Foreign factory vessels face near-zero at-sea inspections in Irish waters as naval capacity collapses, raising fairness and enforcement concerns
Oireachtas Hearing Raises Questions Over Offshore Inspection Capacity
Members of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Fisheries and Maritime Affairs were told that large foreign factory fishing vessels operating in Irish waters are subject to minimal at‑sea inspection, largely due to the sharp decline in Naval Service capacity.
Sea‑Fisheries Protection Authority executive chairperson Paschal Hayes told the committee that inspections conducted by the Naval Service had fallen dramatically in recent years.
“Inspections at sea by the Naval Service decreased fivefold, from 1,131 to 204, between 2021 and 2025,” Mr Hayes said.
He said fisheries patrol days had also fallen significantly, limiting Ireland’s capacity to board and inspect vessels operating within the exclusive economic zone.
While the SFPA has increased its use of European Fisheries Control Agency patrol vessels to compensate, officials acknowledged that EFCA resources are limited.
“If there is but a single patrol vessel operating within the entire EEZ, it means a large area is not being covered when it is in any given area,” operations executive Adrienne Patterson said.
Factory Freezer Vessels Rarely Boarded at Sea
Committee members repeatedly questioned how often large pelagic factory freezer vessels are inspected while operating in Irish waters.
Ms Patterson confirmed that no pelagic factory vessels had been inspected at sea so far in 2026, while four such inspections took place in 2025.
“We have not actually inspected any pelagic vessels fishing in the Irish EEZ this year,” she said.
When asked for inspection figures covering the previous five years, SFPA officials said they did not have those figures to hand, drawing sharp criticism from the committee Chair.
“As Chair of the Joint Committee, I will state that it is not satisfactory for any agency of the State to come before a committee without having figures to hand,” he said.
Mr Hayes acknowledged the criticism and said inspection numbers were likely to be “in the region” of zero to four per year.
“At a guess, that is what it is going to be,” he said.
Reliance on Logbooks, Aerial Surveillance and Satellites
Members expressed concern that Ireland has little direct oversight of what factory vessels catch unless those vessels land their fish in Ireland.
The committee Chair said the State appeared to be “utterly blind” to the volume of fish taken from Irish waters by factory ships, aside from self‑reported logbook data.
Mr Hayes responded that under the Common Fisheries Policy, responsibility for control lies primarily with the vessel’s flag state.
“The concept of the Common Fisheries Policy is that there is an obligation on every member state’s control authority to control its own vessels wherever they fish,” he said.
Ms Patterson said the SFPA supplements surface inspections with aerial surveillance and satellite monitoring.
“We undertake aerial surveillance supported by EFCA‑chartered aircraft,” she said, adding that inspectors monitor live feeds and follow up on potential non‑compliance.
The Chair challenged the effectiveness of these measures, saying phrases such as “any and all non‑compliance detected” masked major limitations in coverage.
“That wording is doing a lot of heavy lifting,” he said.
Ms Patterson confirmed that investigations were under way following some aerial surveillance detections but said she could not discuss individual cases.
Irish Vessels Face Disproportionate Enforcement
The committee heard evidence suggesting Irish vessels are subject to significantly higher inspection and enforcement rates than foreign vessels.
Ms Patterson told members that Irish vessels account for 55.5% of total tonnage caught in the Irish EEZ, with 27.7% taken by other EU vessels and 16.8% by non‑EU vessels.
Despite this, Irish vessels accounted for the majority of at‑sea enforcement cases.
SFPA legal executive Barry Murphy said that in 2025, 14 case files arising from at‑sea inspections were submitted to the Director of Public Prosecutions.
“One was for a Spanish vessel, two were for French vessels, two were for German vessels and nine were for Irish vessels,” he said.
Committee members questioned whether this reflected accessibility rather than compliance levels, noting that Irish vessels are more likely to fish closer to shore and land into Irish ports.
Irish Fishing News Patrons 2026
Observers on Foreign Vessels Not Currently Permitted
Deputy Jennifer Whitmore asked whether Ireland could place observers on board non‑Irish vessels operating in Irish waters.
Mr Hayes said this was not currently possible without approval at EU level.
“It would have to go through the Council of Ministers,” he said.
Ms Patterson confirmed that the SFPA had written to the Minister in November 2025 seeking approval to pursue the issue but said no response had yet been received.
She said that from January 2028, remote electronic monitoring will become mandatory across EU waters.
“From 2028 onwards, there will be REM on board, which we will have access to as the coastal state,” she said.
All Fisheries Infringements Treated as Criminal Offences
A significant portion of the meeting focused on enforcement policy, with members highlighting that Ireland treats all fisheries infringements as criminal matters.
Mr Murphy explained that this approach is mandated by the Sea‑Fisheries and Maritime Jurisdiction Act 2006.
“There is no administrative sanction available under the 2006 Act,” he said. “All infringements are potentially liable for action through the criminal justice system.”
He confirmed that every fisheries infringement where enforcement action is taken must be referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions.
“There is no other option under the legislation,” he said.
Serious infringements also attract penalty points under EU law, applied independently of any court proceedings.
Control Plan Not Harmonised Across the EU
Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn questioned whether Ireland’s fisheries control plan is stricter than those in other member states.
Ms Patterson said control plans are not harmonised across the EU and are tailored to national circumstances.
“There is no harmonised approach to control plans,” she said.
She acknowledged that additional control measures were imposed on Ireland to satisfy the European Commission regarding post‑landing weighing procedures.
These differences, members argued, contribute to an uneven enforcement landscape across Europe.
Strained Relations With Industry and Accountability Criticism
Several committee members said fishermen across the country view the SFPA negatively.
“Every group’s number one complaint is the Sea‑Fisheries Protection Authority,” Deputy David Maxwell said.
Questions were also raised about media and communications training undertaken by SFPA officials.
Corporate services executive Louise Murphy confirmed that eight staff attended communications training in January 2026.
“The total cost was €3,849,” she said.
Chair Signals Further Scrutiny
In closing, the Chair said the lack of inspection of large factory vessels represents a serious gap in fisheries protection.
“That is a huge gap and a huge risk,” he said.
He confirmed that the committee rapporteur is preparing a report comparing Ireland’s enforcement regime with those in other EU and non‑EU states.
“I do not think this will be the last engagement we have,” he said.
