subsidy for vessels between 40 and 80 feet in length in order to make money available for smaller boats. But this does not dispose of all the difficulties. For example, a daily rate might be rather difficult and could be quite inappropriate, and on top of that, many of these boats are catching shellfish, for which there has never previously been a subsidy. Nevertheless, having regard to the way in which the men themselves have made this offer, we are looking into the matter urgently.
Lord BRUCE of DONINGTONMy Lords, would my noble friend give some indication to the House as to whether the organised blockade of British ports is lawful; and if it is not lawful, would he also give some information as to what consideration Her Majesty's Government have given to this aspect of the matter?
§ Lord HUGHESMy Lords, I am not certain about the extent to which it is lawful—or whether the blockade was lawful or unlawful. At least, the courts granted interdict against the operations, so it may be that they are unlawful. But on the assumption that there was a breaking of the law, the question as to what should be done is a matter for the police and the prosecuting authorities. If I may refer to the discussions we had yesterday in relation to other undoubted law-breakers, there are occasions when it is perhaps not advisable to invoke the full rigour of the law, and I think that this 109 occasion with the fishermen is perhaps one of them.
§ Lord LEATHERLANDMy Lords, may I ask my noble friend—and I do so as one who has great admiration for the heroism of these fishermen—whether the Government would cause inquiries to be made into the not extravagant price which the fishermen obtain for their catches, and the very extravagant price which housewives have to pay to retailers?
§ Lord HUGHESYes, my Lords. It was announced at Question Time on 17th March that my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection proposed to ask the Price Commission to undertake a study of prices and margins in the distribution of fish. An announcement is to be made shortly about the detailed scope of the study.