Dr. Andrew Cromie:

I wish to answer Senator Lombard's earlier question about cross-breeding and breeding programmes because it is relevant to this discussion. The Senator will be aware from his dairy farming background that cross-breeding never took off, even though the science suggested farmers should cross-breed. Senator Lombard asked why a farmer would not do it. That reason is that the economic breeding index has data going back to 2005. At the time, the ICBF was in the midst of various storms around changing the direction of dairy breeding away from holsteinisation and milk traits to talking about a trait that the farmer could not see. The relevant question was whether the cow would calve, that is, female fertility. he ICBF was embroiled for several years in controversy regarding the new index.

As a direct consequence of the new index and commercial farmers having confidence in the index, they did not cross-breed. It is as clear as day. In other countries that do not have the database, the data, independent genetic evaluation or an agency like Teagasc, farmers have been cross-breeding.

Let us look at this in the context of beef. What we are doing now is unpopular. We are changing the approach to breeding to focus on traits that the farmer cannot see. Farmers have to be more reliant on science and technology to help them to identify these traits. That is what the BDGP is all about. The improvement has started to move in the right direction. Now the key is whether we can generate engagement with the breed societies and the bull breeders because commercial suckler farmers now want these bulls and AI straws. In that sense, it is no different from the economic breeding index story. A fire has been lit in that regard. Farmers see the increases in profitability and now they want more of them. I accept the points made regarding communication and so on. Our challenge is how to get a beef industry or beef breeding programme going. We do not want to see the influx of dairy genes into the suckler beef herd. If we are going to control our suckler beef herd, we need to work with all the breeds to identify the bulls within them that will drive terminal and maternal traits. As a consequence, as Mr. Coughlan has alluded to, we hold three meetings per year with every breed and we have breeding programmes involving every breed to try to generate gain. We have an active bull list containing all the bulls across all breeds. We encourage the bull breeders. The breeds at the top of the bull list provide reassurance. Many Charolais bulls are on the list for replacement index, which means there is an opportunity. That is because it is a large breed with a large number of good committed breeders. We are now using genomics in this way. We bring data from France and the UK to identify exceptional Charolais bulls, but it is for this new index. Traditionally, we could not see components of the index. That change is the challenge. That is the core of what we have to do now. We need engagement to get this industry moving. If we can do that, the outcomes and gains we have discussed that have been achieved in dairying can be achieved in beef and more besides. It is, therefore, a fantastic opportunity.

In fairness, the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine went out on a limb to back the BDGP. Officials had seen how the EBI worked and decided to support science and technology. They understand that the ICBF was independent with no vested interest. Its representation is drawn from across the industry to drive industry good and industry gain and they will support this scheme. The ICBF is not in favour of any dilution or diminution of the scheme.

From an Irish Cattle Breeding Federation, ICBF, standpoint, what we really need to do is to get the engagement to get the scheme going. There should be no dilution or diminution of that scheme - of course core schemes need to be discussed and reviewed - but everything now is moving in the right direction. That is what we want to see.