IFA doesn't matter

djmc

Hope its not out of order but for the crack I thought I'd start a thread asking if the IFA really matters can the other farming loby group's take their place or will they be trusted again as the main farming organization.
I have not posted in the other IFA threads as I don't feel that they represented my interests
I think they were good around the 1960s but seem to be more involved in politics than a farmers union in the last twenty years

_Brian

I'm no fan, haven't been member in maybe 5-6 years.
But, farming like many or most industries has become a game of politics and a competition to see who's interests are represented at the table.

mayota

I don't think any other groups will come anyway close to replacing the IFA. The work they do on taxation for example is invaluable. They have a legal team on hand to help farmers. They will liaise with DAFM over whatever issues arise. The IFA is there to be used to your advantage. The government cannot ignore a strong IFA.

6480

mayota wrote: »

I don't think any other groups will come anyway close to replacing the IFA. The work they do on taxation for example is invaluable. They have a legal team on hand to help farmers. They will liaise with DAFM over whatever issues arise. The IFA is there to be used to your advantage. The government cannot ignore a strong IFA.

Sure any government can easily laugh back at them for the carry on of them with in their own doors ,they have let down the orindary small farm family in this country and I ll never support them again

Timmaay

mayota wrote: »

. The government cannot ignore a strong IFA.

We haven't had a "strong" IFA in years, it's been replaced with the fifa of farming, and we've only just turned a corner now in changing this.

Field east

DJMC -a very good question and the answer could have a very significant impact, positive or negative, on the sector.
As you said, IFA was 'very good' at one stage- I'd say up to much later than the 1970's. Anyway , it was very effective for a long time on behalf of the sector because it spoke for all activities within the sector, had a very good handle of the EU and well got there, well organised branch system, large membership, fairly secure income stream, a well oiled administrative system, etc, etc, etc.

Because some parts of the sector felt over that last few years that their voice was not being heard, they then set up their own org. Such org experience significant problems after the initial euphoria re low membership, low/sustainable income, economic viability, available volunteers, being taken seriously, etc, etc. Divide and rule comes to mind which in normally not good

A lobby monolopy in the sector may not be the most desirable as a bit of coo petition- not competition you will note- might keep all on their toes.

On balance, I would be of the opinion that there is a need for what we know as the IFA of old but reorganised/ modernised to keep abreast of technology , changing sector needs, be where decisions are made , etc, etc. but not in the direction some aspects of the org. have taken.

I suggest that the IFA brand is still very strong and very respected.
The current hiatus was caused by a number of factors coming together but essentially due to a centralising of power between a few apparently and they - through group think - lost their sence of reality. Following solid advice there is no reason why IFA cannot be even more effective in the future.

If IFA disbanded in the morning , how long would its replacement take to provide the range/ level of service as IFA has provided.

Fuxake

mayota wrote: »

I don't think any other groups will come anyway close to replacing the IFA. The work they do on taxation for example is invaluable. They have a legal team on hand to help farmers. They will liaise with DAFM over whatever issues arise. The IFA is there to be used to your advantage. The government cannot ignore a strong IFA.

IFA claims all the credit for tax measures but don't be fooled by the propaganda in the Journal. Other groups are also on the tax issues. Found this on the ICSA website for example:
http://icsaireland.ie/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/ICSA_TaxConsultationSubmission_March2014.pdf

John Comer of ICMSA has been always impressive on taxation too.

6480

Field east wrote: »

DJMC -a very good question and the answer could have a very significant impact, positive or negative, on the sector.
As you said, IFA was 'very good' at one stage- I'd say up to much later than the 1970's. Anyway , it was very effective for a long time on behalf of the sector because it spoke for all activities within the sector, had a very good handle of the EU and well got there, well organised branch system, large membership, fairly secure income stream, a well oiled administrative system, etc, etc, etc.

Because some parts of the sector felt over that last few years that their voice was not being heard, they then set up their own org. Such org experience significant problems after the initial euphoria re low membership, low/sustainable income, economic viability, available volunteers, being taken seriously, etc, etc. Divide and rule comes to mind which in normally not good

A lobby monolopy in the sector may not be the most desirable as a bit of coo petition- not competition you will note- might keep all on their toes.

On balance, I would be of the opinion that there is a need for what we know as the IFA of old but reorganised/ modernised to keep abreast of technology , changing sector needs, be where decisions are made , etc, etc. but not in the direction some aspects of the org. have taken.

I suggest that the IFA brand is still very strong and very respected.
The current hiatus was caused by a number of factors coming together but essentially due to a centralising of power between a few apparently and they - through group think - lost their sence of reality. Following solid advice there is no reason why IFA cannot be even more effective in the future.

If IFA disbanded in the morning , how long would its replacement take to provide the range/ level of service as IFA has provided.

Agree with you on some of the above issues but they got far too greedy and collected far too much in levies for the amount of work they were doing

Fuxake

Field east wrote: »

DJMC -a very good question and the answer could have a very significant impact, positive or negative, on the sector.
As you said, IFA was 'very good' at one stage- I'd say up to much later than the 1970's. Anyway , it was very effective for a long time on behalf of the sector because it spoke for all activities within the sector, had a very good handle of the EU and well got there, well organised branch system, large membership, fairly secure income stream, a well oiled administrative system, etc, etc, etc.

Because some parts of the sector felt over that last few years that their voice was not being heard, they then set up their own org. Such org experience significant problems after the initial euphoria re low membership, low/sustainable income, economic viability, available volunteers, being taken seriously, etc, etc. Divide and rule comes to mind which in normally not goo

A lobby monolopy in the sector may not be the most desirable as a bit of coo petition- not competition you will note- might keep all on their toes.

On balance, I would be of the opinion that there is a need for what we know as the IFA of old but reorganised/ modernised to keep abreast of technology , changing sector needs, be where decisions are made , etc, etc. but not in the direction some aspects of the org. have taken.

I suggest that the IFA brand is still very strong and very respected.
The current hiatus was caused by a number of factors coming together but essentially due to a centralising of power between a few apparently and they - through group think - lost their sence of reality. Following solid advice there is no reason why IFA cannot be even more effective in the future.

If IFA disbanded in the morning , how long would its replacement take to provide the range/ level of service as IFA has provided.

Lot of good points here TBF. Always reckoned that other farm orgs are essential to keep IFA on their toes if nothing else. In some cases, on some issues, they actually do a better job for a fraction of the money. Whether that is sustainable is another question.

Bullocks

Field east wrote: »

If IFA disbanded in the morning , how long would its replacement take to provide the range/ level of service as IFA has provided.

We might have plenty chance to see how good the other organisations in the future.
Most praise I have heard of the service and power of the IFA usually comes from the IFA

djmc

Bullocks wrote: »

We might have plenty chance to see how good the other organisations in the future.
Most praise I have heard of the service and power of the IFA usually comes from the IFA

I would agree with that they are singing praise of all the work that they have done at renewal of membership telling me all the money I could save on hotels the insurance IFA telecom etc.
It never adds up and I can find better discounts when I look online.
They never got back to me on anything I asked them to look into but maybe that's partly my own fault for not chasing it up.
I have also found them a bit pushy when I didn't want to renew membership.
The biggest problem they will have now is earning the trust of farmers again.
As someone said in another post if fine weather was forecast they would nearly loby and claim the credit for it if it arrived.
They need to lead by example there is a monopoly in the factory's in this country with years
While the number of full time farmers is falling year on year
Any farmer should be able to earn at least the average industrial wage no matter where in the country the live or at least the minimum wage.
There is probably hundreds of thousands of acres falling into disrepair along the west coast of Ireland simply because farmers can't afford things like lime and grass seed.
Farms would be a lot more productive if there was either a grant for those or a return from farming where profit could be invested back into the land.
What we have is a situation where most farmers are waiting tell Christmas waiting for the cap money so they can pay off the years bills and hopefully buy the wife and kids something for Christmas.
A case of get big or get out and take on more debt seems to be the order of the day which IMO can be a recipe for disaster for some farmers.
I will wait and see what the new IFA will do before renewing my membership but it will have to be more than lip service.

Bullocks

djmc wrote: »

I would agree with that they are singing praise of all the work that they have done at renewal of membership telling me all the money I could save on hotels the insurance IFA telecom etc.
It never adds up and I can find better discounts when I look online.
They never got back to me on anything I asked them to look into but maybe that's partly my own fault for not chasing it up.
I have also found them a bit pushy when I didn't want to renew membership.
The biggest problem they will have now is earning the trust of farmers again.
As someone said in another post if fine weather was forecast they would nearly loby and claim the credit for it if it arrived.
They need to lead by example there is a monopoly in the factory's in this country with years
While the number of full time farmers is falling year on year
Any farmer should be able to earn at least the average industrial wage no matter where in the country the live or at least the minimum wage.
There is probably hundreds of thousands of acres falling into disrepair along the west coast of Ireland simply because farmers can't afford things like lime and grass seed.
Farms would be a lot more productive if there was either a grant for those or a return from farming where profit could be invested back into the land.
What we have is a situation where most farmers are waiting tell Christmas waiting for the cap money so they can pay off the years bills and hopefully buy the wife and kids something for Christmas.
A case of get big or get out and take on more debt seems to be the order of the day which IMO can be a recipe for disaster for some farmers.
I will wait and see what the new IFA will do before renewing my membership but it will have to be more than lip service.

If they aren't getting back to you on anything you asked them to look into then why bother even thinking about renewing .
I think the ICMSA is trying to do something about beef prices , they might be worth looking into instead

freedominacup

Fuxake wrote: »

John Comer of ICMSA has been always impressive on taxation too.

You're easily impressed.😉

freedominacup

djmc wrote: »

I would agree with that they are singing praise of all the work that they have done at renewal of membership telling me all the money I could save on hotels the insurance IFA telecom etc.
It never adds up and I can find better discounts when I look online.
They never got back to me on anything I asked them to look into but maybe that's partly my own fault for not chasing it up.
I have also found them a bit pushy when I didn't want to renew membership.
The biggest problem they will have now is earning the trust of farmers again.
As someone said in another post if fine weather was forecast they would nearly loby and claim the credit for it if it arrived.
They need to lead by example there is a monopoly in the factory's in this country with years
While the number of full time farmers is falling year on year
Any farmer should be able to earn at least the average industrial wage no matter where in the country the live or at least the minimum wage.
There is probably hundreds of thousands of acres falling into disrepair along the west coast of Ireland simply because farmers can't afford things like lime and grass seed.
Farms would be a lot more productive if there was either a grant for those or a return from farming where profit could be invested back into the land.
What we have is a situation where most farmers are waiting tell Christmas waiting for the cap money so they can pay off the years bills and hopefully buy the wife and kids something for Christmas.
A case of get big or get out and take on more debt seems to be the order of the day which IMO can be a recipe for disaster for some farmers.
I will wait and see what the new IFA will do before renewing my membership but it will have to be more than lip service.

Monopoly in the factories???? Seriously?

Any farmer should be able to earn the average industrial wage? Because they own a few acres?? The government should underwrite farming to the tune of €5billion per year assuming the average farm breaks even on it's farming activities before any labour charge, this is your proposal?

God help any candidate if these are the expectations of the average ifa voter.

djmc

Yes monopoly one sets a price they all follow no competition between them
In mainland Europe you could simply drive across the border to the next country shipping costs here prevent that being feasible
It doesn't matter if its beef lamb or pork if one factory changes price they all do and it's been that way since the beef tribunals.
Why shouldn't a full time farmer be able to earn the average industrial wage and why should they not earn the minimum wage per hour
If it was anyone else being paid less than minimum wage it would be called exploitation or slavery
Is there any other union that hasn't got a pay raise for its members in the last thirty years because milk and beef were making the same back then as they are today while our costs have sky rocketed.
Sure the IFA have done a great job altogether but just don't ask what their earning because that's nobody's business but their own.

freedominacup

djmc wrote: »

Yes monopoly one sets a price they all follow no competition between them
In mainland Europe you could simply drive across the border to the next country shipping costs here prevent that being feasible
It doesn't matter if its beef lamb or pork if one factory changes price they all do and it's been that way since the beef tribunals.
Why shouldn't a full time farmer be able to earn the average industrial wage and why should they not earn the minimum wage per hour
If it was anyone else being paid less than minimum wage it would be called exploitation or slavery
Is there any other union that hasn't got a pay raise for its members in the last thirty years because milk and beef were making the same back then as they are today while our costs have sky rocketed.
Sure the IFA have done a great job altogether but just don't ask what their earning because that's nobody's business but their own.

Still not a monopoly.

COOL rules, e.u. wide.

Possibly has been but still not a monopoly.

Repeating this idea doesn't make it any less ridiculous.

IFA is not a union. Farmers are not employees.

Who are they?

djmc

Just price fixing then.
Possibly right.
Who are they? Probably fools.☺
http://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/ifa-pigs-committee-faces-potential-split/

Farmer Ed

Field east wrote: »

DJMC -a very good question and the answer could have a very significant impact, positive or negative, on the sector.
As you said, IFA was 'very good' at one stage- I'd say up to much later than the 1970's. Anyway , it was very effective for a long time on behalf of the sector because it spoke for all activities within the sector, had a very good handle of the EU and well got there, well organised branch system, large membership, fairly secure income stream, a well oiled administrative system, etc, etc, etc.

Because some parts of the sector felt over that last few years that their voice was not being heard, they then set up their own org. Such org experience significant problems after the initial euphoria re low membership, low/sustainable income, economic viability, available volunteers, being taken seriously, etc, etc. Divide and rule comes to mind which in normally not good

A lobby monolopy in the sector may not be the most desirable as a bit of coo petition- not competition you will note- might keep all on their toes.

On balance, I would be of the opinion that there is a need for what we know as the IFA of old but reorganised/ modernised to keep abreast of technology , changing sector needs, be where decisions are made , etc, etc. but not in the direction some aspects of the org. have taken.

I suggest that the IFA brand is still very strong and very respected.
The current hiatus was caused by a number of factors coming together but essentially due to a centralising of power between a few apparently and they - through group think - lost their sence of reality. Following solid advice there is no reason why IFA cannot be even more effective in the future.

If IFA disbanded in the morning , how long would its replacement take to provide the range/ level of service as IFA has provided.

Sorry if I'm being rude.but any harm to ask what you work at yourself? Or what might even be more interesting how much you get paid?

browned

Farmer Ed wrote: »

Sorry if I'm being rude.but any harm to ask what you work at yourself? Or what might even be more interesting how much you get paid?

Wouldn't it be appropriate for you to declare your line of work and how much you get paid before asking it of others

Farmer Ed

browned wrote: »

Wouldn't it be appropriate for you to declare your line of work and how much you get paid before asking it of others

I have no problem declaring I'm a farmer. And sadly I make less than 100k.
Im self employed,but as a benefactor of the EU taxpayer,and like all farmers, anything they pay me is published. That is the law and I guess they have a right to know where their money is going. I don't think it's uncommon that the man who pays the piper would like to know how much he is paying him?

Username John

Farmer Ed wrote: »

Sorry if I'm being rude.but any harm to ask what you work at yourself? Or what might even be more interesting how much you get paid?

Farmer Ed wrote: »

I have no problem declaring I'm a farmer. And sadly I make less than 100k.
Im self employed,but as a benefactor of the EU taxpayer,and like all farmers, anything they pay me is published. That is the law and I guess they have a right to know where their money is going. I don't think it's uncommon that the man who pays the piper would like to know how much he is paying him?

ha ha...

You asked "how much?" - your answer of less than 100k is a vague enough answer Ed

This whole debate it seems, is apparently about clarity, and transparency, and knowing exactly how much people are getting paid. But you're coy enough with your own numbers it seems

Farmer Ed

Username John wrote: »

ha ha...

You asked "how much?" - your answer of less than 100k is a vague enough answer Ed

This whole debate it seems, is apparently about clarity, and transparency, and knowing exactly how much people are getting paid. But you're coy enough with your own numbers it seems

I told you any money I get paid from other people is published online for everyone to see. There seems to be a consensus here that people have a problem with IFA staff getting paid more than 100k per year? I can assure you I don't fall into that category. Is it fair to ask can you say the same?

Now has anyone seen Far East this morning????????

browned

Farmer Ed wrote: »

I have no problem declaring I'm a farmer. And sadly I make less than 100k.
Im self employed,but as a benefactor of the EU taxpayer,and like all farmers, anything they pay me is published. That is the law and I guess they have a right to know where their money is going. I don't think it's uncommon that the man who pays the piper would like to know how much he is paying him?

So if you make less than 100k it could actually be 99k. You are correct that all money's farmers get from eu taxpayers are published but after an hour searching I couldn't find any payments paid to a "farmer ed " or an "ed farmer" on the department website.

Ed I lied, I didn't spend the last hour searching for your payment figures as I've no interest in how much you earn, it's your own business. To ask a fellow poster their income is rather disrespectful

hurling_lad

Farmer Ed wrote: »

Sorry if I'm being rude.but any harm to ask what you work at yourself? Or what might even be more interesting how much you get paid?

Is it so difficult to just engage in debate on the points raised re: the IFA without attempting to (once again) personalise the argument?

It was because of personalised criticism and abuse that the original thread on this topic went completely off the rails; I am at a loss to understand why you are trying the same thing again.

Farmer Ed

hurling_lad wrote: »

Is it so difficult to just engage in debate on the points raised re: the IFA without attempting to (once again) personalise the argument?

It was because of personalised criticism and abuse that the original thread on this topic went completely off the rails; I am at a loss to understand why you are trying the same thing again.

Lad I did make my apologies if I was being rude in asking the question.I think in the interests of transparency, i've been pretty open in declaring where I am coming from.

I'm afraid the response i've received, and in fairness not from the person to whom the question was addressed, has been much less charismatic than the original question. I fail to see how a question can be viewed as ?criticism??

Farmer Ed

browned wrote: »

So if you make less than 100k it could actually be 99k. You are correct that all money's farmers get from eu taxpayers are published but after an hour searching I couldn't find any payments paid to a "farmer ed " or an "ed farmer" on the department website.

Ed I lied, I didn't spend the last hour searching for your payment figures as I've no interest in how much you earn, it's your own business. To ask a fellow poster their income is rather disrespectful

If you ask a couple of your friends there. They claim to know who I am alright. But to save you the trouble I get something like 16k per year in EU farm payments.

I agree you are somewhat correct. I wouldnt say its disrespectful to ask someone how much they get paid, but I can understand how it could be seen as rude. Hence my preempted apology.

However as I said I don't think it is that unusual for the person paying the piper to try and establish how much exactly he might be paying him..

Username John

Farmer Ed wrote: »

I told you any money I get paid from other people is published online for everyone to see. There seems to be a consensus here that people have a problem with IFA staff getting paid more than 100k per year? I can assure you I don't fall into that category. Is it fair to ask can you say the same?

Now has anyone seen Far East this morning????????

To be honest Ed, I don't give two hoots about the IFA, nor how much they pay their staff.

To me, the IFA may as well be SIPTU, or the ICTU. I'm not a member of any of em, so for me to rant about how much anyone in any of those organisations get paid would be irrelevant.

I will add - I am not a full time farmer and am not dependent on farming for my income, so you could argue that its easy for me to flippant about it.

Fuxake

Farmer Ed wrote: »

If you ask a couple of your friends there. They claim to know who I am alright. But to save you the trouble I get something like 16k per year in EU farm payments.

I agree you are somewhat correct. I wouldnt say its disrespectful to ask someone how much they get paid, but I can understand how it could be seen as rude. Hence my preempted apology.

However as I said I don't think it is that unusual for the person paying the piper to try and establish how much exactly he might be paying him..

Well I guess that the only thing that can be said for sure is that you are not paying them anymore than your membership and whatever they grab from you on levies. If you stop paying levies, then you can ensure even greater certainty!

Farmer Ed

Fuxake wrote: »

Well I guess that the only thing that can be said for sure is that you are not paying them anymore than your membership and whatever they grab from you on levies. If you stop paying levies, then you can ensure even greater certainty!

Yes I agree. Very similar relationship to that of the EU tax payer and farmer don't you think?