Hansard

The minister asks which other countries have mixed fisheries. The answer is easy: Iceland, the Faroes and Norway all have mixed fisheries and all handle their fisheries management infinitely more successfully than we do in the European Union.

It would be churlish to deny that during 2006 some Scots fishermen have prospered. The increase in nephrops quotas secured at last year's summit has brought some stability. Given that catching effort has been cut by two thirds, and given the abundance of haddock, the hugely truncated white-fish fleet has had a reasonable year. Fishermen report plenty of fish at sea. But, as ever, the European Commission cannot leave well alone. In pursuit of the cod recovery plan—a strategy that has led to virtually no recovery in cod biomass since its introduction six years ago—the warning shots have already been fired from Brussels, as we have heard. In prospect are still further swingeing cuts in cod quotas; a possible 25 per cent cut in days at sea; and, since cod can be taken as bycatch, nephrop quotas are also under siege. A year after they were increased by 32 per cent, this December could see prawn quotas slashed by up to half that. Like the grand old Duke of York, we have marched our prawn fishermen up to the top of the hill, and now the EU ministers would like to march them straight back down again.

How can hard-pressed fishermen and processors plan for the future against that kind of rollercoaster background? It is hardly surprising that the minister himself has labelled the Commission's opening shots as "provocative and confrontational." He believed that there was a new and constructive approach among ministers to securing agreement, so it is little wonder that he described the Commission's opening stance as "profoundly disappointing." Profoundly disappointing yes, but surprising, no.

After all the years during which the minister has trekked to Brussels, the only surprise—if we consider the EU's law of diminishing returns—is that the minister is still surprised. Still, around 21 December, I have no doubt that Ross Finnie will emerge waving a bit of paper to tell us what a victory he has achieved against overwhelming odds. As we have seen before in such negotiations, the victories are about how little he has had to concede rather than about how much he has achieved.

We on this side of the chamber wish the minister every success in his efforts. Fishermen all over Scotland—not least the prawn fishermen in Pittenweem in my part of the country—will be on tenterhooks until they know what kind of future they can look forward to next year.

I do not subscribe to the view attributed to Richard Lochhead that the minister lacks backbone; what he lacks is a negotiating position. I have been attacked over the years for stating that, without a backstop negotiating stance, the minister has an impossible task at December summits. He may disagree with my view that the long-term future of the UK fishing industry lies outwith the common fisheries policy, but I cannot imagine that that stance—shared by at least one other Opposition party—has been totally unhelpful to Messrs Bradshaw and Finnie in concentrating the minds of obdurate EU ministerial colleagues in recent December summits. If the minister disagrees, perhaps he can tell us how British ministers can ever negotiate successfully with states who know that there is no ultimate sanction and who have no national interest in conceding us a solitary extra herring.

The minister has been quoted as saying, somewhat forlornly, that it is now time for the Commission to change the way in which it does business. But why should it? There is nothing that UK ministers can do to make it change its ways. However, we are where we are—at least until the next UK elections.

The minister must live up to his boast of championing the best interests of Scottish fishermen—especially those in the processing sector, some of whom are represented in the public gallery today. They are going through gruelling economic times. Because of bad weather, 20 per cent of this year's haddock quota has not been caught. Similarly, 8,000 tonnes of nephrops have not been caught. The quota arrangements do not allow things to be carried forwards, so Scottish processors face ruin and their staff face the dole because they cannot get supplies of fish species that are there in abundance.

The minister must resist any attempt to cut the nephrops quota. There should have been a 10 per cent increase in the total allowable catch of monkfish in July this year, and he must achieve that in December. Most important, he dare not come back with any further reduction in days at sea. What the minister must fight for is a period of consolidation. He must demand an end to the haemorrhaging of Scottish fishery jobs. What our fishermen and processors need is light at the end of a long tunnel of despair, and the hope that one day, with the support of all parties, they can begin the task of rebuilding that once-proud Scottish industry.

I move amendment S2M-5303.1, to leave out from "an outcome" to end and insert:

"urges the Minister for Environment and Rural Development to resist all attempts to reduce nephrops and cod quotas and to press for increased haddock and monkfish quotas to secure a sustainable future for our remaining fishermen and particularly for the beleaguered processing sector and for the coastal communities dependent on fish, but ultimately believes that the only solution for Scottish fishing is to bring back control and management of the industry to Scotland."