Registration of Fish Buyers and Sellers and Designation of Fish Auction Sites Regulations 2005

My Lords, I am grateful to the two noble Baronesses who have contributed to this short debate. It has highlighted some important points, which I shall do my best to answer. First, it is important for the House to understand the background to the introduction of this statutory instrument. European Council Regulation 2847/93—the control regulation—sets out the detailed rules on the first sale of fish, including the provision of sales notes. The control regulation applies directly in the UK, and the regulations that we are considering make provision for its enforcement and administration. The House has great respect for the Merits Committee; I do also. Of course, we are concerned when it expresses concern about the impact of any measure. Here, it is concerned about the impact that the measure will have upon buyers of direct sale fish from smaller fishing vessels. The committee also notes that EU legislation envisages that exemptions from compliance obligations may be considered if those obligations create a disproportionate burden compared to the economic importance of the activity. That is certainly true, but such exemptions cannot be adopted at national level; they have to be agreed by the Community. It is difficult to see how that could be achieved in this case, as many other member states have routinely required sales notes in respect of landings from vessels of under 10 metres for a number of years. It would also be difficult to justify in terms of stock conservation, as it would seriously weaken the controls —not referred to in the previous two speeches—that are necessary to ensure the effective conservation of fish stocks. It has been said that under 10-metre vessels account only for 5 per cent of catches of quota stocks. That is true, but I remind the House that there are notable exceptions. They account, for instance, for over a quarter of the catch of Channel cod, a stock currently subject to stock recovery measures. As has been noted, the regulations, in line with the control regulation, provide an exemption from compliance for purchases of less than 25 kilogrammes direct from fishing vessels by individuals for personal consumption. The noble Baroness asked why that limit was not 50 kilogrammes. The proposal for a 50 kilogramme limit was reduced to 25 kilogrammes at the request of the fishing industry. Therefore, the practice of individuals wanting to buy fish directly from vessels is in no way altered, providing that it is not for onward commercial sale. I remind the House that, in November 2003, the UK received a letter starting infraction proceedings against it for shortcomings in fisheries control arrangements. The letter specifically refers to the need to ensure that independent information regarding fish landings is available from sales notes. The UK’s response refers to   the new arrangements to be introduced under the regulations which we are now considering. During recent visits to the UK, Commission inspectors asked about progress in the area, noted that the requirements were not yet in place, and were assured that that was imminent. We are aware that Commission officials are currently considering the legal arguments for taking the proceedings forward to the next stage. Noble Lords will no doubt be aware that last week France was fined a lump sum of €20 million for failing to comply with its obligations under the common fisheries policy, with a periodic penalty of almost €58   million for each subsequent six-month period over which the failure continues. Although the process of infraction against the UK has some way to go before it reaches the stage of the French case, the recent fines illustrate the levels of potential penalties for non-compliance. If it ended there, that might be one thing. However, the arguments in favour of this statutory instrument do not simply relate to legalistic questions and the risk of infraction proceedings, however serious, against this country. The requirements will bring real practical benefits in relation to the control of illegal landings of fish. As the House knows, such ““black fish”” landings threaten the long-term future of the fishing industry and are detrimental to those who operate within the law. As the Prime Minister’s Strategy Unit report on a sustainable and profitable fishing industry said:"““The current levels of non-compliance are a problem because they disrupt efforts to recover stocks, undermine trust in the system and corrupt incentives within the industry . . .  Fishermen cite the illegal landings by other fishermen as the most important reason for their own illegal actions. Such perceptions and attitudes are deeply corrosive””." The Strategy Unit goes on to recommend the introduction of a high transparency system where all catches and landings are traced through markets and processors, with enforcement focusing more on forensic accounting. The regulations provide the foundation for such an approach. As the report of our European Union Committee on European Union fisheries legislation—House of Lords Paper 24—concluded,"““it is vital that mechanisms for compliance with EU regulations are improved””." The Merits Committee and this debate have raised important points about the regulations, particularly in respect of proportionality as regards the burden placed on buyers purchasing directly from smaller boats. I recognise that that is a new requirement for such purchasers, and we have been aware of the need to minimise its impact. Registration as a buyer is a one-off process for which no charge is made, and some restaurants and pubs may even find advantage in being able to tell their clients that they are registered to buy fish fresh from the boat. As regards the practicalities, there is no reason why fishermen cannot complete the detail of sales notes for their customers, with the customer simply checking and vouching for its accuracy. In the longer term, Defra is working to develop a system which will allow for the electronic submission of sales notes, reducing costs and enabling automatic cross-checking of information from different sources. There remains the question of whether landings from boats of under 10 metres are significant enough to justify imposing the same requirements as on larger boats. The fleet of boats of under 10 metres numbers 5,000, and in some respects they are more lightly regulated than other fishing vessels. Because of that, over the past decade there has been a significant increase in the catching capability of those boats, as the Strategy Unit pointed out. Let me tell the House briefly what the position was and what it will be. At the moment for boats of over 10   metres, fishermen need to complete log sheets of catches on board and submit landing declarations to   the department. For boats of under 10 metres, fishermen have no such duties but some submit sales notes, and fisheries officers carry out sampling of merchants’ records to estimate landings for boats of under 10 metres. The new arrangements will provide, first, for independent cross-checks of over 10 metre landing information—that is crucial—secondly, a new duty on buyers purchasing directly from fishermen to provide sales notes and, thirdly, better information about under 10 metre landings. The noble Baroness, Lady Byford, asked about the submission of sales notes within 28 days. Section 5(5)(b) of the regulations, to which she drew the attention of the House, relates not to sales notes, but to records kept by buyers, which fisheries departments may ask to see. She also asked what the department would do with sales notes. They are recorded in fishing databases within two years and we hope to have an automatic cross-checking of information. She asked how the regulations would impinge on fishermen who sold their catches from stalls. The answer is that fishermen selling their own catches on their own stalls to members of the public for personal consumption will not be affected by the regulations. The noble Baroness, Lady Miller, asked about public consultation. There were two full rounds of consultation with stakeholders before the regulations were made, including with the sea fisheries committees. The noble Baroness, Lady Byford, raised two other issues. She asked, first, about an article in the Sunday Telegraph, which was followed up in the Western Morning News. There is no plan to slap a £1,000 charge on inshore fishermen or anyone else. Frankly, many misleading reports have been published in the press about that and I welcome the opportunity that she has given me to set the record straight. A report published last year on marine fisheries and environmental enforcement, the Bradley review, suggested a £1,000 charge on inshore fishermen and the Prime Minister’s Strategy Unit report, to which I have referred, published last year, recommended charging the industry more generally. In our response, Securing the Benefits, we recognised that arrangements for recovering government costs exist in many areas and, in principle, that that should be the case for fisheries. However, we recognise that there are complex questions to consider, including the impact on competitiveness. For that reason, charging would be considered only alongside the steps that were set out in Securing the Benefits to make the sector more sustainable and profitable. We are not planning to impose, at this stage, a charge of £1,000, or any other sum. The noble Baroness also asked me about the European Union Committee report of 11 July. We are, indeed, giving priority during our presidency to improving the decision-making process for fisheries management—for example, in relation to the decisions currently taken, as the noble Baroness knows so well, every December in the Fisheries Council. In conclusion, I know that the House shares our concern to ensure that fisheries activities are properly controlled and, particularly, that illegal fishing is prevented, because such activity threatens the long-term future of this industry and is detrimental to those who operate within the law. The regulations will make such illegal practices more difficult and will provide the ability to verify information on landings from other sources. The under 10 metre boats are an important component of our fishing fleet and EU requirements in this area apply to them directly. As I have said, the UK cannot unilaterally exempt those vessels from the new requirements, so I do not believe that the regulations, which are a central plank of our efforts to secure the sustainability and profitability of the fishing industry, inappropriately implement European legislation.