asked the Minister for Fisheries and Forestry if he will make a statement on the outcome of the EEC Fisheries Ministers meeting on 3-4 October 1983.

I have already made clear my disappointment that the Council of Fisheries Ministers on 3-4 October 1983 failed to reach agreement on total allowable catches and quotas for 1983 because of the continuing deadlock on the North Sea herring problem. However, the meeting was by no means a total failure in that there were some very positive results for Ireland arising from agreement on other matters. In particular I would mention structural measures. The Council agreed, by majority vote, a package of structural measures which will provide aid for restructuring the Community fleet over the three-year period 1983-85. Our main interest here is in the restructuring and modernisation sector where funds will be available for (a) the construction of new vessels and modernisation of existing vessels for which a total sum of £85.5 million has been made available, (b) aquaculture for which a total sum of some £24.5 million has been made available.

There was also agreement on technical measures for conservation. These are a series of technical measures mainly laying down mesh sizes and minimum landing sizes for fish. In addition — and of particular interest to Ireland — is the acceptance of a new "box" off our south east coast stretching across to the Welsh coast and the English south-west coast wherein there will be a total ban on mackerel fishing with effect from 16 November 1983. It is a very important nursery for western stock mackerel and it is very important for us that this has been achieved despite the protests of some other member states. This was a conservation measure which was agreed on in the knowledge that, for example, in 1982 something in the region of 90 per cent of the mackerel caught in that area would have been deemed to be immature or juvenile mackerel.

The third piece of good news, so to speak, which came out of that meeting was in relation to the Norwegian agreement when an unacceptable clause whereby Norway would have been allowed to trawl for blue whiting within our 50-mile box — which had been established as far back as the Hague agreement in 1976 — was under pressure from us and was removed at that meeting.

In addition to the above items agreed at Council, the Commission also amended their TAC/Quota proposal to bring up the Celtic Sea herring quota to the 1982 level. The Deputy will recall that the initial offer in this started as far down as 5,500 tonnes which was away below the 1982 level. Eventually bit by bit it came up to the final agreement of the 1982 level. However, this is just an offer at the moment. It has not been agreed officially in the Council because that will take place in the context of an overall agreement on TAC quotas which has yet to be finalised.

In relation to getting in with the Celtic Sea on the overall agreement it was previously accepted that the Celtic Sea was a separate issue and was not part of the negotiations on TAC quotas last year. The Minister will be aware that in the negotiations last year to which the Celtic Sea was extended it was done separately from the existing arrangement and the overall question of TAC quotas. It would be desirable in my view that it be kept separate from the overall policy issues.

I have endeavoured to do just that, but because of the insistence of four large member states in particular in demanding that the North Sea herring issue be first agreed, everything else has been blocked including the Celtic Sea quota. That has been the problem all along and that is what is holding up a final decision on TAC quotas.

Overall?

Yes.

Is it possible to separate and get a decision on the Celtic Sea?

There is no question of separating the Celtic Sea from the TAC quota fishing.

A final supplementary question from Deputy Denis Gallagher.

The Minister mentioned grants for aquaculture. Has he any details as to how it is proposed to spend that money or what areas will be taken in, for instance oyster fishing development?

This global sum will not be allocated on a member state basis. It is all in the central EEC kitty to which promoters of projects can apply and it will be a Commission decision as to who is successful in an application for grant aid.

Do I take it that it will be necessary for us to have a programme prepared to have each application dealt with or at least put before the Commission before it can be dealt with?

Correct, yes.

I want to ask the Minister a question arising out of the meeting on 3 and 4 October. Did he raise with his colleagues the question of the box north of areas 6A, that is off the north coast of Donegal and the west coast of Scotland? There is an area there where our boats are not allowed to fish. I ask the Minister to raise at that meeting the question of allowing us to fish in that box. Heretofore we were allowed to fish there, with the consequence that our season started a month earlier. If the season this year had started a month earlier, we would possibly be £1 million better off with the refunds from Europe.

The Deputy's use of the word "heretofore" may be open to misinterpretation. Under the EEC Common Fisheries Policy Agreement — and the Deputy's colleague, Deputy Daly is aware of this — despite valiant attempts by him, and in succession by me, we failed to be allowed to continue to fish in the area referred to by the Deputy. We did not have much ground to stand on in that the period during which we fished these waters prior to the agreement was only three years, so we had not built up a long historic tradition of fishing there.

This is an important matter for us.

I know it is important, but we cannot spend all day on this question.

If the Minister could put this question down for that meeting, it would be a good day's work for the country.

We would probably want a day to do the days' work and we shall have to get another occasion.

I am just trying to get the Minister to assert a historic right with regard to fishing in this area during the month of October and to make an effort.

It would suit me fine if I could say yes to that.

I am not asking the Minister to.

I am being brutally honest in saying that this provision forms part of the agreed Common Fisheries Policy.

Will the Minister be raising it at the next meeting?

Deputy, I am passing on to the next question.

I will raise it, but I can give no guarantee. There is a very slim hope, indeed, but I do not want to be told in six months' time that I failed. I am warning the Deputies as of now that it is part of the overall agreement and any derogation from that will cause severe problems.

It is a tight rope, but if the Deputy falls into the water we will rescue him.