Mr. Michael Keatinge:

That is the real difference this time around - what I might call integrated community-led local development. I will address a number of the questions together and perhaps help the members see the complex nature of what we are dealing with. At a European level, Ireland accessed some €241 million of funds from the EMFF. That would have been set at an EU level, so we get the amount set down by the council. BIM would have no part in that negotiation, but I stress that it is set at an EU level. With regard to where we are in this structural fund compared to the last round, I understand there is an improvement. That fund depends on one critical thing: the EU element is €147 million or thereabouts, but to ensure we got the full drawdown, the State was required to come in with national co-funding. The State did not have to come in with the full co-funding. It could have said it was prepared to put up only a certain amount, which would mean less funds could be drawn down. The point I am making is that the EU part has been fully backed by the State part and Ireland will access the full €241 million that has been allocated to it.

We are dealing with a fund of €250 million. Unlike the last time, however, the fund now includes not just fisheries and seafood development but also control and enforcement. Members will see in the public consultation document that control and enforcement have been allocated €46.5 million. It also incorporates the data collection framework, which funds much of the research and surveys that the Marine Institute does, the work BIM does collecting economic data and so on. That is funded to the tune of €40.8 million. Of the €240 million, about €90 million is taken out for control and enforcement and for data collection, leaving something in the region of €160 million for seafood development.

One might then say that €12 million is less than 10%. We should bear in mind the point to which Deputy Harrington has alluded. The €12 million represents that portion of the fund that we are giving over in its totality to local groups to handle. That must not be confused with the suggestion that they cannot access the remainder of the funds. For example, the Senator raised the issue of safety. We will have a big safety programme.

As an aside, one of the key things we do on safety in Ireland was evidenced by what I call the life jacket scheme, which was launched in Union Hall 18 months ago after the dreadful tragedies in which people were lost. We put the new life jackets on everyone going out on a boat, particularly those under 15 m in length, with a built-in personal locator beacon. I am not glad to report, but it is worth recording, that some weeks ago a vessel sank off Wicklow. Three men found themselves in the sea within minutes. It was rather like that tragedy in Waterford in which three brothers were lost. They could probably see Brownstown Head and the local airport in Waterford, where the helicopter was located, but nobody knew they were alone in the sea and dying. The three men who found themselves in the waters off Wicklow last month were all wearing the new life jackets that BIM and the State had provided. The little personal locator beacons went off and in less than 15 minutes the helicopter was overhead. What could have been a tragedy ended with families reunited. There is an important lesson to be taken from this. The point I am making to the members is that under EU legislation the EMFF will not allow us fund that, because it is a requirement under national legislation and the EMFF states that structural aid may not be used to fund something that is already a legal requirement. Ireland, though, has taken the view that we should continue to fund that regardless under de minimis. That sort of safety programme will remain in place, along with all the other safety work we do. That is, the standard safety scheme, under which we deal with life rafts, life jackets, fire-fighting equipment and all that, will remain in place. That is outside the €12 million. Those fisherman in FLAG areas can continue to avail of that.

We are bringing in a new programme to support education. For too long, fishermen have not been financially supported in attending the colleges in Greencastle or Castletownbere. Of course we have the mobile training units that visit these sites, but I believe fundamentally that we should offer financial support to fishermen to undertake training - not just safety training, but the whole range of training. For example, our fishermen come ashore in the winter looking for alternative work. They may go to a shipping company looking for a job as a deckhand, but they have no qualification. We must change that. We must look at the fishing certificates to ensure that as the year rotates they can move seamlessly from inshore fishing in the summer to working on a guard ship, a supply vessel or something else in the winter.

To return to the point I am putting across, the chairman has said the difference this time is that FLAGs can and should be encouraged to promote projects to avail of the rest of the €160 million for fisheries development. The €12 million is the bit they will fully control. The other €148 million is there, as are Leader funds. We have to stop seeing the FLAGs as somehow in competition with Leader. Far from it: community-led local development should be a partnership and it should be seamless across the agencies. The one thing we are saying is that the unique situation of coastal communities demands that they have a local action group. They deserve that. They deserve their own group, which must not be confused with suggesting there is any distinction between BIM and Leader. It should be the opposite. A public consultation is under way. Of course we are vying with the processing sector, with the bigger fishing boats, within agriculture and so on, right across a whole range of areas of seafood development, and everyone wants their part. There is €12 million there for FLAGs, and there are many other people vying for funds. It is a balancing act. If I take the direct funds the FLAGs will access €12 million. If I take the inshore management scheme, which is another €6 million, that brings us up to €18 million. Deputy Ferris talked about onshore storage for products, and we have worked a lot in the past, particularly on lobster storage. There is a special measure in here that deals directly with support to produce organisations for quayside storage of unwanted catches. However, that sort of measure can also provide onshore facilities. It will mean the total package for the inshore seafood areas will far exceed €12 million, but the €12 million will be there to be directly driven by local communities.

That is the empowering aspect and there is no reason it could not increase in future.

On the area of multitasking, it would be remiss of me to suggest to the committee that it is an easy job. I have discussed this at length with the Marine Survey Office and the big problem is that if someone heads out to sea in the morning with pots, rope and equipment, then comes back ashore later and encourages tourists to come on board to do whale watching, sea angling or whatever, there are issues of insurance and safety which pose complex problems. It may be that we are able to find a way forward whereby a single vessel may change role midway through the day or multitask. That would put new demands on the operator of the vessel. There are other models; for example, in a community with a number of boats, they could, through a community-led structure, make a decision as a group of fishermen that a particular boat will be dedicated this summer for sea angling and that they will equip it and so on - "I will help you fish your pots in the morning, and you use my boat during the day for sea angling." That type of group thinking and co-operation could be another way forward. These are models we will have to explore with the Marine Survey Office. They are not easy, and it would be wrong of me to suggest that the Marine Survey Office is just blocking this. It is very happy to co-operate but it is difficult. There is a range of things we can consider.

I have mentioned safety in particular, and I will ask my colleague Mr. Donal Maguire to say a word about the area of aquaculture. There can be a very exciting role for aquaculture in the whole area of FLAGs.