(1 day, 11 hours ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, this Government’s deal with the EU allows Europe to retain around 40% of the fishing rights in our exclusive economic zone and territorial waters for a further 12 years. This undermines the substantial expansion of the private tax-paying fishing sector that should have been possible. The fishing and coastal growth fund from taxpayers’ money’ is poor compensation and unfairly distributed, particularly as regards Scotland. Can the Minister explain how this can be in tune with the Government’s pro-growth agenda?
The funding is being allocated using the Barnett formula, which is the normal mechanism used by HM Treasury to determine funding for the devolved Governments. That is the mechanism used and, while allocations are not directly linked to the size of each nation’s fishing industry—the noble Lord mentioned the Scottish fishing industry—devolved Governments have full flexibility to target this funding to best meet the needs of their coastal and fishing communities, so there is an opportunity. This is extra funding on top of other funding that has been granted, so it is providing a support to coastal and fishing communities.
Does the Minister agree that the botched Brexit deal that the Conservatives negotiated has done great damage to our coastal and fishing communities? Fish exporters have been wrapped up in red tape and penalised with extra costs for trading with our closest neighbours. To better support our communities, what steps are the Government taking to address the delays and implement the UK-EU sanitary and phytosanitary agreement as soon as possible?
The noble Baroness mentioned the Brexit deal agreed by the previous Government, which provides de facto guarantees for EU boats to UK waters beyond 2026. What we have done is to secure a deal with the EU that ensures returns for our fishing community, including scrapping red tape and restoring shellfish exports to the UK. This demonstrates that we are absolutely committed to the long-term prosperity and sustainability of our fishing industry. On the SPS agreement, I am sure the noble Baroness knows that negotiations are due to start shortly. I cannot give any further details until we move further down the line, but we absolutely want a really good deal for our country.
My Lords, I am sure the Minister would agree that there is no point investing in our fishing industry if there are no fish to catch. The sad truth is that, according to Oceana UK’s latest report, Deep Decline, over half of the UK fish stocks are being overfished, particularly the top 10 species. What plans do the Government have to ensure that fishing quotas are set on a sustainable basis, so that the stocks can recover and provide our fishermen with livelihoods not just today but in the future?
The noble Lord is absolutely right: overfishing has been a real problem and we absolutely need to ensure that it does not happen in the future and that the fishing quotas that are agreed are sustainable. In fact, they are, in theory, sustainable at the moment, but we need to get the best data we can in order to make the best decisions in the future. Clearly, we hope that working with the EU more closely will enable this.
My Lords, before Britain left the European Union, the inshore fishermen, the under-10 fishermen, were promised an increased quota of cod and other fish—before the waters warmed up and they went elsewhere. Under the coastal fund, will there be anything for the inshore fishermen, who are now the largest number of fishermen in English waters?
The noble Baroness is absolutely right to refer to inshore fishermen, who are a really important part of our industry. Regarding detail, we are negotiating with stakeholders. We are looking to work very closely with all the different groups that are interested or have an impact with this growth fund. Clearly, they will be an important group as part of our discussions.
My Lords, it has occurred to me that the noble Baroness might not have seen the Oceana report, Deep Decline. It is absolutely excellent, if a bit depressing, but it gives some very good recommendations, so perhaps I could make sure that she gets a copy.
I would be absolutely delighted to receive a copy from the noble Baroness.
My Lords, for a number of years, when I was a Member of the European Parliament, there were considerable complaints about the illegal landing of black fish. Are the Government satisfied that material quantities of illegally caught black fish are not landed in this country?
The kinds of issues that the noble Lord refers to are ones that the Fishing Minister is obviously aware of and will monitor, because we absolutely do not want to see illegal fish landed. It is really important.
My Lords, given that 80% of fish caught in our waters are exported, I ask, as the chair of the International Chamber of Commerce in the UK, what priority are the Government giving to exports in general? We hear about the economy and growth, but what about exports, including our fishing exports?
Exports, whether that is of fish or in other parts of our food industry, are a really important part of how we can continue to grow the economy in this country and support both our farmers and our fishermen. Exports dropped fairly significantly after Brexit, so one of the things we want to achieve with the SPS agreement is better export conditions to increase opportunities for both our farmers and our fishers.
My Lords, does the Minister agree that this exchange of questions demonstrates a certain absence of knowledge about how much damage was done by the terms in which Brexit was embedded, which has resulted, as she says, in a sharp drop in our exports? Would the Government find it useful to put into the public domain a little bit more of the factual basis for the sort of questions we have had this afternoon in the House?
Clearly, one reason we want to do the EU reset and get an SPS agreement and a better working relationship with the EU is to ensure that we have the best economic growth we can possibly get in this country. However, it is also important that we can work efficiently and effectively with our closest trading partner. The noble Lord has made some very good points about the kind of information that should be available, and I hope that the EU reset will start to reset some of the difficulties that he is referring to.
I must say that I find this conversation surprising. The Government seem to have given 12 years of fishing away in a negotiation without getting any very clear benefits in exchange. Our fishing has been an enormous issue right across the country, so I am slightly surprised by the tone of this conversation. Can the noble Baroness, whose views I always respect, help me on this matter?
I do not see that this Government have “given away”. As I said earlier, we have secured additional funding, in addition to the spending settlement that the UK Government provide to each devolved Government, to provide more support for the fishing industry. I do not remember that the agreements made by the previous Government following Brexit were particularly welcomed by the fishing industry. As part of the reset, we are trying to improve our working relationship with the EU in order to continue to support our farmers, our fishers and our businesses more broadly.