asked the Minister for Fisheries and Forestry the response to the FEOGA grant schemes for fishing vessels and aquaculture projects in 1983.

During 1983, 73 Irish applications for FEOGA grant aid for fishing vessels and five applications in respect of aquaculture projects were approved. The total grant amounted to £4,044,204.

Is the Minister satisfied with the condition of the scheme that only boats up to 33 feet in length can qualify for grants?

That was a decision taken by the EEC Commission. I do not see any great problem in relation to our fleet being able to avail of these grants since the vast bulk of the fleet would be eligible.

Is the Minister stating that there were no applications in respect of boats in excess of 33 feet? Is he of the opinion that there would not be any applications even if the limit were extended? Is he aware that all the boats fishing for mackerel should be much bigger but that the fishermen cannot apply for bigger vessels? What steps is the Minister taking to ensure that grants will be payable on larger vessels?

This issue has been a bone of contention for some time at Council level within the EEC. This is a compromise position and it is felt that it is the best deal that could have been obtained.

Of the 73 Irish applications, how many were for new vessels and how many for modernisation or conversion work?

I have not that information here but I will pass it to the Deputy.

Would the Minister accept that our fleet has now reached a stage where it should be expanding? The regulations imposed by the EEC seem to restrict the possibility of expansion. Would he not accept that these regulations are detrimental to the future of the industry?

I do not accept that our fleet is hindered by the application of the EEC regulations, nor do I accept that our fleet should be expanding. It would be more beneficial if the fleet could be restructured to cater for diversified fishing. I should like to see the fleet changing in that area.

Is the Minister stating that it is the policy of his Department to entice fishermen not to expand to larger vessels?

I did not say that.

We cannot have a discussion on this matter. That would have been appropriate last week on the Estimate.

Is the Minister satisfied with the maximum grant of 20,000 ECUs available for modernisation and conversion work? Does he believe that Irish fishermen purchasing boats worth £1 million are in a position to pay a deposit of 25 per cent?

The number of ECUs is dictated by the availability of finance within the EEC, which is the subject of discussion elsewhere today. I am not satisfied with the level.

What steps is the Minister taking to make known his dissatisfaction to to the Commission?

This has been made known by me on numerous occasions at the appropriate level and in the appropriate places.

Is the Minister satisfied that fishermen are now in a position to pay a 25 per cent deposit on boats costing £1 million? Does he not consider that it hinders fishermen from purchasing larger boats?

It possibly does but it was felt that, because of the difficulty in collecting repayments, a 25 per cent deposit was necessary so that the applicant could show by his track record that he could provide this amount of money and continue to pay instalments on the borrowed portion of the outlay.

Is the Minister stating that the difficulties arise in relation to the larger boats?

The Deputy is reading something into my statements which I would not wish. He is literally misinterpreting what I am saying.