Via Ms Teams
- Mr Martin Higgins (MH), Chairman
- Mr Patrick Knight (PK)
- Ms Mary Cullen (MC)
- Prof Martin Cormican (P. MC)
- Prof Francis Butler (FB)
- Mr Gerard McCurdy (GMcC)
- Ms. Ann Horan (AH)
- Dr Pamela Byrne (PB), Chief Executive
- Mr Kevin Roantree (KR), Board Secretary
- Ms Gail Carroll (GC) – for Item 1
- Mr Bernard Hegarty (BH) – for Item 1 and 2
- Mr Wayne Anderson (WA) – for Item 1
- Mr Aidan Horan (AH/IPA) – for Item 1
- Dr Cliodhna Foley-Nolan (CFN)
There was no private session of the Board
1. Risk Appetite Statement
AH/IPA opened opening by outlining the objective(s) for the session as well as outlining where the session fits in terms of the process to agree the RAS for the FSAI.
There was a discussion as to the proposed RAS compares to similar public sector/regulatory agencies and AH/IPA outlined that it would be broadly similar. It was outlined that it was a useful exercise to ensure an alignment between the views and position of the Board and that of the SLT.
It was noted that it was important to agree the RAS, and the subsequent changes to the Risk Policy and Register, prior to commencing the process to develop the FSAI’s new strategy. Linked to this, it was also agreed that it was important the RAS, and the subsequent newly populated Risk Register, should be shared with the DoH – in the interest of transparency and seeking to agree shared outcomes.
There were discussions regarding the appropriateness of such a RAS with regard to the FSAI being an ‘enabling regulator’ and the balance which the FSAI should take with regard to formal enforcement and the creation of a climate of compliance. There were also queries as to how the FSAI will remain an enabling regulator and how performance could be measured. It was raised as to whether the RAS sufficiently considered, and represented, the link between consumer protection and public health.
Key Activity Item #4 was discussed in terms of whether it should better capture the 2 key relevant areas relating to monitoring and enforcement. It was agreed that the description should be amended to highlight these areas and their alignment to Key Activity Area #8.
It was noted that while there is an articulation of ambition in the proposed approaches, in the RAS, the FSAI was constrained by considerable skill/capacity gaps across the organisation. It was agreed that the RAS should include an ‘Ambition Statement’ for the FSAI.
A number of minor amendments in content and presentation were also requested. The Board approved the RAS, subject to agreed changes, and requested the Executive to commence the review of the Risk Register and Policy.
All left the meeting as Item 2 on the agenda was via a separate MS Teams Link
PB and BH provided the background, and context, on the proposed transition of LAVS to DAFM.
BH provided an update on the recent meetings and discussions between relevant parties involved in the transition and that further progress meetings were scheduled – BH stated that he would update the Board on these meetings at the Board meeting on the 21st June.
There were discussions as to whether there was a risk that the LAVS transition to DAFM might not occur and then what might the implications be for the FSAI. It was clarified that all parties had stated their commitment to ensure a successful transition but nonetheless it represented a risk which the FSAI should continue to monitor.
There were concerns raised as to what the final outcome for the FSAI might be and what control the FSAI had in creating the optimum for the FSAI and the consumer. It was requested that BH return to the Board with an outline of the desired outcome(s) for the FSAI, what the possible resourcing impacts and needs were post transition and what the scenario based financial planning was for a post LAVS FSAI.
Next meeting: 21st June