Tipperary farm leader Pat McCormack weighs in on four movement controversy

Two things are “absolutely clear” arising from Minister Michael Creed’s comments on the four movement controversy”, according to ICMSA president Pat McCormack.

The Minister’s statement that the deeply unpopular stipulation was a “private arrangement” between two named organisations and nothing to do with his Department, must provide the basis for reform and forward movement within the beef sector, he said.

Speaking in the Dail on February 14, Minister Creed told Michael Healy Rae: “A Quality Payment System (QPS) for the payment of bonuses in respect of certain categories of cattle at slaughter plants was introduced in 2009 by agreement between Meat Industry Ireland (MII) and the Irish Farmers’ Association (IFA).

“My understanding is that the conditions attached to qualification for this bonus payment include a limit on the number of movements of cattle in their lifetime prior to slaughter.

“This is a purely private arrangement between both parties and my department has no role in its design or implementation.

“The Irish factory Quality Payment System (QPS) penalises more than four movements of livestock between farms prior to slaughter.”

The Minister has since clarified his remarks.

However, Mr McCormack said that the first thing that needed to be understood by everyone was that attempts to pitch the problems on beef prices as a suckler versus dairy question was at variance with the fact.

He said ICMSA believed it was deliberately being peddled to obscure much more fundamental questions about the defects in the system - and most specifically - defects in the QPS Grid.

“On the question of the QPS, any look back at the record will show - whatever anyone might say - that it was absolutely not thoroughly discussed before its introduction,” he said.

The Tipperary farmer said it had not been debated or the subject of any consultation. It was effectively foisted on the farmers and the files will show that.

“The record will also show that ICMSA alone, both at the time and ever since, was the only organisation that queried where the QPS came from and who, why, and how it was designed,” said Mr McCormack.

He said that the second thing we can all surely agree on was to ask what was the point of the Beef Forum as currently constituted.

“It’s been meeting on and off now for five years. It’s over three years since the forum agreed to review the very QPS that’s caused this row and still not a word about a start date or the makeup of any review body,” he said.

ICMSA believed that much of the frustration and anger among beef farmers was directly linked to this feeling that although we all knew where the problems started, and where the solutions will have to start – the QPS - there seemed to be no appetite among certain groups to accept that fact.

“There seems to be a reluctance to accept that mistakes were made and it’s time to return to the drawing board and design a grid that’s understandable, practical and is not so hopelessly lop-sided against the farmers selling into the factories,” he said.

Mr McCormack said that following the controversy was it not time for everyone to accept that.