Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank the speakers again. They have had a difficult morning but I appreciate their being forthright and honest in their answers. It has been said there will be no financial impact but the reality is farming is not a short-term business but generational. Deputy Fitzmaurice referenced that suckler farmers in the community have legitimate concerns about future SCEP eligibility. Mr. Coughlan is probably correct that there is no immediate impact for farmers as the next replacement index will not be until October 2027 but the concern among suckler farmers is the changes in the indexes will have a negative impact on their eligibility for the next SCEP, though the speakers will reject that.

The suckler community sees this as a covert means of reducing their herd. I said earlier, and I am steadfast in this view, that the ICBF has overreached its remit. The ICBF exists to benefit farmers, the food industry and the wider community through a focus on genetic gain. On its own website, it states that genetic improvement comes when the parents of the next generation are genetically superior to the contemporaries. I said previously that the ICBF has absolutely no responsibility or duty of care when it comes to carbon management. On its website, methane is only mentioned 25 times and progeny is mentioned 441 times. The ICBF's business is progeny, its efficiency and profitability. Carbon has no effect on the value of an animal or the profit or sale of an animal. This cannot and should not be included as part of an index based on monetary value and profit. I am worried that what is being proposed and implemented is legally flawed and open to challenge.

Notwithstanding Mr. Doran's corporate responsibility as a board director, he is also on the board as a representative of the IFA, the largest farming organisation in the country. The IFA is very focused when it appears before the committee. We owe it to the IFA, its many members and the five chairs of the Connacht IFA groups, who publicly issued a statement expressing disquiet and a lack of confidence in the ICBF as a result of this new direction. I appeal to the ICBF to take the message they have heard today, pause the introduction of the new indexes, add an independent review to the proposals and, based on the findings of that review, engage extensively in a consultation process.

The ICBF has done fantastic work through the years. It is a relatively new organisation but it has done phenomenal work and has been a key industry player. I do not want to let the decisions it made in recent months overshadow or diminish the value of the work it has done. It has a key role but it has overstepped its mark.