Debate contribution: Fishing Industry: Capital Investment

Debate contribution by Mr Jim Allister KC on .

MLA
Mr Jim Allister KC
Party at the time
Traditional Unionist Voice
Date
27 February 2024
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Private Members' Business
Heading
Fishing Industry: Capital Investment
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4237568

Read the official Assembly record

Text

The sad truth is that our fishing industry has not been able to attain its full potential for over 50 years. It is no coincidence that those 50 years have, essentially, been the period of our membership of the EU. The EU's common fisheries policy has crucified our fishing industry with punitive quotas and needless bureaucracy and is constantly on the back of fishermen. I am told and have no reason to doubt that, before we joined the EU, in Kilkeel harbour, when the fishing fleet was in, you could walk from one side of the harbour to the other across the decks of the boats. Today, when the fishing fleet is in, it is a few boats straggling up each side. That is a clear manifestation of how much our fishing industry has been denuded by the common fisheries policy. Now that we have left the EU, we still have the problem of the protocol, because, historically, a lot of fishing boats fishing in the Irish Sea out of Kilkeel, Portavogie or Ardglass would have landed their catch at, say, Whitehaven, and carried on fishing. When they do that today, they now transport the catch back by lorry and have to pass through the Irish Sea border, further impeding the free passage, free commerce and free trade that catching fish in British waters should give rise to. That is a continuing hurdle and burden. We also have —.

Yes, I will give way.

If the Member had been listening, he would have heard, "Before EU membership, things were so much better". If he would take off his rose-tinted glasses —

— he would see that it was the common fisheries policy that crucified our fishing industry and left it in the poor state that it is in. That is indisputable when you compare how we were then with what we are now. Other matters affect our fishing industry. We have had the voisinage agreement for some years. It was unimplemented for many years in respect of our rights to fish in Irish waters. I heard the Sinn Féin representative talk about our all-Ireland fishing. Sorry, but we still have a prohibition on boats from Northern Ireland fishing in the six to 12 miles of Irish waters. Why? Because of that agreement and the failure to fully address those issues. Recently, we had DEFRA make an agreement to allow Irish fishing vessels into the Rockall waters, which is to their advantage, but we did not have a quid pro quo of arguing and attaining access for Northern Ireland fishing boats into the six to 12 miles of Irish-controlled waters. That is another failure in respect of our fishing industry. We are in a situation where, if ever an industry needed to be liberated to find growth and the potential to expand in the way that it could, fishing is that industry. However, I fear that, instead, the latest threat to our industry will come under the banner of the green agenda. I heard Mr Blair talk about all the things that need to be done, but I do not hear any talk about the costs of doing that in the industry. Who will pay those bills? Will it, again, be the hapless fishermen who is put upon by further needless bureaucracy? Will it be the fishermen and boat owners who will be impeded in that way?

Certainly.

Of course, Iceland has had the great advantage of not being in the EU for the past 50 years and being able to grow its industry. Indeed, I served on the Fisheries Committee in the European Parliament for many years. I happen to know that the fishing industries in Norway, the Faroe Islands and Iceland, all of which are outside the EU, flourished and grew because they were not subject to the crucifying restraints of the common fisheries policy. Now is the time to liberate our fishing industry and give it the growth and momentum that it has been starved of for so long, so that we can have the full benefit of what that industry can do.

685 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.

  • Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.12 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
  • None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
  • Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.86).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (0.97).
  • Subject area: Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty.
  • The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.

This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.

Jev’s structured answers

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.10No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.04No
Cultural grievance politics0.02No
Dog-whistle messaging0.10No
Controversy escalation0.07No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.86Yes
Overall judgement0.12At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)0.97
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.00
Adopts it0.03
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty0.74
No identity-related subject0.26
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.00
Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 09:38 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification