Dr. Gary Kearney:

There are two elements there, the hard border and the regulatory divergence. A hard border will not stop safefood from fulfilling its mandate and doing well, as we have for 20 years. The convenience that people might experience when going from the North to South or South to North might be impacted if there is a hard border. It might make the building of sustainable relationships take longer. It is a challenge but we have had many challenges and will get over that challenge. It might be at a slower rate, especially when developing new relationships. We have great networks already in place and they will continue. One would not want a hard border when developing new networks.

Senator Feighan asked how particular foods could be affected. We do not know what the United Kingdom is going to do in the way of amending the existing food standard legislation so my answer involves a bit of speculation. The United Kingdom could, for example, decide to remove best-before dates, which could be for very good reasons because these dates are related to quality and not safety. If one eats a tin of beans six months after the best-before date, it might not taste very good but it will be safe, whereas use-by dates are critical for perishable foods. However, to remove them would not dovetail with EU legislation and I do not know what would happen in that scenario. From a promotional point of view, nutritional standards are represented by a nutritional pyramid in the Republic but a plate in Northern Ireland and the UK. We deal with the two different approaches by just getting on with it. We can work around the issues relating to our promotional activity but if labelling is significantly different it would be a matter for Government and the regulatory agencies.