Salmon Conservation Convention: Infringement (Hansard, 6 June 1990)

§ Lord Carmichael of Kelvingrove

My Lords, we are all aware of the great knowledge of the noble Viscount, Lord Thurso, with regard to the habits, catching, by both net and rod, and processing of salmon. Those of us who were involved in the 1985 Act—it gave me a shock to realise that it was as far back as that—realise that his knowledge of salmon was a great contribution to our proceedings in the House.

In this instance, the noble Viscount has brought to our attention an issue that is vital to Scotland, particularly the north and eastern coasts of Scotland, where it appears, according to the information that I have received from NASCO, that our seedcorn could be destroyed. I understand that illegal fishing appears to be taking place in those waters, so that within a few years serious inroads could be made into the spawning salmon coming up to the famous east coast rivers of Scotland.

1499 I have received the same information as the noble Viscount; namely, that Danish nationals are getting round the convention by flying Polish and Panamanian flags and are catching significant quantities of fish. I understand that the subject will be under discussion at the next council meeting of NASCO in Helsinki in two weeks' time.

It is important to realise that NASCO is a responsible organisation. As the Minister will know, its headquarters are in Edinburgh and its convention was signed by most countries involved—Canada, the USA, the Faroe Islands, Norway, Sweden, Iceland, Finland, the European Community and the USSR. It deals with salmon conservation and it has dealt with quotas, so we must take seriously its reports, both verbal and written, and its advice. I understand that there have been diplomatic approaches to Poland and Panama and that Iceland has protested to Poland, but I am not sure whether that was a formal complaint.

I think that Poland should be able to put an end to violations of a convention, given the position just now of Poland. It is important to Poland to be seen as a responsible country, particularly in a period in which it is concerned about help and aid, economic and otherwise, from the West. I understand that similarly America has protested to Panama, which is another of the countries whose ships' flags are being used. Again, in view of Panama's dependency on the United States, I hope that it could also take action to prevent the abuses that appear to be taking place.

But it is also the case that NASCO should protest as a group. Signatories to the convention should be able collectively to highlight violations by other countries even if those countries are not themselves signatories to the convention.

We should be grateful to the noble Viscount, Lord Thurso, for raising this matter. It is a matter about which we should be able to do something. I believe—with my limited knowledge of salmon, most of which I have obtained in this House and a great deal of it was from the noble Viscount—that it would be very short-sighted if we were not to take steps as soon as possible to do something about this illegal fishing in the North Atlantic.

§ The Minister of State, Scottish Office (Lord Sanderson of Bowden)

My Lords, first of all I should like to thank the noble Viscount for raising this matter. I shall be quite specific and rather more lengthy in my explanation of the events surrounding these unfortunate episodes. Before I do so, however, I must first thank him for his kind remarks about what the Government have done for Scottish salmon fishing. I know that he will understand that it is a difficult matter trying to deal with enforcement action regarding the Irish and drift netting off the west coast of Scotland.

Co-operation between ourselves and the Irish authorities at practical enforcement level has led to improved coverage around the United Kingdom-Irish median line. That contributed to a 1500 number of Irish vessels being detained and prosecuted by their own authorities in 1989. All I can say to the noble Viscount is that we are trying to tackle this difficult problem of illegal fishing, and the arrangements for this year will be just as tough as they were for the previous two years when we tried to tackle this issue with a great deal of determination.

On the question of the north-east drift net issue, the noble Viscount mentioned that this was a remit of the Salmon Advisory Committee. I have to say to him that it was specifically not a matter for the Salmon Advisory Committee. The question of the north-east drift nets was one thing that was not to be left to that committee but in fact was a matter for ministers. I can only say about the review that the scientific analysis is in the final stages of preparation. Ministers will then have to consider the implications and will report to both Houses as soon as possible thereafter.

Perhaps I should not say it but I know that the noble Viscount has perhaps a bee in his bonnet about the weekend close time. I respect him for that because he argued the case very well when it was discussed in your Lordships' House at the time of the implementation of the order. It is true that the levels of effort and consequent catches of salmon by traditional netting methods have reduced sharply in recent years. That is perfectly true. That is the result of private purchases of netting rights from willing sellers as well as a change in weekend close time. However, I am not persuaded that that change is undesirable in the broader public interest. That is where we differ.

First of all, higher catches are now achieved by angling, which has greater economic multiplier benefits to tourism, as the noble Viscount recognises. Secondly, salmon farming can now provide a vastly greater quantity of salmon for the table and reduced exploitation must improve access to spawning grounds. But the major issue on which I wish to report tonight is the problems in the high seas with regard to some vessels.

It might be helpful if I were to explain to your Lordships that the North Atlantic Salmon Conservation Organisation (NASCO) was set up in 1984 and that its objective is to promote the conservation, restoration, enhancement and rational management of north Atlantic salmon stocks. At present, there are nine contracting parties to NASCO covering all the "home water" coastal states for salmon throughout their range in the north Atlantic from the USA to the USSR. The European Community is a contracting party represented by the Commission, and so too, separately, is Denmark in respect of its special relationship with the Faroe Islands and Greenland.

The convention is perfectly clear on the matter of fishing for salmon on the high seas. Under Article 2(1) of the convention, fishing for Atlantic salmon throughout the convention area is prohibited outside the fisheries limits of coastal states. Moreover, within the fisheries limits of the coastal states, the contracting parties have bound themselves to prohibit any fishing for salmon, by any method, outside the 12-mile limit from the baselines from which their territorial seas are measured. There are 1501 some variations to these limits around Greenland and the Faroe Islands so as to enable the prosecution of the traditional salmon fisheries further off their coasts. But the Greenland and Faroes salmon catches are tightly regulated, as the noble Viscount will know, by quotas and set on the basis of impartial scientific advice from the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea. The quotas are supported also by a number of effort restrictions agreed in NASCO. The NASCO convention, in effect, applies the principles enshrined in United Nations treaties on the law of the sea which have consistently recognised the special position of salmon; and the rights in that regard of coastal states with home spawning rivers for the fish.

There is also Community legislation which seeks to discourage fishing for salmon in that part of the north Atlantic which lies outwith the control of the Community or its member states. In essence, it is an offence under EC Regulation 3094 of 1986 for vessels to bring into EC waters any salmon or sea trout which has been taken in the non-EEC part of the north Atlantic.

I come now to the activities of certain foreign vessels, which the noble Viscount has raised. Over the past few months or so there have been a number of disturbing reports of large scale and apparently illegal fishing activities in international waters. These waters, broadly speaking, are off the north-west coast of Norway and fishing for salmon has been by vessels registered in countries which are not contracting parties to the NASCO convention.

There has been a complex series of events and sightings of vessels. In September 1989 it was reported that heavy penalties had been imposed by the Danish authorities on the three Danish owners of vessels which had been operating under the Panamanian flag of convenience. The court was reported to have found that in all material respects the vessels were considered to be Danish with no genuine links with Panama. Penalties in excess of £2 million were imposed for their illegal salmon fishing in the north Atlantic.

In December last, officers from my department on a Scottish fisheries protection vessel made a routine inspection off the Shetlands of a long liner vessel, "Brodal", which had a large quantity of salmon on board which the skipper believed to be in the region of 30 tonnes. The skipper was a Danish national and the crew came from Bornholm: but the boat was owned and registered in Panama. The skipper claimed that the fish were caught by long line in international waters over a period from mid-October to early-December. The vessel was on its way to land the fish at Kolberg in Poland. There was no reason to doubt that the salmon had indeed been caught in international waters. Details of the incident were passed both to the Danish embassy in London and to the Commission of the European Communities, the contracting party to NASCO.

In January, the Faroese reported to NASCO the activities of the Polish registered vessel "Minna", as the noble Viscount has so accurately said, which put into Torshaven in the Faroes. The vessel had salmon on board and had been fishing in international 1502 waters well to the north of the Faroes. The skipper claimed he would return eventually to Poland.

I understand that in Denmark the police intercepted on its way to Poland a vessel which was carrying salmon. This boat—inappropriately named "Uncle Sam"—was one of those engaged in salmon fishing in international waters between Iceland and Norway. The boat came from Bornholm in Denmark but was registered in Panama. The Danish authorities are carrying out investigations into the involvement of Danish nationals. The vessel intercepted is the subject of legal proceedings in Denmark. The catch of salmon valued at about £60,000 has been confiscated. I understand that a number of legal issues—in particular the applicability of the Community and NASCO measures forbidding salmon fishing beyond 12 miles to EC nationals operating under flags of convenience and carrying salmon through the fisheries limits of member states—are currently under investigation, including references of points of law by the Danish court to the European Court of Justice at Luxembourg.

We share the concern of the noble Viscount and the noble Lord about these events. So do all the contracting parties of NASCO. We have discussed the issues with the Commission of the European Communities and have communicated all the information we have on the sighting we made. We have raised the matters bilaterally with representatives of the Danish Government and we have stayed in very close touch with the secretariat of NASCO.

It is a clear duty under the NASCO convention for contracting parties to invite the attention of any state not party to the convention to any matter relating to the activities of vessels of another state which appear to affect adversely the aims of the convention or its implementation. The Danish Government, as a contracting party, have been extremely active. The US, currently holding the presidency of NASCO, has taken a positive line in discussions with the Panamanian Government. Action has been taken too with the Polish Government and assurances have been given of their willingness to assist in preventing the undermining of the principles and practice of the NASCO convention by the use of flags of convenience.

We anticipate that the various legal proceedings and diplomatic exchanges will be fully discussed at the annual meeting of NASCO which is due to take place next week in Helsinki. Indeed, as an indication of the seriousness with which these activities are viewed a specific agenda item is to be devoted to the question of this thoroughly undesirable fishing for salmon in international waters in contravention of the international conventions on law of the sea.

I can assure the House that our firm and continued advice to the European Communities—and the line that we shall take on these worrying developments at the NASCO meeting—will be to uphold, by whatever means are practicable and appropriate, the principles of the NASCO convention.

I hope the noble Viscount will accept that these matters are being tackled vigorously by the various 1503 fisheries authorities. The Danish authorities are taking a firm line. Although the most recent prosecution must still be regarded as sub judice, the vessel in question is still impounded until the legal issues are resolved in the European Court of Justice. Our response to this problem has been to alert fishery protection officers on land and at sea to be on the look-out for suspect vessels, several of which have now been identified by name. Whenever possible, such vessels will be boarded and inspected. If evidence of illegal fishing is found the vessel will be detained and the report submitted to the prosecuting authorities.

There is a general determination to tackle this problem quickly before it becomes more serious. Some of the issues, however, are for international authorities or bodies and it may take a little time to ensure that their efforts are effective. Nonetheless, the problem is being tackled and I hope that the various points that I have been able to make will reasure the House, that the Government and all contracting parties involved in these unfortunate affairs are taking the matters extremely seriously.

House adjourned at nine minutes past midnight.