I am writing to comment on Eddie Downey’s recent article. To me I feel that he has somewhat misunderstood the reasons why some people have issues with imported beef.
Also Read: Opinion: Mocking or knocking our institutions needs to stop…Some of us are of the opinion that imports can be used as a price-control mechanism, alongside other ‘sharp’ practices that have taken place in the beef sector.
With regard to a recent labelling issue (involving meat being sold in an Irish supermarket), I would ask how and why labels – marked Azerbaijan – were used?
Also Read: IFA levels allegations at SuperValu…following beef ‘coding error’If a farmer had an animal with incorrect identification tags, he or she would be sanctioned; yet it seems that supermarkets can get away with these ‘errors’.
These errors are exactly what we – as farmers – do not want to destroy our “vital image” that Eddie Downey speaks of. In my view, it is far from a ‘petty squabble’ from a farmer’s perspective, when he or she can see other stakeholders in the industry thrive, while the primary producer suffers.
Eddie Downey also speaks of the Irish Catttle Breeding Federation [ICBF] and Teagasc in high regard – as do I.
They help producers when it comes to driving efficiency and quality in many sectors of farming. However, when farmers are delivering top-quality produce below the cost of production that’s when we must look at all aspects of the industry and ask: What are these bodies actually delivering?
What’s of particular concern is that ‘Pathways For Growth’ and ‘Food Harvest 2020’ appear to have – largely – achieved what they set out to but, all the while, have left primary producers behind.
In my view, by their very design these initiatives appear to have failed farmers. Processors and retailers have gained, but at what cost?
From Pat Maher, member of the Independent Farmers of Ireland (IFOI), Co. Kilkenny