14 December 2005
In a debate on the level of penalties for breaches of the Common Fisheries Policy, in the European Parliament in Strasbourg, DUP MEP Jim Allister, in a speech which aroused some controversy with Irish MEPs, sharply drew attention to Dublin's failure to properly enforce CFP restrictions, in contrast to the UK living by the rules. The debate arose from Irish MEPs, with the support of Jim Nicholson and De Brun, opposing belated attempts by Dublin to introduce legislation bringing the Republic into line with a 1999 Regulation which requires "proportional, effective and dissuasive" penalties for serious infringements of the Common Fisheries Policy.
In the course of his remarks Mr Allister said:-
"Since 1999, countries that obey the rules have been honouring Regulation 1447/1999 and imposing the "proportional, effective and dissuasive" penalties which it demands for serious infringements of the Common Fisheries Policy.
It is no surprise to find that the UK is top of the class in its dedication in meeting the Commission's demands, whereas those that talk the loudest about their commitment to the European project, like Spain and Germany, are among the main defaulters. The latest figures of how serious CFP infringements have been punished are those for 2003. They show that the average fine imposed in the UK was 77,922 EUR, whereas the EU average a mere 4664 EUR. On the serious matter of falsifying records, the UK average fine was 132056 EUR while in Germany it was a derisory 98 EUR. 98 more though than in the Republic of Ireland, who according to these official Commission figures had no penalties to declare in 2003, though it belatedly admitted there had been 103 serious infringements.
It is not without significance that only when a red-faced Dublin Government published proposals for penalties akin to those of its nearest neighbour, that at the behest of Irish MEPs this question was raised.
Let me make it clear, I see merit in equitable and proportionate penalties across the EU, but I am less than impressed by the fact that so long as the fishermen of the UK were bearing the brunt of punitive action, no-one cared. But once one of the free-wheeling States is asked to pedal, the cry is for equity, fairness and a level-playing field.
The disparity that has been at play for years has a practical detriment for complying states. Take the situation in the Irish Sea, where most of Northern Ireland's fishing effort is concentrated. There we compete with fishermen from the Republic of Ireland. Whereas Northern Ireland's fishermen for years have been subject to the draconian UK penalties to which I have referred - indeed at present some Ulster fishermen are awaiting trial at Liverpool Crown Court - yet for years their Southern counterparts have had the benefit of flaunting the rules without penalty. Think what that does to competitiveness! The Northern Ireland fisherman, every time he goes out, has to factor in the risk of savage penalty if he seriously infringes the CFP, but the Republic of Ireland fishermen, in the same waters, it seems has no such worries for, till now, his government - according to the 2003 figures - doesn't bother with penalising serious infringements.
So by all means, let us have parity of treatment but let us understand the detriment suffered to date by those who for years have kept the rules on pain of savage punishment. How, Mr Commissioner, I ask you is that historic wrong to be righted?"
Fishing
