Mr. Ciaran Fitzgerald:

In broad terms, there is a major dispute as to where we are, never mind how we got here. In terms of our presentation of where the industry is, the value of it and the progress that has been made, those are facts. We have not embellished anything. The fact that there has been a sustained 40% increase in cattle prices has been a major and positive achievement in the middle of a recession when the Irish economy has lost €30 billion of GDP, Irish consumers have seen their spending fall by €15 billion and €1.5 billion a year extra has been delivered to beef farmers.

With regard to signalling by the industry and what that has been about for the past five, six and ten years, particularly with regard to young bull beef, it has been very specific. We worked hard within Food Harvest 2020 segment, first, to make sure that there was a beef story in it because there seemed to be a large part of the agri-community who did not want a beef story, and, second, to make sure that very explicit statements were made by the implementation group about what the market requirements were, particularly around bull beef. Very strong statements, in black and white, were made in 2010 and before that about what the specifications were for young bull beef - that they were for 16 months and younger and that if anybody was doing something more than that and wanted to talk to particular processors that they should do so.

In terms of where we are and how we got here, we would disagree with a view that would point out, first, that we are in a bad place and that the reason we are is that the industry did not communicate because the industry has strongly communicated, and, second, that we are in quite a strong position. We are in a situation where 99% of all our beef goes to markets in Europe. The industry faced a major challenge ten years ago. At the time of intervention and export refunds the challenge put to this industry was to become market-driven and not support-led. We now have major access to markets. Deputies raised the issue of other markets. We would love to get certain products into the Japanese market and they would enhance the return and that enhancement of the return would be passed back through the system. Access to the US and Canada is imminent and all such openings of market access are very important to us, both reputationally and in giving us a spread of markets.

This industry has delivered in terms of what it has invested in capturing markets. On some of the issues such as contracts that have been addressed, to return to Food Harvest 2020, an issue for the implementation group at that time was that the industry should have been mandated, never mind encouraged, to increase contracts, particularly with winter finishers. The industry made a commitment to that group to do so and has increased the amount of beef under contract. That was done on the basis that if people were going to commit to extra costs that they would be given a commitment in terms of market outlets. Everything that can be done in order to facilitate the supply side here has been done. This industry is hugely dependent on the decision of individual farmers to continue in the beef business. We know that is a very competitive situation and that there are structural and other cost issues, as have been mentioned, but the industry is not foolish in that context. We have neither signalled a product that the market does not want nor have we asked producers to get involved in production systems that do not meet the market specification. We would have not have a beef industry in the future if we did that.