Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees
Wednesday, 13 December 2023
Joint Oireachtas Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine
Recent Reclassification of Beef Indexes: Discussion
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Deputies Cathal Crowe and Seán Canney and Senator Aisling Dolan have indicated they want to attend the meeting. Before we begin, I remind members and witnesses to turn off their mobile phones.
Witnesses giving evidence from within the parliamentary precincts are protected by absolute privilege in respect of the evidence they give to the committee. This means that a witness has full defence against any defamation action about anything said at a committee meeting. However, witnesses are expected not to abuse this privilege and may be directed to cease giving evidence on an issue at the Chair's direction. Witnesses should follow the direction of the Chair in this regard.
Witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that, as is reasonable, no adverse commentary should be made about an identifiable third person or entity. Witnesses who are to give evidence from a location outside the parliamentary precincts are asked to note that they may not benefit from the same level of immunity from legal proceedings as a witness giving evidence from within the parliamentary precincts and may consider it appropriate to take legal advice on this matter. Privilege against defamation does not apply to publication by the witnesses outside the proceedings held by the committee of any matters arising from the proceedings.
Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official, either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. Parliamentary privilege is considered to apply to utterances of members participating online in the committee meeting where their participation is from within the parliamentary precincts. Members may not participate online in the public meeting from outside the parliamentary precincts. Any attempt to do so will result in the member having his or her online access removed.
The purpose of today's meeting is to examine the recent reclassification of beef indexes. The committee will hear from witnesses from the Irish Cattle Breeding Federation, ICBF, and Teagasc. The witnesses from ICBF are Mr. Michael Doran, chairman, and Mr. Sean Coughlan, chief executive. The witness from Teagasc is Dr. Paul Crosson, beef enterprise leader. I welcome the gentlemen to today's meeting. I acknowledge that they have come in at short notice, which is appreciated. The changes to the indexes have brought much media comment. There is much worry and anxiety. It is important that we have this meeting so we can try to get to the root of the reasons for these changes.
I will allow the witnesses five minutes to read an opening statement and then we will proceed to a question-and-answer session, where I will give ten minutes to each member in the first round and we will come back for a second round of questions if required.
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
I thank the Chairman and members of the committee for the invitation to appear before them. I welcome the opportunity to provide some information to the committee on some of the key elements of the recent beef Euro-Star index changes. We have attended the various farmer meetings around the country over the past couple of months and have fielded many queries and concerns about the updates to the Euro-Star evaluations. In that context, and in the context of the invitation to attend today, I propose to cover some of those issues raised over the next minutes. My colleagues, Dr. Paul Crosson and Mr. Michael Doran, chair of the ICBF, will be more than happy to answer any questions.
What is the Euro-Star index and how is it calculated? In order to make it easier for beef farmers to quickly understand the genetic merit of an animal, a star rating system was introduced in 2012. The idea was that the animals would be divided into quintiles based on their genetic evaluations. The top 20% would be 5 star, the top 40% would be 4 star, and so on. The system has been very successful for farmers quickly getting an understanding of the genetic merit of an animal and the use of the Euro-Star ratings has been widespread as part of the purchasing decisions of stock bulls in recent years, especially given the link between the star ratings and the terms and conditions of the recent beef technology schemes implemented by the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, namely, the beef data and genomics programme, BDGP, and the suckler cow efficiency programme, SCEP.
How do we know that the Euro-Stars work? In any analysis that one chooses to undertake at a national level, 5-star animals consistently outperform 1-star animals, whether that is in the context of weight gain, carcase quality, calving difficulties, cow milk, cow fertility, or any other trait. Teagasc and the ICBF have published scientifically peer-reviewed analysis of the effectiveness of these indexes in improving profitability on Irish beef farms. Twomey et al., in 2020, found that suckler cows which ranked higher on the replacement index had superior performance across a range of key maternal traits. Furthermore, Kelly, in 2021, showed that, for each unit change in terminal index and replacement index value, gross profit per livestock unit increased by €1.41 and €0.76, respectively.
To give some discrete examples of females that calved for the first time over the past year, the age at first calving of the 5-star heifers was 100 days earlier than the 1-star heifers. In both groups, there was a strong continental breed representation. This difference represents a significant improvement in the profitability and environmental sustainability of those heifers. They are productive at a much earlier age and a lower replacement rate is required. The 5-star animals also have a calving interval of 30 days less than the 5-star animals. Projecting this on the national population of suckler cows means that there are millions of days lost to longer calving intervals that can be reduced by improved genetics.
This should not be surprising. The basic genetic evaluation models being used are well proven internationally and are used across species. When we combine that with the very large quantity and quality of data, we have a very sound basis for confidence in the figures produced. Each evaluation is provided in conjunction with a reliability figure, which indicates the level of data confidence there is in that evaluation. The better the quantity and quality of data, the higher the reliability of the evaluation. Of course there will be anomalies where animals perform better or worse than what their star ratings might suggest. That will always be the case because genetics creates the potential but management realises the potential, but in building a more profitable and sustainable industry, we need to build it around a strategy of pursuing the highest star ratings possible.
The genetic trends in the suckler herd have been positive in recent years. The printed opening statement contains a graph of the improvements. The improvements in the suckler cow herd have been achieved while also continuing to make progress on the terminal side. Carcase weights and conformation continue to improve and age at finishing continues to reduce.
The core drivers to the changes in the Euro-Star index are the change in input costs, such as feed and labour, and output prices, including the price of carcases and weaning weight. These updates are primarily taken from the Central Statistics Office, CSO, and are incorporated into the Teagasc farms systems model. This model, which was developed by my colleague, Dr. Paul Crosson, then calculates the economic value of each trait.
Second, we have incorporated carbon into the indexes, to help produce a lower carbon footprint animal. This strategy has already been adopted in the two dairy breeding indexes in Ireland. The approach taken was to assess the impact of a unit change in performance on farm emissions and convert this to monetary values by assuming a carbon price of €80 per tonne.
Third, we have included three new traits in the indexes, namely, finishing age, tuberculosis resistance and carcase specifications. There is general acceptance among farming and industry stakeholders that these traits are important for beef farming in Ireland.
Why do the updates now? The economic values were previously updated in 2015. According to the CSO, in the period 2015 to 2020, prices increased by only 2.2%, so over that period, prices remained stable. However, between 2020 and 2022, prices increased by 47%. Despite some easing in 2023, it would appear that agricultural input prices, in line the rest of the economy, have established a new baseline much higher than heretofore. Although beef prices have also increased, and we include a 16% increase for this relative to 2015, it is clear that a major challenge for beef systems is to manage production costs.
The ambition is to further reduce greenhouse gas emissions from beef cattle in line with Government objectives to reduce emissions from agriculture by 25% by 2030 relative to 2018.
While we accept that at the present time farmers do not get rewarded for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, there are clear policy, market and consumer signals that this is an important issue and we must future-proof their interests through the indexes in line with these expectations. These new economic figures have been applied to the evaluations to make them more relevant. We need to ensure that the next generation of suckler animals that we are breeding are economically and environmentally sustainable in this new era of increased output prices, but even higher input prices. Are these evaluations a one-size-fits-all? No; the economic model, developed by Teagasc, that underpins the calculation of the Euro-Stars, derives an economic value for each of these critical traits. This means that animals with quite different characteristics can be profitable, and therefore can have high star ratings. Hence, we have animals from all of the breeds with high and low star ratings. There is often more variation within the breeds than across the breeds. However, the economically important traits apply to all systems. Regardless of whether a farmer is autumn, spring or summer calving, is producing weanlings, stores or finished cattle or is on heavy or dry land, profitable beef farming requires easy calving, fertile and low maintenance cows, producing progeny that show good live-weight performance and are feed efficient.
I will turn to genotyping and why it is useful. Genotyping is the process by which a tissue sample, typically an ear notch in the context of the genomics scheme, is used to generate a DNA profile of the animal. This DNA profile can then be used to further enhance the accuracy of the genetic merit figures on an animal, as well as confirming an animal’s ancestry. What happens when the Euro-Star indexes move? The first thing to note is that the indexes continue to move and evolve like all genetic evaluations around the world. ICBF runs six evaluations in the year, in particular, as data on animal performance becomes available such as mart data, factory data, calving data, etc. Some animals will move more than others but the vast majority of animals will move to some extent. That is the case in dairy animals, sheep, pigs, chickens, and beef is no different. There will also be evolutions in how we calculate the indexes. Research is ongoing. It includes, for example, research on technical solutions to improve the accuracy of the models. That will be a never-ending process. This is part of the job of an independent evaluation organisation such as the ICBF. Unlike most organisations doing evaluations internationally, ICBF does not have a commercial interest in the animals it is evaluating. That allows it to use independent science to act in the best long-term interest of the broad farmer population.
I will now look at some of the impacts been to commercial farmers due to the recent changes to the star ratings. There has been some movement in the star ratings on commercial farms but 84% of the females who were 4 and 5 star before the recent changes remain in the 4 and 5 star category. Those that have dropped in the star ratings will hold their original star rating qualification status for the duration of the SCEP scheme. Currently, 82% of herds have enough females to make them eligible for the next SCEP deadline at the end of 2025. We will need to engage with some farmers, especially those with closed herds, in order to help them implement a strategy that keeps them SCEP compliant, but this will be a minority of herds. The index changes have reranked bulls, however there continues to be bulls in all breeds that farmers can use to meet the requirements of SCEP. ICBF is not telling framers that they need to change the breeds of cows they have on their farms. We have however, updated the indexes, as is international best practice, to help farmers to continue to improve the profitability and environmental efficiency of their suckler herds in response to evolving market conditions and new research findings.
I now turn to some of the impacts to pedigree breeders of the recent changes to the star ratings. Of bulls born in 2022 and 2023 that are yet to be sold, approximately 4.5% that were previously eligible for SCEP and are ineligible. Therefore, 95.5% of those previously eligible for SCEP are still eligible. In 2022, only 40% of pedigree bulls sold to suckler herds were sold into SCEP herds; 60% were sold into non-SCEP herds. On the replacement index across breed, 8% of the bulls that were previously 4 or 5 stars are now not. Some of those bulls would be 4 or 5 stars on the within breed replacement index or on the terminal index, and therefore are still scheme eligible.
Despite our best efforts to engage with representative groups ahead of the change and doing all we can to flag the changes in media when they happened, it is clear that there is some confusion among farmers about the impact of the current changes and that has naturally caused anxiety. Our communication of these changes needs to be reviewed to better manage the anxiety that farmers and herd owners feel when these indicators change. We will look at how we can improve that. This week, we have written to all SCEP participants. We will be doing further direct communication to allay fears and to ensure farmers have a full understanding of what the changes are, and how these changes will benefit the national suckler herd. ICBF is setting up an industry stakeholder forum early in 2024 to engage with all stakeholders on the suckler beef indexes.
Suckler farming continues to be under pressure from many fronts. We are very confident in the ability of genetics to deliver improved economic, environmental, and social sustainability for Irish suckler farmers. The new economic values are more representative of the impact that advances in production traits have on the profitability of Irish suckler beef production systems.
Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I welcome the witnesses. I am very disappointed about the way they have handled this. It has caused great outrage among farmers all over the country. Coming into Christmas, it is a difficult enough time for farmers and for families to hear this news. The witnesses are right in what they say: the federation has handled this badly in the way that it has communicated it to farmers. I will propose later that the federation suspends its proposals until it sits down with farmers and discuss this and work it out to see what can be agreed. This is being pushed on them and is not fair what is happening to farmers from Europe, from the Department of agriculture and now from the federation. I want to know who recommended the changes. Who was consulted on the changes? Who verified the efficiencies of the changes? Who approved the actual changes? Was the board aware of the severity and effect it would have on farmers all over the country?
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
It has been flagged for some time that these changes were coming in. In November 2022, the changes were implemented on the dairy side. There are two beef indexes on the dairy side. We updated the dairy indexes and brought in similar changes to those we brought in on the beef side. Had we not done that on the dairy side already, and done the beef side first, it would be reasonable to assume the beef farmers might feel aggrieved that we had started with beef and not dairy. That was one of the points. We, therefore, started with dairy and these changes were coming forward.
I will leave it to my colleague, Dr. Crosson, to discuss the updates to the changes. The indexes are updated on an ongoing basis. If input costs have increased by 47% over recent years, the indexes have to reflect that. Dr. Crosson will cover some of that around the updates to the economic model and then I can come back on the process around how they were implemented.
Dr. Paul Crosson:
I welcome the opportunity to discuss the economic values and the updates on the Teagasc beef systems model that were applied. I will give a small bit of background on the Teagasc beef model. It is a farm systems model so it is a bioeconomic model that describes the whole farm system in terms of its economic and environmental impacts. It is very widely published. It has been internationally peer reviewed and, in fact, the model has been adapted for beef systems in Scotland, Norway and other Scandinavian countries and Uruguay, and we are in discussions with colleagues in Brazil who are interested in taking the model and adapting it for their circumstances. It is a very widely used model and international peer reviewed.
On how we adapt and use the model from the perspective of economic values, we design a production system representative of suckling farming in Ireland. That is challenging because we know there is massive variation in production systems in Ireland. For each trait that has an economic value, we change that by one unit. For example, with age at first calving, we change age at first calving by one day and we assess and quantify the economic impact of age at first calving. We first used this model in terms of the economic value updates for the breeding indexes in 2012. Prior to that, there was a single breeding index. In 2012, it was separated into a replacement and a terminal index so the Teagasc beef systems model was then applied to generate the economic values for those updates. The economic values and the model are always evolving and developing. We updated the economic values and revised the figures in 2015 and we have carried out the same exercise again this year. As Mr. Coughlan said, the previous updates were reasonably standard. The economics had not changed hugely but it was warranted to change them regardless. Clearly the economic impact, in particular in the most recent updates to the index, have been much more substantial.
That is basically down to what we see every day in terms of input costs. It is not just in farming but in all sectors of the economy. As input costs change for fertiliser, contractors and feed, the economic impact of a unit change in a trait will change accordingly. The greater the change in prices, the greater the change in the economic value. There is no question that the impact of the most recent revisions have been greater than previously.
Coupled with that, there is also a dynamic in relation to carbon and greenhouse gas emissions. We might revert to that a little bit later. As part of these updates, we have now included a monetary value for the emissions that are generated within the beef breeding system or beef cattle production systems. Again, as each trait changes, there are emissions associated with that and we apply a monetary value to that.
Coupled with the large changes we have seen in prices, that has exacerbated the changes in terms of the economic values. It is predominantly a combination of those two factors that have driven the change in economic values. There are some new traits in there as well and we might revert to them as the discussion continues. They are important but probably secondary to the other two aspects that I mentioned.
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
To revert to Deputy Ring's question on potentially reversing or postponing the changes, one of the challenges there is that as soon as a change comes forward people will want to know the impact of it and how it will affect them. The reality is that either the indexes are published or they are not. Bad and all as it is now, it would create an even bigger vacuum of information if people do not know whether the indexes are going to be published or not. Then we would face into a breeding season next spring where people are buying or selling animals or making breeding decisions and they are operating in a vacuum. What is critical at all stages is that the buyer and seller in any transaction should have the same opportunity to know what the value of a bull or cow is. We do not want a situation where we release the indexes, take them back, and then some people have access to the indexes as they were, they know what they are going to be, they are selling on one index and a commercial farmer is potentially buying on another index. That is simply a recipe for carnage and is not what an independent evaluation unit should be doing.
Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
How independent is it? Who independently evaluates the ICBF's decisions?
Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
How long ago was it set up?
Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Has the board been changed in the six years?
Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is it the same people there all the time?
Mr. Michael Doran:
Some extra people have been added. The people who started are still on the technical advisory group but we have added in extra people as well. If we are dealing with something in a specialist area what we also do is bring people in to present the information. If we have PhD students researching something, they present it to us. It is an independent technical group that is doing it and it makes its recommendations to the board.
Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is there any check on it? When it comes to the board, it makes decisions, but who evaluates the decisions of the technical advisory group? Are its decisions taken as gospel?
Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Experts differ all the time.
Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
It is like the courts. Solicitors differ and judges differ. Farmers differ.
Mr. Michael Doran:
Yes. I am a farmer. I have been a suckler farmer for 20 years. The objective of the changes that have been put in place this time to determine the index is to have easier calving, shorter gestation, less calf mortality, better conformation in carcasses and heavier carcasses, earlier finishing age, less feed intake and improved TB resistance. That is on the terminal side. On the replacement side, we are looking for more fertile cows and this is the direction of travel that these changes are going to bring us. They will be slightly lighter cows, so a little bit more feed efficient, easier calving, have a shorter gestation, less calf mortality, earlier finishing age, less feed intake and improved TB resistance. That comes at a slight cost in relation to slightly lighter carcasses of their offspring but the terminal index can then make up for that. We are trying to improve the type of cow that we have on farm and the type of terminal bulls that we have available to people as well. The direction of travel is what the indexes are trying to do. It is a piece of information to help farmers make those breeding decisions.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Mr. Coughlan should be very brief. Deputy Ring's time is up.
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
I will say a couple of things very briefly. The first is that this is something that suckler beef systems globally are struggling with in terms of where they are going. Input costs are going up. Globally, cow size is continuing to get bigger and bigger and there are impacts on greenhouse gases. What these indexes are doing is looking to stabilise that.
The second point relates to what will happen if we do not make these changes. Breeding is a long-term business. It will take six or seven years before the full impact of these changes take effect. If we are back before this committee in 2030 we would rightly be accused of having sleepwalked the suckler industry into a cow that was not fit for purpose. That is something that we could not do.
Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I want to be excused but I will be back again.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That is fine. There are an awful of speakers who want to get in so I will give everyone a ten-minute slot and then there will be a second round of questions if people want. There is no problem in that regard.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
First, I thank the witnesses for coming in. I will be quick and I ask for short, quick answers. There is a lot of confusion about the SCEP. If I have an enclosed herd and my cows were four or five star and they came down to three stars, am I correct that nothing changes while I am in SCEP? Is that right or wrong?
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Right. That is for the cow. If I have an enclosed herd and I bought a four or five star bull, which bulled the cows last summer, and I have calves coming forward, even if my cows have been reduced to two stars, and my bull has been reduced to two stars, are the heifer calves coming forward that I hold on my farm eligible under SCEP at this time?
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
They are not eligible for the person going forward in the SCEP.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is it correct that if I am selling them they are not eligible either?
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That is going to have dire consequences for the people who have signed up to SCEP if the figures have gone wrong on their farm.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
There will be dire consequences.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That is the first point. I want to get my head around this. I follow the kills in factories and over the last four or five years, even with all our genomics in dairy and beef, overall, we have lighter carcasses. Mr. Coughlan will probably be able to give me a breakdown between beef and dairy. If we want to talk about carbon, we are now killing four cattle to probably three going back eight to ten years ago to make up the same weight.
If we look at the quality, in terms of whether it is an O, P, U or whatever, the quality has gone down even with all our genomics. Could Mr. Coughlan explain that to me please?
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
To be clear, the genomics relates to the suckler herd. We were here in 2015 explaining why we felt that the BDGP and the suckler schemes were justified, as they were coming under quite a bit of criticism at the time. Deputy Fitzmaurice is absolutely correct. At a national level the carcass weights and carcass conformation have been dropping.
However, that is due to the influence of the increased numbers of dairy beef animals, relative to suckler animals. I will give a few statistics on the suckler side, but I will start with the dairy and dairy-beef side. In the past five or six years, as the Deputy highlighted, they have dropped slightly in terms of carcass weights. Dairy-beef animals are down approximately 6 kg of carcass weight on average in the past few years and confirmations have probably dropped half a confirmation score. It is similar on the dairy side and perhaps even slightly more exaggerated on the dairy only animals. Critically, on the suckler side, the criticism that was made in 2015 was that we would breed a herd of suckler cows that would destroy beef quality. What has happened in the past ten, eight or seven years in the quality of animals coming from the suckler herd - to be clear these are progeny coming from beef cows, sired by beef sires - is that the carcass weights have increased by 15 kg. If we take the period 2010 to 2022, this has been a reasonably linear increase. From a confirmation point of view - that is a carcass quality point of view - the confirmation has increased by half a confirmation score. This is where suckler farmers do not get nearly enough credit; there are massive green credentials in this. Crucially, over that period, we have increased our carcass weights and the quality of our carcasses and the age at finishing has dropped by 100 days. That is a massive saving, financially for the beef industry, but also as regards our greenhouse gas credentials.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank Mr. Coughlan for that.
On the new index, why were 24 of the top 50 replacement bulls on the suckler side awarded one star for carcass weight? Is that correct?
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Mr. Coughlan said they have gained weight. Why do 24 of the top 50 on the new proposal have one star for carcass weight?
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
I will hand over to Dr. Crosson in a moment. However, one of the issues I highlighted in my opening statement was that there are many different traits as regards the replacement index and carcass weight makes up a portion on the cow side, but it is not a significant portion. I was in Carrick-on-Shannon the week before last, so I will look at the calves per cow per year in County Leitrim. We are at 0.82 calves per cow per year from the suckler herd in Leitrim. That is an extremely challenging position if we are trying to carry an extra cow in every five cows. We are only getting productivity effectively from four out of every five cows. The national figure is similar. It is approximately 0.85 or 0.86. Chasing carcass weight on its own on the cow side-----
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
It is pretty important when you are killing them, on the bullock side.
Dr. Paul Crosson:
Looking at the relative emphasis, which means how much emphasis is put on the various traits, the farmer wants to improve many traits in the suckler cow. Carcass weight is one of those. It is approximately 11% of the total, so almost 90% of the emphasis is on fertility, milk, cull value, calving traits and all the other traits we want in a suckler cow. We are trying to balance them all. It is also important to remember that the resulting calf is a combination of the cow's genetics, the replacement index, and the sire's genetics, the terminal index. In the terminal index, carcass traits account for almost 50%, which makes sense. You produce a terminal sire calf for slaughter, whereas under the replacement index a calf is being bred to produce a suckler cow. It is about trying to get a balance of all the desirable traits in a profitable suckler cow and the balance comes in at 11% on carcass weight.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
What is meant by resistance to TB, if ICBF only uses TB test responses in TB breakdown animal cohorts as the measurement of resistance?
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
There is not one scientific test to say it is right.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I will put this on the record. I spoke to someone in England who has researched TB. Am I correct that the ICBF looked at the guts of 4 million cattle, dropped it down to 780,000 for the pedigree, then selected 144,000, of which 14,000 were bulls? Will ICBF tell me that under the new TB approach, I will not get TB?
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Okay. Am I correct that with 300 herds at 50 a piece, we are almost free from TB? That is the Department's guide. Is that right or wrong?
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That is the figure that is used.
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
Can I come back to the Deputy? The evidence on this is quite clear. Dr. Sue Brotherstone and Dr. Coffey in the UK have also published a paper on the advantages of including TB resistance in the index. The bottom line is that, for example, in the 1980s, if we go back to the data, we had a bull that was heavily used. You have bulls and you are trying to get those bulls to breed daughters that will be resistant to disease. It could be lameness. It could be-----
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
There is no such thing as resistance, according to the people who have researched it, because stress causes TB, they can have a gene-----
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The bottom line is that different cattle react in different ways. If you put stress onto cattle, some of them will show up with TB. Some of them might never show up with TB.
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
That is correct and there is a reason for that. One component of the reason is genetic.
In the 1980s, a high-profile dairy bull was used extensively in herds that were exposed to TB. If that bull's daughters were in that herd, 95% of his daughters went down with TB. There were daughters of other bulls in those herds and 5% of their daughters went down. It would be ridiculous to say they will not get TB. What we are trying to do is to give another little indicator to tilt the balance in favour of the farmer, so that if his or her animals are exposed to TB, maybe a few less will go down with it.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
What percentage of the new index is attributed to TB resistance?
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
What does a couple mean? Is it 2%?
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Going by when I looked at it-----
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I will tell you one thing. The people who have researched TB all their lives in England and Ireland have given me documents which strongly disagree with the system the ICBF is using.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
They will say clearly that TB will never be eliminated completely.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I have more questions, but my time is up.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
There is huge interest in this, so I will give everyone ten minutes first and then I will give everyone a second opportunity.
Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I will keep within my ten minutes. First I thank all the witnesses for coming in. They are our guests and I want to set that as the frame. We do our business in a constructive, respectful and engaging way. Clearly the witnesses are up for it. They have been robust in their responses so far.
I will put a few questions to them. I speak on behalf of farmers who put them to me. I am a conduit for the purpose of putting these questions to the ICBF. I will kick off. ICBF fundamentally changed the rules of the suckler cow efficiency programme, SCEP, after farmers signed the contract in good faith.
I am going to list the changes, after which I would like a sharp, concise response. It has been stated that the ICBF changed the star rating of calves mid-pregnancy, the star rating after breeding bulls were purchased for next year’s breeding season, the material indexes of the many suckler farms, rendering them incapable of breeding replacements, and the star ratings highlighting the inaccuracies of the past evaluations. It is said that the changes the ICBF has made are so dramatic that any future trust in the scheme will be tarnished, if not broken. That is a terrible thing to have to say. Can the ICBF provide the number of suckler farmers who, if current ratings remain unchanged, will have difficulty complying with the scheme?
I wish to make a few more points before listening to the responses. The Irish Simmental Cattle Society has called for the suspension of the ICBF and the changes, to protect the suckler sector. That is important. An article in The Connacht Tribunestates these kinds of midstream changes in the index ratings of cows and bulls have put many farmers in the SCEP in real trouble, and that it seems the ICBF is a totally anti-suckler and anti-pedigree cattle society. Councillor Geraldine Donohue, from Gort, states people are angry and outraged over what has happened. While we will listen to the witnesses’ responses today, we want them to commit. What are they going to do about this? How will the ICBF reverse its decision?
I will ask a final question and then hear the responses. Several colleagues have talked about the validity of the research, the technical solutions and the accuracy of the model used. While it is early days, the ICBF has not yet convinced us of the accuracy of the model it is using. The agenda is built around environmental initiatives, which we all respect. While farmers have a huge role to play in environmental initiatives, who was driving all this? Who is driving all that the ICBF is about? That is the concern. Who recommended the changes? More important, who approved them? Is everyone acting in unison or is there some division within the ICBF’s ranks? They might share that with us. Farmers across the spectrum are deeply angry, frustrated and hurt over what has happened. The lack of engagement and the way the ICBF has conducted itself are part of that. There is another way. It is through partnership, negotiation and discussion. The agri-sector is fragmented enough as it is, so we need some unity and a response, but a response that takes on board the genuine challenges we have put to the witnesses so far and that will continue to be put to them today. Are they up for change and watering the programme down? Are they up for rowing back on the vision and plan they want to pursue, for which there is no broad support within the agriculture community?
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
I acknowledge there is much confusion and fear. I strongly argue it is unfounded fear but it exists nonetheless. I fully accept that, so it is up to us to deal with it.
With regard to the changes, I mentioned in my opening statement that 84% of the herds already in SCEP have enough eligible animals to meet the next requirement at the end of 2025. That is not even taking into account the animals under 16 months, which are in the pipeline.
On the indexes, we do evaluations six times a year. The indexes were always evolving. There has been a significant change. I will go back to Dr. Crosson on that and the climate aspect.
On the matter of trust, a question arises. Some 60% of the pedigree bulls sold last year into beef herds were sold into non-SCEP herds. Those concerned are also using the stars to make the purchases, and that is what is causing significant issues. I am referring to people who have no requirement from a scheme perspective to buy or use the bulls in question, yet they are doing so. I would argue that there has been such a furore because there is such regard for the indexes. Without such regard for them, there would not be a tinkle from those outside SCEP. That is not the case, however. The indexes are updated on an ongoing basis.
Every two months, it is possible that an animal will move from four stars to three stars. How does that happen? For example, if somebody has a bull associated with a significant number of difficult calvings – and these are recorded by a commercial farmer, for example – the calving difficulty percentage for that bull will go up, increasing the associated costs and reducing its star rating. Similarly, if a bull is consistently breeding daughters in respect of which there are very long calving intervals, for example, and this information starts to flow, it will update the indexes.
On the allegation that we are anti-suckler and anti-pedigree, I have attended many more suckler and beef meetings this year than dairy meetings. We had a series of meetings with the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine on SCEP in the spring. They were all over the country. There were 11 or 12 of them. Therefore, to suggest we are somehow anti-suckler is not correct. We have fought the fight in this regard right since 2015, when the easiest thing would have been to throw in the towel and give up.
Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
May I come back in? I am conscious that this is my time as well. I want to go back specifically to three questions that I want an answer to. The ICBF changed the star rating of calves mid-pregnancy. What is Mr. Coughlan’s response to that? I ask him to be concise.
Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
How is that going to be sorted out or resolved?
Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
What is Mr. Coughlan going to do about it? How is he going to champion the cause? He accepts farmers should not be at any disadvantage.
Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Grand. I will hold Mr. Coughlan to that. We can come back to him on it.
The next point I was asked to make was that the ICBF changed the star rating after breeding bulls were purchased for next year’s breeding season.
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
We are running these evaluations six times per year. We typically publish on 21 September, for example. On 20 September every year, bulls and other animals are traded. The day after, the index is changed. That is just an ongoing feature. There is no easy option on that. You cannot go with two sets of indexes.
Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Can I tease that out and focus? Is Mr. Coughlan going to stand over that? Yes or no?
Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Okay. Let us move on. Can Mr. Coughlan provide a figure for the number of suckler farmers who, if the current ratings remain unchanged, will have difficulty complying with the scheme?
Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Can Mr. Coughlan quantify it? He prepared to come in here today and knew he would be subject to questioning.
Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Can Mr. Coughlan furnish the committee with more exact details?
Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Who ultimately verifies the efficiency of the changes?
Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Was the board aware of the severity of the changes before they were approved?
Mr. Michael Doran:
I will take that. The board is always presented with the recommended changes. It was presented with the changes and direction of travel, which I outlined to Deputy Ring. When you make changes or an evaluation, some bulls’ and cows’ ratings go up while some go down. There will always be change. For the benefit of everyone involved, we are trying to breed more efficient and better animals.
Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Was the board aware of the severity of the changes?
Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Were there any dissenting voices among its members?
Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is Mr. Doran aware of any dissenting voices?
Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Could Mr. Doran share with us the elements that the board had concerns over?
Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Could Mr. Doran share two or three of them with us? That is all I am asking for.
Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Will Mr. Doran tell us what was the severity? He said the board had concerns. What were its concerns?
Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
What was the outcome? The board expressed this concern. What then was the remedy or follow-on with the board? Surely, the board is influential here. This is the board and it will have to explain. Mr. Doran identified today and told this committee that the board had concerns about this scheme. Would Mr. Doran be able to furnish the committee with a written statement or some sort of memo or note as to its concerns? That is critical. It may warrant holding another meeting and inviting more people in for questions. It would be helpful if Mr. Doran co-operates and shares the concerns of the board with us because that is critical.
Mr. Michael Doran:
We can do that. The main concerns were around the eligibility for SCEP and the associated terms and conditions. In addition, as the Senator identified, there were concerns around the implications if a person had bought a bull and the bull had dropped. We spoke to the Department of agriculture about that and I have spoken to a number of people in the Department around seeing whether there is anything we can do.
Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
What was the Department's response?
Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Will Mr. Doran keep us informed?
Victor Boyhan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
It is important. This is the committee that deals with agriculture. I thank Mr. Doran for his time.
Michael Collins (Cork South West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I welcome the witnesses but the ICBF has lost the dressing room. It is quite clear it lost the dressing room. Its board has lost the dressing room. Who is the board made up of? They are disconnected from the reality on the ground. There is an absolutely outcry about what it has done. Farmers have lost confidence and the political system has obviously lost total confidence in the ICBF and its indices. The most affected farmers are those who followed the ICBF’s advice and had herds of 4-star and 5-star cattle. Why should they now change from these cows and risk the ICBF changing its mind again? The replacement index is becoming a farce. The only farmers who will follow these indices are those who are forced to as part of the SCEP scheme.
There was no consultation with the breed societies prior to the changes being agreed. Societies were informed of the changes to the economic model but the impact of the changes was never shared with the societies. It is evident from the changes to breeding valuation that the ICBF still has not conveyed all the changes it made to the calculations. Its representatives admitted the lack of consultation themselves. When a rare breed such as a Dexter is brought towards the top of an economic index, it is fundamentally broken. They are, by definition, non-profit making, and following the index will lead to financial ruin. It is also evident that these types of cattle are being promoted in other beef breeds.
The ICBF stated that no farmer will be financially affected by the change to the scheme. Who will compensate both pedigree breeders and replacement providers that invested in what the ICBF said were 4-star and 5-star animals that can no longer provide progeny suitable for the scheme? The bulls being elevated to the top of the replacement index will have a major negative impact on both the carcase’s weight and the weaning weight that farmers can produce. This in turn affects farmers’ viability and the quality aesthetics of the Irish beef producers.
I have a number of questions. They will be quickfire because I have quite a lot of them and I do not think we will be able to go through them all. Who requested Teagasc to develop a new algorithm for calculating the indexes? I will ask three questions at a time. What was the objective of the exercise Teagasc undertook? What is the new algorithm optimised for?
Dr. Paul Crosson:
The model is the same; it is the same model we used in 2015 and 2012. At the outset, I outlined the background to the model development, where it used and how it is used. The changes that have been implemented are economic changes. They are effectively price changes, such as fertiliser price, feed prices, contractor prices and so on. As we know, they have changed. At the outset, Mr. Coughlan outlined the price indexes and where they have gone. We see that every day in our daily lives and our farming lives, so I do not think that is surprising at all.
The other element where there is a change is the carbon piece, which a number of Deputies referred to. The carbon subindex or carbon component to the model was developed probably 13 years ago in 2010. We had a PhD student in 2012 who developed the submodel and it has been part of the overall farm systems model since then.
Michael Collins (Cork South West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Who requested Teagasc to develop a new algorithm?
Michael Collins (Cork South West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Was the data from the commercial and pedigree population split or combined while conducting the analysis?
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
The data is one set of data. We do not separate out the pedigrees. The pedigrees are separated in terms of the within-breed indexes provided, but regarding the genetic evaluations, all of the data goes into the same evaluation. I think that is appropriate because otherwise there is a risk you end up with animals that are suitable for pedigree herds and not suitable for commercial herds, which would be a disaster.
Michael Collins (Cork South West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is combining the data not like comparing apples with oranges? Should allowances have been made for pedigree breeds?
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
I do not agree, simply because the core customers for the pedigree breeders are the commercial farmers. Pedigree breeders sell some bulls to other pedigree breeders but the vast majority of pedigree bulls go to commercial farmers. Therefore, they need to be suitable for those commercial farmers.
Michael Collins (Cork South West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Administration is not a strong point for all farmers, so the accuracy of the subjective data coming from farmers will not be very high. Is this not impacting on the integrity and accuracy of the calculations?
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
That point is constantly raised. There is no doubt that more accurate data is always better to do these evaluations but there is a constant narrative out there that somehow commercial farmers are not capable of giving an accurate indication of what is happening on their farms. I strongly refute that and the data we have strongly refutes that. I know it is a technical term but we would not achieve the heritabilites on those traits that we are achieving if that data was not accurate.
Michael Collins (Cork South West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is there any reason a different index calculation optimised for the role of the continental pedigree herd breeding the seed stock and foundations for future generations cannot be developed?
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
There is absolutely no reason that is required. There is more than enough in the current indexes. The reality is that if we look at the make-up of the national suckler herd from 2008 to 2022, the breed profile has not changed. If anything, there are a few percent less Angus and Hereford and perhaps a couple percent less first-cross in the dairy herd. The make-up of the population has remained the same. We have seen in the advent of BDGP that people using Charolais, Limousin, Simmental, Angus, Hereford – whatever breed they want – have been able to make progress.
We talk about the numbers of the breed representation on the active bull and that is a red herring. Commercial suckler farmers have a preferred choice that they have stuck with over the past 15 years since 2008 - in the time period for which we have decent records. They are choosing to stay with the continentals and they will still be able to choose. They might have to choose a slightly different bull if they are breeding their replacements. However, the representation of the traditional breeds on the active bull list has always been more than their representation. Prior to the recent changes, there were still 30 or 40 Angus, Hereford and Shorthorn bulls on the active bull list yet the representation of national cow population is only 20%. It is the same on dairy, sheep and across the species. Farmers like a breed and will stick with it.
Michael Collins (Cork South West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
This is a serious question. Are the ICBF witnesses fully aware of the impact of the new index on top cows and ability to make a living on farmers’ income, wellness and mental health? Some people have lost 40% of their income because of this decision. It was wiped out overnight. Do the witnesses have any understanding of what they have done? Will they go back to their board and explain the anger people have and suspend this for a while until there is an independent review on it? That is all we are asking. They have to do this. They are stabbing farmers not in the back but straight into the heart on this issue. They have to understand the feeling and anger that is out there today, all week and since this happened. Overnight, they wiped out people’s incomes. The mental health stress they caused is astonishing. The board members must give very serious consideration to what they have done about their own futures. Do the witnesses realise what they did out there?
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
I have been at various meetings, I have been taking calls from farmers and I am very well aware of what is happening. One of the challenges I mentioned earlier is communication. There are genuine cases out there, but there is a lot of fearmongering out there as well. I genuinely believe that because I have talked to farmers who rang me personally with serious problems. I look at their herd and explain what is going on. Many of the farmers, when they were ringing, did not even know what changes had happened. Many of the farmers who are worried about the indices are not even in SCEP. I am not diminishing for a second that there is a lot of concern, especially among some pedigree breeders. In fairness, some of the pedigree breeders have bulls that have dropped on stars. First, from a SCEP point of view, it is taking only 40% of the bulls. Second, in terms of eligibility for SCEP, the animal has to be 4 stars or 5 stars within or across breed. Only 4.5% of the bulls that were 4 stars or 5 stars within or across breed are no longer 4 stars or 5 stars within or across breed.
Michael Collins (Cork South West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I do not fully agree with Mr. Coughlan when he tells me he is well aware of this. If he were well aware of it, he would have gone back to the board and looked again at this decision and its impact on the people who are losing incomes, but he is entitled to his view.
Are we entitled to obtain the minutes of board meetings? I asked Mr. Coughlan a question. Will the board consider suspending these changes until after an independent review? We are not saying they should be cut out altogether, but they should be suspended until after an independent review. Are we entitled to look at board minutes? We need to see if the board is clued into what is going on in the real world.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Briefly, Mr. Coughlan. Deputy Collins's time is up.
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
As regards reversing these changes, if we think the level of confusion out there now is bad, changing again midstream and having indexes and people not knowing where they will stand or when this will be done, they will try to predict what will happen and it will create even more chaos out there.
Michael Collins (Cork South West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Mr. Coughlan says "reversing". The ICBF should suspend the changes until after an independent review is-----
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I welcome the witnesses. For what it is worth, in another world I breed purebred Angus cattle. It is important to put that on the record.
What I have been told since the confusion of this episode arose is that it would suit me, but I am still not jumping out of my chair and I do not think it will suit anybody. While I was gesturing a minute ago, Mr. Coughlan said farmers were ringing him up and did not even know how this would affect them and had the wrong side of the stick. That is misinformation. I acknowledge the fact that Mr. Coughlan acknowledges that the ICBF has a communication problem, as he said, and that this was not communicated properly. As the old adage goes, however, when you are explaining, you are losing. If the ICBF wants to bring the dressing room with it, there must be communication.
Mr. Coughlan is also now promising a stakeholders' forum. That is cart-before-horse territory. If there is a need for a stakeholders' forum, it was needed before the changes were made. Even if nothing changed, even if we were in the same place today, the communication would have improved and people would have known the consequences of the changes. As Deputy Collins rightly said, whether the information the farmers are getting is correct or incorrect, if it is having an effect on their mental health and making them worry, it was a mishandled situation.
Chair, that is not where I intended-----
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
May I respond to that? I have already acknowledged that if the communication was optimal, we would not be sitting here today. I accept that and I am not for a second dismissing the stress and anxiety that is out there on some farmers. What I was trying to articulate - and this is part of what we have to sort - is that in many cases that stress and anxiety is not warranted, so we have to take the stress out of it. We have communicated with farmers directly this week to try to give them the list of cows that are eligible for the scheme in order that we can take out some of that stress and anxiety. I am not diminishing for a second that the-----
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
As I said, that could have been avoided, I think, if the horse was put before the cart, not vice versa.
In the interest of balance, I noted that Senator Boyhan mentioned a councillor from Gort. Coincidentally, the man who has given me the most information on this is a man who is very much associated with the mart down there and everything to do with cattle, Councillor Gerry Finnerty. That is in the interest of balance, considering somebody was mentioned previously.
If I talk for a second about the whole concept, I get the science. I see where we are going and I know what way things are intentioned. As I said at the outset, I breed Angus bulls. I will give the witnesses an example from five or six years ago. I had a young lad in the yard buying a bull. He brought his grandfather with him, and his grandfather was lying over the pen of bulls looking at the bulls while the young fella was on his phone looking at the year tags. In the end, the grandfather won and the young lad did not bring home the bull the phone was telling him to buy. The young lad came back three years later and said, "That auld lad was not as thick as I thought he was." They are breeding cattle and they got the calves they wanted, not from looking at the phone but from looking at the bull. Where is the ICBF going to draw the line on that?
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
As I said at the outset, I get the science, I get the reasoning, I get the carbon emissions, I get the reduction of the slaughter dates, I get the ease of calving and all that, but when will the ICBF recognise stockmen, farmers and husbandry in all that? There is no column in any of the algorithms for any of the aforementioned, but that is what has got us to where we are in farming: good farmers, good farmer practice, good eyes, good stockmen, judgments on cattle, making a profit and rearing big families and educating them for the past 400 years.
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
May I respond to that? The Senator raises a criticism we get constantly, and it is a frustration among pedigree breeders that farmers come into their yards or are at sales or whatever and all people are looking at is the stars, the stars, the stars. I have consistently said, right since we were getting beaten up on this process back in 2015 and SCEP, that the indexes are a tool. The amount of communication and noise that is out there at the moment in this regard is clearly such that people see a value in them. When somebody goes to buy a bull, their eyes are a tool and the indexes are a tool. The reality is that you can see some of the traits of an animal by looking at the animal. You have a decent chance of seeing the conformation. By looking at a bull, you have no idea what the age of first calving of his daughters will be. You have no idea what the calving interval of that bull will be. You really do not know from looking at that Angus bull how the daughter's milk will be. You therefore absolutely have to use both. I advocate using both and would never advocate disregarding one because if an animal is not functional, it is not worth having.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
On that train, the phrase "lost the dressing room" has been used here before. The majority of the information the ICBF is feeding into this computer and this algorithm is based on trust in the farmer feeding it that information. It is like playing golf. You trust the man to mark his own score. Given the fact that the ICBF has lost the dressing room and lost confidence within this sector now, how much can it trust that the information is not, for want of a better word, jigged a small bit to try to meet the unacceptable and unachievable targets the ICBF is setting? It has lost that dressing room.
Mr. Michael Doran:
The one comment I will make to the Senator is that I was that young lad with my father when I started farming, going to sales rings and bull sales to buy bulls. There was a catalogue there with the pedigree ancestry of the bull. Sometimes you were lucky; more times you were unlucky. We had one example where docility and calving difficulty were massive problems we had after a particular bull was purchased because there was very little data. The data now in the database is able to help us and we use that information to generate indexes, help people make those decisions and take the cattle breeding-----
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I was not making the argument one way or the other; I was making a point. There has to be a mid-term. This is the first time the ICBF has considered the mid-term.
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
One further brief point is that we are at risk of doing commercial farmers a disservice to think that they are not going to put accurate information on the record. One of the key drivers is calving information.
They are legally required to do it, they do it well and I am convinced that they will continue to do it. Objective information is coming through from the marts; that cannot be messed with. The factory information cannot be messed with either. I have full confidence that the vast majority of the data will be fine for the purposes of generating indexes.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
On the overall point, does the ICBF see the importance of bringing the dressing room with it?
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Mr. Coughlan spoke earlier about TB resistance and he gave an example of a bull, the female progeny of which had 95% TB resistance. Surely to God that depends on where those animals ended up; let it be a closed farm or an open one. Is allowance made for closed and open farms? There is a lot less TB on so-called closed farms than there is on open farms.
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
Only the herds that had a TB outbreak were relevant to that analysis. If a herd did not have TB, there was no way to establish whether it had been exposed to TB or not. In that scenario, the herds involved are ones that have had a TB outbreak. I agree that herds in some parts of the country will be far more exposed to TB than other herds.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Let us go back to the decision, the announcement and the role of the board. Did the board have any input into this or was it just a rubber-stamping process? If we look at the make-up of the board, there are up to seven farm organisation representatives on it and one person from the pedigree cattle breeders. Their representatives sat on the board and now they are up in arms and on the blower to us every day of the week. How did it get through the board such that those organisations are so disgruntled now, yet they have representatives on the board? Did the board have any say or is it just a rubber-stamp outfit?
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
I will let Mr. Doran come in after me. It is important for members of the committee to understand that the objective of the ICBF is national genetic gain. When the members of the board come around that table, that is the only objective they can take into account. Their fiduciary duty requires them to ensure that is the case. If there is a conflict of interest for somebody, they need to remove themselves from that decision-making process.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
On that point of a conflict of interest, seeing as the ICBF owns bulls, including artificial insemination, AI, bulls, does it see a conflict of interest for itself with the way the goalposts have been moved in this?
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
That is an extremely important point because there are few genetic evaluation organisations in the world doing independent genetic evaluations. By that I mean that most organisations in the world that are tasked with doing genetic evaluations have a commercial interest in the animals they are evaluating. That is not the case with the ICBF. We have no commercial interest in the animals we are evaluating and that is why commercial farmers place such trust in the ICBF.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Does the ICBF have AI bulls?
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I am only asking for the purpose of clarity.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thought the ICBF had them.
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
No, we do not. We have no AI bull. We have no commercial interest in whether stars go up or down and that is part of the reason dairy, beef, sheep and commercial farmers have such trust in us. It is because we have no commercial interest. If we drop a bull, then that bull drops and we are not looking at the bottom line as to how many straws we have in the tank of that bull.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I have the details of the board in front of me.
Mr. Michael Doran:
-----and the farmer representative organisations have six representatives. That is the breakdown of the board.
A number of years ago, as chairman, we set up an independent subcommittee of the board on corporate governance and we have an independent person who specialises in corporate governance chairing that to help us as a board in our remit. As my colleague has said, the remit of ICBF is genetic gain for the national herd. That is our remit and responsibility, while generating independent evaluations to do it. We are clear on what the board's role is.
Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I echo a lot of what the other speakers have said. I appreciate that the witnesses from the ICBF passionately believe in what they are setting out and that the ICBF is coming at this from a scientific point of view. However, the reality is that, unfortunately, the farming community at large has not bought into what it is trying to do and the ICBF has gotten it badly wrong. We have had unprecedented representation over the past two weeks on what is happening here. I echo what others are saying and the general thrust of what we are recommending is that the ICBF pause the implementation of this new scheme, pending an independent review and proper consultation with farmer and breeding groups.
There are a few key issues that farmers are contacting us about. I appreciate Mr. Doran said that breeding groups are on the board with three spots, which is 18% of the board. They say they have not been properly consulted and that queries they raised were never adequately answered. They said there was a webinar and they were told they would get a recording of that and that any unanswered queries from the webinar would be followed up afterwards. This did not happen. They sought a list of 100 AI bulls prior to 28 November and this was not provided. The new breed averages were only furnished to them a week prior to the changes. The ICBF has said here on a number of occasions that these were reviewed by its technical group and an industry focus group but it is clear that the farming community at large has no faith in either its industry focus group or its technical group.
I have a few questions for Dr. Crosson and I am conscious of time so I ask him to answer as quickly as possible. One of the biggest bones of contention is the rise of breeds like Dexter. It has risen significantly when compared with Charolais. Dexter has a kill-out average of 200 kg at 24 months versus 350 kg for Charolais. I am not a farmer but if I was breeding cattle, it would make sense for me to breed a Charolais. Why has the Dexter come up? What is the rationale for this?
Dr. Paul Crosson:
The Dexter is an issue that has reared its head a good bit in the past week or fortnight or thereabouts. Looking at the index and the breakdown of the various traits within that, the major trait where the Dexter is benefiting is in the cow's live weight. It is important to bear in mind, as Mr. Coughlan pointed out in the opening statement, that it is a niche breed. It is not seen as a widely commercially-used breed. On developing the economic values, that is done with an average cow live weight of 670 kg. That is the baseline within the economic model. There is variation around that within the national herd. You can go below 600 kg and in certain cases you can be 750 kg to 800 kg. A Dexter-type breed is well outside of the stress-testing within the model.
Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Let us take what Dr. Crosson said about the Dexter and what the ICBF would say about the indexes and what they aim to achieve. The indexes are a monetary figure expressing the profitability of progeny. There is nothing in what Dr. Crosson has said about the Dexter to suggest that it should have a high index rating.
Dr. Paul Crosson:
Except that live weight is an important part of the index in terms of the cost of the cow. If we look across the index, it can be divided the cow traits and the calf traits. The cow traits account for approximately 60% of the total value within the index and calf traits account for approximately 40%, within the replacement index. That is why there is the terminal index; to balance out the terminal traits you want in the progeny.
Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I will echo what the Senator said earlier. Bad heifers, regardless of what index they are given, will never be good cows. I know a good pedigree producer living in County Longford. He breeds Charolais and Limousin cattle and he routinely sells calves and young bulls for between €10,000 and €20,000. He is breeding one of the best-selling ones off a cow with an index rating of 1 and a bull with an index rating of 4. Based on that, the progeny should be coming out with an index rating of about 2, yet he sold one in recent weeks for €15,000. I accept that there will always be examples like that but with his science hat on, I ask Dr. Crosson if the ICBF has made provision for that bank of knowledge that is there.
The huge strides we have made were acknowledged in the opening statement in terms of sucklers and the profitability and prices we are achieving now. This is not inherently down to just indexing but to good farm practice and knowledge. Is there no accounting in the indexes for these aspects?
Dr. Paul Crosson:
In terms of the farm system we model, we assume exceptional levels of management, that is, very high efficiency in terms of the performance levels on the farm. If we look at this in terms of grass and management and forage consumption within the system, the percentage of grazed pasture as total feed budget, weaning weights achieved, calves and calving intervals, we are assuming the highest level of management. In terms of reflecting best practice and what farmers are achieving, particularly in our demonstration herds and our research farm herds, we are certainly replicating that within the economic model.
Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank Dr. Crossan. Turning to Mr. Coughlan, the ICBF website specifies that the indexes are a monetary figure expressing the profitability of progeny. In the new indexes, we have seen the introduction of carbon and an increased emphasis on TB. Yet carbon has no effect or implication for the monetary value or profitability of an animal. What would Mr. Coughlan say in response to this point? Where has the carbon come from? I appreciate that nationally we are focused on the environment, but who said that carbon was to have a significant input, given that right now it has no implications whatsoever for the value or profitability of an animal?
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
That is a fair point. I will go back to Dr. Crossan on this aspect, if this is okay. Before I hand back to him, because breeding is such a slow process, in the context of the breeding decisions that are going to be made based on the new indexes, those heifers will be coming on the ground, the cows will be inseminated next spring and those heifers will probably calve in 2026 or 2027. To have any meaningful impact, therefore, we are looking out to 2030. This is part of what the indexes must do as well. They must breed the cow for the future. Returning to the point made earlier, we would be very much criticised, and rightly so, if in six years' time we arrived at that point and we have a cow that is not fit for purpose. People would be asking how we sleepwalked into being in this position and ended up with such a national population of suckler cows in 2030.
Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That Is still not answering what that carbon-----
Dr. Paul Crosson:
In terms of the carbon piece, it is important to remember that in terms of the overall relative emphasis, within the terminal index, 6% is due to carbon. In the replacement index, 10% is due to carbon, the carbon economic values. In other words, 90% is due to conventional economics. Regarding the economic values themselves, 13% of them are carbon. I do not want to bamboozle the Deputy with numbers, but just to give him an indication, the point is that approximately 90% of the total changes in economic values are non-carbon. That being said, carbon is important and Mr. Coughlan has outlined the rationale and the overall driver for this.
Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
If this was rolled out across animals, it is still going to affect only one in ten animals if it is 10%.
Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The crudest example is if I am looking at my herd, one in ten of my stock is going to get a very bad rating now on the basis of what is being applied for carbon, even though this is not what these indexes were set up to do. As the ICBF would say, these indexes are purely to reflect the profit value of progeny. Nowhere in the mandate or raison d'êtreof the ICBF, as a company, has anything to do with carbon.
Dr. Paul Crosson:
To go back to carbon and the economics of carbon, every animal will have a carbon cost associated with it. The three main parts are: the emissions generated by the animals themselves, the methane emissions the animals emit; the emissions associated with the feed production, the nitrogen lost as part of nitrous oxide as part of the food production process; and slurry management. The important thing to bear in mind is that we are looking at carbon in terms of a shadow carbon market and putting a value on this carbon. Equally, however, we-----
Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
We do not have any carbon market now.
Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
This simply should not be in this. If anyone were to go anywhere legally with this, then it would fall. This is nothing. The ICBF had no mandate to do what it has done with these indexes. It had absolutely no mandate. There is nothing within the company that says it could do this. It had no right to go and do this.
Dr. Paul Crosson:
To finish the point in terms of carbon economics, Mr. Coughlan has covered the future-proofing in terms of what might be merited in a carbon market, but that is not what I am talking about. I was referring to the situation where if we were to take the emissions the animal generates as part of the digestion of feed, about 5% to 10% of the energy the animal consumes is a loss of methane. It is, therefore, an economic loss within the system. I refer to the nitrous oxide emissions. The nitrogen lost as part of the nitrous oxide emissions is also an economic loss in the system. We can discuss the future-proofing aspect-----
Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I am conscious that my time is nearly up. The witnesses keep saying this is a cost to the system.
Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The ICBF's responsibility is not the system. Its responsibility is the profitability of progeny and of the farmers that produce them. The ICBF is doing something that is completely outside its remit. It has absolutely no responsibility for carbon within the herd in Ireland. None whatsoever.
Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I know. I am out of time and I am going to come back to this point. The ICBF is completely overreaching. This is not its area. I thank the Cathaoirleach.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Okay. I call Deputy Kerrane.
Claire Kerrane (Roscommon-Galway, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank the witnesses for coming in at short notice and for their opening statement. Before I go into my questions, it is important to say that I think a picture is being painted here that farmers are confused or do not understand, when, in fact, I think they understand very well. They understand very well even though this has been extremely badly handled up until this point. Unless something is done and changes are made from here on in, this is not going to go well.
The Irish Beef and Lamb Association held a meeting last Sunday, with several cattle societies and breeders present. The cattle societies have been very clear as to their reading of the change in the indexes and the impact it will have on farmers engaged in SCEP. I think it is important to put that on the record. The Irish Limousin Cattle Society has said it does not have confidence in the updated run of indexes. It believes it will have a detrimental impact on the breed and their breeders. The Irish Cattle Society has rejected the changes made and it is concerned about the process used to implement them. It has said no breeders or breed societies were given any input. The Irish Blonde Cattle Society has said the criteria to evaluate their breed is not fit for purpose and that all decision-making regarding their stock has been stripped from them. They have no faith in the ICBF as it stands. The Irish Simmental Cattle Society has said that the changes are greatly devaluing animals and leading to worries about farm viability. It has highlighted a number of apparent flaws in the new indexes and it is seeking independent auditing.
I spoke to one farmer who told me that he has, overnight, suffered a financial loss of more than €100,000. He has embryos that were worth €1,000 each but that are now worthless. He has had to tell his daughter that she cannot go to college. This is the impact of this change. It is not enough to come here and say there is an impact and that the ICBF acknowledges it. It must be willing to do something about it. It was said several times that in six or ten years' time it will be said that we sleepwalked suckler farmers into disaster. For the sake of a number of months, though, which is really nothing, I think it would be far better for the ICBF to pause what it has done, and I do not buy the thing that there would be confusion about this index and that index. The new index should be paused. The old index will not fall apart overnight. The stakeholder forum that the ICBF should have held several months ago should be held now. This process should be done right. The ICBF should bring the farmers with it. I say this because with carbon emissions, the environment or anything else, if you do not bring the farmers with you, then it is not going to work. This is the case right across agriculture, right across the board.
I ask the ICBF, as a board, to consider this point. For the sake of a very small amount of time, the world is not going to fall apart if there is a return to the old index and then undertake this change properly, as should have been done in the first place. I ask the ICBF, as a board, to consider doing this. I do not buy the argument that in six to ten years we will have sleepwalked into the situation mentioned. This change should be made now and got right, instead of continuing on as is. I think the word Mr. Coughlan used, in relation to "carnage", sums up very well what is being done here to farmers.
The opening statement referred to there being some confusion "Despite our best efforts to engage with representative groups ahead of the change". Can the witnesses, very briefly, tell us who, specifically, the ICBF engaged with ahead of the changes announced?
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
For example, the Deputy mentioned the breed societies. On 21 July, we had an extensive meeting with the representatives of the breed societies, where we went through all the changes. Dr. Crossan was at that meeting, as were Professor Donagh Berry and Dr. Ross Evans.
We had an extensive and robust meeting, with a lot of discussion. Minutes were circulated afterwards and a number of questions were outlined in those minutes, which were answered, but I did not hear anything after the meeting about it.
One of the challenges the ICBF has, and it is also one of the benefits it has, is that no breed society is going to sign off on or be happy about changes that are going to impact on the breed or some members of it. Our remit is the national suckler population, comprising 50,000-odd suckler cows and 850 suckler cows. That is the remit around taking those forward. On the point about carbon and climate, we have a very good story to tell. I was saying earlier we have managed to increase both our carcase rates and our confirmation rate from the suckler herd, and we have reduced the age at finishing by 100 days. That is a really positive story that is not being told in the context of the green and carbon credentials of this. Part of the challenge relates to the fact no breed society that is going to be impacted by this is going to agree. It is not possible for that to happen.
Claire Kerrane (Roscommon-Galway, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Given the importance of sustaining suckler farmers, did the ICBF engage with them on the changes before it made them?
Claire Kerrane (Roscommon-Galway, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Did the ICBF engage with suckler farmers, however, on the changes to the index?
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
The changes to the index are largely coming from the changes to the economic values. That is a matter of fact; it is nothing something somebody can just come up with. That is why we were real with the experts, through Dr. Crosson, in coming up with the economic values that are applied to the indexes. Those figures come from the CSO and research. It is not a matter opinion, fortunately.
Claire Kerrane (Roscommon-Galway, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Yes, but my question is whether the ICBF engaged with suckler farmers before it made the changes. Mr. Coughlan referred to the ICBF’s “best efforts to engage with representative groups”. To me, an important representative group are suckler farmers.
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
We had a focus group, which met the day before that herd book technical meeting, that had a broad range of industry representatives, including suckler farmers, regarding how we would best communicate that. Obviously, that plan did not work and I acknowledge that. Deputy Flaherty talked about releasing the top 100 bulls. It is not any major surprise to suckler farmers that input costs have risen. Every suckler farmer knows feed costs, fertiliser costs and contracting costs have risen. When we have spoken to suckler farmers, it was no great surprise the economic values associated with that would need to be updated. That then puts a knock-on cost on fertility, the age of first calving and the age of finishing, the longer those animals are out there. If we continue as a suckler population to have 0.8 or 0.85 calves per cow per year, such that we are getting only 85 calves for every 100 suckler cows in a given year, we are going to continue to struggle, and that is why the economic emphasis has changed.
Claire Kerrane (Roscommon-Galway, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The ICBF has put an emphasis on communication but, really, that is only a small part of it. Whichever way it is communicated, the message is the same. Farmers signed up to SCEP in good faith. Mr. Coughlan stated the input costs have risen. Suckler farmers need a scheme more than ever and they need one that pays them and treats them right. They signed up in good faith and the rug has been pulled from under them. The goalposts have changed and, from reading Mr. Coughlan's opening statement, it is highly likely they will change again. He spoke about future-proofing. How can any farmer sign up in good faith and then have the rug pulled from under them? Mr. Coughlan has acknowledged that issue but it does not seem as though anything is going to be done about it. Whatever way the message is communicated, it is the same, and farmers feel very aggrieved about that.
My time is short, so I will move to questions on the ICBF board. How are board members appointed? Are minutes kept of meetings held with stakeholders? How is it determined how many board members each representative organisation gets to have? How many members of the board have a suckler or beef background?
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
The make-up of the board and its representation goes back to when the ICBF was set up in 1998 and the constitution of the organisation. As the chairman outlined, there are six members from the farm organisations, three from the AI companies, three from the milk recording organisations, three from the breed societies and one from the Department of agriculture. There are 16 in total.
We constantly meet stakeholders. I hold a quarterly meeting with the pedigree breed societies, known as the herd book technical meeting-----
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The question was whether the ICBF keeps minutes of those meetings.
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
We meet stakeholders regularly. Specifically, there are minutes of the technical meetings with the pedigree breed societies, which I send out myself. The minutes, for example, of the meeting we had on 21 July were sent out on Monday, 14 August. We do hold minutes of those technical meetings. In fairness, I get feedback reasonably regularly as to updates that might need to be made to those minutes, and we make those updates.
Claire Kerrane (Roscommon-Galway, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
How are people appointed to the board? That is important.
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
The breed societies, for example, have three seats, so they meet as a group and it is up to that group to decide among themselves. I am not completely familiar with, for example, the breed societies as to how they choose whom to appoint. The representative organisations that have those groups of seats make the appointments themselves.
Claire Kerrane (Roscommon-Galway, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
How is it determined how many seats each organisation gets?
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I recall a right good row over that too.
Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank the witnesses for coming in at such short notice. I have received a few statements from farmers. As the ICBF representatives admitted, there was a major breakdown in communication with farmers, and we are getting a lot of emails and so forth on this. One farmer gave one example of their cows. In September of this year, they stated, she was a €133 replacement, 1-star index, at 53% reliability, whereas in November, she had become a €61 replacement, 5-star index, at 53% reliability. They wrote that they did not accept that animals can change from being in the top 20% to the bottom 20% just from the model of index formulations having changed.
Another farmer wrote that they use their herd’s AI bull, selected by the ICBF under the ICBF Gene Ireland breeding programme, to breed replacement females. He was one of the three elite Limousin bulls selected by the ICBF just a year ago to breed replacements. In September of this year, the farmer continues, he was a 5-star replacement bull at €135, whereas in November, he had become a 3-star replacement index at €84. None of his daughters will be eligible cows for the farmer in the scheme as qualifying females, given to be eligible they must be either 4- or 5-star replacements. Still another said they were not aware, nor was any other farmer, of the changes in the Euro-Star indexes when they signed up to the SCEP schemes, and that they will be penalised for not reaching their targets. That is some of the impact this is having on the farming community.
Obviously, index and breeding values are dependent on science. Why was the methane data from the ICBF test station in Tullow not included in the index composition? Was a financial statement produced on the changes the new indexes would have on the average farm? Feed conversion efficiency is what delivers profit in farming.
How much feed does it take to gain a kilo of carcase gain? Why is feed conversion efficiency not included in the indices? Finally, how can a breed of cattle such as Dexter be of a higher breeding value than the Charolais breed?
Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Did that cost taxpayers €3 million or so?
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
It is world-leading research. The critical point to remember on that methane data is that it is gathered on an indoor system for the finishing period. It is critical that we actually get the life cycle. We need to know what the methane data is on the growing animals, on the cow at grass and on the lactating cow, so we need to have the full picture before the methane data will come in there. In regard to the impact I will let Dr. Crosson deal with that question in terms of the impact of the financials because that is what the model actually does. In regard to the feed conversion efficiency, that is included in the index. The critical point is that there are two components, the input component which is the feed intake, namely, how much does an animal eat, and then the output in terms of how much carcase does that animal produce. They are the two. That is where the feed intake is. We are not measuring feed intake in terms of live weight gain. We are measuring feeding intake in terms of the output of carbons. I will pass over to my colleague on the financial impact.
Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
In regard to the average figure, we are all talking about this 20% and 30%, but actually on an average farm what does it mean? What is the price or the cost on the actual farm.
Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
And what about the Dexter issue?
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
I already mentioned that the Dexter is a niche breed, a native breed with a very specific purpose. Anybody that is engaging in a discussion about comparing Dexters and Charolais is not serious about having a discussion about the direction of the national suckler herd. I am not going to diminish the role the Dexters have to play in a small niche but if we are serious about the national herd, the breed profile of the national herd has not changed over the past 15 years. We have had good solid data on the national herd since 2008 and in that timeframe, the Charolais and the Limousin had 51.3% in 2008 and 51.5% now. That has not really changed. The percentage of Angus and Hereford has not changed, in fact if anything it has dropped a small bit. If we are serious about moving the dial on the national herd and improving the profitability, we are working with the main breeds that are part of it because largely as I said earlier, people going out to buy or breed animals are going to choose the breed first and then work with the animals within that breed. That is the psychology of farmers.
Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
There has been a good deal of talk about economic value but at the end of the day we all know that the farmers are at the mercy of the big producers and the factories. No matter what they do or do not do. That is the fact. You can prove you can make money but they all rely on the prices that those people charge.
Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is Mr. Coughlan going to consider going back to the board and asking it to revise the decision? As you can see, the impact it is having is-----
Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That is a fact of life.
Mr. Michael Doran:
We actually held a special board meeting after the request came to delay it for six months. I spoke to a number of farmers before we actually had the board meeting, in order to get their views. We had not released the index changes at that stage. The view they expressed is that they would prefer to know the information now than to wait for six months because if they wait another six months they will have bred another cohort of cows and are only delaying the changes that are going to happen. They would prefer to know now so that there is time to see it. If the changes and the recommendation of the changes are bringing in a better direction, they would like to implement that sooner rather than later. The board discussed it. Views were expressed but the decision the board took was, actually we delayed it by a week to allow a little bit more engagement with people in that week, but the decision was to actually have the indexes out there so that people could actually see it and see what the implications are for themselves. There was a vacuum and much debate about where it might actually bring us. However, the bottom line was that 84% of animals that are in SCEP still will be SCEP-qualified in 2025. The changes are small but for those that the changes affect, we acknowledge it is a big impact for those. We want to engage with them and try to see whether we can put something in place to help them to meet it. As I already said, we have engaged with the Department of agriculture for those who have made breeding decisions already, to see whether there any flexibility or any way we can actually help to address those people that are caught.
Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
It is just that 16% is an awful lot. I do not like us to start talking in terms of percentages because these are actual people.
Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
They are not statistics.
Mr. Michael Doran:
I agree and the challenge we have is to actually try to engage with and work with those to try to help. I was before this committee seven or eight years ago at the start of the beef data genomics programme, BDGP. There were similar concerns that the direction that the BDGP was going to remove the suckler herd. At that stage we were looking at it and the people who were going to be negatively affected. By working with people and trying to work towards it, that scheme actually had a clawback. If a person did not meet the criteria he or she actually had money clawed back from him or her. One thing that has happened in relation to this scheme is that by farm organisations lobbying the Department of agriculture, that clawback is no longer in place. Therefore if a person is short it does not mean previous money he was paid will be clawed back. He might only miss an element of a payment.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
They did not sign up to take risks.
Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
There is not a clawback. Were the emissions the main driver?
Dr. Paul Crosson:
Emissions are about 10% of the total in the economic values. While I have the opportunity I said €362 per hectare. I should have said per cow calving. That is the margin per cow calving. It is €492 per hectare. I want to correct that singular point. It is predominantly around economic value, price changes.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
We are two hours into the committee meeting. I am obliged to ask people whether they are happy to continue or do they want a break?
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
We will sit until 12.30 p.m.
Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank the Cathaoirleach. I thank the witnesses for making themselves available on foot of the representations we all have had in regard to the issues and the difficulties that have arisen as a result of the amendments the witnesses are seeking to make or believe they have made. The were a party, obviously, to the initial design, maintenance and ongoing implementation of SCEP. I appreciate and understand their role in monitoring the scheme correlating information and statistics and measuring cost implications, value and profitability with an eye to worldwide transition to low carbon emission in produce. That is a role they have too. They say the measurement is only 10% but I would venture it may be more of a thinking behind their input. To get to the nub of this issue, the revision of stars after the scheme has begun in my opinion is highly unprofessional. I am being quite honest and blunt about that. It is okay to highlight changes and the alterations to a new or a further scheme that might follow this. That would be appropriate. However, changing terms and conditions of a contract is not best practice. I do not believe think it would be tolerated in many other aspects of business life in this country. Carbon economics is fine.
The old issue of food production, feed production and slurry management, genomics, which is an ongoing project and process, and the big issue relates to the merits of dairy beef. That has potential and may assist suckler farmers and the beef sector. It may address the live calf exports conundrum. It may assist, maintain and enhance our dairy produce and its worldwide reputation as well. The general move is to try and align production systems with environmental ambition and consumer sentiment. That is a new and ongoing chapter in how farm families are funded and assisted with the transition. The provision of an Ireland fund, a climate fund, and COP28 this week, all point to transition in this area. It will take investment by the Government and the EU to front-load a lot of the costs and the fall in profitability in the short term but it is an investment that is worth making because it will safeguard, maintain and further enhance our products worldwide both in the dairy sector and in the beef sector. I do not think that can be imposed in the way in which the system may seek to do at this juncture. Those who have signed up to this in the best of good faith and with the best of intentions in regard to other matters on their farms are making efforts in regard to carbon emissions and so forth. Many of us feel the role they have silently played on this before it became the live issue it is today, has not been honoured.
I appreciate and acknowledge what the witnesses are at. I can see the merit in what they are saying but, as Senator Paul Daly said, that is another day's work. That is another contract that has to be entered into by the State and by producers to get the alignment that we all want to see that protects and enhances our products into the future. That is going to cost money, whatever Government is in place. The provisions have been made through the future Ireland fund and the climate fund by virtue of the receipts we have had from corporate tax. That investment can be made but it is a new contract. This contract and this scheme does not deserve the cull that has taken place mid-stream.
The views of members of this committee from all parties and none are unanimous. It is that the Department and the Minister would be told in no uncertain terms. Commitments were made that are not being honoured. Commitments were made on ACRES. I refer to commitments that were made subsequently to banks and creditors. To be let down in such a way on an environmental scheme does not assist us all in our efforts to do this transition in a way in which we can come out of it better than we went into it. The great cost involved must be borne by the State as an investment and it should not be a burden on current producers who are not equipped with the tools to make the transition properly or effectively.
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
We have acknowledged that any farmer that has acted in good faith should not suffer any consequence from a SCEP point of view. They are two separate issues. When we are talking about the direction of the national herd and the challenges that breeding faces on a global basis with the efficiency of the beef cow, it is not an Irish phenomenon; it is the same all over the world. How can we continue to have a more efficient beef cow?
The carbon piece does not have to be all bad news from a farmer's perspective. I am not sure if the Deputy was here earlier but over the past 15 years or so the average carcass weight of a finished suckler animal in the factory has risen by 15 kg. The average conformation of the finished suckler animal in the factory has risen by about half a conformation score. We have managed to get those animals finished in 100 fewer days than was required to finish them ten years ago.
Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I appreciate that.
Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
As I mentioned, there might be another solution to that.
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
What I would argue is that, as Dr. Crossan alluded to, in some ways the more efficient carbon animals are also the better and more profitable animals. We need to make sure that we do not lose that benefit. I agree completely with Deputy Cowen that a top-up needs to be funded from somewhere else to compensate for the reduction in output and income due to carbon.
Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
But it will come right.
Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
With all due respect, not in the information that Mr. Coughlan collated, presented, and that stands up scientifically.
Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
It is against the backdrop of a commitment being made by the Department, through this scheme, and the farmer for a lifetime, with information emanating from it that would determine the terms and conditions of a future scheme. As I said, whether one likes it, one cannot draw up a contract and change it mid-stream.
Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I agree with the information Mr. Coughlan mentioned, but that is for another day's work and another fund needs to be put in place, and huge investment must be made to subvent the changes that will cost farmers initially but will benefit both them and the State thereafter.
Eugene Murphy (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The witnesses are welcome. I am not saying I agree with everything that has been said. A lot of farmers will disagree with everything. There are certainly issues and problems here.
Councillor Gerry Finnerty was referenced by two members. I read an article in the Connacht Tribune. This is a very experienced man. He is a farmer and auctioneer, and he knows the scene very well. He said the actions of the ICBF would effectively "finish off" the various cattle breeding societies, which down through the years have done invaluable work in improving the quality of pedigree livestock.
I know Mr. Doran is into farming but I do not know if Dr. Crossan or Mr. Coughlan are. If I were to ask Mr. Doran, who is on the ground, what topic has come up most in the past 15 to 20 years among farmers if he met them at the mart or out socially for a drink and they were talking farming, it is the quality of animals. Farmer after farmer will say that the day of producing scrub cattle or bad cattle is gone. I make that point in this context. We cannot leave experienced people like that on the sideline because that is what has happened here.
I do not want to be disrespectful to Mr. Coughlan but I do not think he answered Deputy Kerrane's question totally honestly. The ICBF did not engage properly with the suckler farmer. I am not saying he gave a dishonest answer but he did not give her a straight answer.
I will ask him a few quick questions. I would like his assessment of the Carrick-on-Shannon meeting. I put my hands up; I was not at it. Could he give me an honest answer based on his own assessment after coming out from that meeting? What did he think of the meeting last week?
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
It was a very fractious meeting with a lot of upset people in the room. That is it. My colleagues and I who were at the top table took the full brunt of that. That is fair enough. That was not a surprise. I did not go up there to get a clap on the back. I knew what was coming. That is part of taking our medicine for having suboptimal communication to this point.
Eugene Murphy (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The reason I put the question is that I have had representations in recent months about this matter and the difficulties that were arising for farmers and I had a multitude of calls after that meeting. People were not robustly attacking the ICBF but they said they did not get satisfactory answers. Other members were right when they referred to the issue. I would not use the term "mental health", but there is anxiety among farmers about the income they are losing and going to lose.
We will park that there. How many of our guests have been at the launch of an agricultural show in recent years? Okay. What is the one thing that stands out in that regard? I am PRO of Strokestown agricultural show, which is one of the strongest shows in the country, as my colleagues from Roscommon or Galway will know. I do not know whether Deputy Cowen was ever at it, but he is welcome next year. I am very much involved in supporting shows such as those in Castlerea, Roscommon and many other locations. What is the major ingredient when the show is launched a couple of weeks prior to the event taking place?
Eugene Murphy (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
It is the show cattle and the societies.
Eugene Murphy (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Member after member is asking the ICBF to go back to the table. Mr. Coughlan is very robust in what he is saying. I will give him a bit of advice. He is far more experienced than I am. I am an ordinary humble human being. One should often take the advice of an ordinary humble human being, however. My advice is to go back to the table on this. If the ICBF does not take into account the show societies here, it is going to wreck every agricultural show in Ireland. They are a major part of rural Ireland. The breeders societies put a significant amount into the shows. Hundreds of people turn out to those shows to look at the quality of the animal. That is a fact; Mr. Coughlan will not deny it. We see the best production of cattle anywhere in the world. Mr. Coughlan was correct when he said the ICBF has the remit for the suckler beef scheme. It has the remit, but what is its remit? The witnesses can correct me if I am wrong. Its remit is to have a slimmed-down suckler beef section. That is the remit it is coming from, and it is not going to work. I ask Mr. Coughlan to take into account the damage this will do to agricultural shows throughout the country, which are such an important part of rural life.
A matter that has not yet been mentioned is the value of agricultural exports. Last year, they accounted for €19.5 billion, with 150,000 in the agricultural business. There was reference to changes all over the world. We all know environmental changes have to be made but changes to agriculture in other parts of the world might be different from changes in Ireland because we can produce the class product. That is a fact known throughout the world. I ask Mr. Coughlan to respond on those points.
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
In the most respectful terms, I absolutely refute any suggestion that there is an agenda here about slimming down or reducing the numbers of sucklers. We are desperately trying to hang on to what we have. At the moment, suckler farmers are voting with their feet in terms of getting out because it is economically challenging. Part of the challenge is that suckler farmers, with all due respect to them, are being hit from all sides at the moment. We happen to be the lightning rod for that. Fair enough, the indexes are, but there is lots more coming at it as well.
The show sector is an incredibly important part of the fabric of rural Ireland throughout the summer. It keeps positivity around farming, gets young people interested in agriculture and puts a positive message on it. The breed societies play a critical role in that. In terms of the future of the suckler herd, more than 80% of the herd are still breeding from stock bulls and the breed societies will continue to play a critical role in that. I have mentioned a couple of times - members have been in and out of the meeting, so I am not sure who was here and who was not - that the breed profile of the national suckler herd will not change very much. Approximately 70% of the national suckler herd is of the continental breeds. That will remain the same. Where will they source the stock bulls for those herds? They will source them from the pedigree breeders who are involved in the breed societies. I am clear as to the positive. There are some magnificent animals presented at these shows. They tend to be terminal in nature, even the females. They are really heavy and muscled animals. That is not always going to be reflected in the index. The big muscled animal is not necessarily going to get the full reflection in the index because, as Dr. Crossan stated, we have to take account of fertility, calving and all the other matters. I hope I have answered the Senator's questions.
Eugene Murphy (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I will be very fair and take on board what Mr. Coughlan has said. I accept he is being sincere. That is important. I will make a final point. We are all worried about farming, where it is going and the role of young people. I am sure the witnesses have noticed the number of young people - brothers and sisters, young couples and friends - who have got together and are producing wonderful animals. They are all over the place. One of the most positive things in Irish farming at the moment is the number of young people who are producing. They are proud of what they are doing and they are heavily involved in it. It is good for their lives. I am talking about people of 17, 18, 19 or 20 years of age. It is incredible to watch them. We should be bringing those people with us as part of our discussions. They are proud of what they do. There are fantastic shows going on throughout the country and the involvement of young people in them is highly significant and very positive for the agricultural sector going forward.
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
If I may briefly respond, I completely agree with what the Senator is saying. I was probably a bit of a let-down for the audience in Carrick-on-Shannon after the festival that was on that weekend. It was fantastic to see the young people at festival.
The Senator referred to the quality animals we are exporting and the export weanlings. In 2022, we exported approximately 28,000 weanlings. Of them, approximately 16% were 1-star animals, while approximately 24% were from 5-star cows. To have a better chance of breeding an animal that is fit for export - they tend to be what people generally consider to be the better quality weanlings - one is better off using a 5-star cow. I stand to be corrected but my understanding is that the Belgian Blue heifer that made the €21,500 in Carrick was out of a 5-star cow.
Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I acknowledge the witnesses. I apologise for stepping out of the meeting; I had to do something in the Chamber. Mr. Coughlan and I have had our disagreements through the years. When the ICBF relocated from Bandon to Cork city, I was critical of the organisation for doing so. We had discussions on that issue. I still think that, given the nature of the industry, it was inappropriate for the ICBF to relocate from Bandon, a rural town in west Cork, to Ballincollig in Cork city centre, but that has to be acknowledged.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The Senator should stick to the beef industry.
Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I will, indeed. As much as I criticise the ICBF, I compliment it on the new index regarding the health issue Mr. Coughlan spoke about earlier. I ask him to elaborate on the TB element. I know Deputy Fitzmaurice might have issues in that regard. We will discuss the TB element later on. It is not directly part of this but how does it tie into the issue regarding what is being proposed with the change in the merit?
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
In recent years, a significant amount of research has been done in respect of taking TB data. If we have TB data from the reactor database, we know the contemporaries within those herds and the grouping within those herds, and we have the ancestry, we can establish that a percentage of the resistance to TB is genetic in nature. Much of it is down to management. I do not want to get too technical but the heritability is approximately 14%. What we are seeing is that approximately 14% of the variability in terms of the animals that do or do not get TB is related to genetics. That means 86% of it does not relate to genetics but, rather, to where the animals are located, their exposure to the virus and so on. There is a strong heritability, however. On the TB battle, the feeling is that we need to take every possible avenue. Even if it can just nudge it in a very small way, farmers will take that. The current TB is at approximately 2% to 3% on the new index. It will not have a dramatic impact in terms of the index. There is a narrative which the point raised by the Senator brings up. A farmer in Carrick-on-Shannon told me there was TB in their herd last year.
The assertion was made that that was the reason their indexes had fallen. That is certainly not the case. There is no difference in that regard. Getting TB in your herd will not have an impact on the star ratings of the animals. We find biologically that animals that tend to be resistant to one disease tend to be resistant to other diseases. They just tend to be more resilient animals.
Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Regarding the SCEP scheme and how this could have an impact on it, what changes does Mr. Coughlan think the Department should make, with the help of the ICBF, to make sure that we can get as many people as possible to qualify for it or to alleviate the pain? What practical changes could be proposed to help alleviate the pain for farmers?
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
To be clear, the terms and conditions of the scheme are strictly a matter for the Department. I would take more of a principled outlook that anybody who has acted in good faith, if they have cows in calf and so on, should not be unreasonably impacted. Taking that as a principle is a good place to work from.
Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Mr. Coughlan might elaborate on his organisation. It is owned by private entities and is not accountable to this committee in many ways. Would that be fair?
Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Even though it has a member on the board, the Department does not actually have-----
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
It does not have any shares in the organisation. It does not have ownership of the organisation. We are not a State entity. We are unique globally in that regard. Our genetic evaluation functions, in the 1980s and 1990s, would have been done by the Department of agriculture on both the dairy and beef sides. When the ICBF was set up in 1998, the Department transferred responsibilities for genetic evaluations to the ICBF. That meant the performance test centre was transferred too.
Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That is an unusual arrangement globally. My view is that the ICBF is acting as a hand of the Department without any principal legislation having been put in place to govern it. Is that a fair point?
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
We are licensed by the Department. There is an EU requirement that an entity of the Department or somebody needs to be licensed to do that. The important point there is that most genetic evaluations globally are carried out by the organisations that have a commercial interest in the animals they are evaluating. I am not sure if the Senator was here earlier when I was discussing that. That is an important point. In the US or New Zealand, the entities that are evaluating the animals have a commercial interest in the animals and whether they rise or fall. If they drop the index on an animal, it will have a commercial impact. The ICBF has a different structure. We do not have that commercial interest in the animal. While it is patently not easy to make the changes, it is easier to-----
Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
What I am trying to get is that, legally, the ICBF makes a recommendation, with Teagasc, regarding the index itself. It does not fall under the Department. Where does this-----
Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The Department basically licenses the ICBF to do this work.
Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
It is not, however, a semi-State board.
Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
It is very unusual.
Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Regarding the membership of the board, I realised when I read the list that it has only two female members. Is Mr. Coughlan happy with that?
Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
With new European legislation coming in, probably next year, to make sure there is over 30% representation of a gender, has the ICBF discussed how it will deal with that issue?
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
To be fair to the lads, we are not here to talk about the composition of the ICBF board but about the indexes.
Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank the Chair. Mr. Coughlan has been saved.
Aisling Dolan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank the Chair for giving me the time to speak and to the Irish Cattle Breeding Federation, which is before us. We are speaking about the impact on suckler farmers and farming families of the recent beef Euro-Star index changes. I will ask Mr. Coughlan a question that relates to his role as chief executive of the organisation. He referred to suboptimal communications. Would he accept that there has been a failure in communications about these recent changes, one which has impacted the livelihoods of the farmers I represent in Roscommon and Galway?
Aisling Dolan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That failure, which Mr. Coughlan has just admitted, has impacted on the livelihoods of farmers and farming families.
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
I would beg to differ on that. The failure of communication has meant that there is much anxiety and worry among farmers, many of whom will not be negatively impacted, but that has not stopped them from being worried. Some 84% of the animals that were 4- and 5-star previously will be 4- and 5-star going forward. Some 82% of the herds already have enough animals to qualify for the next stage of the scheme. Fair enough, not all of those animals will still be in those herds. Regarding the concern and fear, there are some herds and pedigree breeders that are impacted, which is a challenge.
Aisling Dolan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
As Mr. Coughlan said, they amount to 16% of herds. As he mentioned, animals that stay within the herd of course keep their rating. What is the likelihood of that? Many farming families will need to sell cattle on. Once they do that, the star rating changes. Is that correct?
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
If those cattle are put in a ring in a mart, what will their star rating be?
Aisling Dolan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I come from a family where we grew up as suckler farmers. We kept cattle for a short time and they went to the mart. If we did not make a sale, it had a huge impact on our family's income as small farmers.
Aisling Dolan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I ask Mr. Coughlan again about the impact in the failure in communication on the livelihoods of farmers who now need to sell cattle and go to the mart, with the cattle's star rating having now dropped. They were not aware of that. Does the failure in communication not indicate that it has an impact on the livelihoods of farmers?
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
The point I would make is that there are two people who are part of the transaction. This is also part of what we have to realise. That person is going to the mart and selling that cow but other commercial farmers are equally dependent on buying the right type of animal to make their living. They are entitled to know what the rating of the animal is.
Aisling Dolan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The ICBF is a large enterprise with close to 80 employees. It has agri-advisers. How many locations does it have across the country?
Aisling Dolan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Does the ICBF have any liaison officers who work with farmers?
Aisling Dolan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Teagasc does it on the ICBF's behalf.
Aisling Dolan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is Teagasc represented on the board?
Aisling Dolan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
How is Teagasc engaged with? Is Teagasc the communication arm?
Aisling Dolan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Again, on communications with farmers, Mr. Coughlan has indicated that there are certain liaisons within the ICBF. Who are they? What role is played by Teagasc? If Teagasc is not on the board and no Teagasc people are employed by the ICBF then where is the communication with farmers?
Aisling Dolan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I understand that.
Aisling Dolan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I know that Dr. Crosson's specialty is beef enterprise.
Aisling Dolan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is Dr. Crosson an economist by background?
Aisling Dolan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is Dr. Crosson a statistician?
Dr. Paul Crosson:
My Ph.D was on developing a farm systems model, so the economics of beef cattle production. It is developing economic models and looking at their effect at farm level. It is farm systems evaluation. In the last ten years or so more of that is life-cycle assessment. I look at the environmental impacts of farm systems and couple that with economics, which is where that interacts with this piece of work.
The research piece is the front end where we work with Mr. Coughlan and the team to develop economic values, provide them with that information and then that information becomes part of the beef indexes and, indeed, the dairy index, sheep index and so on. The work is across species and other indexes.
Aisling Dolan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I worked in the SFI and research centres so I very much understand the importance of research integrity.
Aisling Dolan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I also understand the lack of communication sometimes from a scientific-specific perspective-----
Aisling Dolan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
-----with people on the ground. What we are discussing here is a prime example of the lack of communication on research that Teagasc conducted. It was decided to announce that, which has led to a huge impact on farmers. I want to again ask about the lack of communication and the structures that have been set up. Out of the 80 employees employed there are no agri-advisers as such and the ICBF works with Teagasc in order to work with farmers. I know that your specialty is economic indexes and statistics. Is there an economist on the board or employed within the ICBF?
Aisling Dolan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
How is the economic indexes done?
Aisling Dolan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Teagasc is an agricultural research body so what business enterprises or universities does ICBF work with? Where is the background and expertise in economic indexes, which is what has been used to determine the indices here? On what is the ICBF reliant on? Does the ICBF rely on Teagasc? Teagasc is an agricultural research body, not an economic research body.
Aisling Dolan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I apologise I was not.
Dr. Paul Crosson:
The model is used in Norway, Scotland, Uruguay and Brazil. I outlined this earlier when I outlined the background of the model.
On the question about knowledge transfer and engagement, Teagasc has a research remit and a knowledge transfer or KT directorate. Within the knowledge transfer directorate we have both an education department and an advisory department. Within the advisory department the country is separated into 12 regions. Although this is not my part of the organisation I can say that we have approximately 50 offices around those 12 regions and we have beef advisers in each of those offices.
Aisling Dolan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is that within Teagasc?
Aisling Dolan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The communication structures within the ICBF is not fit for purpose from what I see here in terms of impact. Again, it has been noted that this is an issue here for you as well. I am also concerned about the economics and qualifications in terms of the board.
I take on board the point Senator Lombard made about female representation on the board. The issue has not solely to do with farming organisations, which nominates people. There is also AI and I am sure that there are a lot of female scientists who work in this area. I know through my knowledge of Mountbellew Agricultural College that there are a lot of very excellent people in research working in this space so I do not accept that argument either and I am just highlighting that.
Aisling Dolan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I will let Mr. Coughlan back in, if there is time, but I will first ask another question.
Mr. Coughlan mentioned the scientific advisory group and the board. Is there a scientific advisory group and a technical advisory group? I apologise if my question was answered earlier. Is there cross over? How are conflicts of interest managed within the organisation?
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
We are not here today to discuss that matter and I stopped Senator Lombard earlier.
Aisling Dolan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I suggest Mr. Coughlan writes to us with his reply.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
We invited the delegations to discuss the beef indices.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The composition of the ICBF board can be a matter for discussion on another day.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Please may we have the answers to the questions on the beef indexes.
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
The technical advisory committee, TAC, is the independent subcommittee. Possibly, what the committee heard earlier was that we have herdbook technical meetings, which are engagements that we have with the breed societies once a quarter to update them on the technical developments that are happening.
Aisling Dolan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank the Cathaoirleach.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I have two speakers who wish to contribute for the first time and they are Deputies Cathal Crowe and Seán Canney. I also have three members who have indicated a wish to speak for a second time. I will give them five minutes each, which will take up the full quota of our time. Deputy Fitzmaurice must leave to attend Leaders' Questions, so I will give him the first five minutes and then it will be Deputies Crowe and Canney after that.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Percentage kill-out is not taken into account. Is that correct?
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is it taken into account?
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That is good to know because we get a lot of questions on the matter.
Explain this. I was looking through some of the stuff and Kealkil Prime Lad is in the top 1% age of slaughter. He is a no grade - 293 kg at 691 days. Then there is a bull in the bottom 1% who is 102 kg more at kill-out at 676 days. How would that be if you were looking at better cattle?
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Just quickly.
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
The bottom line is this. Take the particular bull the Deputy mentioned, and he has been coming up, he is a trait improver in the Angus breed for seven out of the ten traits in the terminal index and 13 of the 17 traits in the replacement index, including being on top of the breed for calving difficulty, gestation, age at slaughter, carcass confirmation, daughter milk and daughter fertility. The critical thing there is that if there was a cow, say an Angus, that was extremely good on carcass and might be lacking on some of the other traits, this bull might have a role to play because he will improve the fertility, age at slaughter, the calving difficulty and the milk. He is trait leader on a lot of traits and bad on the carcass traits. There will be other bulls on that list who will be really good on carcass traits and poor on the others. That is the whole idea of the model and I discussed that in the opening statement.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Tomschoice Lexicon was the bull.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Okay.
I have another question and we have received phone calls on this. There are a lot of farmers with 50, 60 or 80 cows and one bull. They bought the bull in the last year. They have complied with BDGP and SCEP. They have run it to the letter of the law. They are now left in a situation where cows were brought down and the bull may have come down to two stars. The heifer is off then. This is an enclosed herd because many of these farmers are trying to keep TB out. Every one of them I spoke to this morning is in trouble in coming back up. Would the witnesses support us, as a committee, going to the Department to ask it to allow those heifers to be brought into play to comply with the scheme until the end of 2027? The witnesses talk about 2025 but it is a five-year scheme. Would they support this committee? Would they do that too? If we keep going down the road we are going down with people who have followed it to the letter of the law from BDGP, SCEP and so on, many of those farmers will not comply at the end. I know the witnesses will give the figure of 75 but some cows will not going into calf, some of them will be older, some of them will get hurt or whatever. All these problems happen; that is the reality in farming. It will end up that those farmers will never comply with another scheme on the figures they have, when they are an enclosed herd and when they are tight like that.
Second, what do the witnesses say to the breeders? I know a young lad who is in Australia at the moment who put all his money into breeding Limousin bulls. This is a young lad from Castlerea. He is devastated today because the whole job has turned upside down on him. His bulls are gone from 4 and 5 stars down to 2 stars and 3 stars. What is the solution to help the likes of those people? Simental also got a good rattling. What is the solution for helping those people out? I read that no farmer would be financially impacted. Those were the words it used.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I will get it for you. Do not worry; I will send it to you. There are farmers between the suckler side and the breeding side. This is the nub of the issue. How are we going to help them get through this with a bull that could have been worth €6,000 but is now worth €2,000? It depends on what they are worth for killing. What is the solution for that?
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Sorry.
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
We are not a lobby organisation. That is the first thing. Having said that, the critical thing, as I said earlier, is that I do not want to see any farmer who has acted in good faith negatively impacted. That is an underlying principle and I would take that as a given. I accept some of the bull breeders are impacted. It is important to bear in mind the number of pedigree bulls going to SCEP compared to non-SCEP. The 2022 figures show about 40% went to SCEP and 60% went to non-SCEP.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Whether SCEP or non-SCEP, everyone now is looking at the sheet. Would Mr. Coughlan agree?
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
It is negative for those who have been reduced.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The fact is that if you have a bunch of pedigree bulls to sell and their star rating has gone down their commercial value has dropped.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
There are two parties in SCEP but an outside party has destroyed those in SCEP with the figures. Does Mr. Coughlan understand me? It is not the fault of the farmer. That is what I am trying to say.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Okay. I thank the Chair.
Cathal Crowe (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I welcome the people from ICBF. We have to declare if we have an interest here. I am a suckler farmer. I foddered 26 Shorthorn and Herefords before I came here this morning. Many of us have skin in the game and it is important to say that.
This has been devastating to farmers but I want to go back to the politics of it. We are politicians first and foremost. If I have counted correctly, there are 18 members on ICBF. The IFA holds four board positions, ICMSA two, there are two from the Department and the balance is made up by breeders. How did they allow this to go through? What were the mechanics of this decision? Did they rubber stamp it? Was there a vote on it? How did it get through in November?
Cathal Crowe (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Did the board vote on this?
Cathal Crowe (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Was there consensus?
Cathal Crowe (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I am an IFA member. Every email I have received over the last few days has been from IFA, ICMSA and breeding society members. They are wondering what the hell happened in that board room that it agreed a scheme that has decimated the breeding index.
Mr. Michael Doran:
There were questions today on the representation, the board structure and things like that. People putting their names down and being appointed to the board have to take the remit of what our board is. It is about maximising genetic gain for the national herd. As part of corporate governance and the board's strategy, the board signs off on that strategy, and every board member has a role to play in relation to that. People have questioned my own point of view from the perspective that I am now milking cows but I spent 20 years suckler farming. I was a former national livestock chairman in the IFA. I have sat on various things, including the meat and livestock board; I have chaired a Teagasc beef stakeholder forum; I was on the EU beef advisory; and I was on the meat and livestock committee. I have as much experience as many people when it comes to sucklers and an understanding of it.
The thing that is fundamental from my perspective is that ICBF remains independent in relation to the evaluations provided. There is no vested interest in relation to the outcome of those. The structure of ICBF is what has our-----
Cathal Crowe (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Can I ask one very important question as to how this decision came about? There are four IFA members, two members from the ICMSA, the breeders, and a lady from the Department who is secretary to the committee. We do not need to know about the other meetings but before the IFA members went into that meeting, which has been so important and had such an impact on farmers, did they get a position paper from the IFA to represent it? In that moment, were they acting independently as ICBF members or are they IFA men in that room?
Mr. Michael Doran:
As anyone who sits on a board knows, your responsibility when you sit on that board, as part of corporate governance, is to do what is right for the organisation and board on which you are sitting. That is what your remit is and that is what we have been advised regarding corporate governance.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Anything else would be illegal.
Cathal Crowe (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I will move on. I have a question for Dr. Crosson. Who requested Teagasc to develop a new algorithm for calculating the indexes?
Dr. Paul Crosson:
I thank Deputy Crowe for the question. He was not in the room earlier. The algorithm has not changed. I think Deputy Mythen asked this previously. It is the same algorithm that was initially used in 2012. We used it again in 2015 when the prices changed and we updated it again this year in line with price changes. It is the same model. Of course, parts of it have changed. The greenhouse gas emissions component has been included in the model since the 2012 iteration but it is the same model that was used. The process is that the ICBF has a review or an update of economic values. We are requested to carry out that analysis. The dairy beef index, DBI, was completed last year and the request was for the suckler index this year.
Cathal Crowe (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
We have all heard of this algorithm. I do not know if anyone in the room has seen it. Is it available or can it be released?
Cathal Crowe (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
With any algorithm, things fluctuate and change. Dr. Crosson mentioned that pricing changed from 2020 to 2022 and that was fed into the algorithm. I note also that there is a carbon index now, with which I do not fully agree, and a TB resistance index, which is the only positive I can see in all of this. Surely when all of that is fed in, it distorts the index and, at the end of the day, prices. What people are generally seeing is the price of the heavier animal has come way down, or "plummeted" to use the word of the Salers Society, and the price of the lighter animals has come up.
Dr. Paul Crosson:
It goes back to the formulation of the index and the various components within that. Clearly the cow live within the replacement index has a big impact on the overall index value. If we look at the impact on the cow side, since the previous analysis in 2015, which was the last time we ran this, cow costs have increased by 41%. That is the current analysis. The cost of carrying the cow has gone from approximately €1,100 to €1,550. This is actual farm data on what it is costing to carry a cow. We put those values into the economic model. The cost of the cow, in other words, the cost traits, are not just the cost of feeding the cow but also the fertility traits. Fertility is directly related to feed costs in the sense that a cow that is still in the shed in April and should have calved in March, depending on the part of the country, is still on a silage diet and is costing twice as much as grass silage for the cow that goes outside because it has calved earlier. Therefore, the fertility aspect is really important. Equally important is the output element of it. Where output is constrained because of long-calving intervals, where we have 90-day calving intervals, the average output per year is lower. Both of those are directly impacted by fertility but feed costs have been a really big driver of the changes in the economic model.
Cathal Crowe (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I agree with Senator Dolan on the communication. It has been chronic. I will read a couple of lines from the Salers Society's its take on all of this. It wrote to the ICBF and stated:
Many breeders are reporting that top-performing cows in their herds have not just dropped in the replacement index but have plummeted. These are cows with excellent fertility / calving interval, calving ability, mothering ability, milk, longevity, etc. Breeders are struggling to understand how many of their top-performing cows can be so drastically downgraded under this new algorithm. This has caused many to question the validity of the index.
Given that the ICBF is establishing the stakeholder forum in March, I think-----
Cathal Crowe (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I ask the ICBF to suspend its decision of 28 November until the stakeholder forum has taken place. The Salers Society is one of the major stakeholders and it did not see this coming. This is not a farmer over the road who has penned a letter here. It is one of the stakeholders with which the ICBF is supposed to have negotiated and spoken over many months. The Salers Society is questioning the validity of the index and is saying that what has manifested bears no resemblance to what the consultation and talks in the proceeding months would have produced. The obvious thing to do here, and we have often had to do it politically, is to walk away with one's tail between one's legs, reassess and come at it from a different angle. Surely the obvious thing to do here is to abandon this, at least until the stakeholder forum has taken place. We should not be talking about compensatory schemes or any of that kind of stuff. The whole thing should be suspended, at a minimum, until the spring period. Surely the board has discussed that. We have all had to do that politically. When something goes pear-shaped, we go into our inner sanctum, meet in camera, and say there has to be a break-out from this. Has that not already been discussed given the huge reaction the ICBF has had from farmers?
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
I have acknowledged the deficiencies in the communication, which is my responsibility, but I am absolutely convinced that solving this communication issue will be impossible if we do anything other than explain what the current changes are. People will have two sets of information and they will not know where they are going. They will be trying to work it out saying these are the stars now but this is what they will be. That would create chaos.
Cathal Crowe (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Why have a stakeholder forum if the ICBF is not willing to take it into account? This decision of 28 November should be suspended until this stakeholder forum has taken place. Is that not the prudent way to go?
Cathal Crowe (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
In politics, we call it a citizens' assembly. We let it out for a year and we discuss it. The ICBF cannot hold a stakeholder forum after the horse has bolted.
Cathal Crowe (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
We all know that. I have only 30 seconds remaining and my question has still not been answered. Farmers are questioning the validity of the index. That is what I am questioning. The ICBF is holding a stakeholder forum in the early spring. Why not suspend for eight or nine weeks, or whatever that interval is, until the stakeholder forum has been held? Why would the Salers Society or the Irish Limousin Cattle Society even come to that stakeholder forum if the ICBF is already saying that nothing will change? Why discuss anything further?
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
The reality is that these evaluations are an ongoing process. If something else happens and the economics change again - perhaps feed prices increase by another 20% in the long term or they may decrease - and Dr. Crosson says the economics need to be tweaked, we will do that. The stakeholder forum is a reincarnation of something called industry meetings, which we used to have in the past. In recent years, industry meetings were just herd book meetings. The stakeholder forum is broadening that out, meeting on the herd books and having the commercial farmers, the marts and the various farm organisations there. We will have those industry meetings. It is not just about this issue but about what is going to happen next. It is one part of the lessons we are learning.
Cathal Crowe (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The stakeholders who have joined the ICBF board just seem to be nodding their heads anyway.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The Deputy is out of time.
Seán Canney (Galway East, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I have been listening to this debate in my office and in the committee room. What is baffling to me is the number of farmers from different organisations who have contacted me saying they are going to lose and that they are destroyed. I heard Mr. Coughlan say that most farmers will not be affected financially. However, farmers will be affected financially. How are they are going to be compensated for this loss? They were following all of the rules and regulations and trying to keep to the highest standards. Now, their bulls are worth nothing. That is the first point.
We should not get caught up today on the communications because it will not bring any solace. Mr. Coughlan has admitted that communications are his problem and responsibility but that is not what I want him to say. I want him to tell me how these farmers will be compensated and what roads are open to them to do that.
It is also a bit baffling that, as Mr. Doran said, the representatives of the IFA attended the meeting but could not bring in their vested interest. For God's sake, given that they are from a farmer organisation, would they not say at the meeting, although perhaps they did, that this would have an effect on farmers financially?
Did ICBF discuss that to establish if it knew before making the decision how much of an impact it would have on farmers and the industry before they made the decision or did they just accept what was given to them? I am concerned by Deputy Crowe's remarks that the validity of the science is being questioned. The witnesses talk of key issues and underlying principles but that does not matter a damn to the farmers here or listening in who are looking at their figures and saying, "We are ruined." That is what we have done and why the witnesses are here today. I am not a member of the committee but have had so many people on to me that I felt it was proper to come in here to say they have done some disservice to suckler farmers. I will not apologise for saying that. I want to hear what they will do to correct that. The first thing they need to do is suspend any decision until they have had another look at the implications, the cost and where the money will come from to deal with that decision.
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
I go back to the need for independent evaluations. Feed costs have risen dramatically. I think the Deputy will acknowledge that. That affects the financial viability of suckler farms. If we are recommending by means of the indexes the most profitable animals to use, there are two people in that transaction. If we are talking about bulls, there is a person selling the bull and the person buying the bull. In a lot of the discussion nobody is thinking about the person who will buy the bull. I am not undermining the difficulties pedigree breeders selling stock bulls will face but we have a responsibility to the person buying the bull.
Seán Canney (Galway East, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
ICBF has all those responsibilities. What will it say to farmers whose bull was valued at X amount? Now what they will get from the buyer is X minus Y.
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
That is the principle. Two things can be true at the same time. One is I can have sympathy for those breeders and understand the difficulties they are going through. The second is we are an independent genetic evaluation organisation that does not have a commercial interest in the animals. If somebody around our board had 50 bulls to sell and would be negatively impacted by us dropping or changing the indexes and we did not change the indexes because there was somebody on our board that had 50 bulls to sell, that would be a dereliction of duty of anybody on the board of ICBF. That is why we are an independent evaluation organisation. That rarely happens globally. The vast majority of organisations do the evaluations on animals on which they have a commercial interest. Those organisations are selling on one index and buying on another. If it is a global AI company, it runs down the stocks of certain bulls it knows will change at a particular point in time. Then it changes the index when it has all the stock shifted.
Seán Canney (Galway East, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
With all due respect, the farmers I speak to are not on any exchange or investing in or buying and selling bulls commercially. We are talking about real farmers. I understand ICBF's independence but when it takes an action, there are consequences. ICBF knows the consequences for farmers. What will it do or recommend to the Department to help those farmers?
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
There are consequences on both sides. If I go to a meeting of a group of commercial farmers who will go out next week to buy a bull and ask them if they want to know what the index will be today or next week, they will only want to buy the animals on the index will be next week. That is the harsh reality. We are not a lobby organisation. My personal view is that farmers should not be unreasonably impacted. If there are cows in calf to the bulls that have dropped, I think they have acted in good faith. The Department of agriculture is the sole arbiter of the terms and conditions of the schemes.
Mr. Michael Doran:
Every board member is given the opportunity to express his views and be part of the discussion on any decision that is being made on the board of ICBF, no different from any other board I have sat on. When it comes to decision-making, the board makes the decision, but every member of the board has the opportunity to express views and concerns.
Seán Canney (Galway East, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
If ICBF asked the question, knew the consequences for some farmers and got an answer, was it satisfied with the answer and did it then support it?
Mr. Michael Doran:
When we were looking at it, we were told a certain number of bulls would go up and a certain number would go down. We were given the range of the changes but the decision was made. It was the same when we were asked to delay for six months. I had a herd-book contacting me to ask if we could delay for six months and wanting to know if it could have the information on all the pedigree registered bulls their members own and farm at the moment. It wanted the information but for the farmer not to have the information for six months. I am clear as chair of a board that provides genetic independent evaluations that everyone has the same information. The view was farmers wanted the information now rather than delaying the inevitable. If feed costs have gone up, we reflect that in what we do.
I had another phone call from a person who has a number of pedigree breeds on their farm. When I discussed with him why different animals in different sections had changed, he said he agreed those animals ate an awful lot more than the others so he understood why the change had taken place.
A number of people have discussed communications. The board had a strategy of communicating the changes with a plan in place. However, a national newspaper put it on the front page a month before we had implemented those changes so the information was out there and that changed part of that.
Seán Canney (Galway East, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I am not worried about communication.
Seán Canney (Galway East, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Communication is not the problem; it is financial. Mr. Coughlan mentioned commercial farmers. The farmers I represent own family farms. They are commercial in the sense they are trying to make a living out of it and they will be ruined. That is the commercial reality of it. I do not know what the witnesses mean by a commercial farmer. A commercial farm to me is a family farm trying to eke out a living and the decisions ICBF has taken have created for them a huge financial disaster.
Mr. Michael Doran:
As I said in response to Deputy Mythen, there is 16% and each of those are individual farmers and people who are making decisions to feed their own family and who the changes are affecting. I have spoken to the Department of agriculture on some of those and to see if we can find solutions. I know Deputy Fitzmaurice asked for the same, and I will too.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I will give three minutes to a couple of members who want to put a supplementary question. We have to be out of here because there is another meeting at 1.30 p.m. In fairness, we got this slot at short notice. There is Deputy Flaherty and Senator Daly. Is Deputy Kerrane okay?
Claire Kerrane (Roscommon-Galway, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I have one quick question.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Okay.
Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | 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.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That was more of a statement than a question.
Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I said it would be a statement.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
My comments are mainly related to SCEP. There has been a lot of talk about bull breeders losing in this situation. It is not all about the vendor. The biggest investment in a suckler herd can be the stock, pedigree bull. Many farmers invested in bulls last March and April. They are now scratching their heads, and it is not just the sellers. In fairness to sellers, they are probably losing more but there are many suckler farmers who cannot afford to take a hit. Farmers are taking a hit collectively.
How long was this change in the melting pot? It was launched on 21 November. How much work went into it and how long did it go on? The Minister launched the SCEP on 20 March. Surely to god something the ICBF was ready to launch in November was nearly cooked by March. The ICBF has a member of the Department on its board. I presume it is in constant contact with the board. Could there not have been some correlation with the terms and conditions of the SCEP to coincide with this launch, rather than moving the goalposts eight months into it?
Deputy Flaherty mentioned legality. I have a feeling that this might not stand up legally. The ICBF is the scorecard for SCEP. If I have two cows at home, one born in 2018 and one born in 2019, with the same father and mother and husbandry, and I keep one - she is a 4-star - I will be paid SCEP for her. If I sell the other one to Senator Lombard or whoever else, he cannot get SCEP for her. She does not qualify. There must be legal complications in that regard? It is the same animal. When we applied for the scheme, it was a 4-star. Now, it is moved back to a 3-star, mid-scheme. If I keep my cow, I will be paid for five years. If I sell her to someone else, he will not get a penny. That is the scheme but the ICBF is the scorecard for the scheme.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Could there not have been more correlation and communication between the ICBF and the Department? If the ICBF is right, the integrity of the scheme is gone because I will be paid on a 4-star cow that, if the ICBF is right, is a 3-star cow. The integrity of the scheme is gone and confidence in it is certainly gone. Where was the communication between the ICBF and the Department in allowing that scenario to evolve?
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
In ideal circumstances, everything would line up perfectly. We do not live in an ideal world. We cannot always guarantee at what stage research will come. On 4- and 5-star animals, that has always been the case, back through the BDGP, if an animal dropped in stars. Bear in mind-----
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
It dropped across the board. It dropped in my farm as well. Now, the ICBF is saying the cow will stay 4-star on my farm for SCEP but will be a 3-star on someone else's farm, if I sold it to him, once she goes outside the yard.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
What is the difference between enclosed and movement? In the past, both would drop from 5-star to 4-star under-----
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Now, if I keep them on my farm, it stays a 4-star animal.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Mr. Coughlan said I would still get paid SCEP. It has to be 4- or 5-star for SCEP.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The terms and conditions of SCEP state they have to be 4- or 5-star cows.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The integrity of the scheme is in question.
Claire Kerrane (Roscommon-Galway, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Mr. Coughlan acknowledged that this will have an impact on farmers and breeders. Given that he specifically said he did not want them to be negatively impacted, and based on what the witnesses have heard today, will the ICBF put it to the board to potentially pause this? I do not buy that it would cause mayhem and confusion to pause for a short period, given the concerns raised. It is a reasonable request a pause to engage and hold a stakeholder forum, as should have been done in the first place. Will the ICBF bring that proposal to the board?
Claire Kerrane (Roscommon-Galway, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
No, there would just be the old index.
Mr. Sean Coughlan:
The new ones are out there. People have seen them. That is what they are upset about. Next spring, farmers will be buying and selling animals, trying to make breeding decisions and they do not know if they are coming or going. It is completely impractical. I acknowledge the communication difficulties. I know the Deputy does not want to talk about communication - I have to sort that. It is an impossible job if there are two sets of indexes.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
We have to conclude because we have gone over time. I thank the witnesses for coming in today. It has been a very comprehensive discussion. Several very valid points have been made by committee members. The changes have financial implications. The ICBF has acknowledged that its communication was not the best. As regards weightings for the indexes, what exactly is attributed to each weighting, such as climate change and its impact on profitability, carbon, etc? The climate change part in the indexes must be re-examined. At the end of the day, the indexes should be based on profitability and the profitability of the progeny.
I appreciate the ICBF representatives appearing before the committee at short notice. They gave very comprehensive answers to the questions asked by all members. The large attendance shows the interest, the lobbying of politicians that has occurred and the questions we have been asked. People are extremely worried about this. There is clearly a lack of knowledge. A beef breeder who contacted me the other day said he had a bull he was using extensively, a 5-star animal that was well used within his breed. It was a top bull but it had gone down to a 2-star. He has stock bulls ready to sell, yearling bulls coming on and calves in gestation. They have all lost huge value commercially. They are turned from being pedigree into commercial cattle. That is significant.
They have what they will make in the factory. There are significant implications. The chairman of the ICBF has said he will take the content of our discussion back to the board. We appreciate that. The committee will meet in private session and discuss the ICBF and the indexes.
A point was made by Deputy Flaherty. It is right that, as Chairman, I acknowledge the tremendous work the ICBF has done since it was formed. It has co-ordinated the genetic improvement in both dairy and beef. The witnesses gave figures about the improvement on the beef side. The same is true on the dairy side. The ICBF's contribution to the improvement in Irish cattle breeding has to be recognised. As I said, there are issues with these indexes. Communication and getting explanations about weighting is vitally important.
We had 13 contributors, which is a high number for a meeting of the agriculture committee. This was a very important meeting. The fact that the witnesses came in at such short notice shows that they recognise there are issues. We appreciate that.
The meeting will resume at 5.30 p.m., when the committee will receive an update on the eradication of tuberculosis, another very serious subject.