Ms Catherine McAloon:

I will add a few points to Professor More's response to Deputy Carthy's original question. On whether we can do it quickly, much can be achieved if we have an agreed motivation and a collaborative approach within the sector across all levels of industry. On the regulation and change that will be required to the status quo in prescribing antimicrobials related to mastitis, there are certainly things we need to do, some more urgently than others. There is currently a gulf between the legislation and the mindset among both vets and farmers and an understandable fear as we move away from blanket dry cow therapy. Ultimately, there is a need to address communications and frame this legislation as positively as we can because the narrative around opportunities to improve our prudence in antimicrobial usage and in addressing quality to reduce the need for antimicrobials in the first place, provides us with a real opportunity to keep pace with our competitors.

During discussions in CellCheck we have looked at whether those things are achievable, such as a communications strategy that could be co-ordinated nationally in upskilling vets and farmers. The targeted advisory service on animal health, TASAH, dry cow consults that CellCheck has implemented have been very successful as reported by vets and farmers alike, so the framework for some of this is already in place. We are told that on increasing the need for milk recording, infrastructure could be put in place quite quickly. There is certainly a positive opportunity there if the collaborative effort is agreed and the motivations are brought in line.

I thank Deputy Fitzmaurice for his questions. I will elaborates on the issue of bringing us into line with Northern Ireland. There are a couple of points on this. Our industry is quite different in that it is manufacturing-based with milk supply contracts, milk going into infant formula and niche markets that are quite different from sales north of the border. With that in mind, and trying to protect and promote the market we have in infant formula, there is a real need to move with best practice in antimicrobial usage and prescribing. Ultimately, mastitis is quite farm-specific and the epidemiology of problems relating to mastitis is quite unique and specific to farms, which means we need bespoke solutions for them. It is certainly possible to apply best practice and that is what we should strive to do in prudent antimicrobial use within the dairy sector here. We need to push on and achieve that.

On the question relating to cost, it is a very valid concern among farmers. The overall point of this regulation is to reduce antimicrobial usage but also to move towards more prudent use. Regardless of who sells the antimicrobial, the national goal is to reduce usage overall through a co-ordinated effort to improve milk quality and reduce the need for antimicrobials. Mastitis is a very costly disease. Teagasc has reported a difference of €20,000 in farm profit between a bulk tank cell count of 100,000 compared to a bulk tank cell count of 400,000. There are significant costs associated with individual mastitis cases and overall, if done properly and safely, reducing mastitis on farm and the need for antimicrobials, will be a cost benefit in the long run.

Ms McCoy may be able to add some further points on this, but the idea of where we can purchase drugs is not necessarily something we can comment on in terms of scientific best practice. The Danes and the Dutch, who are both very successful in their quest to reduce antimicrobial usage in their dairy sectors, are operating different models. From the scientific point of view, our focus will certainly be on bringing prescribing in line with best practice.