§ 3.0 p.m.
Lord CAMPBELL of CROYMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
The Question was as follows:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will urgently seek to reach agreement with the other countries concerned on zones in which fishing for herring would be prohibited for a period, in order to conserve stocks in the North Sea and other home waters, on the lines of the trawlfree zones recently agreed outside Norway's fishing limits.
§ The MINISTER of STATE, SCOTTISH OFFICE (Lord Hughes)My Lords, the United Kingdom has proposed and secured international agreement to a close season during the summer on certain herring spawning areas off the West Coast of Scotland, and we are consulting the industry on whether we should propose that the closure should be extended in area or time. Limitation of the total catch by means of quotas is, however, the only effective means of conservation, and the United Kingdom will press strongly for more effective protection of the stocks by this means at the next meeting of the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission.
Lord CAMPBELL of CROYMy Lords, as worldwide acceptance of a 200-mile economic zone is likely to come too late to save serious damage to our herring stocks and as unilateral action would probably lead to retaliation and chaos, should not the Government immediately try to obtain agreement with the countries concerned for further measures since the livelihood of many of our fishermen is at stake?
§ Lord HUGHESMy Lords, if this refers to the attempt to obtain further close seasons, I may say that close seasons of varying duration have been in operation in the North Sea in a number of years past but have had no marked effect on the total catch. In any event, these close seasons were in operation before the quota system came into operation. The difficulty about the close season is that the advantage of it can be lost by the much more intensive fishing that takes place after the close season comes to an end. It is an exceedingly difficult matter to deal with and can only be satisfactorily accomplished finally by co-operation between the nations concerned. No one knows better than the noble Lord, from his experience in the Scottish Office over a number of years, that this is a difficult task. We keep on trying.
§ Lord HOYMy Lords, is my noble friend aware that unilateral action will not bring a solution to this problem; that it has been tried; and that the noble Lord opposite when he was responsible had this problem confronting him for a long time, and he found no solution? If we are to get agreement on this, the one way is to go for protection of stocks 1250 in these waters as the only real way in which they can be preserved and provide a livelihood for our fishermen. Will my noble friend agree that this can only be done when the Law of the Sea Convention takes place and multilateral agreement can be reached to deal with this problem?
§ Lord HUGHESMy Lords, I am glad to be able to say that I agree with my noble friend. I should be worried if this were not to be so, because no one in the House is more knowledgeable on these matters than he is.
Lord CAMPBELL of CROYMy Lords, may I make it clear that in my supplementary question I indicated that I did not agree that unilateral action was the right answer? Would the noble Lord agree that to wait until the world conference has reached agreement on the 200-mile economic zone is too late? Norway has shown how agreement between the countries concerned (six or so of them) can be reached in the meantime.
§ Lord HUGHESYes, my Lords, but I would remind the noble Lord that I said we were consulting with the industry about its views on further area or time closures. When we have got the views of the industry we shall know better what is best for the industry in relation to the international discussions which must inevitably follow. I agree that if we cannot get some urgent action, the danger to our stocks is the greater.