review of bord iascaigh mhara (bim) - home - department of
TRANSCRIPT
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Chapter 1: Introduction 2
1.1 Background and Review Group Membership
1.2 Scope of Review
1.3 Review Process
Chapter 2: Overview 3
2.1 Seafood Sector in Ireland
2.2 Government Policy for Development of Seafood Sector
2.3 Seafood Structures and Roles
2.4 Role of Non-commercial State Agencies
2.5 BIM’s Evolving Role and Functions
2.6 Relevant International Service Delivery Models
Chapter 3: BIM Organisation 10
3.1 BIM Restructuring [2006-2012]
3.2 Savings and Efficiencies [2006-2012]
3.3 Current BIM Structure and Service Delivery
3.4 Current BIM Staffing and Costs
3.5 Seafood Sector Observations on Review
Chapter 4: Analysis of Considerations 17
4.1 Delivery of Government Policy
4.2 Transfer of BIM Functions to DAFM
4.3 Additional Savings and Efficiencies
4.4 Perceived Impact on the Seafood Sector
Chapter 5: Conclusions and Recommendations 20
5.1 Conclusions
5.2 Recommendations
Appendices 23
1. Terms of Reference for the BIM Critical Review Group
2. Submissions Received
2
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background and Review Group Membership
In November 2011, the Government published its Public Service Reform Plan and
announced that “critical reviews” of certain agencies would be carried out, including
Bord Iascaigh Mhara (BIM). The specific purpose of the BIM review, as stipulated in
the Government’s plan, was to assess if the agency’s functions should be transferred to
the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine (DAFM). This review was to be
completed by June 2012.
In March 2012, the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Simon Coveney
T.D., established a Review Group consisting of:
Dr. Noel Cawley (Chairman);
Mr. Lorcán Ó Cinnéide;
Dr. Cecil Beamish, Assistant Secretary, DAFM;
Mr. Philip Carroll, Assistant Secretary, DAFM;
Ms. Josephine Kelly, Principal Officer, Seafood Policy and Development
Division, DAFM;
Mr. Colm Hayes, Assistant Principal, Economics and Planning Division, DAFM;
and
Mr. Terry Jennings, Assistant Principal, Department of Public Expenditure and
Reform (DPER).
Mr. Nicholas Hoffman, DAFM, was appointed Secretary to the Group.
1.2 Scope of Review
Under the Terms of Reference (see Appendix 1), the purpose of the Group’s review was
to assess if BIM’s functions should be transferred to DAFM. To answer this question,
the Group reviewed BIM’s purpose, structures and processes; assessed the efficiencies
and organisational changes delivered by BIM in recent times; considered the
organisation’s current and future operational activities in the context of Government
policy for the sector (i.e., Food Harvest 2020), and evaluated BIM’s service provision,
along with the potential for further efficiencies.
1.3 Review Process
The Group had two independent, external representatives, Dr. Cawley (Chairman of the
Group) and Mr. Ó Cinnéide, and it included representatives from DAFM and DPER. It
met on seven occasions during the Review process. The Group met with BIM and also
received relevant information and organisational data from the agency. The Group
invited submissions from stakeholders in the seafood sector and other interested
organisations. Given the short timeframe allowed for the completion of the Review,
however, the Group was not in a position to meet with these parties. The observations
3
received and issues raised were considered as part of the Review process. The Group
also reviewed information regarding the structures of State bodies and structures related
to the seafood sectors of certain other countries deemed to be of relevance to the
Review.
CHAPTER 2: OVERVIEW
2.1 Seafood Sector in Ireland
The Irish seafood sector is an indigenous industry that makes a significant contribution
to the national economy in terms of output, employment and exports. The total output
for the sector in 2012 is estimated by BIM to reach €738 million. Approximately
11,000 people are employed in the sector, mostly in coastal communities. The sector
supports ancillary industries such as net making, vessel repair, transport, and other
services. Because the seafood industry is dispersed around the Irish coastline, it plays a
key role in the sustainable development of the economic and social fabric of many small
coastal communities.
The clean, unpolluted seas around Ireland contain some of the most productive and
biologically sensitive areas in EU waters. Overall, Irish fisheries surveys have recorded
almost 400 fish and cephalopod species, ranging from inshore to deepwater varieties.
Pelagic stocks, such as blue whiting, herring, mackerel and horse mackerel, which are
widely dispersed, migrate annually to Irish waters to spawn. Non-migratory demersal
species, such as megrim, hake, cod, whiting, plaice and sole, also have distinct areas to
which they return during spawning season. Many of these species also use the waters
around Ireland as nursery areas for their juveniles.
The Irish seafood industry is complex and fragmented. It involves a commercial
catching sector, an aquaculture sector, processing and marketing, with operators spread
all around the coast. The catching sector consists of pelagic, demersal and shellfish
fisheries, while the aquaculture sector includes finfish and shellfish farming enterprises.
The sector comprises approximately 2,100 vessels, 2,000 aquaculture sites and 200
seafood-processing companies. More than 40 species of sea fish caught in Irish waters,
many of them in small volumes, and the fisheries are highly seasonal. Catches are
landed at six major fishery harbour centres (Killybegs, Castletownbere, Howth,
Rossaveal, Dunmore East and An Daingean), at 40 secondary ports and at a further 80
piers and landing places.
The sector is governed by an extensive policy, management and regulatory framework
enshrined in domestic and EU legislation. Most of the wild fish stocks in Irish waters
come under the remit of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). Ireland receives roughly
one fifth of the total allowable catch set by the EU each year for the Western Waters
area (i.e., ICES1 areas VI and VII), which includes waters around Ireland and west of
the United Kingdom. These waters are also fished by vessels from the UK, France,
Spain, the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, the Faroe Islands and Norway. Under the
fishing opportunities agreement for 2012, the Irish fleet can fish up to 141,000 tonnes of
1 International Council for the Exploration of the Sea.
4
pelagic and tuna quotas and 36,000 tonnes of whitefish. These quotas are worth an
estimated landing value of €250 million. Ireland also possesses valuable inshore
fisheries, particularly shellfish such as lobster, crab, whelk and scallop.
In 2011, Irish seafood exports had a value of about €420 million, an increase of more
than 13% over the previous year. The EU is the main export market destination,
receiving up to 80% of Irish seafood exports, with the remainder going to Russia, Africa
and Asia. The value of the Irish market for seafood in 2011 was just over €300 million.
2.2 Government Policy for Development of Seafood Sector
The market demand prospects for seafood, both at a global and European level, are
favourable, especially in the medium to long term. The world’s population is growing
strongly, and the consumption of fish products in the developed world is continuing to
increase. It is estimated than an additional 40 million tonnes of seafood per annum will
be needed globally by 2030.
This presents a significant opportunity for the Irish seafood sector to grow in a
sustainable way and to increase the value of its output. The Government has recognised
this in the Food Harvest 2020 strategy, which aims over the next eight years to raise the
sector’s annual sales value to €1 billion, to expand the volume of aquaculture
production by 78 per cent, and to increase employment in sea fisheries and aquaculture
to 14,000.
The strategy calls for the sector to achieve these targets through developing new
fisheries, increasing processing activity, raising product quality, developing new
seafood products, and improving marketing. Seafood innovation and new product
development – together with the maintenance of Ireland’s international reputation for
wholesome, fresh and natural seafood, produced in the most sustainable and
environmentally friendly manner – are essential to the advancement and further
development of the seafood sector. State support for the sector is focused on initiatives
that endeavour to deliver these fundamental requirements while also seeking to increase
Ireland’s market share of the international seafood industry.
The Government and its agencies are pursuing some key strategies to grow the Irish
seafood industry and realise the potential identified in Food Harvest 2020. These are:
growing Irish aquaculture production to increase raw material supply to the
processing sector;
adding value to the industry’s raw product and improving the scaling of seafood
operations;
conserving fish stocks through effective control measures and sustainable
management practices;
encouraging foreign vessels to land more of their catches into Irish ports to be
processed by Irish operators; and
increasing the competitiveness of the processing sector.
5
The Government is also working to safeguard the future of the Irish seafood sector
through its participation in the European Union’s current review of the CFP. This
review is of critical importance for the Irish industry, as it will shape the course of the
sector for the next decade, particularly in respect of operators’ access to resources.
Government policy is to ensure the revised CFP protects the future of the Irish seafood
industry on a sustainable basis.
2.3 Seafood Structures and Roles
The management of the seafood sector in Ireland is carried out on behalf of the State by
DAFM as well as three non-commercial semi-state bodies:
Bord Iascaigh Mhara (BIM),
The Marine Institute (MI), and
The Sea-Fisheries Protection Authority (SFPA).
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, FOOD AND THE MARINE
DAFM has three divisions dedicated to carrying out functions in sea fisheries,
aquaculture and coastal infrastructure based at the National Seafood Centre in
Clonakilty, Co. Cork. It also has a corps of specialist technical staff based in regional
offices around the country. The core policy goals for these divisions are (1) to
maximise the contribution of the seafood sector to the economies of coastal regions, and
(2) to support and manage the sustainable use and development of Ireland's marine
territory. The divisions carry out a variety of functions, including: developing and
advising on seafood policy at both national and EU / International levels; representing
the State’s interests in the sector at national and international negotiations; developing
and monitoring funding programmes to support the sector; managing national sea
fisheries resources; developing fishery harbours and related facilities; registering,
managing and licensing sea-fishing boats; licensing aquaculture and related foreshore
activities; and corporate governance, monitoring and liaison with the State bodies
functioning in the sector.
BORD IASCAIGH MHARA
BIM was established under the Sea Fisheries Act 1952 as the state agency with primary
responsibility for developing the Irish sea fishing and aquaculture industries. BIM’s
mission is “to lead the sustainable development of a competitive, market-led, innovative
and quality driven Irish seafood industry, thereby maximising the returns to industry
stakeholders and the socio-economic contribution to communities in coastal regions and
Ireland as a whole.” BIM is focused on expanding the volume, quality and value of
output from the Irish seafood industry. It provides a range of advisory, financial,
technical and training services to all sectors on the Irish seafood industry. The agency
is governed by a non-executive Board, comprised of six directors, including the
Chairman, appointed by the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine. BIM staff
members are located at the agency’s headquarters in Dun Laoghaire, the National
Seafood Centre in Clonakilty, Co. Cork, and in other locations around the coast.
6
MARINE INSTITUTE
The MI is the national agency responsible for marine research, technology development
and innovation. It was set up under the 1991 Marine Institute Act “to undertake, to co-
ordinate, to promote and to assist in marine research and development and to provide
such services related to research and development that, in the opinion of the Institute,
will promote economic development and create employment and protect the marine
environment.” The Institute provides marine research services including fish stock
assessment, fish health services, marine food safety monitoring, environmental
monitoring, research vessel operations, seabed mapping, data management, and national
research and development funding programmes. The MI is governed by a non-
executive board of up to nine members, including the chair. The agency has staff
members located at the MI’s headquarters in Oranmore, Co. Galway, as well as at
offices in Dublin, in Co. Mayo, and in other locations around the coast.
SEA-FISHERIES PROTECTION AUTHORITY
The SFPA was created by the Sea-Fisheries and Maritime Jurisdiction Act 2006 to
operate as an independent body for the State’s sea fisheries and seafood safety law
enforcement functions. The agency was established on 1 January 2007. The SFPA’s
mission is to apply sea fisheries conservation and seafood safety legislation fairly and
consistently. It seeks to promote compliance with the law co-operatively with the sea
fisheries and seafood sectors with the overall objective of ensuring that the marine fish
and shellfish resources from the waters in Ireland’s Exclusive economic Zone (EEZ) are
exploited legally and consumed safely. The SFPA is governed by an Authority
consisting of one to three members, including the chair. Staff members of the SFPA are
based at the National Seafood Centre in Clonakilty, Co. Cork, and at a network of
regional offices around the coast.
2.4 Role of Non-commercial State Agencies
In the course of its review the Group considered the rationale behind the establishment
of State agencies. Government has employed such agencies since the foundation of the
State. Some agencies have had commercial functions, delivering public utilities such as
electricity and gas, airports, airlines and shipping, etc. Others have had non-commercial
functions. Some of the non-commercial agencies have been involved in aspects of
economic development, such as the IDA, Enterprise Ireland, Bord Bia, Teagasc, and –
in the case of the fishing industry – BIM.
In essence, a State agency is a body established under the aegis of a Government
Department to deliver some form of public policy. Agencies are commonly established
due to a combination of particular needs: specialisation in a particular field, flexibility
in service delivery, and a desire to devolve the delivery of services away from central
Government. This allows Government to focus on the broader policy framework while
powers of implementation are delegated to specialist bodies, suitably skilled to carry out
their particular functions. Agencies are usually placed under the direction of
7
independent boards answerable to the Minister of the agency’s parent Department. The
Government Statement on Transforming Public Services, published in November 2008,
acknowledges that the creation of State agencies has in many cases allowed
Government to achieve the scale and recruit the specialist skills needed to focus on
particular priorities.
A study in 2005 by the Committee for Public Management Research (CPMR)2
explained the rationale behind the establishment of agencies and identified some key
functions of non-commercial agencies, including commercial development, research
and regulation. Commercial development was the main purpose behind the
establishment of BIM. BIM’s role complements the differing functions performed by
the other agencies under the Department’s umbrella, as described above, with the MI
performing the research role and the SFPA carrying out the regulatory enforcement role.
2.5 BIM’s Evolving Role and Functions
The 1952 Sea Fisheries Act established BIM as a replacement for the Irish Sea Fisheries
Association Ltd. (ISFA). The ISFA was incorporated in 1930 as a friendly society with
the object of developing Ireland’s sea fisheries. BIM inherited the functions of the
ISFA, but received an expanded range of powers for assisting the development of the
national seafood industry. Using these powers, the agency has evolved over the past six
decades, consistently developing, reorganising and refocusing its services to meet the
changing needs of the Irish seafood sector.
Initially, BIM engaged directly in commercial fishing activities, including processing
and distributing fish as well as the purchase, operation and construction of fishing
vessels. It operated a hire purchase scheme to enable fishermen to buy fishing vessels.
Gradually the agency disengaged from direct involvement in commercial activities,
focusing instead on fostering the expansion of the fishing fleet, encouraging better fish
handling and processing operations, promoting Irish seafood, producing bulk ice for the
fleet at fishing ports, and nurturing fledgling aquaculture enterprises. BIM provided
training services and technical and financial support to the industry to assist its
development.
Since the 1990s, BIM has concentrated on developing the industry’s catching,
aquaculture, processing and marketing segments supported by national and EU funding.
The role of BIM has evolved over time in keeping with the requirements of the sector.
In 2006 it restructured and reorganised its service units, reducing staff numbers and
cutting costs. BIM’s seafood marketing function was transferred to Bord Bia in 2009,
enabling the agency to refocus its services on business development and innovation
services. It also expanded its processing services to the industry and opened a Seafood
Development Centre in Clonakilty, Co. Cork.
Today BIM sees itself as a customer-focused and highly skilled organisation working
with the Irish seafood industry to realise the growth opportunities for seafood identified
2 McGauran Anne-Marie, Verhoest Koen, Humphreys Peter C.: The Corporate Governance of Agencies
in Ireland: Non-commercial National Agencies, IPA 2005.
8
in the Food Harvest 2020 strategy. To achieve these goals, BIM provides advisory,
financial, technical, training and business development services to all segments of the
industry. BIM aims to expand the volume, quality and value of output from the sector
for the benefit of coastal communities. The agency seeks to drive growth, increase
competitiveness and create jobs in the sector, while alleviating constraints that could
impede development.
2.6 Relevant International Service Delivery Models
As part of the Review process, the Group looked at a number of other countries to
compare their management of seafood functions with those in Ireland. The countries
examined were Denmark, France, Norway and the UK. These countries were selected
because they represent the most relevant examples, within and outside the EU, for
comparison with Ireland due to the size or orientation of their seafood industries. While
exact comparisons are difficult to make, it is clear from these examples that other
countries have devolved seafood functions – including development – out of
government ministries and into specialist agency structures.
DENMARK
Denmark is the fifth largest exporter of fish and fish products in the world. About
20,000 people are employed in the Danish fishing and aquaculture sectors and their
related industries. The total annual catch value is approximately 3.0 billion DKR (€0.4
billion). The value of exported fishery products (including products based on imported
raw material) is 16.5 billion DKR (€2.2 billion).
The body with overall responsibility for sea fisheries and aquaculture functions in
Demark is the Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries. The Ministry deals with a
number of policy issues, including fisheries policy, and has 120 staff members.
Working under the Ministry are two bodies, the Veterinary and Food Administration,
which deals with food safety, and the AgriFish Agency.
The AgriFish Agency was set up in 2007 and has a staff of 1,200. It is run by a board
and works towards creating sustainable growth and development in all areas of the food
sector (including agriculture, horticulture, fisheries and aquaculture) as well as
enhancing the living conditions of the population living in rural and fishing areas in
Denmark. The agency’s work includes providing grants, development programmes and
guidance, as well as regulation and control functions. The agency has departments,
inspectorates and inspection vessels countrywide.
FRANCE
France is one of the EU’s largest producers of seafood from sea fishing and aquaculture,
with the industry employing some 25,000 people. The Ministry of Agriculture and
Agri-Food is responsible for setting policies for the management of fish stocks, fisheries
research and fisheries control. These areas are handled by the Ministry’s Directorate for
Sea Fisheries and Aquaculture (DPMA).
9
The DPMA’s duties include setting regulatory controls for sea fisheries and
aquaculture; defining policy for fisheries resource conservation at national, EU and
international levels; defining sea fisheries control policy; representing France at
international fisheries negotiations; coordinating France’s participation in international
fisheries bodies; negotiating with the industry to establish fisheries management rules;
overseeing inter-branch organisations in the seafood sector; and managing state and EU
funding for the sector.
The direct management of France’s seafood products, however, is the responsibility of
FranceAgriMer. This national body was created in 2009 and comes under the aegis of
the Ministry. It is charged with the management of various agriculture sectors as well
as fisheries and aquaculture, including the development of the seafood sector. At
ground level, the services of FranceAgriMer are grouped together with the regional
offices for food, agriculture and forestry. The Fish and aquaculture sectors are
represented by a special committee within AgriMer, which groups together sector
stakeholders. This group makes proposals and gives advice, which is transmitted to the
administrative Council of AgriMer and to the Ministry.
NORWAY
Fisheries rank as Norway’s third most important export (after oil / gas and metal),
accounting for 5.7 % of total export value. In 2011 Norwegian vessels delivered 2.3
million tonnes of fish, crustaceans and molluscs with a landed value of NOK 15.9 (€2
billion), up 19% from 2010. Norway considers the sustainable optimum management
of fish stocks as the most important challenge facing the fishing industry. In 2011, just
over 10,000 people cited fishing as their main occupation.
The Ministry of Fisheries and Coastal Affairs is the central fisheries management
authority and it exercises administrative authority through adoption and implementation
of legislation and regulations. There is an array of fisheries-related bodies operating
under the Ministry’s overall policy direction, dealing with functions such as the
regulation of the fisheries and aquaculture sectors, the administration of ports and
seaways, research into fish stocks and marine ecosystems, marketing of seafood
products, providing advice to the Ministry and industry, applied research on seafood
nutrition, safety and production, etc.
A key body is the Directorate of Fisheries, which acts as advisory body to and executive
arm of the Ministry in fisheries and aquaculture matters. It has a vast range of
responsibilities from managing marine resources and aquaculture, advice to the Ministry
and responsibility for policy implementation. Some of its functions include
administering commercial fishing licences, allocating fishing quotas, regulating and
monitoring fishing activities, developing new fishing technologies and techniques,
monitoring and regulating aquaculture activities, and the commercial development of
coastal areas.
In addition to its head office in Bergen, the Directorate operates in more than twenty
local offices spread over seven regions. It has nearly 500 staff members nationwide.
The regional offices are responsible at county and municipal level for resource
10
management, resource control, aquaculture management, aquaculture control and
coastal zone management.
UNITED KINGDOM
Fisheries management responsibilities in the UK are broken down into regional
departments in England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, and some of the islands.
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) works directly in
England, but also works closely with the devolved regional departments. Defra
generally leads on negotiations in the EU and internationally.
In 2009, the Marine Management Organisation (MMO) was established as an executive
non-departmental public body. It brings together within a single entity a number of
marine management activities from across a number of government departments. The
MMO is the government’s principal regulator, as well as its delivery body, for English
territorial waters and UK offshore marine areas (for those matters that are not
devolved).
The MMO is led and directed by an independent Board but Ministers remain
accountable to Parliament for the overall performance of the MMO. Given the wide
range of departments that have policy interests in the marine area, a cross-Government
Sponsorship Group was created to allow for the coordination of marine policy issues
between the MMO and interested departments.
The MMO has been given a broad range of tasks and functions that are intended to
allow the agency to take a comprehensive approach to marine management, including
conservation of marine species and habitats, provision of financial assistance to the
industry, management of fishing fleet quota and capacity, licensing of commercial
fishing vessels, monitoring and control of fishing activities, licensing of off-shore
activities and development of marine planning.
CHAPTER 3: BIM ORGANISATION
3.1 BIM Restructuring [2006-2012]
In 2006, BIM began a period of restructuring, aligning itself with priorities set by the
new national seafood strategy, detailed in the report Steering A New Course: Strategy
for a Restructured, Sustainable and Profitable Irish Seafood Industry 2007-2013, and
the introduction of the Sea-Fisheries and Maritime Jurisdiction Act 2006. Since then,
BIM has reduced its staff compliment from 176 to 128 full and part time staff members
(see Figures 1 and 2). The organisational structure also has been rationalised. One
service division was eliminated and its functions distributed across the remaining
service divisions. It is understood that the BIM Board has decided to phase out the
agency’s involvement in the provision of bulk ice to the fishing fleet. BIM has reduced
the number of ice plants it operates from 26 to seven, and it intends to end its
involvement in the operation of the remaining plants by the end of 2012.
11
BIM continued its efforts to cut costs and reorientate its functions following the release
in 2009 of the Report of the Special Group on Public Service Numbers and Expenditure
Programmes. BIM refocused its services on promoting enterprise in the sector, which
is carried out in conjunction with Enterprise Ireland and Údarás na Gaeltachta.
Following the transfer of the seafood promotion function to Bord Bia, BIM’s former
marketing division was re-organised into a unit promoting business development and
innovation in the sector. BIM appointed four regional business development officers
and created the Seafood Development Centre in Clonakilty. New units at the agency
are dedicated to managing issues such as seafood economics and strategic planning.
FIGURE 1: BIM HEADCOUNT TREND, 2006-2012
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Nu
mb
er
Em
plo
ye
d
Note: The 2012 figure is an end of year estimate and does not include ice plant staff.
Source: BIM
3.2 Savings and Efficiencies [2006-2012]
As a result of reducing staff numbers, BIM brought its payroll costs down some 20% in
recent years, from €10 million in 2008 to less than €8 million in 2011. It also reduced
its costs for purchasing external services by about €750,000 in the past two years, an
overall reduction of more than 50%. This was achieved mainly through implementing
competitive bidding processes for these services, and by BIM staff undertaking more of
this work themselves.
Despite the decrease in the number of people working at BIM, the agency has
endeavoured to maintain its core services through efficiencies afforded by the flexibility
and productivity of its remaining staff members. BIM personnel are well qualified and
experienced, bringing a variety of skills to the organisation. This allowed BIM to work
12
with staff to introduce cost-neutral changes in work practices and to undertake a process
of task prioritisation.
FIGURE 2: CHANGES TO BIM’S STRUCTURES AND COSTS, 2006-2012
BIM Structures and Costs (2006) BIM Structures and Costs (2012)
Division Staff
Numbers
Salary
Costs (€) Division
Staff
Numbers
Salary
Costs (€)
CEO 16 936,590 Sectoral Planning 10 625,768
Secretariat 22 1,246,613 Corporate
Services 13 851,032
Aquaculture
Development 29 1,677,151
Aquaculture
Development 30 1,930,475
Fisheries
Development 34 2,028,120
Fisheries
Development and
Training
42 2,637,059
Marine Services1 53 2,430,324
Business
Development and
Innovation
19 1,141,677
Market
Development2
22 1,450,814 Other3 13 407,635
Total: 176 9,769,612 Total: 127 7,593,647
Change from
2006: -27.8% -22.3%
1 Division eliminated and functions redistributed.
2 Division reorganised into Business Development and Innovation division following the
transfer of seafood marketing functions to Bord Bia in 2009. 3 Figures includes one health and safety officer and 12 staff working in the agency’s seven
remaining ice plants.
Source: BIM
3.3 Current BIM Structure and Service Delivery
BIM currently is organised into five divisions. Three of these divisions deliver services
directly to the seafood sector: Aquaculture Development, Fisheries Development and
Business Development. The other two divisions are units providing financial and
support functions: Corporate Service and Sectoral Planning. BIM shaped its structures
and services in order to deliver on the targets set out in Government strategies for the
sector, particularly Food Harvest 2020. It also has incorporated these targets into its
own plans, making them the agency’s goals for the near future.
The Fisheries Development and Aquaculture Development divisions seek to expand the
Irish industry’s raw material supply base through a number of initiatives. One scheme
looks to encourage foreign fishing vessels to land more of their catches into Ireland so
13
Irish processors will have access to more raw material. In another effort, BIM is
working to resolve technical issues with the current aquaculture licensing regime in
order to facilitate the growth of the sector in the future. BIM has prepared and
submitted an application to DAFM for a licence to develop a pilot site in Galway Bay
for a deepwater fish farm. BIM estimate that the site could potentially produce up to
15,000 tonnes of organic salmon per year, adding €100 million annually to Irish seafood
exports and directly creating 350 jobs, with potentially another 150 jobs being created
indirectly.
The Business Development Division, along with the agency’s Seafood Development
Centre (SDC), is seeking ways to improve the Irish sector’s position in the marketplace.
For example, the collective route to market scheme coordinates joint ventures by
seafood operators, helping them to access foreign markets and build economies of scale.
Another initiative is the development of branding and certification programmes to help
Irish producers differentiate their products from those of competitors in the global
market. The SDC has been helping seafood companies to find ways of adding more
value to their products. BIM reports that since 2009 the SDC has assisted 300 seafood
businesses and facilitated the launch of 26 new products.
In addition to these services, BIM assists operators in the Irish industry with technical
issues and provides them with training aimed at improving their businesses. In the
aquaculture sector, there are ongoing efforts to help producers increase the quality and
volume of production through the development and implementation of new techniques
and technologies. In the catching sector, BIM has carried out trials of fishing gears in
an effort to help Irish fishermen avoid catches of unwanted fish and reduce discarding.
BIM provides training and mentoring to Irish processors through its SeaPro (Lean
Manufacture) Programme, helping them to increase efficiency through raising capacity
and reducing consumption of water and energy in their operations. BIM reports that, in
2011, participating companies achieved a combined annualised cost savings of
€600,000. Food retailers and operators receive mentoring from BIM to help them
improve their handling, presentation and promotion of seafood. BIM also delivers
hundreds of courses each year to the industry at its facilities in Greencastle and
Castletownbere and through its Coastal Training Units. Courses range from
professional courses for deck and engineering officers to food safety for seafood
businesses.
BIM is the main delivery instrument for grant aid schemes under the Seafood
Development Operation Programme of the National Development Plan – European
Fisheries Fund (EFF). The programme consists of various grant aid schemes for the
fisheries, aquaculture and processing areas of the sector. In 2012, BIM – in conjunction
with Enterprise Ireland and Údarás na Gaeltachta – expects to evaluate and administer
more than €38 million in grants to about 200 enterprises.
3.4 Current BIM Staffing and Costs
BIM currently has 127 staff members working in five service divisions of the
organisation. BIM staff members are located mainly at the agency’s headquarters in
Dun Laoghaire and at the National Seafood Centre in Clonakilty, Co. Cork. Other BIM
personnel are based in offices in Castletownbere, Galway, Killybegs, Greencastle and
14
other outlying locations. The current total headcount includes twelve BIM staff
members who are working in the seven remaining ice plants operated by BIM.
FIGURE 3: BIM STAFF AGE PROFILE TO 2015
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71 76 81 86 91 96 101
Headcount
Ag
e (
ye
ars
)
Note: Excludes ice plant staff and potential retirees.
Source: BIM
FIGURE 4: DISTRIBUTION OF BIM STAFF QUALIFICATIONS
Note: The category “Training & Others” includes staff with the specific professional
qualification, including Master Mariners, required to deliver BIM’s training
programme.
Source: BIM
15
As noted above, BIM has reduced its staff numbers by more than 25% since 2006. As a
result, the organisation’s pay bill was also lowered from €9.7 million in 2006 to €7.5
million. It is understood that the BIM Board has decided to withdraw the agency from
operating the ice plants by the end of 2012, so these employees will be redeployed as
necessary. BIM expects to reduce salary costs by a further €327,000 when this happens.
Following retirements from BIM in recent years, the agency now has a staff age profile
that falls mainly between 35 and 55 years. The current age structure profile suggests
that staff numbers should be relatively stable for a period of years (see Figure 3).
The staff working for BIM are well qualified and experienced. Many are specialists in
technology, business and science (see Figures 4 and 5). Eighty percent of staff have
some type of third level qualification (certificate or higher). More than half have
achieved a primary degree or higher third level qualification. Thirty-four staff members
have qualifications at Masters level and nine have PhDs. The qualifications include
subjects such as business and training, but many of them are in specialised fields like
seafood technology, seafood business, seafood safety management and fisheries and
aquaculture science. In addition, many staff members worked in the private sector and
in the industry before joining BIM, bringing years of experience to the organisation.
FIGURE 5: LEVELS OF BIM STAFF QUALIFICATIONS
Note: This graph shows the portions of BIM staff that have reached each qualification
level.
Source: BIM
3.5 Seafood Sector Observations on Review
The Group requested observations from stakeholders and other organisations interested
in the Irish seafood sector, and nine submissions were received. A full list of the
organisations that made submissions, as well as summaries of the submissions, are in
Appendix 2. Copies of the submissions made to the Group will be made available on
the DAFM website.
16
While there was considerable diversity in the range of views expressed in the
submissions received, a number of themes emerged regarding BIM, which are
summarised in the following table.
Theme Observations
Majority
view
Transferring BIM’s functions to DAFM would have an adverse impact on
services available to the Irish seafood industry and on the industry itself.
Historic
impacts of
BIM
BIM has been a valuable support to the Irish seafood industry since its
establishment, providing vital assistance to operators and helping the sector
realise its potential.
The catch and aquaculture industries have benefited a great deal from the
agency’s projects and initiatives.
The agency has evolved with changes in the sector to meet the evolving needs
of the industry and to help it remain competitive.
BIM staff are highly skilled and have become an integral part of coastal
communities. They are valuable resource to those based in coastal areas.
Transfer of
BIM’s
functions to
DAFM
Any transfer of functions should only be undertaken if this would enhance the
services delivered to the industry.
BIM’s developmental functions should not be transferred to DAFM; doing so
would have a severely negative impact on the industry. It also would destroy
the strong link between the agency and the industry.
BIM brings a needed coordinating influence to a fragmented, diverse sector.
The continued operation of BIM will allow the industry to take advantage of
opportunities to increase output, trade and investment.
DAFM would not be an effective vehicle for the delivery of BIM’s
development functions. Such a role would be incompatible with the
Department’s policy and regulatory functions.
BIM as an organisation has an innovative, commercial focus that is essential
for development of the sector. There is a risk this focus could be lost if BIM’s
functions were transferred to DAFM.
Ongoing
functions of
BIM
There is a clear need for the State to provide the industry-focused financial,
technical and advisory services to the Irish seafood sector in order for it to
reach the targets set out in the Food Harvest 2020 strategy.
The support provided by BIM staff to operators in coastal areas is vital to the
continued survival of the industry.
The developmental services of BIM should not only be maintained, but also
strengthened to help the Irish seafood industry compete in the global market.
BIM’s development of an aquaculture site in Galway could lead to conflicts of
interest, particularly if BIM’s functions were transferred to DAFM.
There should be a clear division between policy / regulatory and operational /
development functions. Operational / development functions should be
allocated to a separate organisation to avoid conflicts of interest.
17
Nearly all the submissions received by the Group noted BIM’s positive impact of the
sector, helping it to develop steadily over the years by providing a coordinating
influence and promoting development and innovation amongst operators. Many felt
that moving BIM’s functions to DAFM would damage the sector and endanger the
industry’s chances of achieving the goals set out in Food Harvest 2020. Industry
groups said that retaining a development body dedicated to the needs of the seafood
sector is a central requirement for the sector to continue its development and to
capitalise on the expected future growth in the global seafood market.
A different view was expressed in submissions from environmental interests, where it
was indicated that the commercial functions of BIM, such as seafood marketing, have
already been transferred to other State bodies, and that BIM’s expertise, knowledge and
facilities could be most effectively utilised by redistributing them amongst a number of
other organisations, such as the MI, the SFPA and DAFM.
CHAPTER 4: ANALYSIS OF CONSIDERATIONS
In assessing whether or not the functions of BIM should be transferred to DAFM, the
Group examined considerations involved with such a transfer, including:
Impacts on the delivery of Government policy for the sector,
Implications of transferring BIM functions to DAFM,
Additional savings or efficiencies arising from any transfer, and
Impacts on the relationship with the seafood sector client base.
The Group examined these issues based on the assumption that the current suite of
development functions delivered by BIM would remain unchanged, whether they were
transferred to DAFM or remained with the agency.
4.1 Delivery of Government Policy
A fundamental consideration for this review was the potential impact that transferring
BIM’s functions to DAFM would have on the achievement of Government policy
objectives for the sector. BIM was established by the Government for the purpose of
developing the national seafood industry and enhancing the economies of communities
around the coast of Ireland. BIM has evolved over the years, revising structures and
refocusing programmes to better meet the needs of the Irish seafood industry. Since
2006, the agency has reorganised itself in order to better deliver current Government
priorities, such as saving on public sector costs and developing better business and
enterprise in the seafood sector. BIM has incorporated the targets set out in the latest
Government strategies for the sector (particularly those in the Food Harvest 2020
document) into its own planning, so that they now constitute the agency’s goals for the
near future.
BIM's staff members have the experience, commercial focus and technical expertise
required to carry out their duties. They have an intimate understanding of the industry
and are integrated in the coastal communities that they endeavour to help. The agency
18
has built up a recognised legitimacy and standing which is in itself an intangible but
vital asset in meeting the development needs of the sector. This may be difficult to
replicate in another structure such as DAFM.
Assuming that the scope of BIM’s development functions are maintained if they are
transferred to DAFM, then – in theory – such a transfer will have no impact on those
functions. In fact, any transfer of BIM’s functions to DAFM will need to be
accompanied by a transfer of the staff carrying out the functions. DAFM then would
have, within its own direct control, access to the specialist skills and knowledge
required for the successful operation of those functions. Given this, one could expect
that the delivery of Government policy for the development of the seafood sector would
remain unchanged. It seems possible, however, that it could deteriorate over time. The
risk would be that the current emphasis on improving and developing the seafood sector
could be diluted and then lost due to lack of focus.
In its deliberations, the Group could not see any advantage for the Government or for
the general seafood sector in achieving very limited cost savings or efficiencies through
a transfer of BIM’s functions. Indeed the Group could not see a single developmental
advantage to the sector that could not be delivered by leaving the current structure in
place. The Group agrees that the current service model, which separates policy from
development functions, should continue.
4.2 Transfer of BIM Functions to DAFM
BIM is organised into five divisions, three focused on delivering development services
to the seafood sector and two “core” support areas dealing with financial and
operational issues. In considering a transfer of these divisions to DAFM, there is in fact
little or no overlap between the developmental functions of BIM and the policy and
regulatory functions of DAFM. Therefore, if the developmental services of BIM
continue as they are, the structure of the three service divisions – dealing with fisheries,
aquaculture and business – would likely be retained by DAFM.
In the short term, it is likely that the current distribution of BIM’s developmental staff,
at various offices around the country, would be maintained by DAFM following any
transfer. However the staff members in BIM’s two core support divisions would need
to be redeployed somehow as their functions – involving areas such as human
resources, communications, reception, accounts, procurement, etc. – are taken on by
relevant units in DAFM already performing these tasks.
With the transfer of BIM’s functions to DAFM, there might be some small scope for the
redeployment of staff from other areas of the Department into the former BIM units if
required. There is also the possibility that, as part of a larger organisation, any gaps that
might exist in the current BIM skill base would be covered by other areas of DAFM
(although under the Employment Control Framework, the scope to do this already
exists). Also, DAFM has units looking after general services, such as human resources,
information technology, etc., and the support provided by the larger organisation might
be more comprehensive than could be achieved in a smaller agency.
19
Some BIM tasks, such as its proposed deep sea aquaculture project, simply would not
be able to be carried out by DAFM as they would involve mixing regulatory and
operational roles in the one organisation, which could create a conflict of interest.
Therefore another organisation would be needed to carry out these tasks. A question
might also arise concerning the ability or advisability of DAFM administering and
operating highly specialist technical functions such as running fishing gear trials,
technological development and training in areas such as improved fishing practices,
safety and engineering.
Many of the submissions received by the Group mentioned this concern, warning that
moving the functions of BIM to DAFM could lead to conflicts of interest, particularly in
relation to the deep sea aquaculture project. These submissions urged that the current
separation of operational and developmental functions (BIM) from policy and
regulatory functions (DAFM) be maintained. Some submissions also made the point
that developmental functions could suffer if they were placed into a Department focused
mainly on its policy and regulatory roles.
4.3 Additional Savings and Efficiencies
As discussed above, BIM has already undergone a rationalisation programme in the
years since 2006, reducing its work force and cutting salary costs while striving to
maintain its services to the sector. The Group therefore considered if any additional
savings and efficiencies could be achieved if BIM’s functions were transferred to
DAFM.
The Board of BIM represents one possible source of savings, as it would no longer be
required in the event of a transfer of functions. BIM reported that in 2011 the Board
received just over €41,000 in fees and more than €14,000 in expenses, thereby offering
a potential savings of nearly €56,000. The Group weighed this possibility against the
added value that an independent board provides. The Group felt that the BIM Board
structure is a worthwhile asset that comes at a modest cost. The Group agreed that the
small savings that could be realised do not justify the loss of such an asset.
As stated above, the Group has assumed that if the functions of BIM were transferred to
DAFM, its development services to the seafood sector would be maintained by the
Department. This means the fisheries, aquaculture and business development divisions
– along with the staff in those areas – would be retained as work units within DAFM.
Therefore, as far as staff costs are concerned, the transfer of these functions to DAFM
would be a cost neutral exercise.
Transferring the functions of the two remaining core support divisions – Sectoral
Planning and Corporate Services – would provide an opportunity to achieve some
limited savings. Most of the functions carried out by these divisions – communications,
human resources, information technology, accounts, procurement, etc. – are already
handled by analogous units in DAFM. The Group identified potential savings of not
more than €700,000 in this area. The Group recommends that BIM explore the
possibility of making shared services arrangements with DAFM or other agencies with
a view to achieving maximum value through this approach.
20
Post transfer, most if not all of the offices currently occupied by BIM staff members
would have to be retained, at least in the medium term, to house the staff of the
development divisions. In addition, these divisions would still need a senior manager to
lead them within the DAFM structure. This could mean the CEO position of BIM
would simply be exchanged for a senior manager within DAFM, with no resultant
saving.
4.4 Perceived Impact on the Seafood Sector
BIM has a long history of helping all areas of the seafood sector with technical and
financial support. By working with industry operators over decades, the agency has
forged a bond with the sector. Many submissions received from sector stakeholders
said BIM staff members are considered an integral part of coastal communities. The
agency has a good reputation, and is trusted by those in the seafood community. If
BIM’s functions were transferred to DAFM, it could be difficult for the Department to
achieve the same connection with the seafood community in the short term.
Submissions received from industry stakeholders indicate that they firmly believe that
transferring BIM’s functions to DAFM would have a negative impact. They see the
agency as a vital resource, the only State body capable of providing the support and
technical expertise they require for the continuing development of the sector. Such a
transfer could remove a key co-ordinating function from the sector, and cause the loss
of the current focus on innovation and development. This could damage the industry
and hamper its attempts to develop and harness future opportunities.
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Conclusions
The Government's Critical Review process set out guiding principles for the
consideration of agency rationalisation under the following headings: citizen focus;
policy formulation; clear democratic and / or cost benefit; specialist bodies,
streamlining; service sharing; agency life-cycle, performance focus and respect of staff
interests.
The Group has considered these principles and adhered to its specific terms of reference
as detailed in chapters 1 to 4 above and concluded:
1. There is a clear distinction of functions among the main State bodies
responsible for the seafood sector in Ireland. BIM is a State agency established
under the aegis of a Government Department to promote the commercial
development of the Irish seafood sector. As such, it falls in line with
established practice for the creation of such organisations.
2. BIM has a clear mandate for the future. It is working with industry to deliver
the goals set out in the Government’s Food Harvest 2020 strategy.
21
3. BIM has a long history of changing and evolving in order to meet the needs of
the Irish seafood industry effectively. Today BIM sees itself as a skilled,
customer-focused organisation assisting the Irish seafood sector with realising
the growth opportunities for seafood identified in the Food Harvest 2020
strategy.
4. In comparing Irish seafood management structures with those in a number of
other countries, it is clear that it is normal and usual to devolve functions –
including development – into specialist agency structures for a variety of
reasons.
5. Significant restructuring of BIM has taken place. It has actively worked in
recent years to achieve greater efficiencies and reduce costs, including payroll
and services expenses, while endeavouring to maintain its delivery of services
to the Irish seafood sector. This restructuring has facilitated efficiencies and
assisted BIM with refocusing its core strategy towards promoting enterprise,
business development and innovation.
6. Given the scale of cost reductions already achieved and planned, the financial
justification for transferring BIM’s functions to DAFM is limited.
7. BIM is actively assisting Irish operators to develop their seafood businesses and
be more competitive in the international seafood market.
8. BIM provides a wide range of services to the Irish seafood sector. The scope
and complexity of these are such that another organisation would face real
challenges in attempting to deliver the same set of services to a comparable
standard.
9. Given the kinds of services it provides, BIM requires staff with particular skills,
qualifications and experience that are not always easily available within Civil
Service structures. As an agency, BIM has recruited the specialist personnel
needed and has trained its own staff for the range of functions it carries out.
10. From the submissions received, it is the clear belief of the seafood industry that
BIM should continue to deliver services considered important to the sector as a
separate entity.
11. BIM is a specialist body requiring specific expertise and independence of
function. Transferring BIM functions to DAFM would not improve the
potential for achieving the State's development objectives for the seafood sector
and might possibly hinder them. There is no apparent advantage for the
Government or for the general seafood sector in achieving very limited cost
savings or efficiencies through a transfer of BIM’s functions to DAFM. The
current service model, separating policy from development functions, should be
left in place.
12. While it is technically possible to transfer most of BIM's functions to DAFM,
the practical, technical and legal issues that would arise in some areas would
present significant obstacles.
22
13. Some additional savings and efficiencies could be realised through a transfer of
BIM’s functions to DAFM, however these are limited. They can also be
achieved through the development of shared services independently of any
transfer of functions.
5.2 Recommendations
The Group recommends that:
1. BIM should continue as a separate entity under the governance of the Minister
for Agriculture, Food and the Marine.
2. BIM should continue to refocus its strategy to deliver the goals set out under
Food Harvest 2020. In its role leading the commercial development of the
sector, BIM should focus on the goals as set out in the Strategy:
Supporting innovation, restructuring and added value,
Improving competiveness, and
Developing environmentally sustainable fishing and aquaculture production
and management.
3. BIM should continue to work in partnership with its customers and other
relevant State agencies to develop the seafood sector in Ireland. The customer
and citizen should be central to the work of BIM, which should engage fully
with its client base in carrying out its function. BIM should strive to continually
and demonstrably enhance its relevance and service to the sector that it serves.
4. BIM should seek to make further efficiencies. Operations should be further
streamlined wherever possible and opportunities for sharing services should be
sought 1) with the Department and the other marine bodies and 2) with the
public service generally by engagement with the proposed shared service
initiatives in the Government’s Public Sector Reform Plan.
23
APPENDIX 1: TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE BIM CRITICAL
REVIEW GROUP
In November 2011 the Government announced its plans for reforming the Irish public
service in the document Public Service Reform. This reform provided for certain
agencies to be critically reviewed by June 2012. In the context of BIM, the purpose of
the review is to assess if the BIM functions should be transferred to the Department of
Agriculture, Food and the Marine.
A Critical Review Group will be established to undertake the review and advise the
Minister.
The Group will operate under an independent Chairman.
The Group will review and recommend whether or not the BIM functions should be
transferred to the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine.
The Group’s review will include:
1. An overview of BIM’s purpose, structures and processes with an assessment of
changes and efficiencies delivered in recent times;
2. An assessment of current and future operational activities and service delivery
within the context of Government policy for the sector (Food Harvest 2020),
and
3. An evaluation of BIM’s service provision together with an assessment of the
potential for further efficiencies in the provision of those services.
The Review Group is to conclude its work by 16 May 2012.
It is planned that the Review Group will include two external representatives:
Dr. Noel Cawley (Chairman) and
Mr. Lorcán Ó Cinnéide.
The Group is also to include four representatives of the Department of Agriculture,
Food and the Marine:
Dr. Cecil Beamish, Assistant Secretary,
Mr. Philip Carroll, Assistant Secretary,
Ms. Josephine Kelly, Principal Officer, Seafood Policy and Development
Division; and
Mr. Colm Hayes, Assistant Principal, Economics and Planning Division.
Mr. Nicholas Hoffman will act as Secretary to the Group.
24
APPENDIX 2: SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED
The BIM Critical Review Group requested observations from organisations that have an
interest in the Irish seafood sector. Submissions were received from the following:
Federation of Irish Fishermen
IFA Aquaculture
Irish Fish Processors and Exporters Association
The Environmental Pillar
Irish Fishermen's Organisation
Irish Seal Sanctuary Sea Fisheries Advisory Group
Irish South and West Fish Producers’ Organisation Ltd.
Killybegs Fishermen’s Organisation Ltd.
Save Bantry Bay
The following are summaries of the observations made regarding BIM in the
submissions received by the Group from various stakeholders and interested parties.
Federation of Irish Fishermen
BIM is a dedicated development agency with specialist skills and programmes.
It is central to the development of the seafood sector and to ensuring the targets
set out in the Food Harvest 2020 strategy are realised.
A transfer of BIM’s functions to DAFM would severely impair the industry and
could hamper any attempt to realise the huge potential growth in the sector.
Since 1952, BIM has played an integral part in helping the Irish seafood industry
adapt to challenges in the sector and deliver on its potential.
BIM is the only State agency with the skill set and knowledge base to address
the fragmented sales structure of the Irish seafood industry.
BIM is a development agency that has staff with commercial and technical skill
sets built up over years. If BIM is transferred to DAFM, there is a danger this
commercial development focus could be lost.
Bodies such as BIM, Bord Bia and Enterprise Ireland need to operate separately
from their parent Departments because those Departments are focused on policy
and regulation and therefore are not in a position to deliver development
functions.
25
BIM has evolved with the needs of the industry and consulted with the industry
to provide services that are relevant to the needs of the sector.
BIM has helped the industry to anticipate and adapt successfully to changes in
the seafood sector.
The training service provided by BIM is vital, given that fishing is such a
dangerous occupation. The training provided is tailored to the needs of the
industry.
The demand for seafood products will grow in coming years, and Ireland should
try to capitalise on this increasing demand. Without a dedicated seafood agency,
however, this will not happen, as there is no other agency or Government
Department that has the required expertise.
The sector development function should be kept separate from the policy
implementation function in order for the industry to operate effectively.
BIM staff are an integral part of coastal communities and a valuable resource to
those in peripheral coastal areas. Such support is vital to the continued survival
of the industry.
BIM’s functions should not be transferred to DAFM. BIM needs to retain its
autonomy to ensure its mission of supporting the industry is carried out.
IFA Aquaculture
BIM has for many years been a supportive and useful advisory agency for the
Irish seafood sector. The wild and farmed fish and shellfish industries have
benefited a great deal from the agency’s projects and initiatives.
It is vital to have a State development body to support, innovate and advise
producers. The industry needs an active development body to sustain and
improve job provision and exports.
BIM should review its progress towards meeting the objectives for farmed
seafood in the Food Harvest 2020 strategy.
BIM can help producers to reduce costs by compiling regular data on costs in
the sector.
Any move of BIM functions into the Department should only be taken if it will
enhance the services and support provided to the industry.
It is difficult to assess what savings, if any, would be achieved by transferring
BIM’s functions to DAFM. But there must continue to be an industry-focused
service that provides technical support, financial backing, development
assistance and independent advice to the sector and to the State’s licensing and
policy functions.
Irish Fish Processors and Exporters Association
BIM’s service provision to the fishing and aquaculture industries in Ireland is a
long-standing and effective operation. The range of these services has been
extensive, from assisting the expansion of primary production to assisting the
26
processing and distribution sectors with generating quality products and
competing in the marketplace.
BIM’s development services should not only be maintained, but should be
strengthened to meet the current competitive market conditions facing Irish
producers.
The development functions of BIM should not be transferred to DAFM. The
continued operation of these functions in BIM would ensure greater flexibility to
pursue opportunities for assisting the fishing and aquaculture industries to
increase output, trade and investment.
BIM brings a coordinating influence to bear on a diverse, dispersed industry.
Environmental Pillar
The report of the Special Group on Public Service Numbers and Expenditure
Programmes said absorbing BIM into other organisations could save about €7.3
million annually.
Many commercial functions of BIM (seafood marketing, export promotion,
seafood business development) should be or already have been absorbed by
other agencies (Bord Bia, Enterprise Ireland, Seafood Development Centre).
BIM’s expertise, knowledge and facilities would be most effectively utilised by
redistributing them amongst a number of other organisations, such as the Marine
Institute, the Sea Fisheries Protection Authority and DAFM.
BIM’s mission statement and customer charter say it is committed to promoting
sustainable development and responsible environmental practice. This
commitment is poorly reflected in BIM’s activities as these are concerned with
driving the exploitation of natural resources and the promotion of the industry at
all costs.
BIM proposes to become an aquaculture licence holder for a number of large-
scale finfish operations. This arrangement might lead to conflicts of interest as
the licence holder and the regulator would be too closely aligned, particularly if
BIM’s functions were transferred to DAFM. There should be a clear separation
of operational and regulatory functions.
Irish Fishermen’s Organisation
BIM has worked with the industry in the past, distributing grant aid and training,
which were badly needed in the industry.
Irish Seal Sanctuary Sea Fishery Advisory Group
BIM have left their core activities behind and the agency should return to these:
providing training to the fishing industry and the marketing and promotion of
seafood products.
27
Irish South and West Fish Producers’ Organisation Ltd.
BIM is the sole State agency dedicated to the Irish seafood industry and is the
only body with the specialist development skills and experience to help the
industry realise its full potential.
Transferring BIM’s functions to DAFM would have an adverse impact on the
services provided to the industry and on the industry itself.
BIM provides essential training services to the industry that are developed and
delivered in line with what the industry requires.
BIM’s Seafood Development Centre is an invaluable tool for the industry. The
SDC and BIM staff are working with the industry to “add value” to seafood
products. The SDC provides seafood businesses with a safe way to develop and
try out new products.
The commercial focus on innovation and development that BIM has could be
lost if its functions are transferred to DAFM.
Other State agencies, such as Bord Bia and Enterprise Ireland, operate separately
from their parent Departments because those Departments – due to their policy
and regulatory roles – are not in a position to deliver development type
functions.
BIM is the only State agency with the skills and knowledge to address the
fragmented domestic sales structure of the industry.
BIM has supported the industry with mentoring and financial assistance.
There is a real danger that if BIM’s development functions were transferred to
DAFM, there could be an adverse impact on them.
It will be hard for the industry to capitalise on increasing global demand for
seafood without a dedicated seafood development agency.
BIM staff have unique expertise and support the industry “on the ground”,
attributes which are vital for the continued survival of the industry.
The current separation between development functions (BIM) and policy
functions (DAFM) should continue.
BIM must retain its autonomy and its functions should not be transferred to
DAFM.
Killybegs Fishermen’s Organisation Ltd.
A developmental role for DAFM would be incompatible with its existing policy
and regulatory functions.
BIM is a dedicated development agency with specialist skills and programmes.
It is central to the development of the Irish seafood sector.
Transferring BIM’s functions to DAFM would damage the Irish seafood
industry as well as Ireland’s chances of capitalising on potential future growth in
this sector.
28
BIM has consistently helped the complex Irish seafood industry to face
challenges and to evolve along with changes in the market.
BIM is more than a provider of financial assistance. It has specialist skills, an
understanding of the sector, and it provides advice and programmes the industry
needs.
BIM has evolved with the needs of the industry. It has consulted with those in
the industry to ensure its programmes remain relevant to the needs of the sector.
BIM has helped the industry achieve an excellent reputation internationally for
quality seafood products.
BIM has provided vital training to thousands of fishermen over the years. The
training is tailored to the needs of the industry.
Any change to the current model of delivering services to the industry could set
the sector back decades.
The demand for seafood is set to increase in the coming years, but without a
dedicated seafood agency the Irish industry will not be able to capitalise on this.
No other agency or Government Department has the expertise to support the
industry.
Development functions and policy functions should be kept separate to ensure
the sector operates effectively.
A move of BIM’s functions to DAFM will destroy the link BIM staff have with
the coastal communities and the industry will suffer.
Save Bantry Bay
DAFM administers aquaculture licensing and regulates the activities of licence
holders. BIM is aiming at becoming an aquaculture licence holder. Therefore
moving BIM’s aquaculture functions under the Department’s remit would be a
conflict of interest. There should be a clear separation of operational and
regulatory activities, and these should be kept in separate organisations.