NORTHERN IRELAND FORUM

FOR

POLITICAL DIALOGUE

_____________________

REVIEW OF FISHERIES ISSUES

IN

NORTHERN IRELAND

by

STANDING COMMITTEE 'D'

(AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES ISSUES)

November 1996

CR4REVIEW OF FISHERIES ISSUES

IN

NORTHERN IRELAND

PAGE

1. INTRODUCTION 1

2. BACKGROUND 3

3. PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED 6

4. REVIEW OF EVIDENCE 18

5. RECOMMENDATIONS 19

APPENDIX A - MEMBERSHIP OF STANDING COMMITTEE D

(AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES ISSUES)

APPENDIX B - MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS

STANDING COMMITTEE D

(AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES ISSUES)

APPENDIX C - ORAL AND WRITTEN EVIDENCEREVIEW OF FISHERIES ISSUES

IN

NORTHERN IRELAND

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 At the last plenary meeting of the Forum before the Summer Recess,

held on Friday 26 July 1996, it was agreed, inter alia, that a Committee

be set up with the following terms of reference:

"to examine the problems being faced by farmers and fisheries and

report to the Forum by 31 December 1996"

1.2 During the Summer Recess, advertisements seeking written

submissions from interested groups and individuals were placed in the

Northern Ireland morning and evening newspapers.

1.3 The Forum reconvened after the Summer Recess on Friday

6 September 1996 and on Thursday 12 September, the first meeting of

the Agriculture and Fisheries Committee was held at which

Mr David Campbell was elected Chairman. Details of the membership

of the Committee are set out in Appendix A.

1.4 The written evidence available was reviewed at this meeting and it was

agreed that it was important for the Committee to address Fisheries

issues in Northern Ireland at the earliest opportunity.

11.5 Accordingly, the Committee commenced work on this topic in early

October, taking oral evidence from representatives of the Fisheries

Industry and from the Fisheries Secretary of the Department of

Agriculture for Northern Ireland.

1.6 In view of the imminent meetings of the Fisheries Council in Brussels

in early December, when the quotas for 1997 will be decided, the

Committee undertook to complete its report on this topic and to present

it to the Forum in sufficient time to permit its recommendations to

influence EU consideration.

1.7 The Committee express its gratitude to all those who participated with

it in the formulation of this report. In view of the timescale for the

completion of the report, it has not been possible to include the

corrected form of the Minutes of Evidence at Appendix C.

22. BACKGROUND

2.1 General

2.1.1 The Northern Ireland Fishing Fleet, which is regarded as an inshore

fleet, depends mainly on fishing opportunities in the Irish Sea and North

Channel and is the main United Kingdom fishing interest in the Irish

Sea.

The value of sea fish landings at Northern Ireland ports in 1995 was

£16,239,222, a decrease of £1,770,238 or 10% on the previous years

figures.

2.1.2 Volume of landings in 1995 decreased from 20,880 tonnes to 20,081

tonnes, or 4%, compared with 1994. The main species landed in order

of importance are Nephrops (Prawns), Cod, Hake and Whiting.

2.1.3 In the course of 1995, local vessels also landed 5,993 tonnes of fish

valued at £5,044,789 outside Northern Ireland, making a total quantity

of 25,891 tonnes and a value of £21,085,528 of fish landed by

Northern Ireland Vessels in all countries. This represents 4% of the

total landings of the UK fleet.

2.1.4 The three main fishing ports in Northern Ireland are Ardglass, Kilkeel

and Portavogie with other smaller ports around the coastline of

Counties Down, Antrim and Londonderry.

32.1.5 The Fishing Industry in 1995 provided 1160 jobs in this area of

catching fish and a further 1280 in fish processing. In addition there

are others employed in chandlery, boat repair, and marketing etc.

These jobs are mainly based in Ardglass, Kilkeel, Portavogie and

Annalong where they are an important source of employment in an area

of high unemployment.

2.1.6 In the fish processing sector, there are 44 businesses the majority of

which are small businesses with a turnover of between £500,000 and

£1m. Many of these are traditional family firms, breading scampi,

filleting whitefish or processing prawntails. Northern Ireland accounts

for 40% of the UK scampi market. Some 20% of the prawn catch is

consumed locally as fresh fish, a further 60% is exported to the UK,

with the balance going elsewhere.

2.1.7 In 1995, there were 190 fishing vessels over 10m in length compared

to 256 such vessels in 1992, a decrease of 26%. Of these 190 vessels,

121 over 25 years of age, and only 2 are less than 4 years old.

2.2 Common Fisheries Policy

2.2.1 The Common Fisheries Policy is a European Union policy with

common rules throughout EU member countries covering all aspects of

the fishing industry. Legally, the EU involvement in fisheries is based

in Articles 38 and 39 of the Treaty of Rome, ratified by all EU

Governments. These Articles set out the various aims and methods for

organising agricultural policy, including fisheries. As a result,

Governments transferred to the Community the power to determine

4measures for the fishing industry although it was not until 1983 that the

Common Fisheries Policy was introduced. The Single European Act of

1986 underlined the EU's role, which included fisheries.

2.2.2 It should be noted it is the intention of the EU that the common

fisheries policy should prepare the way for the post-2002 period which

will be characterised in principle by equal access for all Member States'

fishermen to all Community Waters.

2.3 Problems identified by the Northern Ireland Fishing Industry

2.3.1 In the course of oral evidence sessions with representatives of the

Producers Organisations in Northern Ireland, a number of problem

areas were identified which were discussed fully not only with the

Producers, but also with the Department of Agriculture's Fisheries

Secretary. These problem areas are addressed later in this Report.

53. PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED

3.1 In the course of the Committee's examination of Fisheries issues, a

number of problem areas and issues were identified. These are

addressed in the following paragraphs.

The Hague Preference

3.2 In the 1970s, when the common fisheries policy was being devised,

there was an effort made to protect the interests of fishery dependent

communities eg Northern Ireland, the Republic of Ireland and northern

parts of the UK among others. The Hague Preference resulted in 1976.

It was planned that certain areas would be guaranteed a certain share of

quota if total allowable catches and quotas fell to very low levels.

3.3 The agreement reached was that the Republic of Ireland would be

guaranteed twice the catch it was then taking between 1974 and 1976.

Northern Ireland was guaranteed the size of the catch being made

during the same period.

3.4 However, since 1989, catches and quotas have been set at a low level,

and both the UK and the Republic of Ireland have invoked the Hague

Preference. Up to 1993, in general the United Kingdom was a net

gainer, while Northern Ireland, in particular was a net loser from the

process. The Republic of Ireland has always been a net gainer and this

has caused great frustration among Northern Ireland fishermen.

63.5 In the course of his oral evidence to the Committee, Mr James of the

Northern Ireland Fish Producers Organisation explained that the Hague

Preference is a permanent feature of the common fisheries policy and

that it deprives Member States of the EU of fish which are rightfully

theirs, allowing the Republic of Ireland, alone in the European Union to

expand its fishing fleet whilst every other fleet has been cut. The

reason the Republic of Ireland was given the benefit of the Hague

Preference was to enable it to develop its fleet, the development plan

for this project to run until 1979. Some 17 years after the expiration of

this deadline, the Irish Fleet still benefits from the Hague Preference.

The Republic of Ireland Fleet has been permitted to grow, whilst the

fleets of all other Member States have been reduced. Mr James

explained that his organisation had attempted to obtain a copy of the

Hague Preference from the EU, but that, as it is a Secret document, the

request had been refused.

3.6 Mr James pointed out that the Northern Ireland Fish Producers

Organisation had therefore brought a legal challenge against the Hague

Preference, the High Court of Northern Ireland having referred the

issue to the European Court of Justice for final determination.

3.7 Mr Lavery, the Fisheries Secretary of the Department of Agriculture

pointed out that the Hague Preference is of benefit to the United

Kingdom as a whole. He explained that there is no flexibility in the

Hague Preference, and that the United Kingdom Government

recognises that it works very much to the disadvantage of Northern

Ireland. Each December, he said, international quota savings are used

7to attempt to offset this disadvantage, these swaps taking place usually

with the Republic of Ireland.

The Lasen Report

3.8 Quotas were set in 1983 by the EU and were the first attempt to

manage fisheries. To reinforce quotas, a mechanism was introduced to

limit the size of the fishing fleets, and this was called a "multi-annual

guidance programme" or MAGP. Several MAGPs have been

introduced over the years. MAGP 3 which will end on 31 December

1996, contained a number of objectives, among which was to reduce

the UK fleet by 20%, while the Republic of Ireland fleet was permitted

to grow by 2%. The Northern Ireland fleet reduction through MAGP

3, as outlined by Mr James of the Northern Ireland Fish Producers

Organisation, is to date, 36% by vessel number, 40% by power and

43% by tonnage. Mr James stressed that the Northern Ireland fleet has

shrunk to facilitate the Republic of Ireland fleet which has remained

static.

3.9 In May 1996 at the instigation of the EU, a group of scientists under

the chairmanship of the Danish Dr Lasen published a report on the level

of European fish stocks and the consequent fleet size. There was no

Northern Ireland representation on this scientific committee, nor did

there appear to be anyone on the committee with an in-depth

knowledge of the Irish Sea fisheries. This Committee has concluded

that a 40% cut in the Irish Sea fleet was needed. The Lasen Report's

justification for such a swingeing cut was the need for a 40% cut in

nephrops fishing to sustain stocks in the Irish Sea. Mr James of the

8Northern Ireland Fish Producers Organisation, Mr McCulla of the

Anglo-North Irish Fish Producers Organisation, and the Fisheries

Secretary of the Department of Agriculture for Northern Ireland all

share the same view, viz that the conclusions contained in the Lasen

Report are fatally flawed. The use of prawns as an indicator stock is

highly questionable because of the difficulty in age identification, and

because Irish Sea nephrops are a naturally smaller form of the species.

Secondly, in the words of the Fisheries Secretary of the Department of

Agriculture, Mr Lavery

"there is no indication that I have been able to come up with,

from our own scientists, or any scientist at United Kingdom level,

that stocks in the Irish Sea require this degree of reduction, either

in mortality or in the fleet that is chasing the stocks."

3.10 Talks are now in place regarding MAGP 4 and the EU have identified a

further cut of 40% in the Irish Sea, a cut which in the view of the

Northern Ireland Fish Producers Organisation would lead to the

collapse of the fishing industry in Northern Ireland.

3.11 It is noteworthy that recently in Luxembourg, the EU presidency drew

the conclusion that all Member States regarded the Lasen proposals for

reduction much too large and unrealistic given the effects of the fleet

cuts and the economic and social problems which would occur as a

result.

Technical Conservation Measures

93.12 In his evidence to the Committee on this topic, the Fisheries Secretary

of the Department of Agriculture explained that in June of 1996 the EU

announced proposals covering the number of nets which could be

carried by a fishing boat, the mesh sizes of the nets, and the minimum

landing size of the fish caught. Mr Lavery stressed that the problem

with these proposals is that they were not designed for the Irish Sea.

Mr Lavery said "if account is not taken of our fisheries, they will cease

to be viable - it is as simple as that. So we are arguing for derogations

for changes." In this connection it is worthy of note that NI fishermen

are concerned that their voice is not being properly heard in Brussels.

Indeed Mr McCulla of the Anglo-North Irish Fish Producers

Organisation told the Committee of a MAFF scientist going to Brussels

to negotiate for the UK, including of course Northern Ireland, who was

heard to say that he viewed "the Irish Sea as a backwater"!

3.13 The Irish Sea prawn is a small prawn which does not grow as large as

those elsewhere. These Irish Sea prawns are being cropped

sustainably in the eyes of DANI scientists. The proposed increase in

minimum landing size for prawns could lead to a loss of 60% - at

present the prawn catch amounts to £9m per annum, for which

Northern Ireland has the largest processing facility in the world.

Should the proposed minimum landing size be introduced, there will be

no prawn tails landed in Northern Ireland. It follows that there will be

no scampi, and similarly no further need for the processing and

production factories in County Down, putting approximately 1,300

people (over one-half of the fishing industry in the area) out of work, in

an area of high unemployment. In this connection, the Committee

noted that the UK Government is pressing for a ruling which would

10permit Northern Ireland fishermen to take small prawns of

approximately 70mm from the Irish Sea.

3.14 With regard to mesh sizes, while no change in the prawn mesh size is

proposed, whitefish may be increased from 80mm to 120mm. As the

Irish Sea is a mixed fishery with whiting, hake and a variety of other

fish involved, such an increase would make catches so small as to be

insignificant.

Flagship Technology (Quota Hoppers)

3.15 The problem of "flagships" was identified in the course of the oral

evidence session with Mr James of the Northern Ireland Fish

Producers Organisation. Mr James explained that where a company is

registered in the UK, the company, which may be Dutch or Spanish

etc, owns the boat. Mr James pointed out that the flagship problem

has reached the stage where 20% of the UK fleet are flagships, ie boats

which are in foreign ownership, which are catching up to 40% of the

most significant UK quotas - eg hake, sole and plaice. Mr James

stressed that the UK quota is supposed to be a national asset - "it is no

longer a national asset where flagships can prosecute it."

Herring

3.16 Attention was drawn to the super abundance of herring in the Irish Sea,

and to the fact that Northern Ireland fishermen are not permitted freely

to catch them because of archaic closed areas and closed seasons

11which were introduced in the 1970s when the herring fisheries were in

crisis. It was explained that there is scientific evidence that the herring

fisheries in the Irish Sea have recovered to the point where the fish are

dying of old age and the stock is therefore in danger of becoming

unhealthy.

Sea Fish Industry Authority

3.17 The Sea Fish Industry Authority is a body set up by Government to

foster the fishing industry and to look after marketing issues. In the

past, the Authority had an office in Bangor, Co Down, but because of

contraction it was closed. The Authority is now based in Edinburgh.

Mr James of the Northern Ireland Fish Producers Association pointed

out that many of the statistics produced by the Authority ignore

Northern Ireland.

3.18 It is understood that a new grant and loan scheme for fishing vessels

has been introduced by the Government and that this scheme will be

administered by the Sea Fish Industry Authority. In addition, the

Authority is understood to be responsible for additional work involving

the surveying of boats.

Northern Ireland Fishery Harbour Authority

3.19 The Northern Ireland Fishery Harbour Authority was formed on

16 April 1973, when control of the harbours at Ardglass, Kilkeel and

Portavogie passed to the Authority. The Authority consists of a

Chairman and between 4 and 8 members, appointments being made by

12the Agriculture Minister who normally seeks nominations from the

representative organisations of the industry.

3.20 The main objectives of the Authority are:

- to improve, manage and maintain the harbours;

- to operate such facilities as may be provided at the harbours;

- to dredge and maintain the entrances and channels to the harbours;

- with required consent, to construct, alter or extend any tidal

works;

- to lease or dispose of land, subject to the approval of DANI;

- to make bye-laws to control the day-to-day running of the

harbours and their functions;

- to operate an approved 'Code of Procedure' within the Authority.

3.21 From the inception of the Authority 23 years ago, Harbour Dues which

are higher than ROI and among the top three in the UK have remained

at £50 per vessel per annum, Landing Dues stand at 2% on the gross

value of the catch and Buyers' Dues at ½% on purchases. In the

financial year ended 31 March 1996, the operating income of the

Authority was £647,822 made up of Landing/Market Dues of

£426,106, Harbour Dues of £12,033, Ice Sales of £160,455, Slipways

of £47,845 and other sundries of £1,383.

3.22 Since 1980, the Authority has undertaken a number of capital work

projects at the three harbours at a total cost of £13.8m of which the

13Authority has contributed £2.2m of its own funds. The last 5 projects,

undertaken at a cost of £1.5m were required as a result of EU

directives. The result of this capital investment is that the Authority

has had to borrow from the Banks and is now paying interest of

£26,000 per year. As a result, the Board of the Authority is drawing up

a plan for capital and minor works over the coming 4-year period - a

plan which if approved will be forwarded to DANI.

3.23 Agreed capital projects are at present financed by DANI grant of 80%,

the Authority meeting the remaining 20% from income derived from

Landing Dues, ice sales and rent. The Authority believes that it will be

necessary, because of the current state of its finances, to increase

Landing and Buyers' Dues in all three ports. The Producers

Organisations have already indicated that the proposed increase would

be unacceptable because they believe that they do not have the

necessary and proper facilities in the harbours.

3.24 In the course of questioning, the representatives of the Authority and

the Fisheries Secretary of the Department were questioned regarding

the possibility of closing one of the three fishing fleet harbours in order

to balance the Authority's books. In response it was indicated that it

was the Authority's policy to retain employment and vessels at all three

ports. a view shared by DANI.

3.25 Members of the Committee raised specific problems in each of the

three ports - eg harbour access at Kilkeel, the outer storm-damaged

breakwater at Ardglass, the slipway and ice-making facilities at

14Portavogie. It was made clear by the Authority that no capital funds

are presently available to tackle these jobs.

Diversification

3.26 It was noted in the course of the evidence sessions that resources are

available under the Sub-Programme for Agriculture Fisheries and Rural

Development, part of the Structural Funds, for diversification for

fishing boats etc. However it became clear that as the Irish Sea is a

confined area, and as the fleet is of an inshore nature, there is very little

room for diversification.

Recruitment

3.27 Fishing is not an attractive industry for young people, particularly those

leaving school. Traditionally, son has followed father into the industry

- a trend that is no longer true - and unless new blood comes into the

industry it will in time die.

3.28 The fishing industry is now regulated totally by licences, the value of

which have increased to the point where it is impossible for a young

person on the deck of a boat to aspire to ownership. In the course of

questioning, Mr McCulla of Anglo-North Irish Fish Producers

Organisation agreed that a grant aid scheme to assist young men into

15the industry should be helpful - indeed he indicated that such a scheme

had been suggested to the European Community task force - without

any response.

Health and Safety

3.29 The Committee was surprised to learn that although grant aid is

available to assist in meeting the cost of upgrading conditions to meet

health and safety standards, the level of aid can change and applicants

are not guaranteed access to the scheme because of limited resources

which are available only to 1999.

3.30 Those men who are employed in the fishing industry are without doubt

engaged in a most dangerous profession. It is the view of the

Committee that it is therefore essential that resources are freely

available to ensure that required health and safety standards are

provided and maintained.

Regionalisation

3.31 The Fisheries Secretary of the Department of Agriculture was asked if

the Department had considered the possible application of a regional

policy with regard to the fishing industry. He explained that the United

Kingdom has promoted at Brussels the idea of regional committees

16which would enable fishermen to be consulted more directly on stocks

of fish. He stressed that giving such a committee a formal power to

set quotas and total allowable catches would require a major re-write of

the common fishery policy. However the idea is included in a recent

review of the common fisheries policy which was independently

conducted within the UK.

Job Seekers Allowance

3.32 The new Job Seekers Allowance (the replacement for Unemployment

Benefit) was identified by Mr James of the Northern Ireland Fish

Producers Organisation as having the potential to provide major

difficulties for fishermen. He pointed to the administrative

requirements of applications for the allowance and stressed that in the

event of bad weather, the whole fishing fleet would be seeking

assistance, and that in these circumstances, the Government

administration of the new Scheme would be unable to cope. The

outcome of this situation - delay in payments - would, it was explained,

hit fishermen and their families very hard.

174. REVIEW OF EVIDENCE

4.1 The Committee, having reviewed all the evidence placed before it,

wishes to express its respect for all those involved in the fishing

industry. The Committee particularly admires the courage and fortitude

of the fishermen in particular who regularly put to sea, sometimes in

the most hazardous conditions. Fishermen are members of one of the

most dangerous of professions and are due the esteem of all sectors of

the community.

4.2 The Committee in addressing the various problems highlighted in the

course of its examination of fisheries issues, was conscious of the need

to ensure, inter alia, the retention in Northern Ireland of a thriving,

traditional fishing industry, the provision of safe harbours and the

encouragement of new blood into the industry. The recommendations

contained in the Report are geared to the improvement in all respects of

the conditions under which the Northern Ireland industry functions.

185. RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 The Committee recognises the unfairness of the Hague Preference with

regard to the Northern Ireland fishing industry and supports the efforts

of the Northern Ireland Fish Producers Organisation in its legal

challenge. In this connection, the Committee recommends that the EU

should fundamentally re-examine the working of the Hague Preference

with a view, inter alia, to re-setting the allocation keys, and that the UK

Government should examine the workings across the different regions

of the UK.

5.2 The Committee calls for the introduction of realistic technical

conservation measures which are tailored to the particular needs and

requirements of the Irish Sea and recommends that DANI and the UK

Government should re-double their efforts with the EU in pursuit of a

solution which recognises the unique nature of the Irish Sea fishery.

5.3 The Committee shares the views of the NI Fishing Industry and the

Department of Agriculture concerning the unrealistic scientific

conclusions of the Lasen Report and recommends that the UK

Government and the EU give serious consideration to the levels of cuts

required with the object of reaching a conclusion which is based not on

flawed reasoning, but on the level of fishing which is sustainable.

5.4 The Committee recommends that no further cuts should be made to the

Irish Sea fisheries as such action will undermine the viability of the

fishing industry in Northern Ireland.

195.5 The Committee recommends that regionalisation of the Common

Fisheries Policy should be introduced, taking into account the specific

needs and differences between Member States. The Committee further

recommends that Northern Ireland should be fully represented on

scientific committees where Northern Ireland regional waters are under

consideration.

5.6 The Committee recognises that under the Treaty of Rome, freedom of

establishment permits foreign ownership of boats, however the

Committee considers that the abuse of the UK quota by flagships is of

such magnitude as to require action to be taken. The Committee calls

on the United Kingdom Government and the European Union to take

steps to end the abuse of quotas by 'flagships'. Within the context of a

Common Fisheries Policy, the Committee recommends that preference

be given to coastal fishing communities in areas of deprivation, similar

to the operation of the Common Agriculture Policy.

5.7 The Committee calls upon the UK Government and the Manx

authorities to review the measures introduced in the 1970s to limit

fishing for herring in the Irish Sea when the herring fisheries were in

crisis, and to introduce new legislation which will permit limited fishing

(eg 2,000 tonnes per year in the Douglas Bank area east of the Isle of

Man) which would also be participant limited - the only people licensed

to catch Irish Sea herring being Northern Ireland fishermen who

traditionally fish this area.

5.8 The Committee shares the view of the Northern Ireland Fish Producers

Organisation that a Northern Ireland office of the Sea Fish Industry

20Authority should be established and recommends that the Northern

Ireland Agriculture Minister should intercede to ensure that the

Authority recognises the standing of the NI Fisheries Industry by

opening a Northern Ireland office as a matter of urgency.

5.9 While the Committee acknowledges that within the past 5 years

£560,000 has been spent on the refurbishment of fishmarkets at

Ardglass, Kilkeel and Portavogie and £838,000 on ice plants at Ardglass

and Kilkeel, it is concerned that important work which could affect the

lives of fishermen remains to be done, with little immediate prospect of

resources becoming available. The Committee therefore recommends

that the Department of Agriculture, the Fishery Harbour Authority and

the Industry should as a matter of urgency meet and conclude an

agreed methodology to ensure that resources are put in place urgently

to meet identified shortcomings including health and safety and the

viability of the industry.

5.10 The Committee recommends that the structures of the Fishery Harbour

Authority should be examined by the DANI Minister to provide for

accountability through the representation on the Authority of more

fishermen and elected local representatives.

5.11 The Committee recommends that the Authority should take every

possible step to ensure the implementation of all necessary health and

safety measures at the Harbours.

215.12 The Committee recommends that there should be regionalisation of the

Common Fisheries Policy to take into account the specific needs and

differences of different areas.

5.13 The Committee views with concern the declining number of young

people becoming fishermen, notes the rising cost of licences (due to

decommissioning) which has prevented fishermen from buying boats,

and in the light of this, recommends that the Government should

encourage young people to stay in the industry by making a Start-Up

Grant Scheme available to them.

22MB60.WM

23APPENDIX A

MEMBERSHIP OF

STANDING COMMITTEE D

(AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES ISSUES)

24MEMBERSHIP OF STANDING COMMITTEE D

(AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES ISSUES)

Ulster Unionist Party - Mr D Campbell - Chairman

Mr J Speers

Mr J Gaston

Mr J Junkin

Democratic Unionist Party - Mr D Stewart - Vice-Chairman

Mr E Poots

Mr J Shannon

Mr W Clyde

Alliance Party - Mr K McCarthy

*Mr D Ford

UK Unionist Party - *Mr E Fowler

Ulster Democratic Party - Mr J White

Progressive Unionist Party - Mr D Ervine

NI Women's Coalition - *Ms R Keenan

Labour Party - *Mr J Masson

*Attend the Committee on behalf of their Party under

Rule 14(4)(a) of the Forum Rules of Procedure

25

• Review of Fisheries Issues in Northern Ireland (introduced on 1996-11-22 00:00:00 - CREATE - e800323) [This document] [view current proposal at this moment]
  • None (introduced on 1996-11-22 00:00:00 - REPORT_PROPOSAL - e800324) [view current proposal at this moment]