Committee Reports > List of Committees > Joint > 1984 > Committee on the Secondary Legislation of the European Communities (4th Committee) > Report No. 08 - Implications for the Irish Fisheries Industry of accession by Spain and Portugal to the European Communities

REPORT

A. INTRODUCTION

1. The Joint Committee at its meeting on 10 October 1983, which was held in private session, considered the following motion proposed by Deputy Brendan Daly and which was passed unanimously:

“In view of the fear and anxiety that has been expressed by fishermen and the fisheries industry in general in relation to negotiations on the accession of Spain and Portugal to the European Communities, and the likely impact of Enlargement on the industry, the Joint Committee should examine the practical implications of enlargement on this sector as a matter of urgency”.

2. This Report was prepared on behalf of the Joint Committee by Deputy Joe Walsh in his capacity as Chairman of the Sub-Committee on Agricultural and Fisheries Matters. The Joint Committee is indebted to Deputy Walsh for his work.

3. The Joint Committee was assisted in its consideration of the above motion by an official of the Department of Fisheries and Forestry, Mr. Brendan Egan. The Joint Committee wishes, accordingly, to express its appreciation of the assistance given by Mr. Egan.

4. The Joint Committee was circumscribed in its consideration of certain aspects of the motion due to the limitation on information about details of accession negotiations. Nevertheless the Joint Committee feels that it would be of value to place before the Dáil and Seanad as much information as possible relating to the possible effects of enlargement on the Irish Fisheries Industry in order to assist members in their consideration of motions coming before them on prospects for the industry and, particularly, the motion seeking the approval of Dáil Éireann of the terms of accession of Spain and Portugal to the European Communities, in accordance with Article 29 of the Constitution, and legislative proposals to amend the European Communities Act, 1972 to broaden the definition of “treaties governing the European Communities” by the addition of the treaties relating to the accession of the applicant states.

B. ENLARGEMENT OF THE COMMUNITIES

5. Enlargement negotiations with Spain and Portugal have now been continuing for some seven years. While progress to date has, therefore, been self-evidently slow, the negotiations are now entering their final decisive phase. Inevitably, therefore, the issues now under discussion are those which are most difficult for individual Member States and for the applicant countries, especially Spain. The issues in question include Spanish fruit and vegetables, the dismantling of Spanish tariffs, including high industrial tariffs, olive oil, social affairs, Portuguese sugar, wine and fisheries.

6. There are in reality, two sets of negotiations — those between the existing Member States in order to arrive at common positions to put to Spain and Portugal and, secondly, the actual negotiations proper with the applicant states. The position at present is that the Community has yet to reach internal agreement on a number of key chapters, including wine, olive oil and fisheries. The Irish Presidency, in an effort to facilitate compromise and to politicise and shortcircuit the negotiations, has been putting before recent Councils a partial composite package in the hope that the obvious spread of compromise involved would be helpful to Member States in reconsidering their attitudes to sensitive issues. This approach has helped speed up the negotiations significantly, even though it has not yet been possible to get the full agreement of the ten Member States to all aspects of the package presented to them. Neither has it been possible to include wine and fisheries in the package. Work on these two issues is, however, proceeding at an intensive pace, with a view to agreement being reached on them at an early date.

7. The internal Community negotiations are now at their most difficult and delicate stage. However, it is hoped that they can be completed before the end of the year, in good time to allow for Spain and Portugal to join the Community, as envisaged on the 1st January, 1986.

C. FRAMEWORK FISHERIES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COMMUNITY AND SPAIN

8. The Hague Agreement of 1976 set down the guidelines for the Framework Fisheries Agreement between the Community and Spain. Negotiations began in late 1976 and there was strong Spanish objection to phasing out their vessels from areas where they had traditionally fished.

9. Ireland indicated that it could only agree to the establishment of an Agreement subject to the following conditions:—

(1)Spanish vessels would fish outside a “box”, no point of which would be less than 50 miles from the Irish coast.

(2)Spanish fishing rights in the Irish 12-mile zone must definitely terminate. (These rights were held by Spain in the 6-12 mile zone under the 1964 London Convention).

(3)Spanish fishing in Irish waters would be progressively reduced to a modest level.

After prolonged negotiations Spain finally accepted the above conditions and the EEC/Spain Framework Fisheries Agreement was signed on 15 April 1980 and ratified in May 1981. It is estimated that the agreement has resulted in a reduction of some 50 per cent in the Spanish fishing effort in Irish waters.

D. COMMISSION PROPOSALS FOR FISHERIES IN RELATION TO ACCESSION OF SPAIN TO EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

10. Access to Waters

(a)Inside 12-mile band: Spain is claiming rights in certain Community areas where such rights are protected by international agreements in existence before the CFP (Common Fisheries Policy), was agreed and which Spain had not renounced. The Commission view is that right of access to the 12-mile band is essentially based on recent fishing activity. (Spain has already relinquished any such rights in Irish waters).

(b)Outside 12-mile band: Access for Spain in EEC waters will be governed by the same principles and conditions which apply to the other Member States, subject to a licensing system for a transitional period to 31 December 1992.

11. Access to Resources

Community Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ): Spain will not have access to resources which are subject to TAC (Total Allowable Catch) and quota. Otherwise, Spain may fish subject to the same criteria as other Member States where availabilities allow. Spain will not be allowed to resume past activities or create new fisheries based on structurally depleted stocks. The historical basis for determining Spanish fishing will be the period immediately prior to accession.

12. External Relations

(a)Third Country Agreements: The Community will assume competence for as many such agreements as possible from the date of accession.

(b)Joint Ventures: In 1983 Spain had 106 of these involving some 200 Spanish vessels. It is estimated that these were responsible in 1982 for duty-free imports of some 180,000 tons of demersal fish. The Commission insists that this duty-free concession be withdrawn over a very short transitional period. Spain will also be required to apply the Community’s rules of origin which regard the products of such joint ventures as being of third country origin and thus subject to customs tariffs. (One such Joint Venture located in Ireland is Eiranova Fisheries Limited, Castletown Bearhaven, County Cork).

13. Marketing

(a)Producer Organisations: Pre-accession aid for the establishment of producer organisations amounting to 2.5M ECU is proposed.

(b)Prices: Guide prices and withdrawal prices are to apply from the date of accession. Reference prices are to be phased in over a short period, not exceeding 5 years.

(c)List of Species: Spain is seeking additions to the list of withdrawal species.

(d)Customs Duties: These will be eliminated on the same basis as in other sectors.

(e)Compensatory Duties: Spain will cease to apply these duties from date of accession.

(f)Quantitative Restrictions: These will be applied both by the Community and Spain during a transitional period for a list of sensitive products on the Spanish market.

14. Structures

The Commission is not satisfied that it has sufficient information available in order to assess the Spanish needs and the likely cost to the Community budget. The Commission also considers that the Spanish request for favourable treatment must be taken in the context of the application of structural measures in other areas such as the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), the European Social Fund (ESF) and the European Agricultural Guarantee and Guidance Fund (FEOGA).

E. IRISH POSITION ON FISHERIES IN RELATION TO NEGOTIATIONS ON ACCESSION OF SPAIN TO THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

15. Access to Waters

(a)This is the major Irish concern. It is accepted that the acquis communautaire will require no discrimination as between Member States and thus Spain will eventually have access to the Irish “box”. However, the accession negotiations contain many derogations from th e acquis for a transitional period and thus the Irish approach to date has been to seek a continuation of the “box” for a transitional period. The Commission would see that transitional period expiring on 31 December 1982 when the CFP is due to be re-examined but some Member States are pressing for a longer transitional period of 10 years from the date of accession (presumed, at present, to be 1 January 1986).

(b)It is important to note that all Member states (excluding Italy and Greece) fish within the Irish “box”.

(c)The Irish case for the retention of the “box” is based on Article 4.1 Regulation (EEC) No. 170/83¹ which states, inter alia:

“The volume of the catches available to the Community … shall be distributed between the Member States in a manner which assures each Member State relative stability of fishing activities for each of the stocks considered”.

Given the known interest of Spain in fishing off the west and south-west coasts of this country, it is quite clear that free access for Spanish vessels inside the “box” would obviously affect the relative stability of all who currently fish inside that area.

16. Access to Resources

It is accepted that Spain will have access to Community resources to the level enjoyed under the Framework Fisheries Agreement (mainly hake, monkfish and megrim). The problems really arise in regard to those stocks not subject to TAC and quota. The solution will depend on whatever conclusions are arrived at in regard to access to waters.

17. External Relations

Ireland’s main concern here will be to ensure that Spanish agreements with third countries do not provide an opportunity for cheap fish imports into the Community.

18. Marketing

The benefits to Ireland of the opening up of the Spanish market remains questionable given the distance of Ireland from that market and the related heavy transport costs which seriously affect competitiveness.

19. Structures

The sheer size of the Spanish fleet is going to put a great strain on Community resources in this area and Ireland must ensure that the sector is sufficiently funded following accession to meet the inevitable increasing demands.

F. VIEWS OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE

20. Spanish access to Community waters and fisheries resources is without doubt the most difficult problem to be dealt with in Enlargement negotiations. Spain is requesting equality of access and exploitation in Community fishing grounds and considers that its fishing rights should be based on the situation at 31 December 1976, before the exclusive Community fishing zone was extended to 200 miles.

The extension to 200 miles and the difficulties of access to which it gave rise also for the Community fleet have set up a new balance in Community waters which is politically difficult to overturn.

21. In addition to the problem of access, various features of the fisheries sector in Spain indicate that integration will be difficult.

The Joint Committee identifies the major problem associated with Spanish accession from the point of view of the Irish fishing industry as the size of the Spanish fleet and the dominant role fish plays in the Spanish economy.

Spain is a major producer and consumer of fish. Some statistics may serve to put the Joint Committee’s contention in focus:

(i)The Spaniards have a fishing fleet of 17,500 vessels representing 750,000 gross registered tons. The equivalent Irish figures are 1,600 vessels and 36,000 tons respectively. The Spanish fleet represents 70 per cent of the Community fleet at the moment.

(ii)Spain has the largest per capita fish consumption in Europe — 40 lbs. annually as against 12 lbs., in Ireland.

(iii)Total fish landings in Spain for 1983 were 1.1m tons as against Irish landings of 200,000 tons.

(iv)Spain imports about 270,000 tons of fish a year and exports about 200,000 tons.

(v)The Spanish home consumption of fish is in the region of 1.2m tons a year. (All of this would not be for human consumption but most of it would).

22. Another area concerning the fisheries negotiations which the Joint Committee would like to direct its attention to is Third Country Agreements. Spain has many third country agreements because of their need for fishing opportunities. They have about 20 international agreements along the west coast of Africa, Canada and the USA.

They have about 106 joint ventures whereby they would import up to 200,000 tons of white fish from those joint ventures alone — the equivalent of our total catch so that’s an aspect that has to be carefully considered in accession negotiations because these agreements and joint ventures normally carry with them concessions with regard to duty free entry.

23. While the Spaniards also have a marketing problem with fish on account of their imports (although, in general, Spanish prices are good) their biggest problem seems to be in the area of structures. They will need huge injections of capital for modernising their ageing fleet and to get rid of obsolete vessels and overcapacity. This, in the Joint Committee’s view, could weigh heavily on Community resources to the detriment of this country’s economic development under the CFP and, indeed, other Community structural funds.

24. Fishing in Spain is largely concentrated in regions with political, economic or social problems, i.e. its north-west coast. There is an imbalance between the size of the Spanish fleet (17,500 vessels with 110,000 fishermen) and the fishing zones open to it, resulting mainly from the extension of the exclusive Community fishing zones to 200 miles. Because of the unfavourable stock situation in Community waters, this imbalance is comparable to that affecting the Community, although it is more marked; Spain’s entry to the Community will, therefore, greatly aggravate this problem and make it necessary to introduce costly major restructuring measures.

25. Ireland is dealing from a position of strength and it is essential, in the Joint Committee’s view, that a hard line be adopted in the fisheries chapter of the Spanish accession negotiations. The consistently high number of breaches of our fishing laws by Spanish vessels in our waters is an ongoing reminder of their continuing interest. While, in the final analysis, access to resources will determine the volume of the Spanish fishing efforts, a limitation on her access to waters by the operation of a “box”, albeit on a transitional basis, will be of considerable help in controlling and monitoring such effort. However, the major problem of access conditions to be applied after the transitional period remains and this matter must be addressed and resolved within the accession negotiations.

It is of the utmost importance that the best interests of Irish fishermen be protected in the fisheries chapter of negotiations and that the particular requirements of the Irish fisheries industry in the Enlargement context be forcefully presented.

26. While the Joint Committee is mindful of the obligation to be good Europeans it must be recognised, however, that there are limits beyond which this country cannot go in order to resolve the fisheries problem thrown up by the accession negotiations for the sake of an enlarged Europe which is being sought eagerly by other Member States for differing reasons.

G. CONCLUSION

27. The development of the Irish fisheries industry under the Common Fisheries Policy is of crucial interest to the Irish economy. This country must respond vigorously to the bracing challenge of the new economic order confronting us. Our traditional industrial base is being severely weathered by corrosive capital intensive, high technology competition. However, in the area of fisheries, we have a very valuable natural resource, in good supply, that we must develop and exploit. Downstream fisheries industries must be developed and extended. The whole fisheries industry must be injected with more capital and participants in the industry must be trained to the highest standards possible. To meet the challenge facing our fisheries industry it is not just enough, in the Joint Committee’s view, to nurture a sense of grievance or cultivate a begrudging attitude toward competition. Irish fishermen must be up front, well trained and properly motivated with the back-up of a modern fleet. The Government has a very important role to play in relation to the protection of our fisheries interests at domestic and Community level. Thereafter it is up to the fishermen themselves to reap the rich maritime harvest in the interest of the whole economy. The Joint Committee would like to draw particular attention in this connection to the SDC Report on the Sea Fishing and Aquaculture Industry.¹ The Report deals constructively with the problems of the industry and identifies the opportunities to develop the full economic potential of the sea-fishing sector.

28. The application by Portugal for membership of the European Communities is being negotiated simultaneously with that of Spain. However, Portugal’s application is not of major concern to the Irish fisheries industry as Portugal has no historic fishing presence in Irish waters. The only remaining issue to be resolved in connection with the accession of Portugal to the Communities is sardine fishing and that poses no problem for this country. There is, nevertheless, a strong parrallelism in the negotiation position on both applicant States and thus it has been necessary to invoke the Irish “box” and limitations on access to resources for Portugal identical with those set out in respect of Spain. Ireland’s concern in regard to Spain in the areas of external relations, structures and marketing also apply to Portugal, although to a lesser extent.

29. The concept of the “box” is designed to fix for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks occurring in the Community’s fishing zone, TACs the share of these catches available to the Community, the allocation of that share between the Member States and the conditions under which the TACs may be fished.

Appendix 2 to the Report sets out the Community “box” arrangement around this country’s coasts.

30. In view of the far reaching implications for the Irish fisheries industry of Enlargement, particularly the accession of Spain, the Joint Committee specifically requests a de bate in the Dáil and Seanad on this matter at the earliest opportunity.

GERARD COLLINS, T.D.

Chairman of the Joint Committee.

31 October, 1984.

¹ L24 Vol. 26, 27 January 1983.

¹ Report and Recommendations on the Sea-Fishing and Aquaculture Industry — SDC Report 3.