Fishery Limits (United Kingdom) Bill [HL]

My Lords, I support the Bill which my noble friend Lady Saltoun so elegantly moved a few moments ago. As she said, the Bill in its main thrust gives the Secretary of State the option to withdraw from the common fisheries policy by obtaining parliamentary consent to an order laid before both Houses. The failure of the common fisheries policy to preserve stocks and curb illegal fishing has done untold damage to what was once one of the most prolific fishing areas in the world, particularly the North Sea. It is right that we should now start to move in the direction of regaining control over fishing in our own coastal waters. As my noble friend said, the quota system has been a disaster. More fish are discarded dead into the sea than are landed. What an appalling waste. Such a practice was certainly illegal in Norway a few years ago and I presume that that is still the case. As regards illegal fishing, my noble friend mentioned the taking of underweight fish through using small-mesh nets. I quote a recent example off Rockall when Scottish fishery inspectors boarded 10   large Russian trawlers. Each was found to be carrying between 200 and 400 tonnes of haddock on board, whereas Brussels allows Scottish boats to catch only 562 tonnes a year. The Russians were using minute nets of only 50 millimetre mesh, allowing nothing to escape. It is not just, as my noble friend said, the Spaniards and French and possibly the Belgians and the Dutch who are guilty of using smaller-mesh nets. There are others as well who are causing untold damage. Most UK fishermen, certainly in the south-west where I live, want to see a dramatic shift in the way in which fisheries are managed, balancing the needs of the environment, the regional economies, and the local communities. In the south-west we are somewhat better off than the North Sea, because the warmth of   the Gulf Stream allows a much greater variety of species. The situation is not helped by the practice of trading quotas, where sometimes a great deal of money can be involved and retired fishermen are in effect living off their quotas. That is proving highly detrimental to the smaller fishermen and is helping the larger operators to get bigger. There is also a distinct element of greed involved, and where there is greed there is also an incentive to cut corners and—to use a nautical expression—to sail close to the wind as far as regulations are concerned. I am wholly against the extension of the quota trading scheme into individual transferable quotas, which is being considered at the moment, and which would give legal entitlement to the quota and could lead to them becoming international transferable quotas, which could be sold to fishermen from other countries that are at present barred from fishing in certain of our areas, such as the North Sea. Without a doubt, the situation is a mess, and highly over-bureaucratic. I shall just give another small example of two lifetime fishermen from Scarborough who announced that they are giving up. They had been out at sea for 36 hours with only two hours’ sleep. Before coming in, they omitted to telephone to let the inspectors know that they were coming in. Under EC rules if you are carrying more than a tonne of cod you must give a telephone warning. The inspectors were waiting for them on the quay and although the catch was completely legal, they had not completed their extensive ministry paperwork and they were fined £5,000. For them, that was the end. That is a disgrace. It also has the effect—especially where smaller, local communities are concerned—of dissuading any youngster who might be attracted to going into the fishing business from doing so. That is another great problem from all this mess and over-bureaucracy; younger people are simply not looking to go into the fishing industry. That is a great mistake. Something must be done if our local fishing communities are not to become merely fishing theme parks so that tourists can go and see what the fishing industry was once like. That is beginning to happen more and more to offset local economic decline. The noble Lord, Lord Stoddart of Swindon, was quite right just now in saying that my noble friend’s Bill is well timed in view of the recent rejection of the EU constitution by France and Holland, which has thrown things into confusion. As we all know, confusion can lead to unexpected events. I have heard talk among several of my friends in Europe recently that Germany might seize the opportunity to withdraw from the euro. We cannot tell what will happen, and for that reason it is right that we should put down a marker, which this Bill does, and I support it.