Michael Clifford: EU ruling shining a light on issues in Irish fisheries

A derogation to weigh fish in factories has been withdrawn, casting a huge shadow – and potentially huge cost – on Irish fishing

The European Commission has ruled that Ireland cannot be trusted to police its fishing quotas. File picture: Julien Behal/PA Wire

In 2005, the New York Times described financial regulation in Ireland as “the wild west”. 

Today, it would appear that Brussels has a similar opinion of this country in terms of the regulation, or control, of fisheries. 

As reported in the Irish Examiner on Tuesday, the European Commission has ruled that Ireland cannot be trusted to police its fishing quotas. 

A derogation to weigh fish in factories, rather than pierside, has been withdrawn. An audit by the commission found major issues around manipulation of weighing systems and, crucially, an apparent failure of the State to police the law. The “manipulation”, if proven beyond a reasonable doubt, is a criminal offence.

Most other European countries do weigh their catches pierside, mainly because factories and facilities are located there. In this country, principally because of the size of individual operations and the location of ports, such facilities were never established. 

So, after serious lobbying, the commission granted a derogation in 2012 to weigh the fish in factories. The system by its nature would require a certain degree of trust that there wouldn’t be attempts to under-report the weight of catches.

Scope for fraud

Now, following an audit that began with complaints of alleged malpractice in Killybegs in 2018, the commission has ruled that the system allows too much scope for fraud, and the State, through its policing body, the Sea Fisheries Protection Authority (SFPA), appears disinterested in detecting the crime.

The industry vehemently disputes the inference that major players in Irish fishing have been overfishing quotas and rigging weighing systems. File picture: David A Harvey/National Geographic/Getty Images

“Although aware of these shortcomings, Ireland did not take appropriate measures to address such non-compliance,” the ruling states. 

It goes on to note: “Therefore, Ireland could not guarantee an effective control of landed quantities of catches and minimise the risk of non-compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy.

The failure to ensure appropriate weighing also puts at risk the accuracy of the data reported that are essential for control purposes and monitoring of the uptake of fishing quotas.” 

Translated, this is “null points” for law enforcement.

The removal of the derogation is a major blow to the industry. Already, Ireland’s fishers face a cut in quotas over Brexit. Now, those who earn their living on the seas will have to install expensive weighing systems at the ports where pelagic fish – mainly herring and mackerel – are landed. The new rule will not affect other European trawlers which land catches in this country.

The industry vehemently disputes the inference that major players in Irish fishing have been overfishing quotas and rigging weighing systems. John Ward, the CEO of the Irish Fish Producers Organisation (IFPO), told the Irish Examiner that over the period examined by Europe – running back to 2012 – there has been only one successful prosecution against a producer manipulating weighing systems.

The EU investigation did find that during a four-year period, 33 cases of suspected fraud in relation to fishing quotas were sent to the DPP. None of the cases were sent forward for prosecution. 

Insufficient evidence

The DPP either determined there was insufficient evidence or too much delay in bringing the cases. The EU now wants to examine each of these cases to determine why exactly none were prosecuted.

Five years ago, there was also a survey of the tanks used to store fish on trawlers. These are calculated under what is known as “ullage tables”. A number of operators were found to have misreported the size of the tanks, and by inference, under-reported the size of catches. The Irish Examiner has seen documents in which trawler operators were told by the SFPA that files would not be sent to the DPP over the matter and the value of the suspected fraud would not be calculated. Such apparent leniency, it seems, was not appreciated, as the problems persisted.

In Ireland, pierside weighing facilities were never established. File picture: John D McHugh/AFP/Getty Images

Reacting to the new ruling at the weekend, the chair of the SFPA Susan Steele pointed out where culpability lay. 

“The accurate weighing of the catches remains the responsibility of industry,” she said. 

This is true. As it is that motorists are obliged to obey the rules of the road and bankers obliged to stay within the law. It is also true that without effective policing in any sector of society, the law will not be observed.

So does the fault in fisheries lie in the effectiveness of the policing agency, the SFPA? Industry believes so. 

John Ward of the IFPO told the Irish Examiner that the allegations of malpractice and fraud has its origins in a dispute between fisheries officers on the ground and management. 

“The SFPA is dysfunctional,” he says. 

"The whole EU investigation happened because SFPA down the line made a series of allegations and said senior management was not doing anything about it. As far as we’re concerned, there was no basis for the allegations. We are the meat in the sandwich.” 

Those who earn their living on the seas will have to install expensive weighing systems at the ports where pelagic fish – mainly herring and mackerel – are landed. Picture: Damien Eagers 

That, of course, would infer there was no malpractice by the industry, that the whole thing was a ball of smoke, and that the EU was stupid enough to be drawn into an internal dispute. Few believe that to be the case.

But there is an issue within the protection authority that is rendering it ineffective. The Irish Examiner has reported on documents and protected disclosures that show fisheries officers have, over a period of years, been unhappy at the apparent lack of rigour applied by management in enforcing the law.

Industrial relations

Management at the SFPA reject this contention and ascribe much of the division within the organisation to industrial relations.

Wherever the blame lies, there is no question but the SFPA is in rag order. A report completed last year by consultants PWC concluded that “the SFPA is not working effectively and requires urgent attention. Relationships and trust have been impacted by a range of issues, including some longstanding industrial relations issues which have not been resolved... these issues are impacting on performance and the organisation is not operating as a cohesive unit.” 

The EU appears to be of a similar mind. Now, the cost will accrue. Industry, which must bear culpability for the manipulation and misreporting bears plenty of responsibility. The SFPA, unable to properly police industry, bears more. The bill is arriving in the form of the end of the derogation, an expected depletion of quotas and most likely cuts to EU-backed grant aid. It’s high time the tide was turned on this shambles.