Report on the Ports’ Sector
Tuarascáil maidir le hEarnáil na bPort
JOINT OIREACHTAS COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORT
AN COMHCHOISTE OIREACHTAIS UM IOMPAR
Second Report
An Dara Tuarascáil
April 2010
Aibreán 2010
JOINT OIREACHTAS COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORT
AN COMHCHOISTE OIREACHTAIS UM IOMPAR
Report on the Ports’ Sector
Tuarascáil maidir le hEarnáil na bPort
April 2010
Aibreán 2010
A10/0481
Chairman’s Preface
The Joint Committee on Transport has a wide-ranging remit covering all aspects of
Transport. In compiling this Report the members of the Committee and I were
concentrating on one aspect of that remit namely, the Port Sector.
The Committee’s main objective of this particular review was to discuss, under its
scrutiny and oversight role, a range of issues in respect of the ten commercial
harbours governed by the Harbours’ Act 1996 and under the Committee’s remit.
In the course of its review presentations were made by the following ports to the
Committee:










Dundalk
Drogheda
Dublin
Dun Laoghaire
Wicklow
New Ross
Waterford
Cork
Shannon Foynes
Galway
The Irish Exporters Association and the Commercial Harbours Section of the
Department of Transport also made presentations and the Joint Committee wishes
to express its thanks to all concerned for their co-operation.
Following receipt of all the evidence obtained through the above means the
Committee then compiled their report and has presented an analysis of the Irish
ports sector and the key influences affecting its performance.
Arising from this analysis, the Joint Committee on Transport has presented a range
of recommendations for its improvement.
The assistance of Raymond Burke Consulting in the preparation of this report is
acknowledged.
Frank Fahey T.D
Chairman
April 2010
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
CONTENTS
Page
1.
2.
3.
Context
1
1.1
Joint Oireachtas Committee on Transport
1
1.2
Terms of Reference
2
1.3
The Irish Ports’ Sector
4
1.4
Recent Irish Traffic Trends
6
1.5
International Trends
8
1.6
Key Findings
11
1.7
Principal Recommendations
13
1.8
Structure of Report
14
1.9
Acknowledgements
14
Profile of the Ports under Review
15
2.1
Dublin Port Company
15
2.2
Port of Cork
19
2.3
Port of Waterford
22
2.4
Dundalk Port
24
2.5
Wicklow Port
25
2.6
New Ross Port Company
26
2.7
Dun Laoghaire Port Company
28
2.8
Drogheda Port Company
30
2.9
Galway Port Company
34
2.10
Shannon Foynes Port Company
38
Key National Port Policy and Other Documents
42
3.1
Department of Transport – Statement of Strategy 2008 - 2010
42
3.2
The High Level Review of the State Commercial Ports Operating under the 1996 – 2000
Harbours’ Acts
43
3.3
National Ports’ Policy Statement
46
3.4
Assessment of Port Services Issues for Enterprise
47
3.5
InterTrade Ireland: Freight Transport Report for the Island of Ireland
49
3.6
Review of the Security of Ireland’s Access to Commercial Oil Supplies
53
3.7
Smarter Travel – A Sustainable Transport Future
56
3.8
Dublin Port National Development Plan Study
58
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
4.
5.
Key Issues and Recommendations
60
4.1
Performance of the Ports’ Sector
60
4.2
Importance of the Ports’ Sector
67
4.3
Need for Integrated Spatial Planning
64
4.4
Short Sea Shipping Opportunities
64
4.5
Corporate Governance
65
4.6
Harbour Legislation
67
4.7
The Regional Ports: Bantry and Fenit
68
4.8
Bureaucracy
68
4.9
Rail Freight
69
4.10
Coastal Shipping
73
4.11
Foreshore and Dumping at Sea
74
4.12
Ports’ Policy Statement
74
4.13
Port Sector Co-Operation
75
4.14
Involvement of the Private Sector
76
4.15
Rosslare Europort
77
4.16
Maritime Tourism
78
4.17
Other
79
Conclusion
82
APPENDICES
Appendix 1
Members of the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Transport
Appendix 2
Key Port Statistics and Ratios: 2008
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
1.
Context
1.1
Joint Oireachtas Committee on Transport
Dáil Éireann on 23 October 2007 ordered:
“(1) (a) That a Select Committee, which shall be called the Select Committee on
Transport consisting of 11 members of Dáil Éireann (of whom 4 shall constitute a
quorum), be appointed to consider (i)
such Bills the statute law in respect of which is dealt with by the Department
of Transport;
(ii)
such Estimates for Public Services within the aegis of the Department of
Transport;
(iii)
such proposals contained in any motion, including any motion within the
meaning of Standing Order 159, concerning the approval by Dáil Éireann of
the terms of international agreements involving a charge on public funds; and
(iv)
such other matters
as shall be referred to it by Dáil Éireann from time to time;
(v)
Annual Output Statements produced by the Department of Transport; and
(vi)
such Value for Money and Policy Reviews conducted and commissioned by
the Department of Transport as it may select.
(b) For the purpose of its consideration of matters under paragraphs (1)(a)(i), (iii), (iv),
(v) and (vi), the Select Committee shall have the powers defined in Standing Order
83(1), (2) and (3).
(c) For the avoidance of doubt, by virtue of his or her ex officio membership of the
Select Committee in accordance with Standing Order 92(1), the Minister for Transport
(or a Minister or Minister of State nominated in his or her stead) shall be entitled to
vote.
(2)
The Select Committee shall be joined with a Select Committee to be
appointed by Seanad Éireann to form the Joint Committee on Transport to consider (i)
such public affairs administered by the Department of Transport as it may
select, including, in respect of Government policy, bodies under the aegis of that
Department;
(ii)
such matters of policy, including EU related matters, for which the Minister
for Transport is officially responsible as it may select;
(iii)
such related policy issues as it may select concerning bodies which are partly
or wholly funded by the State or which are established or appointed by
Members of the Government or by the Oireachtas;
(iv)
such Statutory Instruments made by the Minister for Transport and laid before
both Houses of the Oireachtas as it may select;
(v)
such proposals for EU legislation and related policy issues as may be referred
to it from time to time, in accordance with Standing Order 83(4);
(vi)
the strategy statement laid before each House of the Oireachtas by the
Minister for Transport pursuant to section 5(2) of the Public Service
Management Act 1997, and for which the Joint Committee is authorised for
the purposes of section 10 of that Act;
Page 1
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
(vii)
such annual reports or annual reports and accounts, required by law and laid
before either or both Houses of the Oireachtas, of bodies specified in
paragraphs 2(i) and (iii), and the overall operational results, statements of
strategy and corporate plans of these bodies, as it may select;
Provided that the Joint Committee shall not, at any time, consider any matter relating
to such a body which is, which has been, or which is, at that time, proposed to be
considered by the Committee of Public Accounts pursuant to the Orders of Reference
of that Committee and/or the Comptroller and Auditor General (Amendment) Act
1993;
Provided further that the Joint Committee shall refrain from inquiring into in public
session, or publishing confidential information regarding, any such matter if so
requested either by the body or by the Minister for Transport; and
(viii)
such other matters as may be jointly referred to it from time to time by both
Houses of the Oireachtas,
and shall report thereon to both Houses of the Oireachtas.
(3) The Joint Committee shall have the power to require that the Minister for
Transport (or a Minister or Minister of State nominated in his or her stead) shall
attend before the Joint Committee and provide, in private session if so desired by
the Minister or Minister of State, oral briefings in advance of EU Council meetings
to enable the Joint Committee to make known its views.
(4) The quorum of the Joint Committee shall be five, of whom at least one shall be a
member of Dáil Éireann and one a member of Seanad Éireann.
(5) The Joint Committee shall have the powers defined in Standing Order 83(1) to (9)
inclusive.
(6) The Chairman of the Joint Committee, who shall be a member of Dáil Éireann,
shall also be Chairman of the Select Committee.”
The members of the Joint Committee are:
1.2

Frank Fahey T.D. (Chairman)

Paul Connaughton T.D. (Vice Chairman)

Noel Ahern T.D.

Thomas Broughan T.D.

Timmy Dooley T.D.

Frank Feighan T.D.

Michael Kennedy T.D.

Michael Lowry T.D.

Shane McEntee T.D.

Ciaran Cuffe T.D.

Fergus O’Dowd T.D.

Senator Martin Brady

Senator Paschal Donohoe

Senator John Ellis

Senator Shane Ross
Terms of Reference
The purpose of this particular enquiry was to discuss, under its scrutiny and oversight
Page 2
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
role, a range of issues in respect of the ten commercial harbours governed by the
Harbours’ Act 1996 and later.
Presentations were made by the following ports to the Committee:

Dundalk

Drogheda

Dublin

Dun Laoghaire

Wicklow

New Ross

Waterford

Cork

Shannon Foynes

Galway
Rosslare Europort, which is managed by Iarnród Éireann and operates under different
legislation, did not form part of the scrutiny, and neither did Greenore, which is a
private port partly owned by Dublin Port.
The Irish Exporters Association and the Commercial Harbours Section of the
Department of Transport also made presentations to the Committee.
The key matters of interest to the Committee were:

Port performance and constraints to performance

Port infrastructure and proposals for future development

Details of consultancy contracts awarded by the Port Company

Details of acquisition or sale of land or property

Total numbers employed, total wage costs and details of remuneration of Port
company executives

Harbour and other relevant legislation and ports policy

Environmental matters

Value for Money

Corporate governance and its application

Interfaces with Government, statutory and local authorities

Recommendations for change and improvement
Page 3
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
1.3
The Irish Ports’ Sector
The following three tables provide trends in overall Freight Trade as well as for Lift-On
Lift-Off and Roll-On and Roll-Off traffics.
Table 1.1: Freight Trade Trends through the Main Ports of Ireland
PORT (‘000 Tonnes)
2000
2002
2006
2007
2008
Dublin
15,892
15,557
17,930
20,795
21,801
21,127
Shannon Foynes
10,282
10,418
10,619
11,393
11,072
10,819
Cork
9,732
9,042
8,923
9,709
10,098
9,633
Waterford
1,943
1,910
2,342
2,376
2,253
2,082
New Ross
1,121
979
1,102
831
729
694
Rosslare
1,913
1,926
2,174
2,744
2,926
2,722
Drogheda
1,015
1,369
1,268
1,279
1,035
664
Dun Laoghaire
225
146
160
82
61
49
Dundalk
285
291
350
436
371
217
Wicklow
151
182
235
297
221
85
Galway
727
896
960
946
945
838
1,419
2,203
1,657
2,430
2,627
2,151
All Republic Ports
45,273
44,919
47,720
53,318
54,139
51,081
Belfast
12,484
12,825
13,560
13,514
13,416
13,040
All Northern Ireland
21,435
21,363
23,393
24,485
23,868
23,498
Island (‘000 Tonnes)
66,709
66,282
71,113
77,803
78,007
74,579
Other Republic Ports
2004
Sources: CSO & Dot UK
Table 1.2: Lo-Lo Freight Movements (TEU)
TEU
2000
2002
2004
2006
2007
2008
Dublin
449,406
456,153
540,549
680,678
744,156
676,543
Cork
120,740
121,279
155,061
181,501
196,737
186,922
Waterford
131,518
147,166
180,117
184,866
185,959
173,237
Drogheda
8,487
63,233
48,384
34,846
29,832
7,108
Shannon Foynes
Republic
0
0
735
18,430
16,617
0
710,151
787,830
924,845
1,100,320
1,173,301
1,043,810
26,000
30,000
20,000
24,000
36,000
33,000
Belfast
193,000
187,000
229,000
236,000
264,000
255,000
Northern Ireland
219,000
217,000
248,000
260,000
300,000
288,000
Island
Sources: CSO & Dot UK
929,151
1,004,830
1,172,845
1,360,320
1,473,301
1,331,810
Warrenpoint
Page 4
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
Table 1.3: Ro-Ro Freight Movements (Freight Units)
(Freight Units)
2000
2002
2004
2006
2007
2008
489,669
554,496
608,328
693,002
733,038
704,343
39,080
30,335
29,787
18,992
16,933
13,898
100,950
104,718
126,955
157,114
168,375
156,703
3,940
3,712
5,707
4,413
1,539
1,134
Belfast
349,857
306,870
340,000
344,533
339,639
315,642
Larne
322,375
384,122
404,051
408,853
420,185
414,679
52,273
52,339
58,487
87,544
86,798
82,000
Republic
633,639
693,261
770,777
873,521
919,885
876,078
Northern Ireland
724,505
743,331
802,538
840,930
846,622
796,278
1,358,144
1,436,592
1,573,315
1,714,451
1,766,507
1,672,356
Dublin
Dun Laoghaire
Rosslare
Cork
Warrenpoint
Island
Sources: CSO & Dot UK
To put Irish freight volumes in context, Table 1.4 provides freight volumes for a
number of European ports.
Table 1.4: Top European Ports – 2008 (M Tonnes)
Port
MT
Rotterdam
421
Antwerp
190
Hamburg
140
Marseilles
96
Amsterdam
95
Le Havre
80
Bremen
75
Grimsby and Immingham
65
Valencia
60
Genoa
56
Zeebrugge
42
Ghent
27
Dublin
21
Page 5
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
1.4
Recent Irish Traffic Trends
The latest analysis of 2009 shipping traffic data published by the Irish Maritime
Development Office (IMDO) indicates that the rate and pace of the decline in shipping
traffic volume continued to ease during the 3rd quarter of 2009. Despite this, the
sector has recorded its 7th consecutive quarter of traffic volume decline.
Table 1.5: Changes in National Volumes
3rd Quarter
Lo-Lo
Ro-Ro
2008
-12%
-6%
Bulk
-1%
2009
Source: IMDO
-20%
-8%
-29%
Lift-on/lift-off (lo/lo) traffic fell by 20% in the third quarter to 268,357 TEU which
resulted in more than 50,000 fewer laden units being carried over this quarter
compared to the same period in 2008. Two thirds of laden volumes were previously
made up of imports, in particular from Asia. Lo/lo container volumes slumped over the
past 18 months due to an abrupt correction in consumer demand and slowdown in the
domestic construction sector. Seasonal factors related to Christmas demand resulted
in a slight rise in imports, by 5% in September from August. Exports were up also up
22% month on month between September and August. These seasonal factors were
absent in 2008 when volumes continued to fall at an accelerated rate of decline from
the middle of the year. We forecast a total decline of 23% in lo/lo volumes to the year
end.
Roll-on/roll-off (ro/ro) traffic, which is largely weighted towards shipping services to
and from the UK, fell by 8% between July and September with 385,259 units being
handled. On a monthly basis the typical seasonal pattern was observed with falls in
volume during July and August followed by a rise in September. Volumes on the direct
continental ro/ro routes increased by 64% to 8,044 units in the third quarter of 2009.
Overall in the ro/ro sector, 35,000 less freight units were carried on all routes when
compared to same quarter in 2008, with a total of 152,000 units less for the first 9
months of the year.
The port of Antwerp also saw its annual volumes drop with a decline of 16.7 per cent
in 2009, with container volumes down 15 per cent. Total port tonnage slipped to 158m
tonnes last year, while container volumes fell to 7.3m TEU and ro-ro volumes were
down by 27 per cent to 3.2m tonnes.
Dry bulk volumes declined by 34% in quarter three 2009. The dry bulk markets have
seen heavy volume erosion since the volume peaks recorded in mid 2007. Since this
point there is now 4 million tonnes less of dry bulk cargoes being shipped through
Irish Ports. However there has been some notable volume recovery during the period
July to September. Improved global demand for alumina and ores has boosted
volume throughput during the last quarter, this was also helped by modest domestic
increases in agricultural fertilizers and grains.
Page 6
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
Figure 1.1: Changes in National Unitised Volumes
(LoLo in TEU and RoRo in Freight Units)
500,000
450,000
400,000
350,000
300,000
250,000
200,000
150,000
LoLo
Q32009
Q22009
Q12009
Q42008
Q32008
Q22008
Q12008
Q42007
Q32007
Q22007
Q12007
100,000
RoRo
The breakbulk sector that is predominantly weighted in transport of construction
related materials remained subdued with a further 45 per cent decline in volumes
during the 3rd quarter. Tanker volumes declined by 22% in the third quarter 2009
when compared to the same period in 2008.
The main shipping routes have continued to make short run adjustments to the supply
of shipping capacity in 2009 while there has also been some notable structural route
consolidation in the market by some operators. The IMDO estimates that total
available capacity has been reduced by a further 13% in the third quarter, which has
been implemented by a reduction of frequency on certain routes and reduction in
vessel sizes. Ship-owners and operators will remain cautious of the inflationary impact
of the upward trend of bunker fuel prices. The price of bunker fuel has doubled since
the beginning of 2009 from $229 to over $460 per mt, with continued price increases
likely.
While all market segments have not returned to the previous 30 month volume lows
that were recorded earlier this year, the severe volume deterioration that has occurred
over this period is likely to result in traffic volumes returning to pre 2003 levels by the
end of this year. Depressed freight rates, lower volume demand coupled with
increases in fuel and bunker costs will provide a challenging environment for shipping
operators over the winter months. Underlying weaker domestic consumer demand is
likely to continue to suppress import volumes while the strength of the euro against
the dollar and sterling will continue to put pressure on export volumes to our key
markets.
Page 7
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
1.5
International Trends
Last year, 2009, saw a dramatic decline in traffic through most of the world’s
terminals. Table 1.6 shows the impact of the economic downturn on a number of
international ports. All but one reported a significant decline. The figure overleaf,
reproduced from the Financial Times, is a graphic presenting container traffic
reductions for the first half of 2009. The four biggest operators – Hong Kong’s
Hutchison Ports, Singapore’s PSA, Denmark’s APM Terminals and Dubai’s DP World
have cut costs, including laying off staff, and delayed or cancelled new construction
projects.
Table 1.6: Impact of the Collapse of Key Shipping Markets on Certain Ports
PORT
% Change H1 2008 and H1 2009
Bremerhaven
-20.8
Rotterdam
-15.0
Antwerp
-18.5
Barcelona
-34.5
Valencia
+4.7
Genoa
-10.1
Los Angeles
-16.0
New York
-17.0
Vancouver
-15.0
Shanghai
-15.6
Shenzhen
-21.1
Qingdao
+2.0
Provisional figures from the Port of Rotterdam, a major trans-shipment port for Irish
imports and exports, show that container volumes fell by 6% in 2009 compared to
2008, while ro-ro traffic was down 11%. The port’s overall volumes fell 8.5% year-onyear to 385m tonnes. Rotterdam container traffic within Europe, mainly to the major
destinations such as Ireland, England and Spain, was hit quite hard. The services to
North and South America are sharing in the malaise. The port said its ro-ro volumes
were primarily hit by the decline in the UK market.
A recent article1 in the New York Times noted that more than a tenth of the vessels
that transport the world’s manufactured goods in containers are idle. For most, orders
to sail will not come for some time. Although world trade, which collapsed last year, is
beginning to recover, driven by demand from developing countries, the recovery is
being offset by added capacity in the large number of new container ships coming out
of shipyards.
1 New
Ships Idle, Waiting for Cargo to Fill Them, New York Times, 15 January 2010, Matthew Saltmarsh
Page 8
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
Source: Financial Times 27 November 2009
Page 9
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
Among those suffering the most are lines like the German carrier Hapag-Lloyd and
the Danish group A. P. Moller-Maersk. Much like the giant banks crippled by the
subprime mortgage crisis, the companies are now paying for having expanded too
aggressively during the boom, according to analysts.
Drewry Shipping Consultants in London estimates that the 20 or so major carriers, all
Asian or European, lost $20 billion in 2009. According to Alphaliner, an industry
information provider, seven smaller carriers shut down last year.
Most analysts say that container traffic will probably not recover to prerecession levels
until 2012 or later. Drewry Shipping expects a 2.4 percent increase in global trade
volume this year, after an estimated 10.3 percent decline last year.
The recession led to a slowdown in trade, and underscored the overcapacity in the
industry. Container carriers have responded by slowing their shipbuilding plans;
analysts said that financing had yet to be arranged on most ships on order for this
year and next.
Some new ships have been deferred, almost certainly involving lost down payments,
which are typically 15 to 20 percent — not an insignificant amount if the bill is $160
million. The privately held CMA CGM of France, one large carrier, recently said that it
was discussing cancellations and postponements with shipbuilders in South Korea.
Even so, shipbuilders are expected to deliver 371 container ships this year and 127 in
2012, according to Alphaliner. The container fleet will grow 14 percent in 2010 and
almost 10 percent next, meaning that even more ships will be competing for cargo.
Many Asian carriers were in a better position than their European rivals because
government subsidies had allowed shipyards to shift cancelled orders to domestic
liners or owners at low rates.
The current slowdown is weighing not only on the shipping companies, but also on
ports and shipyards, especially in Europe. The European industry has been in decline
for years. Italian and German shipyards have recently sought state guarantees, and
the European Commission approved aid to the historic Gdansk yard in Poland last
year.
But government support runs beyond shipbuilding. Tens of billions of dollars were
extended to the sector in Europe last year, excluding aid to banks most exposed to
the industry, like Royal Bank of Scotland and Commerzbank. Berlin and Hamburg
have already stepped in to support HSH Nordbank, the largest shipping finance bank,
and the German government has offered Hapag-Lloyd 1.2 billion Euros ($1.7 billion)
in guarantees.
Page 10
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
In the United Kingdom,

Total port traffic for the year to Q3 2009 was 9 per cent down on the four quarters
ending Q3 2008. Inward traffic was down 9 per cent and outward traffic down 7
per cent.

The number of units handled was down 12 per cent. Inward traffic was down 13
per cent and outward traffic down 12 per cent.

Total traffic in quarter 3 of 2009 was down 9 per cent compared to the same
quarter in the previous year. Inward traffic fell by 10 per cent, whilst outward traffic
fell by 7 per cent compared to quarter 3 2008.

Unitised traffic was down 5 per cent compared with the same quarter in 2008.
Inward unitised traffic was down 4 per cent and outward unitised traffic was down
6 per cent compared to quarter 3 2008.
Figure 1.2 shows the trend in freight tonnage since 2000.
Figure 1.2 - Major UK Port Traffic Indices, Tonnage - Rolling Four Quarter Totals to Q3 2009
(2000 = 100)
120
115
110
Inward
Outward
Total
105
100
95
90
85
80
75
4
1
2000
2
3
2001
4
1
2
3
2002
4
1
2
3
2003
4
1
2
3
4
1
2004
2
3
2005
4
1
2
3
2006
4
1
2
3
2007
4
1
2
3
2008
4
1
2
3
2009
Source: UK Department of Transport Port Statistics
1.6
Key Findings
The key findings of the Committee are:

Seaports are indispensable components of the European Single Market and play
a fundamental role in the overall competitiveness of the European Union. As
gateways of most of Europe’s external trade and half of its internal trade, seaports
are indisputable key parts of logistics chains designed to provide a vital link
between the industries and their market and supply sources. Seamless logistic
and transport systems ensure the cost competitiveness of the existing industry
and encourage the establishment of new businesses, increasing employment
opportunities and thus fulfilling the Lisbon Agenda’s objective of improving growth
and jobs in Europe

This is particularly so in Ireland, an island economy, where ports are a critical
element of the logistics supply chain; national competitiveness depends on the
efficiency of port operations

Public awareness of the importance of the sector to the Irish economy is not as
well known as it should be

Irish ports played a pivotal role in alleviating the traffic chaos caused by the
extreme weather conditions in Ireland over the recent period. For instance, over
250 trucks transported more than 4,000 tonnes of rock salt across the country
after a shipment arrived at Foynes Port. The Port of Cork had a number of
Page 11
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
shipments of salt that were sent to the surrounding regions, and Dublin Port
remained fully operational throughout the current adverse weather with no
disruption to arrivals and departures at the port

Ports are key drivers of maritime tourism and leisure; Dun Laoghaire and Galway
Harbours are cases in point; Ireland is also a major cruise location and the tourist
agencies have a role in promoting Ireland as a cruise destination

It is estimated that the total value of goods handled at the Republic’s ports in 2009
is of the order of €76 billion

The ten ports under review had, in 2008, a Turnover of €142 million, an Operating
Profit of €92 million and Total Net Assets of over €610 million

They handled 46 million tonnes, 90 per cent of total tonnage through the
Republic’s ports

They employed almost 500 staff with total salary costs of the order of €31 million

The economic recession of 2009 has resulted in a significant reduction in freight
traffic through the ports with a consequent reduction in Operating Profit

The decline in profits has impacted on investment in new facilities and equipment
with companies introducing a range of cost-cutting measures including
redundancies and salary cuts

Many port companies have significant deficits in their pension liabilities that need
to be addressed; the total pension net liability after tax, according to their
Accounts, was in excess of €52 million

It is unlikely that there will be any significant increase in traffic across the sector
until late 2010 at the earliest

While port capacity pressures have reduced for the time being because of the
decline in trade volumes, there will still be the need to address the matter as
vessels become larger, longer and with greater draft

As it takes time to plan, secure permissions and develop new facilities, decisionmaking in relation to the provision of new and expanded facilities has to be made
some years ahead of actual demand

A number of ports raised concerns in relation to the priority given to road access
to port facilities

Ports compete with each other for business

This does not rule out opportunities for greater co-operation between
neighbouring national and all-Ireland ports in such areas as cruise marketing,
dredging, pilotage, navigation facilities and security reviews

The administration of foreshore licensing is bureaucratic, costly and slow

The absence of an explicit rail freight strategy has hindered ports with their
development strategies

Many of the recommendations of the High Level Review have been implemented

Much of the Ports’ Policy Statement remains valid

Coastal shipping is an undeveloped mode of transport in Ireland

Port companies have reservations about the size of Boards and the nature of
Board representation; for some port companies, the number of Board members
exceeds the number of employees

Dealings with the Shareholder can be bureaucratic and, at times, decision-making
is too slow

Maritime and Logistics clusters can provide both employment and economic
benefit to local and regional economies
Page 12
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
1.7

The reduction in the carbon footprint of ports and increasing their energy
efficiency opens up a wide range of business opportunities for the port sector

The interpretation of the Merchant Shipping Act 1992 in respect of the operation
of non Irish passenger vessels from Irish ports is flawed

The separate legislation that deals with the administration of Rosslare Europort is
an anachronism
Principal Recommendations
The principal recommendations of the Joint Committee are:

Because of the importance of the ports’ sector to the Irish economy, the Minister
for Transport shall report to the Oireachtas, at least annually, on the performance
of the sector. Matters to be covered include: Corporate Governance, Traffic
Trends, Development Plans and Port Traffic

The policies and procedures in relation to Corporate Governance as laid down in
the Department of Finance’s Guidelines should be implemented as a matter of
urgency and actively monitored by the Department of Transport

The Foreshore and Dumping at Sea licence application processes need to be
streamlined; there should be a committee comprising the Irish Ports Association,
the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and the EPA
to review the application process

Notwithstanding that the Harbours legislation enables the merger of Bantry Bay
Harbour Commissioners with the Port of Cork, and Tralee Fenit with Shannon
Foynes Port Company, any merger should be deferred until such time as the
relevant entities agree to it

The Department of Transport should commission a Study of the Potential and
Economic Impact of the Cruise Line Business on the ports’ sector and on the
broader Irish economy

Ports should examine opportunities for co-operation in the interests of improved
efficiency and effectiveness

The Department of Transport should examine again the feasibility of introducing
primary legislation both in Ireland and in the UK to bring Rosslare Europort under
the Harbours’ Act

The Department of Transport should amend the Merchant Shipping Act 1992 to
enable passenger ships with the appropriate International Certification to make
non-scheduled day trips from Irish Ports and for passenger ships’ tenders to be
used to transfer passengers from one location to another while such a ship is
moored in an Irish port or to take passengers on trips in the port, without the need
for an Irish Passenger Certificate but certified by the flag state and classification
society

The review of the Ports Policy Statement should be on developing sector cooperation and integration particularly in the case of ports that have no long-term
viability

A Ports’ Liaison Group that existed to progress matters between the sector and
the Department of Transport should be reactivated.

The Government should make a formal statement in relation to rail freight

The Government should not seek a derogation in respect of opening up the rail
network to third party operators

The Government should consider whether port privatisation, in any form, is in the
public interest and has any benefits for the sector and the national economy

The Government should encourage ports to identify measures that would reduce
the environmental impact of shipping and the ports sector
Page 13
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
1.8

There should be integration of land use planning and investment in transport to
ensure that the need to travel is minimised through consolidated urban form and
mixed-use development

There is a need for integrated planning across the various modes to ensure that
the programmed development and expansion of the road network matches and
complements the schedule of development of port infrastructure, particularly
when new facilities are being provided

It is critically important that there is cohesion and co-ordination among statutory
authorities when viewing the issue of port expansion

There is a need at Government level to ensure that national policies are
integrated and that mechanisms are in place to ensure that there is a consistency
and balance in implementation at a local level by Local Authorities

The Committee encourages all port companies to develop Corporate Social
Responsibility strategies

The Committee encourages the port sector to identify possible EU-funded joint
projects that would develop new services with mainland Europe
Structure of Report
Following this Introduction, subsequent chapters deal with
1.9

Profiles of the ten ports under review

An overview of a number of key port policy and other port-related documents

The key issues identified and principal recommendations made

The main conclusions arising from this Review
Acknowledgements
The members of the Transport Committee would like to thank the management and
staff of the various port companies for their inputs and assistance.
In addition, thanks are due to the Clerk to the Joint Committee, Ms Eileen Brosnan,
and her staff for their assistance.
Raymond Burke of Raymond Burke Consulting assisted the Committee with its
endeavours.
Page 14
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
2.
Profile of the Ports under Review
In this Chapter, we present a brief profile of the Commercial Ports under review. The material
is drawn from their submissions and presentations to the Joint Committee.
2.1
Dublin Port Company
Dublin Port is the leading multi-modal port on the island of Ireland catering for
unitised, that is, Lift-On Lift-Off and Roll-On Roll-Off trade, as well as liquid bulk, dry
bulk, cruise liners and, to a lesser degree, break bulk.
Dublin Port Company is the principal landowner at Dublin Port and is responsible for
the property estate, and for leasing and licensing land to terminal operators, to
stevedores and other customers of the port.
In addition, it is responsible for port planning and development, towage, pilotage, the
efficient use of facilities as well as the maintenance of basic port infrastructure, for the
aids to navigation and for the dredging of the shipping channels.
Dublin Port’s share of national trade has been growing over time and in 2008 was
over 21 million tonnes or almost 30 million tonnes when the weight of containers etc is
taken into account. Over 41 per cent of the Republic’s port trade now passes through
Dublin Port.
2.1.1
Unitised Trade
Unitised trade comprises Lift-On Lift-Off and Roll-On Roll-Off trade.
Lift-On Lift-Off
There are direct daily services from Dublin to the UK and mainland Europe as
well as weekly services to Iberia and the Mediterranean, including the East
Mediterranean. In addition there are world-wide transhipment services to the
Americas, Asia and Australia from such ports as Rotterdam, Le Havre,
Antwerp and Liverpool.
Lo-Lo trade is handled at three terminals in the port operated by

Dublin Ferryport Terminals (DFT)

Marine Terminals Ltd (MTL)

Dublin Port’s common user terminal operated by Portroe Stevedores
The first two are subsidiaries of major companies: Irish Continental Group
and the Peel Ports Group respectively. Portroe Stevedores provide lineindependent container handling at the common user terminal located in the
Ocean Pier area of the port.
The principal scheduled Lo-Lo services are shown in Table 2.3.
Page 15
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
Table 2.3: Principal Scheduled Services
Ports Serviced
Liverpool
Cardiff
Felixstowe
Antwerp
Rotterdam
Le Havre
Rouen
Zeebrugge
Service Providers
Coastal, .Mac Andrews, CMA CGM
Associated British Ports (ABP)
BG Freight Line
BG Freight, Eucon, Hamburg Sud
NorfolkLine, Eucon, Xpress, Samskip, APL, BG Freight Line
CMA CGM
Eucon
APL
In addition, there are regular sailings to Spain, Portugal, Italy and various nonEuropean ports.
Roll-On Roll-Off
Dublin is the leading Ro-Ro port in Ireland and, as a proportion of Republic
freight trade, has remained relatively stable accounting for 80% of total
throughput.
Year-round, there are five ferry companies that, between them, operate up to
16 regular sailings daily from Dublin, connecting with Holyhead, Heysham and
Liverpool. These services cater for both freight and tourism. Some of the
freight continues to continental Europe overland across the UK, the
Landbridge route, exiting at such ports as Dover, Felixstowe, Hull and
Southampton.
There is also a seasonal service to and from Douglas operated by the Isle of
Man Steam Packet Company.
The current UK scheduled Ro-Ro services are shown in Table 2.5.
Table 2.5: Principal Scheduled Services
Ports Serviced
Heysham
Holyhead
Ferry Company
Norfolkline Irish Sea Ferry Service
Irish Ferries: Passengers & Freight
Irish Ferries: Fast Ferry
Holyhead
Stena Line
Liverpool
Norfolkline Irish Sea Ferry Service
Liverpool
P&O Irish Sea
Liverpool
Seatruck Ferries
Douglas
Isle of Man Steam Packet Company
Ro Ro is handled in Dublin in five terminals, which between them have eight
ferry ramps, three of which are two tier.
Page 16
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
Recent Developments
In late August 2009, Dublin Port Company signed contracts with Cobelfret
Ferries and C2C Shipping Lines for a new direct RoRo freight ferry service
between Dublin and Zeebrugge/Rotterdam to be launched over the following
two months. The service offers trailer operators an alternative to the
landbridge route and, thus, is more environmentally friendly. This new service
also provides a modal shift from LoLo to RoRo whereby containers are
carried on the ferries double-stacked on cassettes. The new services will lead
to up to four new sailings weekly.
The new and larger vessels have a
capacity to carry up to 366 freight units.
In addition, a twice-weekly rail freight service, operated by Iarnród Éireann for
International Warehousing and Transport Ltd (IWT) commenced and runs
between Ballina, Co Mayo, and the Port. Its main cargo will initially be
containers of Coca-Cola concentrate from the Ballina production plant for
export to Mexico, Australia, Japan, India and Turkey. Trains of 18 carriages,
each carrying 40ft containers holding 35 tonnes of product, will arrive at the
port every Monday and Wednesday evening. The containers will operate on a
round-trip basis, removing up to 4,000 lorries annually, both laden and empty
freight vehicles, from the road network. IWT said it intends to expand to a
daily service within six months, servicing the western region. This new
business could add up to a further 26,000 TEUs annually to the Port’s traffic.
2.1.2
Non-Unitised Trade
Non-unitised trade includes:

Liquid Bulks

Dry Bulk

Break Bulk
The Liquid Bulk trade is comprised of mainly fuel oil products.
The Dry Bulk sector is comprised of:

Animal Feed imports

Grain and Animal Feed

Metal Ores exports
Dublin Port Company continues to exit the Break Bulk sector, freeing up land
for the unitised sector.
2.1.3
Cruise Sector
In addition to being a major centre for Trade Car imports, Dublin Port is also a
major destination for cruise vessels and almost 80 cruise ships carrying a
total of 120,000 passengers and crew docked at the Port in 2009 contributing
between €35 and €50 million to the local economy..
Page 17
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
2.1.4
The Dublin Gateway Project
Dublin Port Company submitted an application to An Bord Pleanála in 2008
under the Statutory Infrastructure Act to extend Dublin Port to cater for the
increases in trade needed to serve the economy of the greater Dublin area
and beyond.
This would entail the reclamation of 21ha as well as berth
dredging, with the intention of creating additional Ro-Ro and Lo-Lo berthing
and operational areas. The proposed development is known as the Dublin
Gateway Project. The new berths and associated Ro-Ro and Lo-Lo facilities
are designed to service existing large ships and future generations of Ro-Ro
and Lo-Lo vessels. These latter vessels will carry containers of up to 2,000
TEU and have a draught of up to 10.5 metres. Vessels of a larger dimension
can be catered for with further dredging. When operational, the annual
capacity of the new area will be in the order of 1.2 million units (road freight
units and containers).
The Oral Hearing to consider this application was adjourned following a legal
challenge by the Port Company. It recommenced in December 2009 with a
decision expected in May 2010.
Figure 2.1: The Location of the Proposed Dublin Gateway Development
2.1.5
2009 Traffic
Dublin Port Company has reported that total trade in 2009 fell 10.5 per cent to
26.5 million tonnes from 29.6 million the previous year.
Ferry passengers and tourist cars increased during the year, with the former
increasing 18 per cent to 1.5 million in 2009 from 1.3 million in 2008 and the
latter growing 24 per cent to 183,000 from 147,000.
Page 18
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
2.1.6
Key Statistics
The Key Statistics for Dublin Port are:
Table 2.3: Key Statistics for Dublin Port
2006
2007
2008
Turnover €000
66,423
70,450
70,597
Operating Profit €000
25,592
21,664
26,969
Cargo Throughput KTonnes
20,795
21,801
21,127
Lo-Lo TEUs
680,681
744,156
676,543
Ro-Ro Units
693,002
733,038
704,343
7,287
7,734
7,460
208
193
166
67,278
5,330
11,452
Number of Ships
Staff Numbers
Pension Liability €000
2.2
Port of Cork
The Port of Cork is the major port on the South coast handling all six shipping modes,
i.e., lift-on lift-off, roll-on roll-off, cruise, dry bulk, liquid bulk and break bulk. Services
are available throughout the harbour area with public docking facilities provided at the
City Quays, Ringaskiddy, Tivoli, and Cobh.
Cork Port handles almost 19 per cent of the Republic’s traffic.
2.2.1
Unitised Trade
Lift-On Lift-Off
Lift-On Lift-Off (Lo-Lo) trade is handled at the Tivoli Container Terminal
situated three kilometres downriver from Cork city at the junction of two of
Ireland's four Euroroutes, Cork-Dublin and Cork-Rosslare primary roadways
and enjoys ready access to the Cork-Limerick-Galway primary route. Since
the nineties, approximately €20 million was invested in improved facilities.
Current services are provided by BG Freightline, Samskip Ireland, Eucon and
APL.
The majority of the Port’s Lo-Lo business is to the ports of Rotterdam,
Zeebrugge, Felixstowe and Antwerp.
Roll-On Roll-Off
The Ringaskiddy Ferry Terminal accommodates car ferry services to
continental Europe (Brittany Ferries) together with occasional shipments of
trade vehicles.
The Cork Swansea Ferry Service, freight and passenger, which was
suspended in 2006, is scheduled to recommence in March 2010. The
replacement vessel, the 155 metre Julia, has 340 cabins and can carry up to
440 cars, 30 freight units and 1,860 passengers.
Fastnet Line Ltd.
Page 19
It will be operated by
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
The Port is actively involved in Motorways of the Seas EU Initiatives aimed at
transferring long-haul road transportation to short sea shipping, and has been
working on the establishment of a direct service from Cork to Spain and
Western France for the last few years. Negotiations are at an advanced state
and, although not yet certain, it is expected that a decision will be made soon.
A positive decision should mean a start-up in May this year offering a direct
link into Spain, Portugal and South Western France.
2.2.2
Non-Unitised Trade
Most of the Port’s liquid bulk is handled at the Whitegate Oil Refinery by
ConocoPhillips with crude oil imported and refined products exported.
In
addition, the Port handles acids, molasses, liquid chemicals including
methanol and caustic soda liquid. .
Dry Bulk trade comprises fertilisers, cement, animal feeds, cereals,
magnesite and coal.
2.2.3
Other
Cork’s traffic in trade vehicles is handled at the Tivoli Ro-Ro Terminal, the
Ringaskiddy Ro-Ro Terminal and the Ringaskiddy Deepwater Berth where
regular shipments are discharged from British and mainland European ports.
Extensive vehicle storage compounds are situated at Ringaskiddy and Tivoli.
The principal marques imported are Fiat, Ford, General Motors and
VW/Audi/Mercedes.
The Cruise Sector remains a major feature of Port of Cork business and, in
2009, 54 vessels, including the 151,400 tonne Queen Mary II, visited the Port
bringing over 70,000 passengers and crew to the region. This sector has
experienced year on year growth and contributes in excess of €44 million per
annum to the surrounding areas.
2.2.4
Infrastructure Developments
The Port of Cork submitted a planning application to An Bord Pleanála under
the Strategic Infrastructure Act in 2007 for the development of a container
terminal and of a multipurpose Ro-Ro berth at the Oyster Bank, Ringaskiddy.
An Bord Pleanála refused the application in June 2008 for two reasons: the
remoteness of the project from the rail network and congestion at junctions on
the national road network.
The case for the Oyster Bank was driven by a number of factors including:

Insufficient capacity at Tivoli to handle the increasing volume of Lo-Lo
traffic through the Port

The physical constraints of Tivoli impacting the number of vessels that can
be handled there due to the increasing size of container vessel visiting the
Port
Page 20
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
Cork City Council has significant proposals for the development of the
docklands area with the South Docklands Local Area Plan adopted by Cork
City Council in February 2008. The Port of Cork Company in supporting the
initiative has advised the Council that, as the City Quays are central to Port
activities and key to the on-going viability of the Company, there is a need to
provide a funding package to the Port Company to construct the necessary
replacement facilities. The City Council has also been advised that the Port of
Cork cannot consider relocating trading activities from the City Quays until
such time as the funding package is in place.
The Port is currently undertaking a review of its Strategic Plan and is
committed to a re-examination and consultation on potential suitable sites
within Cork Harbour for completion by early 2010 to enable it cater for the
additional Lo-Lo capacity required as well as for the general cargo displaced
from the City Quays and elsewhere.
In 2009 the Port of Cork was awarded the ISO 14001 Certification,
demonstrating the Port’s ongoing commitment to Environmental Practice in
sustaining a quality environment in Cork Harbour, particularly in areas which
have the potential to be affected or influenced by Port Operations. The Port
recently completed an assessment of its carbon footprint and is preparing
proposals for the reduction of their carbon creation activities.
2.2.5
2009 Performance
In its end of year statement, the Port of Cork Company reported that 2009
was a challenging year with all areas of port business exposed to the current
economic slowdown. Over the past fifteen months, it noted that port
customers and the majority of businesses in Ireland have seen a significant
change in trading conditions with an overall reduction in cargo volumes of 18
per cent coming through the port.
2.2.6
Key Statistics
The Key Statistics for the Port of Cork are:
Table 2.3: Key Statistics for the Port of Cork
2006
2007
2008
23,731
24,927
26,296
Operating Profit €000
5,015
5,669
5,145
Cargo Throughput KTonnes
9,709
10,098
9,633
Lo-Lo TEUs
185,002
196,737
186,922
Ro-Ro Units
4,413
1,539
1,134
Number of Ships
2,112
2,048
1,667
117
121
126
1,707
3,919
10,994
Turnover €000
Staff Numbers
Pension Liability €000
Page 21
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
2.3
Port of Waterford
The Port of Waterford, located in the south-east region on the River Suir, 14 miles
from the open sea, handles a comprehensive range of cargoes including lo-lo, bulk
liquid, bulk solids, break bulk and general cargoes offering a broad range of cargo
handling and warehousing services. It is the nearest Irish port to mainland Europe and
services traffic to the United Kingdom and continental Europe.
The Port is currently undergoing a reorganisation programme that is likely to result in
a reduction in the number employed.
2.3.1
Services
DFDS
Containerline
operates
a
twice
weekly
service
from
Zeebrugge/Rotterdam to Waterford. Departures from Belview are on Tuesday
and Friday with arrival at Waterford on Sunday and Thursday.
There is also a weekly service to Belize operated by Fyffees.
2.3.2
Facilities
Since 1992, all cargo handling operations have taken place in Belview, four
miles downstream of Waterford city. The Belview facility currently includes
450 m of container berthage serviced by two high output gantry cranes, 400
m of general cargo berths and a privately owned and operated jetty of
approximately 120 m. The site also provides substantial warehousing facilities
of circa 30,000 sq. m and stevedoring services. Substantial future
development works, for which the port company has planning consent, will
create the development of a further 800m extension downstream of the port
and together with land reclamation will enable the creation of a significant
further operational space for cargo handling and storage. The port company
owns 60 acres of land adjacent to the terminal with planning consent for portrelated activity. In addition, the IDA has created a substantial business park
adjacent to the port.
The port also owns lands and quays in the centre of Waterford, which was the
original location for port activities. The operational use of the inner city berth
has declined over the years to the extent the future of these berths lies in their
redevelopment for a range of mixed-use developments.
Sheltered mooring for vessels is provided and there is a water depth of 6.5 m
chart datum in the access channel. Therefore, the maximum vessel size,
subject to tide, is 170 m in length overall and a maximum draft of 9 m, again
subject to tide with no beam or air draft restriction. The Port handles container
vessels of some 900 TEU, and can cope with such vessels two hours either
side of high water.
Page 22
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
As there is direct rail access to the Waterford to Rosslare railway line, the port
is nationally connected and has a major rail siding. At present, the port
company works six train sets per week.
These dedicated port facilities, which originally were developed in 1992, are
part of a longer term phased programme of investment. Substantial
development works are planned for future port expansion involving an
additional 800 m downstream quay extension to handle lo-lo, ro-ro, dry bulk,
liquid bulk and miscellaneous cargoes. The proposal also allows for capital
dredging to depths of minus 7.2 m chart datum, which would provide deeper
water to accommodate the increasing use of larger size vessels across all key
trades but which affects the container trades in particular. The expansion
proposals may also include a new bulk liquids terminal. The port company
already has received planning permission for its phased development at
Belview as a multi-modal port. The concentration of port activities
downstream at Belview presents an opportunity for significant waterfront
development opportunities over time, particularly along the north quays, to
support the city’s economic regeneration initiatives.
In May 2009, Waterford welcomed the largest ship ever to berth at Belview
Terminal, the cruise vessel mv Rotterdam. With a Gross Tonnage of 50,652
tonne Rotterdam is the largest vessel ever to enter the Port of Waterford and
was facilitated at the recently completed 190m quay extension which has a
minimum depth of 9m alongside.
The cruise sector is an important element of the Port’s business and
welcomed 10 cruise vessels in 2009. Nineteen cruise vessels are currently
scheduled for 2010.
2.3.3
Key Statistics
The Key Statistics for the Port of Waterford are:
Table 2.3: Key Statistics for the Port of Waterford
2006
2007
2008
11,889
12,492
13,748
Operating Profit €000
3,162
3,415
4,309
Cargo Throughput KTonnes
2,376
2,253
2,082
184,857
185,959
173,237
833
831
757
51
54
52
10,366
8,555
9,984
Turnover €000
Lo-Lo TEUs
Number of Ships
Staff Numbers
Pension Liability €000
Page 23
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
2.4
Dundalk Port
Dundalk Port is located north of the town and eight kilometres from the open sea and
equidistant from Dublin and Belfast.
Ships up to 3,500 tonnes and up to 120 metres in length can be handled at the port.
Its business is general cargo where most of its imports are grain and smokeless coal.
Construction-related material was also a major import. Exports are primarily scrap.
The Company has its own dredger and provides dredging services to many of the
smaller ports in Ireland. Over a quarter of its income comes from dredging.
2.4.1
Employment
Dundalk Port Company employs 16, a decrease of three in 2007.
Five
pensioners are included amongst the numbers.
The staff comprises a boatman, labourer, store man and a warehouse
manager supplemented by casual labour as and when required. These direct
operatives are supported by an administrative team of three.
The Pilots are self-employed and now carry out the dredging operation as well
as maintaining the pilot boats. The Chief Executive is qualified to act as a
relief Pilot.
2.4.2
Facilities and Proposed Developments
The Port has three berths and a lay-by berth. Water depths at high tide are 5
metres. The Port has no crane but rents one as required from a private
operator who has three cranes.
The Port has extensive warehousing with covered storage of 17,000 square
metres available on and off the quay.
In 2008, Dundalk Port Company resurfaced its cargo holding area and quay
surfaces.
The Company has sought planning permission for the building of two new
quays along a 200 metre stretch of waterfront. Previously existing quays there
fell into disuse some years ago. Longer term, the Port plans to construct two
new warehouses.
The company has installed a new AIS system which monitors all movement of
traffic due to Dundalk Port from all ports in Europe this has proved to be a
great time saving device to the port.
In 2007, the Port invested in new solar-powered navigation lights at a cost of
€24,000; these solar lights require no maintenance and make the channel
easier to navigate, safer and stop vessels from grounding.
Page 24
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
The Marine Institute has fitted a tidal gauge in the Port funded by EU Grant
aid. The system gives the Port the ability to tell exactly how much water there
is in the river which leads to better control for the drafting of vessels.
The Port Company, through its Lockington Shipping and Brokerage business,
is presently looking to develop new marine projects to improve its financial
position.
2.4.3
Key Statistics
The Key Statistics for the Port of Dundalk are:
Table 2.3: Key Statistics for the Port of Dundalk
2006
Turnover €000
2007
2008
1,815
1,836
1,232
Operating Profit €000
279
236
-276
Cargo Throughput KTonnes
436
371
217
Number of Ships
251
197
109
21
19
16
Staff Numbers
Pension Liability €000
2.5
1,006
Wicklow Port
Wicklow Port is situated approximately 50 km from Dublin adjoining the main road
from Dublin to the south east. Wicklow Port was previously a ‘regional’ port and was
formally incorporated as a commercial state port early in 2002.
Its business is general cargo where most of its imports were primarily constructionrelated with a particular focus on timber. Exports recommenced in 2009.
Almost 40 per cent of its Income comes from Rent and Mooring Fees.
2.5.1
Other Activity
The Port Company facilitates the successful running of local angling
competitions, local regattas, swimming events and water safety training.
In 2008, 12 fishing vessels used the harbour and the following table provides
details of leisure vessels that berthed in the harbour. The Leisure vessels
generated almost 13 per cent of the port’s income in 2008 in the form of
Mooring Fees.
Table 2.3: Leisure Craft Statistics
2008
2007
Local Yachts
35
30
+16.7
Visiting Craft
187
203
-7.9
55
54
+1.9
Local Small Craft
2.5.2
% Change
Employment
Dundalk Port Company employs 3: the Chief Executive/Harbour Master, a
part-time Administrator and an Operative.
Page 25
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
There are two self-employed pilots; although the harbour is not a compulsory
pilotage area, the Port Byelaws require the use of a pilot for vessels in excess
of 100 tonnes.
2.5.3
Facilities and Proposed Developments
The Port has three berths and a lay-by berth. Water depths at high tide are
5.5 metres.
The average size vessel that can use the harbour is 3,500
tonnes and up to 100 metres.
The Port handled 66 vessels during 2008, a decline of 81 on the previous
year.
Stevedoring is provided by Conways who use mobile cranes.
Since corporatisation, there has been no development of port infrastructure;
presently, it is planned to reconstruct sections of the South Quay Wall as part
of a joint venture with Wicklow Urban Council as they are required to
renew/repair the adjacent roadway.
The extent of the repairs will be
dependent on the funds available.
The new Port Access Road (or Town Relief Road) was opened in October
2009 and is an important asset to the Port especially when trade improves.
The West and East Piers are in a serious state of decay underneath the
waterline and are in urgent need of repairs. The Port received an estimate of
€3.5 million in 2007 for their repairs but does not have the funds to progress
the works.
2.5.4
Key Statistics
The Key Statistics for the Port of Wicklow are:
Table 2.3: Key Statistics for the Port of Wicklow
2006
2.6
2007
2008
Turnover €000
517
430
232
Operating Profit €000
125
120
-75
Cargo Throughput KTonnes
297
221
85
Number of Ships
188
147
66
Staff Numbers
3
3
3
Pension Liability €000
0
0
0
New Ross Port Company
Situated some 32 km (19 miles) from the sea on the River Barrow, the Port of New
Ross specialises in handling dry, break and liquid bulk.
Recently Green Bio fuels
Ireland Limited began exporting biodiesel manufactured in a plant built at a cost of
more than €20 million on land leased from New Ross Port Company. At this stage,
no significant investment is being contemplated by the Port Company in port
infrastructure as the current facilities have sufficient capacity to cope with the level of
Page 26
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
activity anticipated for the foreseeable future.
2.6.1
Activity
Principal commodities handled are petroleum products, fertilisers, animal
feedstuffs, coal and cement. The principal export was zinc ore concentrate
from the Galmoy Mine; however, the Mine closed recently.
The port is unique in that it is one of the principal and few oil importing
harbours in the country with Esso/Texaco operating the local terminal.
The overall decline in throughput reflects reductions in agri-product imports
including the decision of Timac Agri to concentrate on speciality fertilisers, the
collapse in the construction sector and the transfer of Campus Oil import
business to Dublin. Nevertheless, the commencement of biodiesel exports is
a welcome development and, to-date, there have been two cargoes of
biodiesel. Overall, Green Bio fuels Ireland Ltd expect to export about 40,000
tonnes of fuel annually in the future.
Pilotage is compulsory with vessels initially required to use Waterford Port
pilots and, from Cheekpoint, to use Port of New Ross Pilots thereafter.
Following a number of voluntary redundancies and revised working
arrangements, the Company now employs 4.5 Full Time Equivalents.
2.6.2
Facilities
There are four operating berths of which three are privately owned. The four
berths are:

Stafford Shipping Rosbercon with a berth length of 210 metres (private)

Stafford Shipping Raheen with a berth length of 60 metres (private)

Stokestown Pontoon Berth (Stokestown Port Company) with a berth
length of 40 metres (private)

Marshmeadows with a berth length of 60 metres (New Ross Port
Company)
A major capital dredging and river training scheme was completed in 2000 to
give better access for vessels to New Ross Port.
The water depth now
remains at generally 2.5 metres.
Both Stafford Shipping and Stokestown Port Services have local warehouse
facilities, and there is also storage available within a short distance of the
Port.
The Port is tidal and so ships may only enter or leave two hours before and
after High Water
Page 27
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
2.6.3
Key Statistics
The Key Statistics for the Port of Cork are:
Table 2.3: Key Statistics for the Port of New Ross
2006
Turnover €000
2008
1,233
1,245
1,338
-141
90
289
Cargo Throughput KTonnes
831
729
693
Number of Ships
309
257
236
Staff Numbers
11
10
10
Pension Liability €000
15
-12
269
Operating Profit €000
2.7
2007
Dun Laoghaire Port Company
2.7.1
Background
The lands of the Dun Laoghaire Harbour Company cover an area of 120
hectares of which 97 hectares is enclosed water space. The long-term goal of
the Harbour Company is to position Dun Laoghaire Harbour as a marine,
leisure and tourism destination, to the highest international standards. Within
its current funding base, the Harbour Company is not in a position to develop
the harbour area but believes that it is possible to realise its ambition and
vision through a Public Private Partnership arrangement that was also used to
fund the marina in 2000. This development strategy, which is currently before
its Board, is in line with the Draft Development Plan for Dun Laoghaire
Rathdown County Council.
The Company was certified as ISO 14001 compliant in March 2008. ISO
14001
is
the
internationally recognised standard for
excellence in
environmental management systems and Dun Laoghaire is the first
commercial port in Ireland to be awarded certification.
In line with a substantially reduced ferry schedule and a corresponding
reduction in revenue, the Company has begun to address the organisational
structure of the business with an open consultation process leading to the
production of a report and recommendations distributed to the board and all
staff in October 2009. At the same time, the company introduced a voluntary
redundancy scheme which has received a number of applications.
2.7.2
Ferry Services
Dun Laoghaire Port provides facilities for Stena’s Roll-On Roll-Off passenger
and freight HSS service to Holyhead. Stena Line is to reduce its freightcarrying high-speed service between Holyhead and Dun Laoghaire to a single
round-trip schedule, operating only in high summer. The HSS Stena Explorer
had been operating two round-trips a day between March and December and
is one of the few fast-ferries operating in UK waters capable of carrying freight
traffic. This
year
(2010)
it
Page 28
will
run
only
from
28
June
until
5
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
September. Outside the summer, the route will be operated by the smaller
Stena Express, which only carries cars and vans. Stena said the weak
market and high fuel costs were factors in the decision, and, in April 2011, the
current agreement will expire. The port is in active discussions with Stena and
several other operators with the key objective of maintaining and developing
its ferry business.
2.7.3
Marine Tourism
The Port is also a major maritime leisure centre where there is private marina
with 820 berths, 400 swinging moorings and a number of sailing and yacht
clubs offering a range of services to their members. There is a diving school
and other marine-related activities.
Dún Laoghaire hopes to host the biannual Dún Laoghaire regatta; the third
one took place in the summer of 2009 and was very successful. The Port has
been successful in attracting the youth world sailing championships in 2012.
This is the gateway to the Olympic Games for talented young sailors and will
attract over 60 participating countries. The Port Company has also secured
for the first time in Ireland the International Sailing Federation’s annual
conference, which will also take place in 2012.
The Port engaged Consultants to examine the feasibility for another marina at
the East Bight; however, the economic downturn has resulted in its
postponement.
2.7.4
Facilities
There are five berths. The first is on the east pier. It is the smallest and is only
76 m. long. The second and third are on the east and west sides,
respectively, of Carlisle Pier and are 139 m. and 130 m. long. They are not
currently in use. The fourth berth is 142 m. long and is on the east side of St.
Michael’s Pier. The fifth is a dedicated berth for the Stena HSS Explorer and
cannot be used for any other vessel. All have a depth of 5.8 m. The Port
Company is currently undertaking a feasibility study to examine the possible
cost of extending the capability of Dún Laoghaire Harbour to facilitate larger
vessels, be they ferries or cruise liners.
2.7.5
Development Proposals
The Port’s plan for the Carlisle Pier reflects that of the draft development plan
of Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council in so far as it says specifically
that the redevelopment of the pier must incorporate uses which will bring
significant cultural, recreational and economic benefits to the area and must
provide for a high degree of public accessibility and permeability with
walkways, viewing areas and public spaces throughout.
The Port has commenced a major feasibility study to determine the viability of
a public private partnership approach to funding the long-term development of
Page 29
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
the harbour and to developing marine, leisure and tourism attractions and
facilities.
Part of this feasibility study will examine successful marine leisure harbours in
other cities internationally where harbour areas have developed facilities in
response to and with relevance to their current and historic contexts. The
range of opportunities for Dún Laoghaire Harbour is quite wide, including
cycle and pedestrian routes, sensitive conversion of former coastguard
cottages for tourism uses, open-air markets, a cultural and heritage centre at
the East Pier Battery, a children’s centre, an art gallery, development of
facilities for cruise ships, development of renewable energy facilities,
boardwalks and sea sport activity centres.
The Port is compiling a very comprehensive master plan for the harbour
which will be brought forward with reference to the Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown
county development plan. All of the details of our proposed plan will be
included in it.
2.7.6
Investment
Over the past ten years, capital expenditure on maintenance and upgrading
amounted to over €40 million including the upgrade of the east pier, at a cost
in the region of €6.5 million. This included the resurfacing of what is best
known as the walking pier. The historic east battery was opened to the public
for the first time.
Repair work to the concrete pile structure supporting the HSS terminal was
completed in April 2007 at a cost of €1.8 million.
2.7.7
Key Statistics
The Key Statistics for Dun Laoghaire Port Company are:
Table 2.3: Key Statistics Dun Laoghaire Port Company
Turnover €000
Operating Profit €000
Cargo Throughput KTonnes
Ro-Ro Units
Number of Ships
Staff Numbers
Pension Liability €000
2.8
2006
2007
2008
10,318
10,755
10,975
3,307
3,573
2,938
82
61
49
18,992
16,933
13,898
679
624
578
49
48
42
3,171
2,630
4,324
Drogheda Port Company
Drogheda Port Company (DPC) is one of Ireland’s multi model ports that handled
664,000 tonnes of freight in 2008 compared with 1,035,000 tonnes in 2007.
Overall
throughputs for 2008 were down on previous years due primarily to the global
economic downturn and the slowdown in the level of construction activity in Ireland.
Page 30
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
In 2002 DPC completed the construction of a new €25m container and general cargo
terminal at Tom Roe’s Point, 2.5km downstream the River Boyne from Drogheda, to
add to the existing Town Quays terminal located in the centre of the town.
A formal application has been made to An Bord Pleanála to develop a new multimodal deepwater port at Bremore and the port company is progressing with plans for
its development.
The company recently constructed a new headquarters at Harbourville, Co Meath.
2.8.1
Long-Term Strategy
A Long Term Strategic Development Plan 2004 – 2024 was adopted by the
Board of Drogheda Port Company on 10th September 2004. The Strategy
contains three main development strands and intends to position Drogheda
Port as one of the most progressive, modern and efficient Ports in Ireland
over the period:

Expansion & Development of existing Port & Facilities

Redevelopment of the North Quays ‘Merchants Wharf Project’

Development of a new Deepwater Port at Bremore
The company continues to implement this Strategy which has developed
within national and regional policy and planning frameworks.
2.8.2
Facilities and Proposed Developments
Drogheda Port Company has two facilities for the loading/discharging of
cargoes, i.e. the inner north quays port and the deep-water facility at Tom
Roes Point Terminal. In addition there are two private facilities. The approach
and estuarial channel is maintained to a depth of 2.2m at Chart Datum to the
deep water facility at Tom Roes Point, 5 km from the sea, and at 0.8m at
Chart Datum to the inner port 7 km from the sea. The port can currently
accommodate vessels up to 120m LOA.
The deep-water facility at Tom Roes Point is the primary container/paper and
timber handling facility at this time. The berth is 160m in length with an
always-afloat dredged pocket of 6m at Chart Datum over a length of 210m.
The berth can accommodate single vessels operations up to 120m LOA or
two vessel of 100m LOA. There are on site open storage facilities of circa 14
acres and a paper store of 90,000sq ft. Primary handling is by two Liebherr
LHM 250 harbour mobile cranes with additional tracked grabbing cranes.
Secondary handling is by a modern fleet of dedicated container handling and
general purpose forklifts. The inner north quay port is a general cargo facility
catering for bulk grains, steel, timber etc. The 4 berths consist 430m of quay.
Three of the berths have an air draft restriction of 27.5m at MHWS. Primary
cargo handling is by a combination of harbour mobile and crawler cranes with
appropriate secondary handling.
Page 31
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
A private hydrocarbons facility can accommodate vessel of up to 80m LOA, in
a dredged pocket of 2.2m at Chart Datum. The oil terminal has a current
capacity of 10,000m3 of Class 1, 2 & 3 products, plus, 1,500m3 capacity at
the LPG terminal. A private bulk cement/magnesite/coal facility can
accommodate two vessels on a 160m berth.
In 2002 DPC commissioned a study to identify the best location for the
development of a new port to address Drogheda Port’s emerging capacity
constraints (both in terms of the anticipated growth in volume of traffic and
also the locational constraints of Drogheda Port) in addition to the anticipated
national capacity deficit on the east coast of Ireland. The primary objective of
DPC was to identify a suitable location for a new port with sufficiently deep
navigable water to accommodate the long term capacity requirements of the
east coast of Ireland, and therefore capable of being developed on a phased
basis to respond to market demand. The port would need to cater for the
increasing volumes of unitised cargo and increasing international ship sizes.
The study considered potential sites in terms of the environment,
archaeology, operations, land and marine access, and engineering criteria,
with Bremore selected as the preferred location. DPC engaged with local
landowners to secure land options for 57 hectares (142 acres) of land at
Bremore Head.
A further study was carried out in 2004 by HR Wallingford, entitled “Bremore Assessment of Suitability for a Container Port”. The brief was to assess the
suitability of Bremore as a location for a new deepwater port, and calculate a
preliminary capital cost of development. The study investigated a number of
factors including the impact on coastal sediment movement, coastal and
wave conditions at the new port, and requirements for ship manoeuvring and
navigation.
Having identified the possible location of a new port and assessed market
demand and commercial viability, in 2006, DPC entered into a procurement
process to seek a joint venture partner with development expertise. Castle
Market Holdings (together with Hutchison Westports Limited) was selected as
preferred partner in December 2006 and the Irish Government approved the
establishment of a joint venture company, Bremore Ireland Port Ltd, between
DPC and Castle Market Holdings in September 2007.
Following the completion of the procurement process, DPC and CMH,
together with Hutchison, have been engaged in various activities to advance
the Project.
BIP envisage that Meath County Council and Fingal County Council will work
together to develop and implement a Strategic Development Zone (SDZ)
planning framework with Government agreement and that both the Strategic
Page 32
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
Infrastructure Development (SID) and SDZ applications will occur in a
timeframe of 2010 to 2011. A detailed appraisal of route corridor options for
the primary port access road from the M1 motorway is also being undertaken
by transport consultants in addition to rail connectivity.
The port cost will be approximately €600 million to €700 million. There will be
up to 1.5 kilometres of quays, two breakwaters and an initial throughput
capacity of up to 10 million to 15 million tonnes of cargo. Fifty million tonnes
would be the long-term position in terms of capacity. Bremore is focused on
the unitised part of the business with some 80% of the business through
Bremore unitised, while 20% will be bulk liquids and solids, and general
cargo. As it is now, Drogheda Port will operate using deep water quays at
Tom Roes Point for certain niche trades, such as bulk, general and paper.
In July 2009 the Harbours (Amendment) Act 2009 was enacted which
provides for the extension of the limits of Drogheda Port by statutory
instrument to cover the Bremore Port development. The Company has
advertised its intention to expand its limits. It was reported recently that
Bremore may be moved farther north to Gormanston, Co Meath to avoid
encroaching on a Neolithic complex of passage tombs. However, no final
decision has been taken.
Figure 2.2: The Location of the Proposed Bremore
Development
Page 33
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
2.8.3
Key Statistics
The Key Statistics for Drogheda Port Company are:
Table 2.3: Key Statistics for the Port of Drogheda
2006
Turnover €000
3,279
2,463
697
956
353
1,279
1,035
664
34,848
29,832
7,115
569
503
332
16
17
16
835
664
1,042
Cargo Throughput KTonnes
Number of Ships
Staff Numbers
Pension Liability €000
2.9
2008
3,199
Operating Profit €000
Lo-Lo TEUs
2007
Galway Port Company
Galway Port is the principal commercial port on the west coast of Ireland catering for
the liquid, dry and break bulk trades. The port is a major importer for liquid fuels as
well as for bitumen freight with Petroleum imports being the primary trade through the
port.
As gateway to the west and northwest, the port is located strategically for the oil
companies to allow them to distribute their products north to Sligo, east as far as
Moate and south as far as Limerick. By virtue of its strategic location, Galway is
recognised by the oil industry as one of the three major distribution centres for
petroleum products in Ireland. There are two major tank farms in Galway operated by
Topaz and Chevron/Texaco.
The harbour area is a major maritime leisure location and the port recently hosted the
successful Volvo Race which brought 500,000 visitors and €80 million in revenue to
the city.
Two cruise vessels visited the harbour in 2009.
Key objectives of the Harbour Company are the development of a new Galway
regional harbour at a cost of some €200 million over two stages with construction to
commence in late 2011, and the Development of Galway Port as a Centre for Marine
Leisure, the Cruise industry and International Boating Events.
2.9.1
Employment
Galway Harbour Company now employs 14, including two licensed pilots who
also act as Assistant Harbour Masters, as well as seven outdoor staff.
Employment costs in 2008 were €1,865,700.
2.9.2
Galway Enterprise Park
Galway Harbour Company owns the Enterprise Park from which it obtains
significant rental income. Forty-five acres in size, it currently has 25 tenants
employing some 300 people.
Page 34
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
2.9.3
Infrastructure
The port has nine berths with a total quay length of 1,044 metres. The berths
are:

Mulvay Quay - Length 209m;

Breathaoch Quay - 176m;

Dun Aengus Dock North - 164m;

Dun Aengus Dock South - 161m;

New Pier – 134m and 85m;

South East Extension - 93m;

Folan Quay - 87m;

Quirke Quay - 80m.
The dredged depth of water varies from -3.4 metres in the Channel and at the
Dun Aengus Dock to -2.95 metres elsewhere. With a tidal range of between
3.6 metres and 5.8 metres, the Harbour can handle vessels of up to 8.5
metres draft without them having to rest on the seabed.
The Harbour Board has 1,800 sq m. of covered storage, various yards and
open storage.
A bridge and access roads to a new Enterprise Park,
approximately 16 ha, were completed during 1993 and sites are available for
lease.
2.9.4
Investment: 2006 - 2009
The principal investments that have occurred in recent years include:
2.9.5

Ultra Modern Oil Terminal opened in 2009 - €40M

26 Berth Marina 2008 €400,000

Additional pontoons 2009- €100,000

New Slipway built in 2009 - €.5M

Total upgrade of Port for Volvo 2008/2009 - €1M

Ongoing Development of Enterprise Park - 45acres- €500,000

New CIE Bus Terminal opens on Enterprise Park Nov.2009

Planning for new port 2006/2009 - €.5M

Sale of 2 acre site on Dock Road due to close September 2010
Redevelopment of the Harbour
The harbour is a gated port which means that it is only possible to berth and
unberth ships for a very limited period, and the maximum size of ships that
can pass through the gates is limited to ships of a maximum size of 7,500
tonnes. The port’s customers require access for modern cargo vessels in
excess of 20,000 tonnes while oil tankers with a capacity of 40,000 tonnes
and above also require access.
Page 35
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
The Government approved in 2008 the request of Galway Harbour Company
to progress its proposal to redevelop and reposition Galway Port to a location
south of the Galway Enterprise Park, and the Company is now advancing the
development of an Environmental Impact Statement as part of its application
to An Bord Pleanála for planning permission for this project under the
Strategic Infrastructure Act which is expected to be made in mid 2010.
Commencing construction in late 2011, Stage 1 of the development is
scheduled to be completed by 2015 with Stage 2 completed in 2021 at a total
cost of the order of €200 million. The project will be funded by Galway
Harbour Company through a utilisation of existing assets, borrowings or with
the possible involvement from third party investors or PPPs.
The redevelopment is driven by the worldwide trend that is seeing a growth in
vessel size. The demand for larger vessels is being driven by a need to
achieve economies of scale particularly in relation to their operation.
However, as ships get larger, they need deeper water, longer quay space and
enhanced facilities at their berths. Due to depth and beam limitations, Galway
Port is becoming less suitable as customers of Galway Harbour Company,
particularly the petroleum and bitumen importers, wish to use larger vessels
and have argued for appropriate facilities to be provided as a consequence.
The figure overleaf provides outline details of the proposed new development.
2.9.6
The Vision Lands
Concurrent with the development of the new port will be the redevelopment of
the existing harbour, referred to as The Vision Lands, as a flagship landmark
project for the Ireland west region under the National Development Plan
2007-2013. The 32 acres of land, including seven acres of water, will include
a series of cultural attractions, residential stock, retail and facilities for marine
leisure and tourism attractions. Central to the rejuvenation of The Vision
Lands is the proposed release of an estimated eight acres of incremental
amenity area to the city.
2.9.7
Key Statistics
The Key Statistics for the Port of Galway are:
Table 2.3: Key Statistics for the Port of Galway
2006
2007
2008
Turnover €000
3,996
4,386
4,347
Operating Profit €000
1,139
1,250
1,250
Cargo Throughput KTonnes
946
945
838
Number of Ships
313
282
252
17
16
18
486
54
907
Staff Numbers
Pension Liability €000
Page 36
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
Figure 2.3: Two Stage Proposed Development of the Port of Galway
Page 37
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
2.10
Shannon Foynes Port Company
Shannon Foynes Port was established from the merger in 2000 of the former
Shannon Estuary and Foynes port companies, as part of the ports rationalisation and
modernisation programme undertaken by the Irish government, and is headquartered
in Foynes. The Port is a major bulks deepwater port catering for liquid bulk, dry bulk
and break bulk. The Port has statutory jurisdiction over all marine activities on a 500
km2 area on the Shannon Estuary, stretching from Kerry/Loop Heads to Limerick City
and is committed to keeping Limericks Docks open as a working port as long as it
remains viable.
2.10.1 Services and Facilities
The company provides a variety of services from controlling navigation and
marine safety to warehousing, logistics and cargo handling. The Port
company handles the largest vessels entering Irish waters, which are up to
225,000 dead weight tonnes, and have a track record of continuous growth
and innovation. All operations are accredited to ISO 9001:2000 by Lloyd’s
Register quality assurance.
Shannon Foynes Port Company services six facilities on the Shannon
Estuary. The facilities at Foynes, Limerick docks and Shannon Airport are
owned by the company. As the deepest company owned facility,
Foynes is the main deepwater facility, catering for vessels up to 198m in
length, a draft of up to 10.5m and vessels from 3,000 deadweight tonnes to
40,000 deadweight tonnes. There is a substantial landbank of serviced land
adjacent to the port and some 30,000m 2 of warehousing within the port
precincts. Significant open dock space is available and handling equipment to
cater for a variety of cargoes, including liquid products, bulk and general
cargo. Transport access to the hinterland is good, with a recently developed
new port access road in place. Modern tugs, craneage and hoppers with dust
suppression units are available.
Limerick Docks enjoy a city-centre location some 100km inland from the
mouth of the estuary, at the heart of the thriving Mid-West region of Ireland.
The 4.5ha water area has a quay length of almost one kilometre and can
accommodate vessels up to 152m long with a beam of up to 19.8m. The
terminal handles a range of dry bulk, break bulk and liquid cargoes and has
modern handling equipment. Brown-field land in the complex suitable for a
range of applications and usages is also available.
Shannon Airport is one of the few international airports to have its fuel
requirement supplied directly by ship.
The three other dedicated terminals, which are privately owned, are
Moneypoint and its 2 million tonne coal transhipment facility, Tarbert Island for
heavy fuel and Aughinish for bauxite imports and alumina exports.
Page 38
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
The company provides its own stevedoring service through a fully-owned
subsidiary, Limerick Cargo Handling (LCH). In addition to stevedoring, LCH
also provides a full range of logistics solutions, from inventory management
and
dispatch
functions
to
onward
road-haulage
management
and
coordination. A number of independent stevedores also provide services at
Foynes.
2.10.2 Infrastructure
Shannon Foynes Port Company has made extensive investment in
infrastructure in recent years and currently has a total asset cost base of €63
million.
With regard to SFPC direct investment in infrastructure, the Foynes terminal
has been earmarked for substantial upgrade in future years. The company
has completed a roadmap for future infrastructure development that has the
flexibility of being implemented over a phased timeframe. Any investment is
subject to cost-benefit analysis in line with the appraisal guidelines for capital
investment. In short, the plan provides for an additional 300 metres of quays
and 14 acres of infill to give much needed additional open quay storage.
The company is currently drafting an engineering feasibility study to determine
the most cost-effective approach and should be ready to commence planning
in the foreseeable future. The aim is to have the statutory consents process
complete to allow us commence construction as soon as it is economically
justified by business demands. Other more short-term projects include a new
fire fighting system to facilitate the new 80,000 cu. m. deepwater oil terminal
at Foynes, a new headquarters and the upgrading of the VTMS system to
facilitate the LNG project and other large-scale future projects.
The company has an available bank of warehousing at both Foynes and
Limerick, and additional facilities are provided by third parties within and
adjacent to the port’s precincts. The company is committed to ensuring that
adequate modern warehousing capacity is available to the port’s users and
engages in constant review and monitoring of demand and capacity to ensure
proactive development of capacity, either by direct investment or by providing
leasehold land to other interested parties who wish to contribute to the overall
development of the port’s throughput and infrastructure.
The Company spent circa €3m on upgrading its asset base in 2008; just over
€2m of this was on the Shannon 1, a custom built multipurpose maintenance
vessel with dredge and towage capabilities. The Shannon 1 has already
contributed significantly by maintaining advertised depths and so far obviated
the need for the imposition of draft limitations; with regard to 2009, the aim is
to continue investing in infrastructure and the Company has planned for
expenditure of circa €2m in primarily land based port infrastructure.
Page 39
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
The Atlantic Fuel Supply Company oil storage and distribution facility (67,000
cubic metres) is under construction and is expected to be in operation in
August 2010.
At Tarbert Island, the National Oil Reserve Agency is expected to commence
refurbishment in 2010 of 250,000 cubic metres of storage for national
strategic requirements.
The LNG facility has received all statutory consents.
The Port believes that it has sufficient capacity, in the medium term, in
warehousing, heavy plant and equipment due to an investment of up to €8m
in these assets in the last three years.
2.10.3 Strategic Estuary Development
The company is very conscious of the need to manage the valuable natural
resource of the Shannon Estuary, and aware of the potential for damage as a
result of the various maritime activities which take place there. The company
therefore leads a consortium of parties in SEAPT Limited, the Shannon
Estuary Anti-Pollution Team, which maintains the necessary equipment to
provide an immediate response to any problem, and engages in ongoing
training and development, as well as liaison with organisations world-wide, to
ensure that any necessary response is world-class. The company also
operates an integrated Waste Management Strategy at its facilities to comply
with present and anticipated legislative requirements.
2.10.4 LoLo
The Company was involved in the container or lo-lo business for a three-year
period up to 2006 but decided to exit this in light of the inadequacy of its
marginal revenue stream. This was due to the characteristics of the Irish
container market and its reliance on feeder vessels to and from the mainland
European ports. Ireland’s deep sea and short sea trade is almost entirely
routed via northern European ports. Given these trade flows, ports on the
west coast are automatically disadvantaged by vessels having to come
around the corner of the south west coast. The associated extra sailing times
and threats to scheduling due to Atlantic weather systems make the service
uncompetitive when compared with south and east coast offerings.
2.10.5 Cruise Vessels
Four cruise vessels visited Foynes in 2009, two more than in 2008.
2.10.6 Key Statistics
The Key Statistics for Shannon Foynes Port Company are:
Table 2.3: Key Statistics for Shannon Foynes Port Company
2006
Turnover €000
2007
16,371
Page 40
2008
12,652
10,877
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
Operating Profit €000
Cargo Throughput KTonnes
Lo-Lo TEUs
Number of Ships
Staff Numbers
Pension Liability €000
Page 41
901
1,946
2,095
11,393
11,072
10,819
9,024
8,013
0
958
892
565
53
50
48
10,101
9,950
12,251
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
3.
Key National Port Policy and Other Documents
There have been a number of major policy reports and reviews carried out over the last
number of years and their key findings are set out below. First, though, we present an extract
from the current Department of Transport’s Statement of Strategy that deals with the
commercial ports.
3.1
Department of Transport – Statement of Strategy 2008 - 2010
3.1.1
Ports
The Minister for Transport has overall responsibility for national ports policy
and for facilitating the provision of adequate port capacity. A core objective is
to provide a framework for the provision by ports of port services, which are
efficient, effective and adequate for the needs of our trading economy. Most
of Ireland’s seaport capacity is located within the jurisdiction of the ten State
owned port companies, which have commercial mandates to develop the
business of their respective ports in competition with each other.
The private sector is heavily involved in service delivery within the ports, with
many terminals either privately owned or operated.
The Ports Policy Statement, published in January 2005, sets out the key
elements of national port policy. Since then, a consultancy report to the
Department in 2006 demonstrated that the projects being progressed by the
ports sector had the potential to deliver adequate port capacity. In addition,
the report noted that reforms to date in the Irish port industry had resulted in a
competitive marketplace for port services. The Department will continue to
work closely with the port companies and others to continuously review
capacity and progress other key objectives for the sector.
3.1.2
Objective: Better Ports
To ensure investment in ports meets port capacity requirements and to
facilitate the availability of commercial port services which are effective,
competitive and cost efficient.
3.1.3
Strategies

Implement the ports sub-programme of the National Development Plan,
2007- 2013, including the proposed study of Dublin Port.

Continuously monitor port capacity proposals to provide on time
additional capacity in line with national and regional needs.

Ensure State port companies are positioned to attract private sector
capital investment.

Facilitate any infrastructure funding opportunities presented by the EU
Motorways of the Sea initiative as part of the Trans-European Transport
Network.

Assess the performance of ports through the corporate governance
process and benchmarking studies.
Page 42
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector

3.1.4
3.2
Keep competition under review both within and between ports.
Key Performance Indicators

Ports sub-programme of the National Development Plan successfully
implemented, including the study of the role of Dublin Port.

Port infrastructure and capacity adequate to accommodate trade and
sea passengers.

Trends in port charges, turnover, costs, profitability, asset utilisation and
rates of return.
The High Level Review of the State Commercial Ports Operating under
the 1996 – 2000 Harbours’ Acts
3.2.1
Terms of Reference
In late 2001, Consultants were invited to
1. To conduct a detailed evaluation of the adequacy of the current model for
the governance of the State port companies (including the advisability of
appointing a regulator) having regard to the need to have in place
structures and approaches which ensure:

that the ports are incentivised to deliver high quality port products to
stakeholders, particularly users;

that the ports have access to appropriate funding to provide for
capacity requirements in the medium to long term;

that appropriate competitive conditions exist within and between
ports, which exert downward pressure on costs and charges for port,
shipping and other port related services;

the avoidance of inefficient monopoly situations developing, with
potential upward pressure on costs and charges; and

that the shareholder/management relationship is conducive to the
development of a port sector which is fully supportive of the needs of
our rapidly developing open economy.
2. To advise on the future role of ports in contributing to the optimum
development of the transport sector in Ireland and appraise / recommend
management / ownership options including enhanced private sector
involvement.
3.
To consult, at a high level, all relevant stakeholders and report by
Summer 2002.
The scope of the Review was limited to the eight port companies operating
under the relevant Acts.
3.2.2
Recommendations
The Consultants made the following recommendations:
Role of the Shareholder

The Shareholder declares without delay its position on the future funding
of ports;

The Shareholder should clearly communicate the commercial role of and
the objectives for the commercial port sector; this requires an agreed
definition of the function of a port;

The Shareholder should place on the record that it is prepared to liquidate
or put into examinership any port company that finds itself in financial
difficulty;
Page 43
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector

Any future guarantees for port bank loans and any Letters of Comfort in
any form should be withdrawn; the Department should advise all banks
that the State as shareholder will not guarantee any prospective loans;

The practice of appointing port users and councillors to port boards
should be discontinued on grounds of potential conflicts of interest;

Port users, local authority councillors and other interested parties should
be members of a Port Users’ Forum which should have a formal
consultation role and be consulted on a regular basis by port
management;

Formal liaison arrangements between Departments should be
established to ensure an integrated policy on transport, and if necessary
the transfer to the Department of Transport responsibility for the full
integration of all of the transportation functions including ports;

To facilitate the future development of the ports, ownership in the
Foreshore within the port’s jurisdiction should be transferred to the ports
on negotiated and realistic terms provided a detailed assessment and
adequate provision has been given to alternative economic and social
developments of these foreshore transfers. The transfer will require a
change in legislation and assurances that any future sale of the
foreshore, other than by public acquisition, must reflect its true intrinsic
and monetary value;

Rosslare Port should be treated on the same basis as a commercial port
operating under the Harbours’ Acts and be subject to the general
recommendations of this Report;
Role of the Port Company

Port management should not be distracted by non-core, non commercial
activities or matters of a social or cultural nature; non-core social and
leisure facilities, particularly jetties and berths, should be transferred to
local authority ownership, provided it does not interfere with primary
functions;

Clear commercial and operating targets should be set by the Boards;

Ports themselves will have to adopt radical and innovative thinking in
relation to addressing the funding of their infrastructure needs;

Every effort should be made to modernise local work practices without
delay through the partnership model;
Port Company Mergers

Ports companies should be consolidated on a regional basis to reduce
overheads, to focus on the strategic trade needs of the region and to
rationalise investment plans;

The Port of Galway should take over responsibility for Rossaveal because
of their commercial activities;

The Port of Cork should take over responsibility for Bantry given their
close operating relationships;
Involvement of the Private Sector

We suggest that the concept of opening up port company ownership to
the private sector, while not ruled out, is not pursued at present. This
option could however be considered by the Department in the future in
the light of the finances of the relevant ports, the effect on the public
interest, the extensive legislation, and oversight framework required and
the likely necessity to appoint a regulator;

Nevertheless, we do recommend that a “do minimum” approach be
implemented in conjunction with the introduction of private sector
Page 44
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
operational skills and investment under Public Private Partnerships,
where these approaches can deliver efficient and cost effective port
products;

We would also recommend that the Port Companies explore a range of
different forms of concession including the build, operate and transfer
model and the design, build, finance and operate model to deliver port
infrastructure where these forms can deliver value for money. This will
require the identification of pilot projects which would be then subject to
further feasibility study;
EU Directive on Market Access to Port Services

The principles of the EU Regulation on Market Access, when the
Directive has been adopted, should be accelerated and extended to all
commercial ports;

The Commission for Aviation Regulation should be the Competent
Authority for the EU Directive on Port Services to avoid any unnecessary
expense and to make use of available experience and expertise;
Corporate Governance

The extent of the corporate governance requirements established by the
shareholder, particularly of a reporting nature, should be reviewed;

Each port should review its bye-laws regularly to ensure that they reflect
current requirements;
Regulation


Market dynamics should be encouraged through structural reform rather
than through the introduction of a Regulator at this time:

by requiring ports to be more transparent in the way port charges are
determined and charged;

by encouragement towards the landlord model
efficiencies, reduce costs and provide competition;

by the use of competition legislation, and

through the establishment of competing terminals where practicable.
to
improve
A Ports’ Ombudsperson should be appointed to provide an independent
conciliation and appeals, including binding arbitration, service which
would hear and decide on cases where a port user believes that the costs
of either a port service or a port charge is unfair or discriminatory. The
Ombudsperson will be reimbursed by the parties to the dispute;
Dun Laoghaire Harbour Company

There is a mandate conflict between the commercial and heritage
obligations of Dun Laoghaire Harbour Company; the responsibility for the
cultural and heritage aspects should be transferred to Dun Laoghaire
Rathdown County Council and consideration given, on commercial and
economic grounds, to merging Dun Laoghaire Port Company and Dublin
Port Company to become the Dublin Bay Port Company focusing on fast
craft business;
Addressing Environmental Matters

In addition to the normal procedures, there should be regular meetings of
interested parties, e.g., port management, Departmental Commercial Port
staff and Coastal Zone staff, relevant state and non-governmental
agencies to discuss how environmental matters should be addressed and
progressed;
Follow-Up Studies

The Department should commission further studies:
Page 45
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector

3.3

In the interests of ensuring the future viability of the commercial ports
sector consistent with the recently published National Spatial
Strategy, it may be necessary to initiate a study into the identification
of which port companies should be merged, the steps to be taken to
effect the mergers, the financial and other implications of such
mergers and the timetable within which the mergers would be
expected to take place;

There should be a benchmarking study of the financial and operating
performance of Irish ports vis-à-vis relevant counterparts in the UK
and mainland Europe,

There should be a ports’ costs study.
The first study builds on the recommendation to consolidate port
companies on a regional basis; the second study will identify areas for
improvement while the third will clarify the ownership and level of each of
the elements of port charges;
National Ports’ Policy Statement
Taking into account the findings and recommendations of the High Level Review, the
Government in 2005 published the National Ports’ Policy the purpose of which was to
provide a framework for the provision by port companies operating within the national
transport chain of port services which are efficient, effective and adequate for the needs
of our growing economy.
The key messages of the Policy document are:

Ports are vital gateways for commercial freight and sea passengers. This is
highlighted by the fact that 9 of the 10 commercial State port companies are
located in areas identified as gateways in the National Spatial Strategy

Ports are State-owned companies with statutory commercial mandates and
operational criteria. The port companies are required to take all proper measures
for the management, control, operation and development of their harbours and
are required to conduct their business at all times in a cost effective and efficient
manner. This has led to a strong independence of action and a focused
commercial mindset

A crucial role of ports is to facilitate the movement of goods from sea to road and
rail transport, and should ensure seamless onward connections between the
various transport modes

The provision of adequate and efficient capacity into the future is a crucial
strategic objective of the Government; significant shortfalls in port infrastructure
capacity could result in serious damage to the economy

Long lead-in times and the need to have in-time capacity in place impose
obligations on ports to provide adequate in-time capacity for the future needs of
the economy

The shareholder expects that the port companies, as commercial entities, should
be capable of funding their operations and infrastructural requirements without
relying on Exchequer support. The port companies are, therefore, encouraged to
seek financial assistance from other avenues such as private sector investment
within ports and from the disposal of non-core assets

Competition is essential in any marketplace to promote efficiency, stimulate
innovation and enhance overall national competitiveness. Public policy priorities
must, therefore, focus on the delivery of efficient and competitive infrastructure to
support our open economy

It is clear that ports compete against each other for trade as determined by
market circumstances. Competitive conditions vary greatly from one port to
Page 46
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
another depending on the location, capacity and type of traffic. Where access is
poor, the level of competition between ports is inevitably reduced. Nevertheless,
the Performance Audit of the State Port Companies, which was carried out by
independent consultants in 2001, found that healthy competition generally exists
between ports
3.4

Ideally, the Department would like to see a situation where the Irish ports industry
is fully competitive and non-monopolistic in character

The Department intends to maintain competition as a foremost policy driver and
capacity provision clearly will have significant implications in this regard.
Competition will be monitored both within and between ports
Assessment of Port Services Issues for Enterprise
Port services are critically important for enterprise in getting product to market. This
2009 FORFAS study assesses a number of ports related issues, including the
comparative performance of Irish ports for freight services, the adequacy of internal
road and rail access and the changing enterprise needs for port services
3.4.1
Key Findings
Ease of access to ports is essential to enable the effective and efficient
movement of goods in and out of the country. For exporters and importers,
the entire chain from their premises to the customer is important for the
effective movement of goods in and out of the country. In this regard,
ensuring that quality road and rail infrastructure is available to link ports to the
national road and rail network is critical.
While the Dublin Port Tunnel has resulted in significant savings in
journey times in and out of Dublin port, these have been offset by the
increased congestion on the M50 during the recent junction improvement
works, particularly for businesses located to the south and west of Dublin. In
view of the importance of Dublin port for ro-ro and lo-lo traffic into and out of
Ireland, congestion in the Greater Dublin Area has significant implications for
the enterprise base’s ease of access to overseas markets and reduces their
flexibility.
Rail access plays a limited role in the movement of freight within the State
and accounted for less than two percent of inland transport volumes in 2005
(latest data available). Currently2, the only rail freight services available in the
State are the Ballina to the Port of Waterford service and the Tara Mines to
the Port of Dublin service. The decline of rail freight in recent years has been
attributed to the comparative advantage of road transportation. In addition,
most ports have a limited geographical hinterland. For example, most of the
Port of Dublin’s business lies within an 80km radius of the port and most of
the Port of Cork’s is in the Munster area. A recent study of the European rail
2 Subsequent to the production of this Report, a twice-weekly rail freight service between Ballina and Dublin Port
has commenced; see also section 4.10
Page 47
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
freight market found that rail freight transportation is only a viable
alternative to road over distances longer than 150km. However, growing
environmental concerns over carbon emissions and congestion and
increasing demand from enterprise are leading to a renewed focus on rail
freight within the EU.
Rising fuel costs are likely to lead to larger ships in the medium term on lo-lo
services that operate in and out of the island of Ireland. This will require
deeper water facilities at Irish ports to handle the larger vessels. If deeper
water facilities are not provided in the medium term, this will lead to a
reduction in the number of routes and services to and from ports on the island
of Ireland, and an increase in costs because of the reduced capacity.
The Ports Policy Statement makes clear that the State-owned commercial
port companies should fund their own operations and infrastructural
requirements without assistance from the Exchequer.
The Harbours (Amendment) Bill, published in September 2008, addresses
a number of the issues identified in the Ports Policy Statement, in particular,
ensuring adequate port capacity to meet future needs.
In broad terms, the analysis of future supply of and demand for port
capacity indicates that the island of Ireland has sufficient ro-ro and lo-lo
capacity (in place and planned) to meet enterprise needs in the medium term,
provided the additional capacity planned proceeds as scheduled.
The main area of dissatisfaction that arises for exporters is related to
problems that occur in respect of lo-lo feeder service connectivity when
feeder vessels are delayed. A delay on one voyage may take two further
voyages to fully correct because of the relatively tight schedule to which the
vessels normally operate.
3.4.2
Key Policy Areas
Improving Internal Connectivity
In view of the importance of internal access to and from the ports for the
efficient movement of goods in and out of the country, transport policy needs
to take a more integrated approach across all modes of transport to ensure
an efficient transport system.
The Port of Dublin handles 40 percent of total port traffic in the State and 70
percent of unitised (ro-ro and lo-lo) traffic. It is therefore imperative that the
congestion in the Greater Dublin Area is addressed as a matter of priority.
Provision of Deeper Water Facilities
Rising fuel costs are likely to lead to larger ships on the lo-lo services that
operate in and out of Ireland in the medium term. This will require deeper
Page 48
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
water facilities at ports on the island of Ireland to handle the larger vessels.
Currently, only limited deeper water facilities are available at ports on the
island of Ireland.
If deeper water facilities are not provided in the medium term, this will lead to
a reduction in the number of routes and services to and from ports on the
island of Ireland, and an increase in costs because of the reduced capacity.
Creating Certainty about the Future of the Port of Dublin
Uncertainty around the future of the Port of Dublin and in particular the
possible move of the port from its current location will hinder much needed
investment in the port’s facilities over the medium term to address issues like
the need for deep sea water facilities. In view of the importance of the Port of
Dublin, Government must ensure that a decision on the future of the port is
taken as quickly as possible especially given the long lead time for the
delivery of port infrastructure and facilities.
3.4.3
Sharing Our Future: Ireland 2025
A subsequent Forfás Report, Sharing Our Future: Ireland 2025, provides a
long term assessment of what is required to develop a competitive
sustainable enterprise sector.
The Report notes that the level of infrastructure in a country affects
competitiveness in a number of ways. Well developed infrastructure can
improve the flow of people, goods, services and finance, as well as increasing
productivity and reducing costs. This not only affects existing firms, but also a
country’s attractiveness as an investment location and the overall quality of
life it can provide.
Completing the inter-urban motorway network with prioritisation of those parts
that support economic development, and improving peak speeds in Dublin
and other gateway cities is crucial. Improving air connectivity and seaport
capacity infrastructures is also of high importance. Freight transport will move
away from air to sea, providing opportunities for deep water ports, ship
building and repair. In particular, it notes that there is a need for continued
investment in strategic infrastructure to address bottlenecks and improve
connectedness.
3.5
InterTrade Ireland: Freight Transport Report for the Island of Ireland
During 2008, InterTrade Ireland published a Report on Freight Transport in Ireland. It
should be noted that this Report was published prior to the dramatic change in the
economic climate.
The Report notes that the current modal position for the island of Ireland can be
summarised as:
Page 49
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector


Road freight has long had the overwhelming share of inland freight movements
within the island of Ireland.

Rail freight has declined in absolute volume in recent years and appears unlikely
to recover much of this lost traffic, though it still continues to have a role to play
for certain specialised movements but only within Ireland, rail freight having
ceased completely in Northern Ireland in 2003

Port and shipping services are of major and increasing importance to the island
of Ireland because of its open economies and its peripheral location relative to
European and World markets. In line with the rapid growth in economic trade,
containerised traffic over the decade to 2006 through the island of Ireland’s ports
has increased by 125 per cent in units of TEU, while Ro-Ro has increased by 70
per cent in units of vehicles
Air freight has grown in recent years with a small base in terms of tonnage
moved, but it is significant in terms of the value of the goods that it moves and
their importance within high-tech industry sectors
Port Capacity
Ports are the nodal points through which the island of Ireland connects with the global
economy. In relation to ports there are 2 issues: capacity and connectivity. Outside of
ports the movement of freight is impeded by city congestion and the state of
completeness on the inter-urban road network. Underlying these points is the
utilisation of transport infrastructure, the regulation of the freight industry and the
provision of a skilled workforce.
Port capacity is currently stretched and will need to expand in the medium term to
cater for continued freight growth. The Department of Transport Ireland (2006)
commissioned a report from Fisher Associates to asses the future seaport capacity
requirements for unitised trade on the island of Ireland. Working on the normal
scenario, Lo-Lo would effectively be fully utilised by 2014 while an approximate 9 per
cent increase on 2005 Ro-Ro capacity would also be required.
It seems likely that additional capacity, for both Lo-Lo and Ro-Ro, will be needed by
this time if not beforehand. Although some uncertainty exists regarding future
economic growth in Ireland, most forecasts predict a short term dip in 2008 returning
to strong economic growth thereafter2. Fisher’s normal growth scenario was based on
4.7 per cent annual GDP growth to 2014. The ESRI 2005 medium term review
forecast that 4.8 per cent growth in GDP to 2015 would represent a high growth
scenario. To date the high growth forecast has been conservative and it would seem
that, a short term correction not withstanding, economic growth will continue to propel
freight increases. Northern Ireland will also contribute to demand with real GVA
growth of 3 per cent predicted for 2007-2008.
For both Ireland and Northern Ireland the upward revision of population projections to
1.8 per cent and 0.7 per cent per annum to 2016 should help sustain a higher trend in
import volumes and the movement of goods.
Observed growth rates for unitised traffic in Ireland in 2005 and 2006 ran at double
those predicted by the Fisher normal growth scenario. Similar levels of growth in
Page 50
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
container traffic through Northern Ireland have also been recorded during the same
period. While over a short time span, this does indicate that the island, North and
South is currently registering high growth in freight movements. Recently published
figures for 2007 by Dublin Port suggest this trend has continued.
The need for extra capacity has been recognised by the port sector and major
expansion plans are underway. It seems clear that expansion will be privately
financed; both governments should facilitate this through timely planning procedures
and supportive infrastructure that connects ports to the wider transport network.
There is inevitably a delay of some years between approval being given for a major
new port facility and the date when it becomes fully available for use. Major long term
damage would be caused to both economies if there was an interim period with
inadequate port capacity for the import and export of unitised goods. Without spare
capacity within the port system there will be no effective competition and little pressure
to control prices or improve service levels in individual ports. The resulting price
increases and congestion delays experienced in ports would impact on the
competitiveness of exporting firms and on their ability to serve existing markets,
causing serious potential long term economic consequences for the island of Ireland.
Recommendation: Unitised port capacity on the island must be expanded. Belfast
Port has set a target of double capacity by 2020. Other ports have similar ambitions.
These need to be delivered, particularly the development of Bremore new port, the
Lo-Lo expansion in Dublin port and the Cork Lo-Lo Terminal in Ringaskiddy. Planning
permission affecting their expansion needs to be progressed rapidly. Decisions on
investment need to take account of the worldwide move towards larger container
vessels that call at fewer and larger ports with greater depth. A similar trend in
increasing vessel size also applies to feeder vessels.
Future investment must ensure that larger vessels can be accommodated and that
freight can be transferred readily onto the wider transport network. This emphasis
towards concentration needs to be counterbalanced by the desirability of competition
to control prices, improve quality of service, as well as to serve the natural hinterlands
of different parts of the island of Ireland.
Port Connectivity to the Road Network
For ports to function effectively they must link seamlessly to the inland network.
Particular bottlenecks exist in getting lorries in and out of ports, impacting on
efficiency and the wider community. Given the significance of the land bridge to
Europe, similar issues facing a number of key ports on the west cost of GB merit a cooperative East-West approach.
Recommendation: Improve local access routes adjacent to a number of ports /
airports. These are: Belfast Port (York Street/Westlink junction); Belfast International
Airport (upgrade road connections to M1 and M2); Warrenpoint (Newry Southern
Relief road); Larne (full dualling of the A8); Rosslare (port access road and complete
Page 51
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
the N25); Drogheda (Northern and Southern Relief roads) and Cork (road system
around the Jack Lynch Tunnel and N28 to Ringaskiddy). Though a number of these
routes are contained in investment plans, it is important to implement these
improvements early enough to support the rapid expected growth in future port traffic.
British land corridor
A large proportion of the higher value trade between the island of Ireland and Europe
(approximately 1.5million tonnes of imports and a little lower volume for exports)
passes overland by lorry through GB, mainly down to the ports of south-east England
and the Channel Tunnel. This relies on the quality and usage cost of the infrastructure
in GB.
A lack of reliable road links to the ports of Pembroke and Fishguard (A477/A40),
Heysham (construct Lancaster by-pass) and Stranraer / Cairnryan (A75/A77) has
been identified. This is a serious issue facing hauliers and those ports on the island of
Ireland which are geographically tied to these routes. This was mentioned regularly
during the consultation.
In the longer term, if the quality of access continues to deteriorate due to the growth of
local congestion, this could seriously hamper the ability of the corresponding port,
North or South to compete with others on the island of Ireland. Any erosion of
competition between ports on the island of Ireland is unlikely to be in the public
interest.
Conclusions
Efficient freight transport is essential to the economy and to the quality of life across
the island of Ireland. Economic growth generates increasing demand for freight
transport.
Goods have to be moved freely, reliably, efficiently to meet business needs, while
minimising the impact on safety, on other transport users and on the environment.
This study has set out to understand the opportunities, constraints and key issues for
freight on the island of Ireland. Through review and analysis, a baseline to help
understand the trends of freight growth has been built up.
A wide range of stakeholders have been consulted seeking their views on the current
freight transport system, future trends, and the key policy objectives that should be
addressed by government.
Supported by the consultation and analysis, we have put forward a number of priority
options for consideration in improving the provision of freight and logistics services
across both jurisdictions have been put forward The most critical of these are:

to improve data collection and forecasting of freight transport;

to increase port capacity and target bottle necks in the road network;

to co-operate North-South and East-West to regulate and support the freight
industry; and
Page 52
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector

to involve hauliers in transport planning.
The economy of Ireland has grown rapidly in the past and expectations are that this
growth will continue, though probably at a less extreme rate. Economic and population
growth in Northern Ireland have also recently started to accelerate recently. It is
crucial to ensure that an efficient freight and logistics system is in place on both sides
of the border, in time and with sufficient capacity, to encourage rather than to
constrain this expected economic growth.6
3.6
Review of the Security of Ireland’s Access to Commercial Oil Supplies3
The Whitegate Oil Refinery is the smallest refinery in the Conoco family. The
company has given a commitment to the Government to continue to refine to 2014.
The Company could invest in the facilities to expand then; alternatively, the Company
might decide to close down the refinery and just use the tankfarm for storage. The
worst scenario is a complete withdrawal from Whitegate.
Energy security is a key element of Irish energy policy. Ireland relies on oil for almost
60 % of our energy needs, all of which is imported. This level of dependency must be
reduced by developing our indigenous energy resources and reducing demand.
In the above Review, the consultants found that in “normal” circumstances, there is no
significant risk to Ireland in terms of availability of commercial oil, or the capability of
Ireland’s oil industry to procure oil. It pointed instead to measures which could
enhance physical access and distribution of oil on the island of Ireland and help
safeguard against internal disruptions to supply.
The report’s findings include, inter alia:

Oil stocks: Ireland should increase the proportion of its 90 days’ strategic stocks
which are held on the island to ensure that sufficient stocks are available to deal
with any disruptions to port infrastructure. This recommendation is in line with the
Government’s Energy Policy Framework 2007 – 2020.

Importation: The three principal ports for the importation of oil are Dublin,
Whitegate and Shannon Foynes. Any redevelopment of Dublin Port should
recognise the importance of maintaining capacity for commercial oil importation
and storage. Options for accommodating larger ships should be considered at the
three ports and in port development generally.
Reliance on shipping means that Ireland’s infrastructure for berthing and unloading oil
tankers, for storing oil at harbour locations and for distributing oil inland by road must
be robust and fit-for-purpose. From its modelling of the capacity of the various Ports,
the consultants concluded that, with the current exception of Galway, the ports, as
currently configured, do have the capacity to meet the present demand. If the plans
for additional tankage and berthing capacity at Galway are realised, the situation will
improve satisfactorily.
By 2015, therefore, the consultants anticipate that within the Republic, only Dublin,
Whitegate, Galway and Foynes, and perhaps New Ross, will remain operational.
Page 53
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
About 45% of the market is serviced through Dublin Port from where it is distributed
inland by road. Whitegate refinery distributes another 14% by road and about the
same quantity is shipped to other port locations for inland distribution. Galway is the
access route for about another 12%. The remainder – which includes most of the
HFO imports – comes through the other ports, including small quantities from Belfast
and Derry.
By 2015, NORA’s obligation will have grown to around 2.15 MT and it is Government
policy, as set out in the Energy White Paper to “rebalance the strategic oil reserves by
maximising Ireland’s wholly-owned stocks of oil and the level of stocks held on the island,
subject to increased storage availability and value for money considerations”. In other
words, there would still be a requirement for around 0.8 MT of oil storage capacity by
2015, if this policy is to be implemented. This is equivalent to almost a million cubic
metres. According to the consultants, this would require four new facilities, each of
250,000 cubic metres capacity; that should be developed at locations which can be
linked to ports with suitable berthing facilities for tankers in the 30,000 to 40,000 dwt
range. Each facility would need around 9 hectares and would cost of the order of €65
M each.
Figure 3.1: Relative Importance of Ireland’s Oil Ports
3 Review of the Security of Ireland’s Access to Commercial Oil Supplies, Purvin & Gertz, Byrne O Cleirigh, Sept 2008
Page 54
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
Source: Review document
Page 55
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
3.7
Smarter Travel – A Sustainable Transport Future4
Following a period of consultation, the Government published a document entitled
“Smarter Travel – A Sustainable Transport Future” in early 2009 that set out an Action
Plan to free Irish towns and cities from choking traffic congestion, cut CO 2 emissions
and help car-based commuters to leave their cars at home.
The 49 measures in Smarter Travel – A Sustainable Transport Future are grouped
under four key headings:

Actions to reduce distance travelled by private car and encourage smarter travel,
including focusing population and employment growth predominantly in larger
urban areas

Actions aimed at ensuring that alternatives to the car are more widely available,
mainly through a radically improved and more accessible public transport service
and through investment in cycling and walking

Actions aimed at improving the fuel efficiency of motorised transport through
improved fleet structure, energy efficient driving, and alternative technologies

Actions aimed at strengthening institutional arrangements to deliver the targets.
The Policy document notes that the efficient movement of goods is vital to our
competitiveness and economic welfare. Sixty-five per cent of our GDP is based on the
export of goods and services whereas the EU-25 average is 30%. At present, 95% of
all goods are moved by road and over 30% of transport greenhouse gas emissions
are from the freight sector. It goes on to state that a specific target to reduce energy
and emissions from the freight sector is needed while at the same time enhancing our
economic competitiveness.
The document also noted that the issue of moving goods brought a variety of
responses during the consultation process. Many maintained that the status quo, i.e.
almost exclusive reliance on road vehicles for goods movements, was unavoidable
due to the short distances from port to final destination and a lack of necessary
infrastructure. Others questioned this assumption, particularly in the longer term,
citing stubbornly high fuel prices and potential for both emissions savings and removal
of congestion from a lowering of the numbers of HGVs on the roads. These
respondents called for the subsidisation of rail freight, carried either by Iarnród
Éireann or private operators. The possibility of utilising light rail systems at off-peak
hours for goods movements was also raised. Another view was that the movement of
goods, including the potential of rail freight, port access, short sea and coastal
shipping and the potential of inland waterways, deserves examination and more
focused attention by the Department of Transport.
The Report presented two relevant Actions:
4 See also Section 4.9 on Rail Freight
Page 56
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
Action 10

Ensure that the Department of Transport deals with freight policy issues in a more
integrated manner and prepares a specific strategy for the freight sector. We will
set a target aimed at reducing the environmental impact of freight while at the
same time improving efficiency in the movement of goods and promoting
economic competitiveness

Organise a forum to bring all interested parties together, including industrial
development agencies and industry representative bodies, to explore in greater
depth the issues relating to the movement of goods, including:

The realistic potential for rail freight

Priority freight routes allowing access to vehicles with greater load factors and
capacity

Developing key logistics centres to transfer goods to more sustainable forms
of transport for final delivery in urban areas

Scheduling of deliveries from the ports and in urban areas to avoid peak use
of networks as far as possible

The incentives and disincentives needed to move to more fuel-efficient
vehicles

The need to have more rigorous testing of goods vehicles to reduce
emissions

The potential of Intelligent Transport Systems and Services to improve
efficiency
Action 29

We will also review ports policy and the 2005 Ports Policy Statement with a view
to maximising efficiency in the movement of goods and in the light of the review of
the freight sector referred to in Action 10
On the 29th January 2010, a preparatory meeting for an all-island freight forum under
the auspices of the North South Ministerial Council took place at Dublin Castle under
the banner ‘Freight Transport: Competitive, Sustainable, Connected’ where a number
of speakers gave presentations on a range of freight matters. Arising from the
discussions, five emerging themes were identified to bring forward for more detailed
analysis and recommendations. They were:

Being competitive in a sustainable manner

A safer compliant, eco-efficient road freight transport

Rail freight and other alternatives

International connectivity

Network management
Input from the floor provided additional areas for consideration including:

Need for good datasets as a basis for policy (evidence-based data)

The role of ports

Institutional connectivity

Access and road linkages

Regulation
Page 57
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
3.8
Dublin Port National Development Plan Study
This Report concerns an assessment of the role and future development of Dublin
Port within the context of the National Development Plan. It was carried out by a
consortium of consultants led by Indecon and was published in late July, 2009.
Terms of reference for study
The Terms of Reference for this study involved an examination of the role of Dublin
Port and its future. The study was in particular tasked to examine the costs and
benefits of various scenarios relating to Dublin Port
Approach
The Consultants conducted an independent cost benefit appraisal of the costs and
benefits arising from both the provision of port capacity for the Irish economy as well
as the costs and benefits arising from the specific port development scenarios that we
have outlined. To appropriately appraise the costs and benefits of the investment
scenarios for the provision of ports capacity for the Irish economy, there are a number
of key variables that must be included in any assessment.
The Consultants produced a table that outlines the net present values (NPVs) of each
of the development scenarios.
The Consultants point out that there is uncertainty concerning some of the costs and
benefits of different scenarios but their analysis suggests that the closure and
relocation of all of Dublin Port would be the least beneficial scenario. This is primarily
because it would involve very significant capital costs and the benefits in terms of
alternative land use are estimated to be much smaller than previously envisaged. This
reflects more realistic views on property prices and inclusion of the cost of disruption
to existing tenants.
Overall Conclusions
The figures suggest that the two scenarios with the highest NPVs are for Dublin Port
to expand or for alternative additional capacity such as the proposed Bremore project
or equivalent capacity to come on line with Dublin Port confined to existing capacity.
The commercial/financial feasibility of any scenarios would require detailed evaluation
by potential promoters.
Summary of Conclusions
1. The level of port capacity requirements will be influenced by economic growth and
by developments in consumer expenditure;
2. There is potential to improve the capacity utilisation of ports in Ireland and this
should be pursued as a priority;
3. There is a need to develop additional port capacity in Ireland by 2025 – 2030 and
this would require the expansion of Dublin Port or the development of the
proposed Bremore Port or some equivalent facility to provide additional capacity
for the Irish economy;
Page 58
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
4. Both Dublin Ports’ proposed 21h development and the development of new port
capacity such as the proposed Bremore Port would have positive net present
values;
5. Nothing should be done at a policy level to block either the proposed expansion of
Dublin Port or the proposed development of Bremore at this stage;
6. The proposals for the development of Bremore and Greenore and other ports
combined with the continuation of Dublin Port would have a higher net economic
benefit than the complete closure of Dublin Port;
7. The scenario involving a potential closure of Dublin Port would have city wide
sustainability benefits but these would not justify the additional cost involved;
8. Consideration must be given to the timing of costs and benefits and who would
pay for capital expenditures and the long timescale required for implementing a
scenario involving the closure of Dublin Port.
A table prepared by the Consultants showed that the two scenarios with the highest
Net Present Values are for Dublin Port to expand (€1,342 million) or for alternative
additional capacity such as the proposed Bremore project or equivalent capacity to
come on line with Dublin confined to existing capacity (€1,127 million).
Page 59
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
4.
Key Issues and Recommendations
Our analysis has identified a range of issues impacting on the efficiency and effectiveness of
the national port sector. These we detail below setting out our recommendations for change.
First, though, we show the importance of the ports sector to national competitiveness and its
role in the economic life of the state.
4.1
Importance of the Ports’ Sector
Ports are the life-blood of Irish trade and play a significant role in ensuring the
economic well-being of the state.
Almost all of the nation’s goods pass through the island’s ports with about 60 per cent
by value transiting the state’s commercial ports. According to the Central Bank, the
total value of Merchandise Imports and Exports in 2009 will be of the order of €127
billion; consequently, the value of goods handled at our ports is of the order of €76
billion.
A study carried out for the Irish Ports Association by Indecon International Economic
Consultants5 found that the value of trade handled by the State commercial seaports
totalled €75.7 billion during 2004 and that their net economic impact was some €5.5
billion supporting around 57,500 full-time employees. In 2004, a total of €38.7 million
of expenditure was incurred by the eleven State Commercial Seaports on wages and
salaries for their 694 employees involved directly in the activities of the
ports/harbours.
An analysis of the estimated aggregate net economic contribution of state commercial
seaports is set out in the table below:
Table 4.1: Estimated Aggregate Net Economic Contribution of State Commercial Seaports
Impact Component
Expenditures
Companies
of
Estimated Net Overall
Economic Contribution - €m
Port/Harbour
Expenditure
of
Port-Supported
Maritime and other Logistics
Activities
Estimated Net Overall Employment
Impacts – No of FTEs supported
190
2,032
3,844
41,927
1,394
13,165
36
343
5,464
57,467
Tourism-Related Expenditures – of
which
Car/Passenger Ferries
Cruise Liners
Overall Impact
Source: Indecon estimates
It is important to note that the estimates presented above highlight the overall
economic contribution of the State commercial seaports across the Irish economy as
a whole. At individual port level, the smaller regional seaports play an important role in
5 Economic Impact of State Commercial Seaports on the Irish Economy - A Report for the Irish Ports Association, May
2006, Indecon International Economic Consultants
Page 60
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
relation to the wider economic development of the surrounding regions in which they
are located. These impacts, which may be underestimated by a simple comparison of
impacts across the seaports, include in particular:

Their role in facilitating the development of regional and local industry which is
dependent on close proximity to seaports;

Their role in supporting ports-supported activities in the maritime and logistics
areas within their regions;

Their role in supporting the development of local and regional tourism.
Ireland’s island and peripheral status requires us to have ports that allow goods to be
delivered at the lowest cost and as quickly as possible. As an important component of
the logistics supply chain, any disruption in the supply chain has an impact on our
competitiveness through extra transport costs.
This point is particularly strongly made in the final Report6 of the Task Force on
Transport Logistics in Connection with Ports which noted that ports, and their
transport linkages, are key nodes in the supply chains of both export and import
goods and consequently play a pivotal role in ‘lubricating’ the economy. The Report
indicated that ports and maritime freight transport have been treated in the past as a
poor relation within the governance structures for the country’s transport system. This
situation risks causing a fall in confidence in the strategy and in the systems that are
in place to find solutions. The Report contends that the transport system must be
developed so that it underpins Ireland’s competitiveness.
Research consistently
indicates that transport is singularly exceptional as a part of the productive economy in
which Ireland remains far behind other developed and emerging countries. An IMI
Report7 survey shows consistently that while MNCs rate efficient air and sea transport
as an important determinant of competitiveness, they also rate Ireland’s performance
in this respect as poor.
A port’s freight business is drawn primarily from its natural hinterland and ensuring
that freight transport distances are minimised, port capacity must match traffic growth
for both unitised and non-unitised cargoes. However, there is significant undercapacity, particularly in so far as Lo-Lo freight is concerned, in the Irish port sector. As
a result, despite investments to date, Ireland is ranked 53rd out of 133 countries by the
World Economic Forum8 in terms of perceived quality of infrastructure and deemed a
competitive disadvantage, and, according to the National Competitiveness Strategy,
Irish business people still consider Ireland poorly for transport (road, air, and sea)
infrastructure relative to leading countries. In the case of Ireland’s port infrastructure.
Ireland scores lowly, ranking 25th out of 27 OECD countries9.
6 Task Force on Transport Logistics in Connection with Ports, February 2002, Chairman: Dr John Mangan, IMI
7 Survey of MNCs in Ireland: Results of 4th Annual Survey of Competitiveness, Irish Management Institute (2001)
8 The Global Competitiveness Report 2009 - 2010, World Economic Forum
9 Annual Competitiveness Report, Forfas, August 2009
Page 61
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
There are still key challenges facing the sector including:

The provision of new port infrastructure as well as maritime access and hinterland
infrastructure to facilitate the growth in freight traffic

The availability of potential port expansion areas as environmental and planning
legislation places an ever-increasing strain on vital port development plans

Putting in place new ways of working as vessels become larger and deeper, and
become more sophisticated from a handling perspective

Overcoming excessive regulation, bureaucracy and administrative demands

The need to deal with international shipping groups who possess strong
bargaining power and are often organised in strategic alliances, allowing them to
be less loyal to any one particular port

Quality of road access and inter-connectivity

Promoting the added value of ports for the economy and society
The EU’s Green Paper also recognises that a successful shipping sector is dependent
on having adequate port capacity.
Because of the importance of the ports’ sector to the Irish economy, the Minister for
Transport shall report to the Oireachtas, at least annually, on the performance of the
sector. Matters to be covered include: Corporate Governance, Traffic Trends,
Development Plans and Port Traffic.
4.2
Performance of the Ports’ Sector
The table overleaf, Table 4.2, provides a summary of the relative performance of the
national ports under review in 2008 and for them as a whole.
A more detailed
analysis can be found in Appendix 2. The information is drawn from the companies’
2008 accounts and CSO data.
It should be noted that the Ports of Cork and Dun Laoghaire do not break out their
Turnover by activity and hence their revenue from Port Operations only is not
available; consequently, any comparative analysis in this regard needs to be treated
with caution. Equally, some ports may have exceptional income and/or costs that may
impact on their returns.
Statistics earlier have shown that there has been a significant decline in freight
volumes through the state’s ports arising from the international economic recession
that Ireland finds itself in. This has had a major impact on ports’ revenue and
profitability, and hence their ability to invest in necessary infrastructure expansion or
technology improvements. It also, of course, inhibits them to pay any dividend to the
shareholder.
Further, with the collapse in the equity market, many ports are experiencing major
pension deficits that have to be addressed out of after-tax income and reserves.
Page 62
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
Table 4.2: Comparative Performance 2008
Dublin
Cork
W’ford
ShFoynes
Total Turnover
€m
70.6
26.3
13.7
10.9
Of which Port Ops Income
€m
58.7
n/a
11.3
6.1
Total Operating Profit
€m
27.0
4.3
2.1
5.1
D’Laoire
Drogheda
Dundalk
New Ross
Wicklow
Galway
Total
11.0
2.5
1.2
1.3
0.2
4.3
142.1
n/a
1.0
0.3
0.8
0.1
2.0
n/a
2.9
0.4
-0.3
0.3
-0.1
1.0
42.7
€m
263.0
112.2
53.9
51.3
69.7
25.0
6.8
11.6
2.9
13.9
610.2
Cargo
KTonnes
21,127
9,633
2,082
10,819
49
664
217
694
85
838
46,208
Lo-Lo
TEU
676,543
186,922
173,237
0
0
7,108
0
0
0
0
1,043,810
Ro-Ro
Units
704,343
1,134
N/A
N/A
13,898
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
719,375
Passengers
Kunits
1,260
77
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1,337
Trade Cars
Units
98,367
54,631
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
152,998
Bulk Liquid
Ktonnes
4,074
6,002
25
1,482
N/A
70
138
N/A
737
12,528
Dry Bulks
Ktonnes
2,385
1,763
706
9,089
N/A
361
142
504
N/A
15
14,965
Break Bulk
Ktonnes
232
286
170
248
N/A
177
75
52
85
86
1,411
Vessels
Arrivals
7,734
1,667
757
565
578
332
109
236
66
0
11,770
Cruise Vessels
Arrivals
82
51
10
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
145
Employees
Nos
166
126
52
48
42
16
16
10
3
18
497
Net Assets per Employee
€000
1,584
890
1,036
1,069
1,659
1,562
427
1,157
960
770
1,228
Capital Employed
N/A
Operating Profit per
Employee
€
162,464
40,836
82,870
43,642
69,956
22,068
-17,245
28,947
-24,905
53,395
184,809
Operating Profit as % of
Turnover
%
38.2%
19.6%
31.3%
19.3%
26.8%
14.3%
-22.4%
21.6%
-32.3%
22.1%
64.6%
Ratio
0.6
3.7
3.9
1.0
1.5
1.6
6.3
7.2
21.1
2.4
Gearing
%
6.8%
7.3%
1.8%
30.8%
10.9%
33.6%
16.5%
21.5%
Return on Cap Employed
%
4.6%
8.0%
4.1%
4.2%
1.4%
-4.0%
2.5%
Unit Employee Costs^
€
69,608
64,162
57,233
61,595
63,341
57,166
31,370
41,807
Pension Net Liability after
Tax
€'000
11,452
10,994
9,984
12,251
4,324
1,042
1,006
269
Pension Liability as % of
Current Assets
%
57.1%
48.1%
116.0%
421.8%
74.2%
60.1%
62.4%
29.3%
Liquidity (CA/CL)
10.3%
Sources: CSO, Company Accounts
^Wages and Salaries only
Page 63
2.0%
1.4
11.9%
10.5%
-2.6%
6.9%
15.1%
48,133
67,296
63,225
0
907
52,229
0.0%
41.6%
76.8%
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
The key findings of the analysis indicate for 2008:
4.3

All of the ports are profitable other than Dundalk and Wicklow

All are solvent as reflected in the Liquidity Ratio

Gearing, ie, Long-Term Borrowing as a proportion of Net Assets, is satisfactory

Profitability Ratios show a major variation across the ports

The total pension net liability after tax is estimated at €52m or 77 per cent of the
sector’s Current Assets
Need for Integrated Spatial Planning
The integration of land use planning and investment in transport is necessary to
ensure that the need to travel is minimised through consolidated urban form and
mixed-use development. The current framework for land use and spatial planning in
Ireland places the concepts of sustainable development and balanced regional
development at the heart of the planning system and is guided by the National Spatial
Plan. However, there is also a need for integrated planning across the various modes
to ensure that the programmed development and expansion of the road network
matches and complements the schedule of development of port infrastructure,
particularly when new facilities are being provided. It is critically important that there is
cohesion among statutory authorities when viewing the issue of port expansion.
4.4
Short Sea Shipping Opportunities
There are two major initiatives to develop Short Sea Shipping in the EU. These are
Motorways of the Sea (MWS) which promotes major maritime corridors between
member States, and Marco Polo which favours modal shift away from road freight.
The “motorways of the sea” concept aims at introducing new intermodal maritimebased logistics chains in Europe, which should bring about a structural change in
transport organisations within the next number of years. These chains will be more
sustainable, and should be commercially more efficient, than road-only transport.
Motorways of the sea will thus improve access to markets throughout Europe, and
bring relief to the over-stretched European road system. For this purpose, fuller use
will have to be made not only of maritime transport resources, but also of the potential
in rail and inland waterways, as part of an integrated transport chain. This is the
Community added-value of motorways of the sea.
In its Transport White Paper of September 2001, the Commission proposed the
development of “Motorways of the Sea” as a “real competitive alternative to land
transport.” To help these lines develop, the White Paper states that European funds
should be made available. These "motorways of the sea" should be part of the TransEuropean network (TEN-T).
Marco Polo is the European Union's funding programme for projects which shift
freight transport from the road to sea, rail and inland waterways. This means fewer
trucks on the road and thus less congestion, less pollution, and more reliable and
efficient transport of goods.
Page 64
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
The current, second Marco Polo programme runs from 2007-13 and features:

a programme budget of €450 million Euros

more themes including "motorways of the sea" and "traffic avoidance" projects

more countries: Countries bordering the EU are also now eligible for funding
It is estimated that every Euro of Marco Polo funding generates social and
environmental benefits worth six Euros or more.
Under Marco Polo, suitable projects can be proposed by the operating companies –
usually a lead proposer, with international co-beneficiaries also listed.
Short sea shipping has been a priority of EU transport policy since 1995 and remains
central to the comprehensive strategy for a clean, safe and efficient European
transport system as set out in the European Commission’s 2001 White Paper,
European Transport Policy for 2010: Time to Decide. The potential for greater short
sea transport links is significant: the introduction of ‘sea motorways’ between key
ports will allow for substantial volumes of goods traffic to be taken off Europe’s
congested roads and thus ease major road and rail bottlenecks. In addition, the
economies of scale that will arise from new shipping services are expected to see the
operator offering high quality and frequent services at lower rates that can easily
compete with the ever-increasing costs of road transport.
The Port of Cork has been actively engaged in developing specific proposals for
improving maritime links between Ireland, France and Spain through the ATMOS and
WEST-MOS project (Western Europe Sea Transport & Motorways of the Sea) and
direct services to the Continent by-passing the U.K Land-bridge route.
The Committee encourages the port sector to identify possible EU-funded joint
projects that would develop new services with mainland Europe.
4.5
Corporate Governance
As public sector organisations, it is imperative that the ports sector conforms to high
levels of corporate governance. Corporate governance comprises the systems and
procedures by which enterprises are directed and managed. State bodies must serve
the interests of the taxpayer, pursue value for money in their endeavours (including
managing risk appropriately), and act transparently as public entities. The Board and
management should accept accountability for the proper management of the
organisation.
The first set of guidelines on Corporate Governance in State Bodies entitled “State
Bodies Guidelines” was issued by the Department of Finance in March 1992, with an
update in October 2001. In mid 2009, the Department of Finance issued an update to
take account of recent developments and consultations.
The guidelines deal with such matters as

The Board and Directors
Page 65
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector

Remuneration

Risk Management, Accountability, Internal Control, Internal Audit

Relations with the Oireachtas and the Minister

Specific Procedures to be Followed by State Bodies
and has a number of Appendices dealing with

Ethics and Standards in Public Office

Framework for a Code of Business Conduct

Charter for Internal Audit

Principles of Quality Customer Service

Format for the Report from the Chairperson regarding

Assessment of Internal Financial Control of a State Body

Framework for a Travel Policy for State Bodies
The Ports sector, while accepting the need and importance of corporate governance
procedures and guidelines, argues that ‘the one size fits all’ approach is not suitable
given the relative sizes of the various port companies. Certain requirements of the
Code of Practice have a disproportionate effect on them because of the nature and
scale of their activities and the resources available to them to comply with certain
reporting and other administrative requirements. The sector would argue that the
Guidelines should be relaxed in certain areas to reflect the reduced administrative
resources of the smaller port company.
The Committee recommend that every Port Company should prepare a Risk
Management Policy to be signed off by the Board.
Such a Policy document would contain such matters as:

An introductory statement on the Port’s philosophy towards Risk Management
and the principles behind the Policy

A statement of commitment to Risk Management

Statements in relation to aim, objectives and purpose

Definitions of Risk and Risk Management

The key activities that will be undertaken to manage Risk

Responsibilities for Risk Management within the Port of Cork

A commitment to regular review

Risk policy disclosure – a commitment to placing the Port’s Risk Management
Policy on the Port’s website
At a Board level, the responsibilities of the Audit Committee should be expanded to
include Risk matters.
Risk should formally be an Agenda item on Management’s weekly review meeting
and any matters identified should be assigned to a relevant member of management
who will be responsible for preparing a Risk Response to be signed off by the
management group and thereafter by the Board. The activities to be undertaken,
Page 66
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
responsibility and timeframe form the Risk Action Plan.
Risk should also become a formal Board Agenda item quarterly, or at such frequency
as determined by the Board, and the Chief Executive should include a report on Risk
as part of his/her Board report including progress on the Risk Action Plan and noting
any Risk issues that would have arisen as well as providing progress reports on any
risk activities in place.
Every six months, a review of the Risk Register should be undertaken and updated as
appropriate. Any new risks identified will require a Risk Response.
The Annual Business/Corporate Plan should include a report on Risk, issues arising,
outstanding and dealt with, and Actions to be undertaken in the following year.
The subject of Risk should be included in the induction training of all new staff and
should also form a training item for all existing staff.
It is imperative that there is an ongoing programme of monitoring of Corporate
Governance practices carried out by officials of the Department of Transport, and
that, every three years, ensure that a formal external risk audit is undertaken.
4.6
Harbour Legislation
Recently, the Harbours’ Act has been updated to

provide for port companies to have regard to any relevant Government policy or
guidelines in relation to the acquisition of land. It is considered appropriate in the
interests of consistency and best practice that this provision should apply also to
the disposal of land by such companies

provide for the transfer of functions from the Minister for Transport to An Bord
Pleanála in the context of the compulsory acquisition of land by port companies.

allow for the reduction in the number of directors on a Port Company board from
12 to 8

to alter the limits of Drogheda Port Company in order to facilitate the proposal to
build a new port at Bremore in north County Dublin

provide a clear legislative basis to underpin investment by port companies outside
their current harbour limits

The transfer of responsibility of certain of the regional harbours to local
authorities, while those regional harbours with significant commercial traffic,
namely Bantry Bay and Tralee and Fenit, to the control of a port company, i.e.,
Cork and Shannon Foynes respectively
While these changes are welcome, for some ports, the number of Directors still
exceeds the number of employees.
One of the consequences of the reduction in the number of Directors is that it can be
more difficult to ensure a quota of attendees to allow a meeting to progress.
In relation to Section 69 (Retirement Age for Pilots) of the Harbours Act 1996, which
was not addressed in the update, the Department of Transport has indicated that it
intends to introduce an amendment during the committee stage debate of the
Merchant Shipping Bill 2009. The amendments propose to remove the statutory
Page 67
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
retirement of marine pilots at 60 years of age and to insert a new section into the Act
that will require all port companies to satisfy themselves as to the medical fitness of
any pilot employed or licensed within their pilotage district.
4.7
The Regional Ports: Bantry and Fenit
Bantry Bay Harbour Commissioners is one of the principal regional ports operating
under the 1946 Harbours Act. A broad range of activities take place in Bantry Bay
including the holding of the strategic oil reserve by the National Oil Reserve Authority
and the oil storage and trans-shipment terminal on Whiddy Island operated by
ConocoPhillips Bantry Bay Terminals Ltd. The export of aggregates by the Tarmac
Fleming Quarry from Leahill Pier, has been temporarily suspended.
There is an important aquaculture sector involved in growing mussels as well as a
small fishing fleet involved in catching prawn, crab, lobsters and shrimp operating
from Bantry Bay. Cruise vessels anchoring at Glengarriff also come under the
jurisdiction of Bantry Bay Harbour Commissioners. In 2009, almost one million tonnes
of freight passed through the harbour jurisdiction, including seven cruise vessels.
Tralee and Fenit Harbour Commissioners are responsible for the activities at the
harbour of Fenit which is located some eight miles from Tralee. The Harbour itself is
not in the administrative area of Tralee UDC but in Kerry County Council. Fenit
benefits from a range of activities including commercial traffic, fishing and marine
tourism. There is a thriving local marina with 120 berths and a waiting list of 60.
Liebherr Container Cranes, which export cranes through Fenit worldwide from their
factory in Killarney, is the principal commercial customer of Fenit. There were twelve
shipments of cranes in 2009.
The Report on Regional Harbour and Ports recommended the transfer of
responsibility of the regional ports of Bantry, and Tralee and Fenit to the Ports of Cork
and Shannon/Foynes respectively.
These recommendations were accepted by
government and are repeated in the Harbours (Amendment) Act 2009 noting that the
proposed amendment will allow flexibility in legislation to provide for their transfer to
either local authority control or to local port company control after due consultation.
It would be the Committee’s view that the status quo should remain and that no
change occurs until such time that the respective ports consent to the amalgamation.
4.8
Bureaucracy
Bureaucracy and over-zealous regulation stifle innovation, competition and progress.
The Joint Committee calls on all government departments to apply regulation lightly,
to ensure co-ordination between all agencies, to minimise red tape and to expedite
decision-making.
A Ports’ Liaison Group that existed to progress matters between the sector and the
Department of Transport should be reactivated.
Page 68
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
4.9
Rail Freight10
There has been much discussion in relation to the potential for rail freight in Ireland
with recent interest stemming from a desire to reduce the negative impact of growing
volumes of road freight. Between 1997 and 2007, road freight increased by 203 per
cent to 315 million tonnes.
At this time, the following rail freight services are in place:
Table 4.3: Current Freight Operations in Ireland
Type of Traffic
Miles
Trains per Week
Ballina/Waterford
From/To
Containers & Tanks
215
3-4
Bird Hill/Limerick
Bulk (Shale)
21
12
Bulk (Tara Mines)
50
15-20
Bulk (Cement)
80
2
Timber
211
4
Containers & Tanks
200
2
Navan/Dublin Port
Limerick/Waterford Port
Ballina/Westport/Waterford Port
Ballina/Dublin Port
The year 2006 saw the cessation of sugar refining in Ireland and the loss of beet
trains, and Diageo decided to transfer beer kegs from rail to road.
The most recent service introduced being, in mid August 2009, the twice-weekly
service operated by Iarnród Éireann for International Warehousing and Transport Ltd
(IWT) from Ballina, Co Mayo, to Dublin Port. Its main cargo will initially be containers
of Coca-Cola concentrate from the Ballina production plant for export to Mexico,
Australia, Japan, India and Turkey. At this time, 25 per cent of North Mayo’s container
exports move by rail on services to Waterford and Dublin Ports with CO2 emissions
about 20% of the trucks that the rail service is replacing.
Trains of 18 carriages each carrying 40ft containers holding 25 tonnes of product
arrive at the port every Monday and Wednesday evening, taking up to 2,000 lorries off
the road yearly. IWT said it intends to expand to a daily service by the end of 2010,
servicing the western region. Trains travel on the main line from Ballina to Heuston
Station before switching to the tunnel under Phoenix Park. From there, they run on
the Maynooth line towards Connolly Station before branching off to Dublin Port. About
400,000 tonnes of ore are already transported to Dublin Port from Tara Mines in
Navan, Co Meath.
Other connections being investigated include the reopening of the line between
Foynes and Limerick to carry bulk freight traffic and the reconnection of the line
between North Esk and Cork that would allow containers to be carried between Cork
and Dublin Port.
The European Commission has long encouraged modal shift from road to rail; the
European Commission White Paper of 2001 – ‘European Transport Policy for 2010:
Time to Decide’, suggested 60 measures to develop a transport system capable of
10 Based on a presentation by Ms Derval Cummins, Booz & Co on Rail Freight to Engineers Ireland, 16 th September 2009
Page 69
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
shifting the balance between modes
The White Paper’s approach was to incentivise sustainable modes and discourage
the reliance on road through

Removing barriers to rail freight market entry

Engaging the ERA (European Rail Agency) and OTIF (Intergovernmental
Organisation for International Carriage by Rail)

Marco Polo Intermodality “open to appropriate proposals to shift freight from road
to more environmentally friendly modes”

Proposed road user charging for road freight related to:


axle loadings

impact on congestion

distance travelled
Attempt to “tighten up” on road freight practices e.g. safe driving time
The White Paper Mid Term Review in 2006 reinforced policies to try to shift freight
from road to rail including specific actions relating to freight:

Road transport: internal market review (2006), review of legislation on working
conditions (2007)

Rail transport: remove technical barriers to interoperability (2006), promote rail
freight corridors (2006), rail market monitoring (2007)

Introduction of the concept of “Co-Modality” to recognise the lack of success to
the extent expected in implementing modal shift policies. “…….Therefore, the
future policy will have to optimise each mode’s own potential to meet the
objectives of clean and efficient transport systems”ains per week
The EC is currently looking at “The Future of Transport” which will input to the next
10-year White Paper and some emerging themes in relation to rail freight include:

The trend of increasing demand for long distance freight transport is unlikely to
reverse

The logistics sector would be creating more flexible, but complex, networks

Large intercontinental ports might reach high congestion levels ….smaller ports
may present spare capacities if not integrated in the established circuits.

European network of rail freight corridors and increased competition in the railway
markets would facilitate enlarging the share of rail

Rail freight vehicles would very likely become longer, bigger and more energy
efficient.

Trucks, ships and aircrafts would increasingly rely on alternative fuels
While switching freight from road to rail can release a whole package of
environmental and other socio-economic benefits, including






Improved air quality
Reduced noise
Reduced impact on climate change
Reduced road congestion
Improved journey timers and reliability
Reduced number and severity of accidents,
Page 70
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
the benefits of rail freight can only be realised where there is a cost-effective means
of getting freight onto rail. Research has showed that rail freight to be more cost
effective over very long distances although other findings11 suggest that the distance
where rail can compete with road on cost is lower:

On distances exceeding 150 km the average costs of moving goods by rail are
usually lower than for transporting them by road

A pilot study on rail freight performance by distance conducted in 2006 on a
group of railway undertakings showed that the market share of rail compared with
road is significantly higher for longer distances



over 150 km = 22%
> 300 - 325 km = 26%, and
> 500 km = 30%
Rail freight in Ireland has declined to the point where it has nearly ceased, carrying
only 0.7 per cent of trade in 2007. Nearly all of Ireland’s freight is carried by road,
main cargoes are agricultural and foodstuffs, and minerals and building materials.
Ireland’s relatively small rail freight task is contained to a few niche cargoes.
However, a number of UK operators are interested in providing rail freight services in
Ireland, possibly using leased equipment from Irish Rail.
On the other hand, rail freight plays a highly significant part in the economic
functioning of Britain. It moves an estimated 43.5 million tonnes of goods to and from
the UK’s ports. Sixty-five per cent of intercontinental trade to the north of England and
beyond arrives by rail from the UK’s southern gateway ports. Each day, rail handles
up to 1,000 containers moving through the Port of Southampton. Every year rail
transports more than a quarter of a million containers through the Port of Felixstowe,
carried on 22 freight trains per day. As well as import (and export) containers, rail is
dominant in transporting heavy and bulk commodities – its traditional strength.
For many years, passenger operations have been Iarnród Éireann’s primary
business, and the existing rail infrastructure reflects this. There are a few freight
yards remaining on the rail network and Iarnród Éireann’s estimates that its rolling
stock fleet has a limited number of years remaining life.
While there are limitations on the rail network, the road network is still developing,
provides good coverage and is generally free. The road haulage industry itself is
highly competitive as there is a large supply of trucks mainly owner-operated. While
distance need not be a limiting factor, lengths of haul in Ireland are generally on the
low side for rail freight operations.
Table 4.4: Length of Freight Haul in Ireland
Length of Haul
% of Total Tonnes Carried
Up to 25 km
50 per cent
25 km – 150 km
40 per cent
Over 150 km
Source: Freight Transport Survey 2007, CSO
10 per cent
11 Monitoring Development of the Rail Network - COM(2007) 609
Page 71
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
Distribution centres or hubs offer a way forward for rail to reduce the impact of lorries
in sensitive areas. Except for certain bulk trades, few traffics can complete their
entire journey by rail alone.
Distribution centres would operate as follows:

exports from all over the region would be taken by road and then gathered into
full train loads before being taken by train to the port.

imports would be taken from the port to the distribution centre before being taken
by truck to individual destinations throughout the region.

operated by a logistics company who can provide an end to end service for their
clients regardless of the mode (i.e. whilst a container may be picked up by a
truck, put on rail and then collected by a truck at the other end the customer must
not feel this) and other services e.g. container power supply or management of
bonded cargoes

Distribution activities (i.e. number of staff, train time arrivals etc.) would be
focused around when customers want their goods, normally between 0700-0900
in the morning
Possible locations for such centres include Clondalkin, Mallow and Athenry.
As the Booz Paper notes

Rail freight has the ability to “reduce the environmental impact of freight”

Whether this can be done “while improving efficiency in the movement of goods
and promoting economic effectiveness” will depend on the individual rail freight
proposal. Opportunities in Ireland will be limited, primarily due to the constraints
of the rail network, but they will occur from time to time

Government needs a basis for assessing rail freight proposals, similar to the way
roads and passenger rail projects are assessed for capital (and operational)
funding

Besides a socio-economic cost/benefit analysis, other factors can be taken into
account - as they are with other transport projects - such as:


Affordability - currently Government’s funding capabilities are limited

Prioritisation - there may be other projects of equal or greater value “in the
queue”. Also, in most cases it will make sense to continue to prioritise
passengers over freight (as in most of Europe)

Local policies - for example, if a particular local authority has a specific aim in
relation to HGV traffic in a sensitive area, expressed in its Development Plan
There is a duty upon policy makers at all levels to express policy in relation to rail
freight clearly and specifically, based on information as to its feasibility in the local
context
As part of a long-term strategy, the DTO is examining the potential for a city cargo
service in Dublin where freight could be carried to and from various locations,
including Dublin Port, by Luas. Such services already exist in Dresden and Zurich.
Action 10 “Smarter Travel” (see section 3.7 above) commits Government to preparing
a freight strategy which could give a context for decisions on rail freight. In this regard,
the North South Ministerial Council has decided to hold an all Ireland Freight Forum to
consider issues relating to promoting sustainability and enhanced competitiveness in
the freight sector throughout the island. As a first step, the Council held a meeting of
Page 72
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
key stakeholders to identify a number of priority issues on which the Forum would
focus its consideration. This has been described in section 3.7 above.
Under EU Competition policy, Member States are obliged to separate the physical rail
infrastructure and its management from the operation of trains – and to put into place
an independent regulatory regime. In Ireland, North and South, the Departments of
Transport were granted a derogation from these requirements and are seeking to
extend the derogation.
The Committee is anxious to open the market to independent operators and
recommends that the derogation be discontinued and the proposed National
Regulator for Transport should be allowed to adjudicate on bids by independent
operators to operate rail freight services.
Interestingly, the European Commission sent reasoned opinions in October 2009 to
21 Member States, including Ireland, regarding their failure to implement properly the
legislation called 'first railway package'. Important issues remain to be solved for
opening up the railway markets to competition.
In the reasoned opinions, the
Commission highlights shortcomings such as:

the lack of independence of the infrastructure manager in relation to railway
operators;

insufficient implementation of the provisions of the Directive on track access
charging, such as the absence of a performance regime to improve the
performance of the railway network, the lack of incentives for the infrastructure
manager to reduce costs and charges and of tariff systems based on the direct
costs of rail services;

the failure to set up an independent regulatory body with the necessary powers to
remedy competition problems in the railway sector.
The Irish Exporters Association and the Northern Ireland Exporters Association have
come together to explores ways of advancing rail freight on the island of Ireland.
Recently it was reported that the Welsh Assembly has included a scheme to build a
£70m rail freight terminal at Holyhead in its Rail Transport Plan. Transport consultant
Aecom has identified a market for rail freight from mainland Europe, southern
England and the Midlands, connecting with ferry services to Ireland from the Welsh
port. Little if any rail freight has been routed this way since the axing of Freightliner
services in the 1980s, which used a dedicated lo-lo ship between Holyhead and
Ireland. Stena Line has welcomed the news, saying that it could be feasible to handle
unit loads delivered by rail on existing ro-ro ships, using maafi-type trailers.
4.10
Coastal Shipping
Coastal shipping is an undeveloped mode of transport in Ireland. We suggest that a
research project be undertaken to establish the potential for this form of transport as
an alternative to road transport. In 2008, only 4 per cent of goods handled were in the
form of coastal trade.
Page 73
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
4.11
Foreshore and Dumping at Sea
The Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Brendan Smith TD, has published
the Foreshore and Dumping at Sea (Amendment) Act 2009 that gives effect to the
transfer of all Foreshore licensing functions not associated with aquaculture and seafishing, from the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to the Department of
the Environment, Heritage and Local Government.
Following enactment of this legislation, responsibility for Foreshore consents in
respect of commercial projects on the Foreshore including, marinas, harbour and port
developments and all energy related developments became the responsibility of the
Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government on 15 January
2010. The State's Foreshore stretches from the High Water Mark seawards for 12
nautical miles and foreshore consents are issued under the Foreshore Acts 19332005.
The responsibility for the issue of Dumping at Sea permits transfers to the
Environmental Protection Agency on 15 February 2010.
The ports sector is particularly concerned with the time taken by the state authorities
and the cost in obtaining or renewing foreshore licences and licences to dispose of
dredge spoil.
Equally, there must be greater haste in the regularisation of applications for foreshore
licences. It is not unusual for a port to wait ten, 12 or even 15 years for a lease to be
issued, by which time the port has invariably built on the foreshore anyway.
The Joint Committee recommends the establishment of a committee comprising the
Irish Ports Association, the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local
Government and the EPA to review the application process and to identify ways to
expedite the approval process, reduce the bureaucracy involved and address the
uncertainties associated with the process.
4.12
Ports’ Policy Statement
The Government’s Ports Policy Statement, published in 2005, laid out national ports
policy in a single document for the first time. This is summarised in Section 3.3
earlier.
Four years on, the key elements of the policy remain valid:

A framework to ensure that capacity needs are identified, planned and
progressed in a coordinated manner;

Clearer and more focussed commercial mandates for the ports and their Boards;

Encouragement of private sector investment and involvement;

Sanction in principle for the use of non-core assets to fund new port
development, but not to mask inefficiencies;

Encouragement of continued healthy competitive conditions within and between
ports.
Page 74
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
The recently enacted Harbours (Amendment) Act 2009 gave a legislative basis to a
number of the proposals contained within the Ports Policy Statement. A key element
of the Act is those provisions relating to the reform of the board structure. These
include a reduction in the overall board size from 12 to 8 directors, the removal of the
statutory representation of local authority directors and a provision that excludes port
users being appointed to future Boards.
The Act further underpins the commercial ethos of the sector by providing for greater
flexibility as regards the companies’ ability to borrow funds, subject of course to
Ministerial consent and also by allowing for investment outside of a company’s
harbour limits, subject again to Ministerial consent. It is considered that these
amendments provide the necessary commercial freedom for the sector in their
operational activities while ensuring protection of the State’s interest via the Ministerial
consent function.
While the current Ports Policy Statement was widely welcomed and has been
acknowledged to have served the sector well, it does date from 2005 and it is of
course entirely appropriate that such policy statements be kept under review and
updated where appropriate particularly that much has changed economically since
publication, particularly in the recent past.
The Committee understands that the Minister for Transport has already announced
his intention to review the ports policy statement during the course of 2010 and will
provide an opportunity for all stakeholders to engage constructively in a re-evaluation
of the regulatory and policy tools required to allow for continued development of the
sector in the medium term.
The Committee welcomes the forthcoming review of the Ports Policy Statement and
suggests that a particular focus should be on developing sector co-operation and
integration particularly in the case of ports that have no long-term viability.
4.13
Port Sector Co-Operation
Seaports compete with each other for cargo and turnover. From an economic
perspective, this competition is a sound principle. In markets that work properly,
competition leads to downward pressure on prices.
Nevertheless, the Committee suggests that there are many opportunities for ports to
co-operate in such areas as

Navigation aids and services

Environmental controls

Security

Dredging

Marketing of Ireland as a cruise destination

New Business opportunities, e.g., distribution/logistics centres

Pilotage
Page 75
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector

Local and overseas training (currently Dublin Port Company and the Port of Cork
jointly market training programmes held at the National Maritime College at
Ringaskiddy)

Cross-border services
Similarly, the Committee believes that there is merit in consideration being given to
the establishment of port groupings such as an East Coast Ports Group that would
include the ports of Greenore, Dundalk, Drogheda, Dublin, Dun Laoghaire and
Wicklow that would examine opportunities for deeper co-operation particularly in
relation to trade, marketing, plant sharing and dredging that would result in improved
efficiencies and effectiveness of operation.
4.14
Involvement of the Private Sector
Europe’s busiest ferry port, Dover, is set to be privatised by the UK government. The
UK government unveiled that it was considering privatising six trust ports, of which
Dover is the largest, in a document called Operational Efficiency Programme. The
other ports mentioned in the document are Tyne, Harwich Haven, Milford Haven,
Poole and Shoreham.
The High Level Review suggested that the concept of opening up port company
ownership to the private sector, while not ruled out, should not be pursued at the time
but could be considered in the future in the light of the finances of the relevant ports,
the effect on the public interest, the extensive legislation, and oversight framework
required and the likely necessity to appoint a regulator;
The Consultants did recommend that a “do minimum” approach be implemented in
conjunction with the introduction of private sector operational skills and investment
under Public Private Partnerships, where these approaches can deliver efficient and
cost effective port products. They also recommended that the Port Companies
explore a range of different forms of concession including the build, operate and
transfer model and the design, build, finance and operate model to deliver port
infrastructure where these forms can deliver value for money.
While many Irish ports are not profitable, as part of the preparation for the ports’
policy review, the Government should consider whether port privatisation, in any form,
is in the public interest and has any benefits for the sector and the national economy.
As part of the analysis, consideration would need to be given to establishing the level
of interest there is by the private sector to invest in the sector, to determining what
protections would be necessary to avoid asset stripping, to ascertaining the maximum
share of equity to could be sold off and the likely returns to be made.
A statement of finding and principle could then be included in the updated Policy
Statement document.
Page 76
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
4.15
Rosslare Europort
Rosslare is not one of the State commercial port companies established pursuant to
the terms of the Harbours Act, 1996. Both Rosslare Harbour and Fishguard Harbour
in Wales are technically part of property owned by the Fishguard and Rosslare
Railways and Harbours Company, an Anglo-Irish company dating back to the 19th
century. With the passage of time, Irish Rail, which manages Rosslare Europort, and
Stena Line today share de facto ownership of this company.
Rosslare had a major capital investment programme for 2009. The bulk of this will be
spent on a new linkspan in the port, which is currently under construction.
The company offers daily direct passenger and road freight services throughout the
year between Rosslare and Pembroke (Irish Ferries) and Fishguard (Stena) in Wales.
There are also regular direct services to continental Europe as follows:

Irish Ferries offers regular passenger and freight services to Roscoff and
Cherbourg

Celtic Link Ferries provides passenger and freight services to Cherbourg

LD Lines provides weekly passenger and freight services to Le Havre
Recently, LD Lines and Celtic Link Ferries entered into an innovative vessel-sharing
agreement in a bid to rationalise capacity on the direct Ireland-France ferry corridor.
The French operator has leased the Norman Voyager vessel to Celtic Link Ferries for
two years, which corresponds with the time LD Lines' charter period on the vessel
extends Now the lines have got together, Celtic will instead expand its network by
deploying the Norman Voyager on Cherbourg-Portsmouth on weekdays, transferring
it to Rosslare-Cherbourg at the weekends but is committed to share freight space on
the vessel with LD Lines, which will continue to issue its own bills of lading.
Rosslare Europort is also a major importer of trade cars.
The Key Statistics for Rosslare Europort are:
Table 4.5: Key Statistics for Rosslare Europort
2006
2007
2008
11,373
12,117
11,862
Operating Profit €000
3,086
3,939
3,154
Cargo Throughput KTonnes
2,744
2,926
2,722
157,114
168,375
156,703
2,005
2,010
2,017
88
84
83
Turnover €000
Ro-Ro Units
Number of Ships
Staff Numbers
Sources: CSO, Company Accounts
The Committee recommends that the Department of Transport should examine again
the feasibility of introducing primary legislation both in Ireland and in the UK to bring
Rosslare Europort under the Harbours’ Act.
Page 77
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
4.16
Maritime Tourism
4.16.1 The Development of the Maritime Tourism Sector
Ports are key drivers of maritime tourism and leisure. Dun Laoghaire and
Galway Harbours are cases in point.
There is general consensus that harbours and marinas have a tourism and
economic benefit for the towns where they are sited:

Marine tourism is a major instrument of regional development. Many
tourism enterprises are situated in areas where other employment
options are limited

Local communities benefit from investment in facilities for tourists such
as leisure and sporting facilities and in associated infrastructure including
access transport and roads

A vibrant tourism industry contributes to the viability and sustainability of a
wide range of local enterprises

Tourism promotes an enhanced awareness and positive appreciation of
local traditions, way of life and cultural heritage
Specifically, tourist expenditure creates both temporary employment and
income from the purchase of local goods and services. Service-type jobs are
created in shops, gift production, and restaurants and hotels. There is also a
multiplier effect where the income or wages generated from tourism is spent
by residents on local services.
Marinas can generate significant income from their activities in terms of local
spend, employment and activity. Whether the marina is occupied by a yacht
owner, a visitor or a berth owner, local businesses will benefit from the
purchases of fuel, supplies and gifts. Chandler purchases and any repairs
carried out will also contribute to the local economy.
Most users of the
marina will spend money in the town on visitor attractions, golf, meals, drink
and other day-to-day requirements, and all of this spend will boost the local
economy which will have a significant impact on employment and local
disposable income.
The Volvo Ocean Race’s first ever Irish stopover in Galway in May 2009 was
worth €55 million to the west of Ireland, according to an independent
consultancy study. The impact was 30 per cent above initial estimates with
€45 million in direct expenditure and €10 million in indirect expenditure in
Galway and the west.
The event attracted a total of 650,000 spectators to the Galway harbour race
village and Salthill promenade during the fortnight. The spend by spectators
and media was twice that recorded at other stopover ports on the round-theworld race.
The cruise sector is also a major contributor to local economies. Dublin Port,
for instance, recently noted that in 2009 its cruise business, comprising
Page 78
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
almost 80 cruise liners carrying 120,000 passengers and crew, contributed up
to €50 million to the local economy.
Tourism promotion agencies such as Tourism Ireland and Failte Ireland
should recognise and support the development of tourism in port areas,
particularly the cruise and marine leisure sectors, where there is significant
potential for increased levels of economic activity and sustainable
employment.
Because of the importance of the cruise sector to local businesses, the
Committee recommends that the Department of Transport commissions a
Study of the Potential and Economic Impact of the Cruise Line Business on
the ports’ sector and the broader Irish economy.
4.16.2 Use of Ship’s Tender
The Department of Transport should amend the Merchant Shipping Act 1992
to enable passenger ships with the appropriate International Certification to
make non-scheduled day trips from Irish Ports and for passenger ships’
tenders to be used to transfer passengers from one location to another while
such a ship is moored in an Irish port or to take passengers on trips in the
port, without the need for an Irish Passenger Certificate but certified by the
flag state and classification society.
The current situation is anomalous because in the circumstances where a
cruise ship is at anchor in a port area, passengers can be tendered to a port
facility without restriction. This is in contrast to the restriction on a cruise ship
moored alongside a port quay where ship tenders are not permitted to
transfer cruise passengers to other port facilities without an Irish Passenger
Certificate. It should be pointed out that in each case, cruise ship tenders
must have the appropriate international certification.
4.17
Other
4.17.1 Maritime and Logistics Clusters
Maritime and Logistics clusters can provide both employment and economic
benefit to local and regional economies. The Committee believes that they
should have a greater priority in national economic planning policy.
4.17.2 Climate Change
The Government should prioritise measures to address climate change that
will result in sea level rises and increased rainfall amounts and which, in turn,
will affect the cost of providing new port infrastructure in the future.
4.17.3 Green Ports
Ports today face serious challenges in their quest to achieve acceptable
sustainability levels on two major fronts: Global and local. “Global” because
all ports today operate in an increasingly complex, challenging and above all
Page 79
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
else, competitive environment; “local” because both the city and the port need
to achieve – together – a balance to produce a “sustainable city”, the balance
between a vibrant social, environmental and economic system.
The
reduction in the carbon footprint of ports and increasing their energy
efficiency opens up a wide range of business opportunities for the port sector
and port authorities can strive to improve CO2 performance in a variety of
fields. Whilst the direct impact of port operations on greenhouse gas
emissions is relatively small, port authorities can contribute in a pro-active
manner to a cleaner supply chain. One of the major opportunities to reduce
CO2 is increased co-modality which can be encouraged in co-operation with
ship-owners, terminal operators, actors in the wider logistics chain and other
stakeholders.
Dublin Port and the Port of Cork have been accredited to ISO14001 in
relation to their environmental management programmes.
The Government should encourage all ports to identify measures that would
reduce the environmental impact of shipping and the ports sector.
4.17.4 Road Access to Port Facilities
A number of ports raised concerns in relation to the priority given to road
access to port facilities.
For instance, an area of major concern to Shannon Foynes Port Company is
the Shannon Estuary’s connectivity to the motorway and rail networks. Given
the estuary’s national strategic importance and the economic potential it has
to offer, the Port Company views it as short-sighted not to include it in the
national plan first rate road and rail connections to it. The Port Company
estimate that for €23 million the lower estuary could be connected to the
proposed M20 Limerick to Cork motorway. This would be a very small price
to pay for unlocking the economic potential that is the Shannon Estuary.
SFPC is currently engaged with the relevant authorities to have these issues
addressed on the Mid-West Area Strategic Plan, MWASP.
The Port of Cork has argued that there is need to prioritise the N28 from Cork
City to Ringaskiddy urgently required to ease congestion on the route and
improve access to the extensive port facilities there as well as to the industrial
lands of the IDA in the area.
4.17.4 Integration
There is a need at Government level to ensure that national policies are
integrated and that mechanisms are in place to ensure that there is a
consistency and balance in implementation at a local level by Local
Authorities.
Page 80
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
4.17.5 Corporate Social Responsibility
A number of port companies have developed Corporate Social Responsibility
strategies whereby they embrace responsibility for the impact of their
activities on the environment, consumers, employees, communities in which
they operate and other stakeholders, and report regularly on their
performance.
The diagram12 below summarises what CSR is all about. The Committee
encourages all port companies to develop such strategies.
Source: Jim O’Brien CSR Consulting
12 http://www.jimobriencsr.com/
Page 81
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
5.
Conclusion
Ports are the life-blood of Irish trade and play a significant role in ensuring the economic wellbeing of the state. Ireland’s island and peripheral status, therefore, requires us to have ports
that allow goods to be delivered at the lowest cost and as quickly as possible.
The logistics supply chain comprises many elements: not only the ports, but also the road and
rail infrastructure connecting to the port, the freight hauliers and distribution network, the port
handling equipment and facilities available, as well as the ships that carry the freight. Each
element of the chain has a critical role to play, and particularly the ports. The competitiveness
of the supply chain is only as good as the weakest element within it. If a port is inefficient or
expensive, or the appropriate infrastructure is not available to handle the forecast trade, the
supply chain suffers.
Notwithstanding the short-term decline in throughput, it is expected that volumes will begin to
recover in the second half of 2010 and continue to grow thereafter. The sector’s ongoing
successful performance, therefore, is critical to the recovery of the Irish economy and it is
essential, therefore, that ports operate efficiently and effectively.
Coupled with increased volumes is the need to address the ever-enlarging size of vessels that
put particular pressure on port infrastructure. Vessels are becoming longer, with greater drafts
and are more technologically sophisticated. From an economic perspective, operators are
using larger capacity vessels to optimise usage and reduce costs. Pressure on port capacity
will consequently become an issue and, because it takes time to secure the necessary
consents, steps need to be taken now to ensure that the required infrastructure is in place
when required.
The key policy driver for the ports’ sector is the Government’s Ports Policy document
published in 2005. While this has served the sector well, it is opportune to review and update
it to take account of the present environment that the sector finds itself in. The Committee
welcomes the forthcoming review of the Ports Policy Statement and suggests that a particular
focus should be on developing sector co-operation and integration particularly in the case of
ports that have no long-term viability.
The Committee has heard many complaints about how the Foreshore Licence process; the
ports sector has complained about the bureaucracy of the process, the costs involved and the
length of time it takes to process applications. The Committee is concerned about any
inefficiencies that involve state agencies and recommends that immediate action is taken to
address them.
It is imperative that the ports sector conforms to high levels of corporate governance. State
bodies must serve the interests of the taxpayer, pursue value for money in their endeavours
and act transparently as public entities in their dealings with staff, customers, suppliers and
the public. The Committee expects that Boards and management accept accountability for the
proper management of the organisation and shall deal with any failures in performance
promptly. The Department of Transport has a major oversight role in this respect equally.
Page 82
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
The integration of land use planning and investment in transport is necessary to ensure that
the need to travel is minimised through consolidated urban form and mixed-use development.
In addition, there is a need for integrated planning across the various modes to ensure that
the programmed development and expansion of the road network matches and complements
the schedule of development of port infrastructure, particularly when new facilities are being
provided.
This Review has presented an analysis of the Irish ports sector and the key influences
affecting its performance. Arising from this analysis, the Joint Oireachtas Committee on
Transport has presented a range of recommendations for its improvement. The members of
the Committee submit that their implementation will result in a more efficient and effective
ports’ sector.
Page 83
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
APPENDICES
Appendices
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
APPENDIX 1
Key Port Statistics and Ratios: 2008
Appendices
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
Key Port Statistics: 2008
2008
Total Turnover
Operating
&
Maintenance
Gross Profit
Admin & General
Expenditure
Operating
Profit/(Loss)
Profit/(Loss) before
Taxation
Fixed Assets
70,597,000
26,295,911
13,748,435
Shannon/
Foynes
10,877,368
23,769,000
14,547,653
1,977,402
6,170,413
46,828,000
11,748,258
11,771,033
19,859,000
6,602,899
26,969,000
Dublin
Cork
Waterford
Dun
Laoghaire
10,974,742
Drogheda
Dundalk
New Ross
Wicklow
Galway
Total
2,463,451
1,231,970
1,338,072
231,547
4,347,455
142,105,951
Not Reported
1,423,589
842,789
409,421
Not Reported
Not Reported
N/A
4,706,955
Not Reported
1,039,862
389,181
928,651
Not Reported
Not Reported
N/A
7,461,781
2,612,129
8,036,609
686,772
665,094
639,179
306,262
3,386,346
50,256,071
5,145,359
4,309,252
2,094,826
2,938,133
353,090
-275,913
289,472
-74,715
961,109
91,849,880
29,204,000
4,083,727
4,019,450
938,682
3,667,485
-186,974
-614,340
182,293
-23,279
1,017,294
42,288,338
274,902,000
95,449,560
47,519,049
51,411,496
67,739,768
24,322,623
5,478,565
10,779,914
1,632,508
12,571,519
591,807,002
Current Assets
20,047,000
22,860,460
8,603,483
2,904,306
5,825,071
1,732,551
1,612,928
917,810
1,309,979
2,180,613
67,994,201
Current Liabilities
31,967,000
6,152,142
2,233,497
2,994,756
3,885,599
1,057,809
257,813
128,294
61,942
894,760
49,633,612
Net Current Assets
-11,920,000
16,708,318
6,369,986
-90,450
1,939,472
674,742
1,355,115
789,516
1,248,037
1,285,853
18,360,589
Total Assets less
Current Liabilities
262,982,000
112,157,878
53,889,035
51,321,046
69,679,240
24,997,365
6,833,680
11,569,430
2,880,545
13,857,372
610,167,591
18,000,000
8,133,491
977,605
15,808,126
7,594,566
8,403,694
1,126,969
2,483,135
58,448
1,651,371
64,237,405
25,951,000
40,468,130
23,423,384
18,720,509
13,998,818
1,041,900
0
3,826,866
0
1,122,417
128,553,024
219,031,000
63,556,257
29,488,046
16,792,411
48,085,856
15,551,771
5,706,711
5,259,429
2,822,097
11,083,584
417,377,162
262,982,000
112,157,878
53,889,035
51,321,046
69,679,240
24,997,365
6,833,680
11,569,430
2,880,545
13,857,372
610,167,591
21,127,000
9,633,000
2,082,000
10,819,000
49,000
664,000
217,000
694,000
85,000
838,000
46,208,000
7,460
1,667
757
565
578
332
109
236
66
252
12,022
166
126
52
48
42
16
16
10
3
18
497
Employment Costs^
11,555,000
8,084,399
2,976,106
2,956,553
2,660,319
914,656
501,924
418,073
144,400
1,211,325
31,422,755
Pension Liability^^
11,452,000
10,994,000
9,984,000
12,251,000
4,324,000
1,042,000
1,006,000
269,000
0
907,000
52,229,000
Long
Term
Bank
Borrowings
Other Commitments
Shareholders Funds
(Net Assets)
Capital Employed*
Total Tonnage
No of Ships (CSO)
Employees
Sources: CSO, Ports’ 2008 Accounts
* Note: Capital Employed = Total Assets less Current Liabilities
Appendices
^ Wages and Salaries only
^^ Pension Liability after Tax
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
Key Port Ratios: 2008
2008
Dublin
Cork
Waterford
Shannon/
Foynes
Dun
Laoghaire
Drogheda
Dundalk
New Ross
Wicklow
Galway
Total
Ratios:
Return on Capital Employed
10.3%
4.6%
8.0%
4.1%
4.2%
1.4%
-4.0%
2.5%
-2.6%
6.9%
15.1%
Operating Profit(Loss) as a % of
Turnover
38.2%
19.6%
31.3%
19.3%
26.8%
14.3%
-22.4%
21.6%
-32.3%
22.1%
64.6%
Profit before Tax/Turnover %
41.4%
15.5%
29.2%
8.6%
33.4%
-7.6%
-49.9%
13.6%
-10.1%
23.4%
29.8%
0.6
3.7
3.9
1.0
1.5
1.6
6.3
7.2
21.1
2.4
1.4
6.8%
7.3%
1.8%
30.8%
10.9%
33.6%
16.5%
21.5%
2.0%
11.9%
10.5%
1,584,229
890,142
1,036,328
1,069,188
1,659,030
1,562,335
427,105
1,156,943
960,182
769,854
1,227,701
Turnover per Employee
425,283
208,698
264,393
226,612
261,303
153,966
76,998
133,807
77,182
241,525
285,927
Operating Profit per Employee
162,464
40,836
82,870
43,642
69,956
22,068
-17,245
28,947
-24,905
53,395
184,809
Revenue from Operations per
Tonne
2.73
n/a
5.41
0.56
n/a
1.50
1.37
1.12
1.55
2.55
N/A
Total Revenue per Tonne
3.34
2.73
6.60
1.01
223.97
3.71
5.68
1.93
2.72
5.19
3.08
2,832
5,779
2,750
19,149
85
2,000
1,991
2,941
1,288
3,325
3,844
Tonnes per Employee
127,271
76,452
40,038
225,396
1,167
41,500
13,563
69,400
28,333
46,556
92,974
Unit Employee Costs^
69,608
64,162
57,233
61,595
63,341
57,166
31,370
41,807
48,133
67,296
63,225
Liquidity (CA/CL)
Gearing (Long-Term Debt/Net
Assets %)
Net Assets per Employee
Tonnes per Ship
^ Based on Wages and Salaries only
Appendices
Report of the Joint Committee on Transport on the Ports’ Sector
Appendices