Government went against scientific advice in setting fishing quotas, court told
Blue Marine Foundation is bringing legal action saying the quotas contribute to a long-term decline in fish stocks and fishers’ employment.
The Government went against scientific advice when it set maximum fishing quotas for 2024, risking the sustainability of stocks and the livelihoods of fishers, the High Court has heard.
Blue Marine Foundation is bringing legal action against the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), saying it acted contrary to its commitments to protect the UK’s marine environment and fishing industry.
Known as the Joint Fisheries Statement (JFS), the Government set eight objectives for managing the UK’s fish stocks, which include sustainability, reducing bycatch, protecting ecosystems and following scientific advice.
The amount of fish that can be caught by British boats in 2024 followed negotiations between the UK and EU that took place between October and December 2023.
David Wolfe KC, for Blue Marine Foundation, said in written submissions for a High Court hearing on Wednesday that Defra had “slavishly” followed the outcome of these negotiations against scientific advice.
He asked the court to declare Defra’s decision on fishing quotas as unlawful “so as to inform that process in the future”.
Defra denied acting slavishly and said it had taken into account “all relevant factors” when setting the quota.
Mr Wolfe said: “The approach taken is contributing to a long-term decline in fish populations and the fishing industry itself, with declining employment and catch value.”
He continued: “Setting a higher level may bring a short-term benefit but at the expense of the long-term position.”
Ned Westaway, for Defra, said in written submissions the claim should be dismissed because it is “premised on a misunderstanding” and “ignores the wider international and regulatory context for the determination of fishing opportunities”.
He said: “Overall, there was no misdirection or other impropriety in following the outcome of the international negotiations in the determination which were themselves informed by a UK position that had regard to all relevant factors: fisheries objectives, JFS policies and scientific advice.”
Officials “had regard” to the scientific advice and “gave it appropriate weight”, he said, adding time constraints meant it was logical for Defra to include the result of the negotiations.
He continued: “Given negotiations until December in any given year and a determination needed before January in the following year, there is no time to carry out fresh consideration of individual fishing opportunities separate from negotiations.”
The hearing, before Mrs Justice Lang, is expected to conclude on Wednesday.
