Member's statement: Isle of Man: Closure of Fishing Grounds
Member's statement by Miss Michelle McIlveen on .
- MLA
- Miss Michelle McIlveen
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 23 April 2024
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Isle of Man: Closure of Fishing Grounds
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4484989
Read the official Assembly record
Text
On 6 February, the Isle of Man Government launched a consultation on a proposal to close vast areas of their fishing grounds, which the Northern Ireland trawl fleet has fished for generations. The consultation closed on 18 March, and access was shut off on 1 April. The Manx Government's evidence document admitted that they cannot accurately measure the value of the fishing area to our trawl fleet. It also recognised that the closed areas interfere with trawl patterns in ways that make even trawling adjacent to the closed areas unviable. The Isle of Man Government purport to have done that to protect blue-carbon habitats, but the science does not support blanket trawling bans as an effective measure. It is suspected that the purpose of the closure is the Isle of Man's proposal to establish a pot fishery for prawns where our vessels trawled. With Northern Ireland vessels out of the way, they have granted themselves a free run. However, there are flaws in the evidence document. In practice, only one in four of the animals in the pot fishery will be of marketable size to langoustine buyers, so it will not be the higher value fishery that the document suggests. To achieve the hoped-for economic benefit, instead of licensing 400 pots per boat, they will require more than 1,600 pots. The environmental impact of each boat working 1,600 pots is potentially catastrophic. The UK Government gift the Isle of Man additional fishing quotas every year, which include prawn and herring quotas. Surely that cannot be allowed to continue, when the reward for that generosity is having our traditional fishing grounds snatched away from us. The ban will cause financial stress for almost every trawlerman in Northern Ireland, and it will put pressure on the 1,850 full-time equivalents in our fishing industry and those that they support. It is imperative that DEFRA, in recognition of this devastating decision, provides some means of compensation for the loss and to support diversification, perhaps in the form of additional herring quota. In no way will that replace the economic value of what has been taken, but Northern Ireland's fishermen need our support and a principled stand must be taken. I call on the Agriculture Minister to urgently meet his Manx counterpart to request that the position that has been taken be reversed, and to speak to the Secretary of State at DEFRA and the Fisheries Minister to discuss alternatives for our fleet.
408 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
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: 0.05 (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 (0.94).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.99).
- 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
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.11 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.05 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.03 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.06 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.94 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.05 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.99 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.01 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.84 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.11 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.05 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 10:03 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.