asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if, in view of the recent EEC communique on the prospects of a 12-mile fishing limit, he will now make a statement of unilateral intent to declare a 50-mile exclusive fishing limit for Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

EEC Council Regulation 2141 of 1970, which was adopted prior to our accession to the European Community, laid down a general principle of equal access for all member states to each others' coastal waters.

The Treaty of Accession provided for certain derogations from this principle which in the case of Ireland allow us to restrict fishing to Irish fishermen in the inner six mile belt around our coast and in the outer six mile belt from Lough Foyle to Cork Harbour. We may also, and in fact do, restrict to Irish fishermen fishing for shellfish in the outer six mile belt between Carlingford Lough and Carnsore Point. These derogations are due to expire on 31st December, 1982. Certain countries have traditional rights in the outer six mile belt under the London Convention of 1964.

The Deputy is aware that the Common Fisheries Policy is being reviewed in the light of the general movement towards extending national fishing limits to 200 miles. In the negotiations we have been seeking to secure a guarantee of the future development of the Irish fishing industry and as a means towards this end have proposed for Ireland an exclusive national band of up to 50 miles subject to provision for the exercise of traditional rights by other member states' artisanal fishermen with boats of a limited size in the outer part of this band. The Deputy will appreciate however that there exists no legal competence on our part to declare such a zone unilaterally vis-á-vis vessels from other Community states.

We are prepared and indeed anxious to extend in common with the other member states of the Community our fishery limits to 200 miles from 1st January, 1977.

May I take it from the Minister that the fishery protocol as negotiated by the Fianna Fáil Government is not acceptable to him and to the present Government? Can be say if we can make a unilateral declaration to extend our own fishery limits? Can he say if he is satisfied that there is a need to protect our present fish stocks not only from over-fishing but from further infringement of our fishery limits?

We have inherited a very unsatisfactory position which unless altered in these negotiations would leave us without any protection against fishermen from other member countries fishing right up to our coasts and into our estuaries by 1982. The purpose of the present negotiations, so far as I am concerned, is to retrieve that situation.

That is the situation by the last Fianna Fáil Government?

It is the situation created by the terms of accession to the Treaty which were negotiated at that time arising from the regulations of the Common Fisheries Policy introduced by the original Six in 1970 without consultation with or regard to the interests of applicant countries. Would the Deputy repeat the second part of his question?

You are making excuses for yourselves.

These are facts.

He is trying to remedy a situation created by Deputy Gibbons's party and Government——

Did you support EEC entry?

And it was your Government——

This is disorderly. If Deputy Collins has a relevant question to put will he please put it?

I am being interrupted by a former Minister who was responsible for——

Order.

The second part of my question is: can we unilaterally declare an extension of the fishery limits?

The position is that the extension of fishery limits to 200 miles is a national prerogative supposed to be exercised by the State itself. The fishery zones thus created, if this action is taken by all member states of the Community are, however, under the terms of the 1970 regulations in the Accession Treaty subject to the operation of the Common Fisheries Policy as set out in those negotiations. While we can unilaterally extend the 200 miles, the zones thus created are subject to the common fisheries policy and are not capable of being dealt with unilaterally by us once they come into existence.

What is the present policy of the Government?

The primary purpose of our policy is to protect existing fish stocks which in a number of instances have been seriously affected. The extent to which they have been affected is not widely realised. For example, herring catches in the Celtic Sea have fallen from 19,000 tons in 1970-71 to 6,500 tons in 1975-76, which represents a fall of over 65 per cent. The stock position is serious because of over-fishing immediately outside our present limits. Obviously the question of ensuring adequate conservation is a vital part of the current negotiations.

Would the Minister accept that on entering the EEC we had to accept the Common Fisheries Policy as it then operated; but that being on the inside we are now in a much stronger position to fight for the rights of our fishermen? Would the Minister also accept that if the Government had been taking the steps suggested in this House we would have a much stronger hand to deal with the EEC?

I cannot comment on whether different terms could have been secured in the negotiations. I have no information on that matter. I have not had the time to seek ammunition to give the Opposition that point. The facts we face are that the terms negotiated give us no protection from 1982 onwards and our problem is to put that right. In seeking to put that right we start from a difficult position because the other member states know that, if these present negotiations do not succeed and if they simply wait it out and ignore the case we are making, they will find themselves in 1982 in the advantageous position secured by the Accession Treaty. Our job is to try to renegotiate in the present circumstances of the extension to 200 miles, using what bargaining counters come to hand in the new situation to retrieve the position which we inherited.

The remaining questions will appear on the Order Paper for the next sitting day of the Dáil.