Fishing Quotas: Statements
Dail Éireann — 2026-02-24
============================================================

Timmy Dooley (FF), Clare

I thank the Minister, Deputy Heydon, for his continued support and the full stretch of his Department, in particular, in the area of marine and fisheries.
As the Minister indicated, the most significant element of the reduction in fishing quotas for 2026 is the reduction in the mackerel quota. It has had a very significant impact, not just on the catching sector but also on the processing sector because we control so much of that stock and have developed that fishery over many years. While there are many reasons a fish stock can fluctuate over time, for example, climate change and increasing sea temperatures are impacting on the stock's ability to reproduce, it is clear in the case of mackerel that the years of overfishing caused by third countries setting unilateral, unsustainable quotas is taking its toll on the stock.
In my time in this role, at every opportunity, I have called for action against those countries which overfish mackerel. We must be wider than that. We focus on mackerel but the level of overfishing by third countries is impacting across all species and impacting other countries equally. Given that Ireland holds the largest share of the EU quota for mackerel in the Western Waters area, Ireland's catching and processing sectors are the most exposed to the impacts of reductions in this stock.
On behalf of the Government, I have called for the EU to send a clear message that actions that threaten the sustainability of our shared stocks are not acceptable. I have raised this matter on a number of occasions at the Agriculture and Fisheries Council, including in October and January when I called for urgent EU action needed on the north-east Atlantic pelagic stocks, particularly mackerel.
I have also emphasised the need for unity by way of a concerted EU response, including the option of triggering the unsustainable fishing regulation. Commissioner Kadis advised us at the December Council that measures would be explored by which action can be taken against third countries whose actions have caused such substantial damage to this shared natural resource. I reiterate that it is imperative that we do so. However, it is worth noting that not every member state agrees with the position we take on this. For geopolitical and other reasons, including relationships that exist between other countries in Europe and these third countries, there seems to be some resistance to invoke the unsustainable fishing regulation. It is well past time for that to happen. It has to be used as a methodology of ultimately getting a sharing arrangement that we find acceptable and that operates within scientific limits.
Even since the December Council, where the fishing opportunities for 2026 were adopted, we have seen questionable actions taken by third countries in how we manage the mackerel stock of the north-east Atlantic. In December, Norway, the UK, the Faroe Islands and Iceland agreed on management arrangements for mackerel for 2026 which excluded the EU. By the way, they excluded Greenland as well. EU countries were unaware that they were even attempting to put a deal together. They announced it as a fait accompli . It does not take a genius to figure out that they are not serious about an appropriate sharing arrangement or a recognition of the necessity to conserve the stock for the future of all member states that fish that species.
The ICES headline advice for mackerel for 2026 is 174,357 tonnes, representing a reduction of approximately 70% on the 2025 total allowable catch. This advice figure is based on a 50% probability that the stock will recover to what is referred to as Blim, or biomass limit, in 2027. Blim means the level of spawning stock biomass, in other words, the amount of sexually mature fish in a population, below which recruitment, that is, reproduction, is impaired or the stock dynamics are unknown.
However, the four parties to which I referred - Norway, the UK, the Faroe Islands and Iceland - have based their arrangements on a total allowable catch of almost 300,000 tonnes, which is significantly greater and with less emphasis on conservation. This represents a reduction of 48%, as opposed to the 70% which Europe opted for. This figure is based on an alternative catch scenario given by ICES based on application of the maximum sustainable yield, MSY, rule, ignoring that the stock is below Blim and is based on a 57% probability that the stock will recover to Blim in 2027. I know that is a bit long-winded. It has taken those of us who are involved in this some time to understand the methodologies used in the scientific analysis. It is clear from a casual observation that the approach being taken by the third countries is excluding the science. They are suggesting they are accepting some element of it, but then they do not include Greenland or the EU in the way they have allocated that cohort of stock. It is using a bully-boy approach of grabbing all they can and leave the rest of us to decide whether we want to ignore science or accept it.
The EU has about 20% of the overall catch in the sharing arrangement for mackerel. At a European level, we are minded to follow the science, rightly so. We are trying to be good citizens and work towards conservation. These countries, which control potentially 80% of the catch, are ignoring the headline advice. The question rightly put to us on a regular basis by fishers in Ireland is why we would bother conserving when we are only in control of 20% and the others take a raw abandon approach to the other 80%. Are we, they ask, just saving it for those countries? That is a valid question that is asked every day, and one I continuously put to the Commissioner, as we did again just yesterday in Brussels. What we are trying to do is push the Commission, on behalf of the European Union, into a more energised approach to negotiations. We need to get this matter resolved because our coastal communities are impacted very significantly. It is a source of annoyance when they continue to see open and fair trade with Norway in particular, yet Norway is, to anyone's mind, misbehaving in relation to the conservation of this important stock.
A meeting will be held early next month in Copenhagen between the EU and the third countries under the coastal states arrangement. I am hopeful that we will see some advances there. There will have to be compromise on all sides, but it has to be fair for everybody. That is what most impacts our sector and fishers, men and women. The next round of those coastal states consultations will take place on 5 and 6 March in Copenhagen. If there is a decision or some outcome from that, we expect to see it before the March AGRIFISH Council, which will be held at the end of March. I will continue to highlight that in the coming months.
Yesterday, we raised a point on this issue under "any other business", and we got considerable support from a number of countries, in particular Germany, Spain, Portugal, Sweden and Belgium. They joined with us, and then we had positive comments from others, including France, Poland, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Austria and Denmark. Bit by bit, we are building alliances around a recognition of the importance of getting a deal done on a comprehensive sharing arrangement that would transcend the current position.
I hope we can get something that is lasting for the next number of years. When we talk to the scientists in the Marine Institute, it is very clear that they have concerns about the state of mackerel and other stocks. If we could get a comprehensive sharing arrangement over a number of years, we would have the potential then to see some recovery. That would give certainty to the fishing fleets, the processing sector and coastal communities. As the Minister outlined, we saw this right from the start when the fishing industry, the Minister, I and others met with the Taoiseach and Tánaiste back in December. We knew where the scientific advice was going. The Minister was very clear at the time that we needed to put in place a framework of supports to assist the fishing sector in all its guises through that difficult period.
What we have to see with these reduced quotas, which are in line with the scientific advice, is a timeframe for conservation. We need to see it almost in a positive light, but there is nothing positive for the people who do not have fish to catch and process and have to raise their kids.
The work the Minister outlined has begun, with the task force led by Michael Berkery. This is an opportunity for all facets of the sector to bring forward proposals and ideas. Of course, we will not be able to fund all of them and we will never have the quantum of money available to us to meet everybody's needs. This is about having a baseline and sending a signal to the sector that the Government sees the importance of it and is prepared to stand by and support it during the period of stock recovery. There is little point in us investing in that and bringing forward ideas if others outside the Union are effectively going to fish it out anyway. We are on a hiding to nothing if that is the case. The immediate issue is to get that arrangement and relationship back on track and get everybody locked into whatever the number is, whether it is the upper or lower figure, whether it is the MSY, the Blim or the approach we are taking or whether it is 174,000 tonnes or 299,000 tonnes. We have to figure out how to share it among all concerned, get on with it and start the conservation measures that are necessary. That needs to happen.
As the Minister said, the mackerel fishery for us is principally in the first half of the year, probably the first three or four months. As such, we need to know what the total allowable catch is for this year and give that information to our fishers in order that they can plan their activities. There are not too many other options for them. There was a time when other stocks were available and they could switch. It is the same with some of the inshore fishermen. They are struggling and need our support.
I thank the Members who sought this opportunity to have a discussion. I look forward to the rest of the contributions.

---

Source: Houses of the Oireachtas. Licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). The Official Report is revised after first publication; the fetch timestamp below identifies the version quoted.

Record URI: https://data.oireachtas.ie/akn/ie/debateRecord/dail/2026-02-24/debate/main
Retrieved: 2026-08-14T04:54:40+00:00
Sitting date: 2026-02-24