Beef Plan Movement (READ OP BEFORE POSTING)

declanflynn

Cattlepen wrote: »

OMG!!!!!!
Is this stupid foolish talk being said by people even after the beef plan fiasco? If your beef farming you are involved in a “high value, low margin” business that has never been any different so if it doesn’t suit you GIVE IT UP! Learn some other business. Even the good man family are moving away from it.

wake up man

declanflynn

wrangler wrote: »

That's s childish beef plan talk, beef plan haven't done any better, worse in fact . childish talk, up there with the rest of farmers lies, sad sad sad.
Farmers who come out with that are a joke.

if the IFA leveraged the money they wasted over the years they would have enough to buy every factory in the country with support from the farmers, they have been asleep at the wheel while the beef industry was taken over by criminals and beef farming almost destroyed, anyone who defends their action or inaction must be on Larry's/IFA's payroll

Bass Reeves

Panch18 wrote: »

as some may know i was against the beef plan and it's blockade of the factories

It is a shame however that it has descended into something resembling monty python sketch with the peoples front of Judea and the judean people front

This hightlights a couple of worrying things for me:

1) that the needs and wants of beef farmers are actually quite diverse and there are a lot of different viewpoints out there - if the anti IFA sentiment that was so strong last year isn't enough to get another strong group off the ground i don't know what is

2) the IFA faces an impossible task - and that is to please all of the people all of the time. IT is literally impossible and it is making the organisation weaker for it. The problem as i see it that in the 50's-90's mixed farming dominated so if the IFA were campaigning for higher pig prices everybody was on board, grain price poor lets all support a protest as we are all effected. Nowadays mixed farming is all but finished so i have no clue how the IFA can organise itself in such a way as to support everybody. If they protest about grain price then the dairy, beef and pig men a like hold on higher grain means higher meal prices, its hard for me to support that. If there's a dairy price protest the beef lads will be thinking them bloody dairy lads are already driving the price of land rental crazy. Maybe the only common denominator is that we are all receiving crap prices no matter what we produce. I don't know, i just find it very hard for the IFA to have an all encompassing platform to work from that can please everybody. It's nearly impossible.

Funny thing is we need a real strong IFA and real strong leadership now more than ever

Panch18 wrote: »

It's not the IFA and structures it has in place that i am necessarily worried about.

It at grass routes level - the farmers themselves.

I'm not sure that the way modern farming is that we can see a united organisation to keep the majority of farmers happy. Because if someone feels they aren't getting the representation they need from an organisation then they leave or else are absent members.

If the Beef Plan, which was built on the back of huge anti Larry, anti IFA sentiment couldn't bring beef farmers together to form a solid group then what can bring beef farmers together? Is it even possible to do?

I am keeping out of posting in this as I find that a lot of the posting descend into rhetoric with no actual analysis of either what happened to the IFA or why BP existed and its influence is still felt indirectly.

You are right in a way Punch it very hard for anyone organisation to represent all farmers. IFA feels all other organisations should be subservient to it. The last CAP round where it GS went to a meeting in the west of Ireland and threatened regionalisation of CAP funding when that section were pushing for payment convergence blew the organisation apart without many in the higher echelons realizing.

We all know at this stage that CAP funding will continually reduce. REPS funding for many farmers helped the imbalance, however the dilution of REPS into GLAS type funding with very little extra in the budget left farmers with poorer quality designated land with out adequate compensation. Instead these farmers saw larger dairy farmers as well as older semi retired farmers in better quality land area's accessing this along with having higher payments. In the last 15 years I have seen farmers that turned there noses up to REPS in the late 90's early noughties now in GLAS these farmers payments have been virtually uneffected because of this or maybe a bit better off. At the same time a farmer in a SAC may have seen 10-20 percent of the land he claimed on in the reference years now declared ineligible even though it has not changed in structure along with a GLAS payment that is 3-5k less than REPS. Add to this due to a combination of beef price and loss of punches attached to a bulls ear pre 2002 his calf not only failed to close the gap but is worth less in real terms. While IFA is not entirety to blame some of it lies with Department bureaucracy and political choices it has left a large cohort of smaller farming operations disillusioned with IFA. Whether you consider it there own fault or that they are in capable of farming is immaterial.

To these farmers deals for road compensation, inheritance tax agri relief and leasing tax refief is immaterial. They consider IFA is lobbying against them. When you look at the last Presidental elections where we had the three candidates all dealing with payment convergence as to be dealt with as upward only and then add in the reality if CAP funding staying the same at best or reducing these farmers are no longer willing to tolerate this. Now you come to the argument about changing IFA from within. The problem with this is no part-time farmer can become a County rep. Therefore at higher levels of the IFA you have only full-time deciding policy . While IFA was always afraid that dealing with convergence of payments and money being directed to environmental schemes within its structure would blow it apart, it did it anyway.

After all that you had the IFA pay scandal along with a lot of beef farmers finally realizing about the factory/mart deduction to IFA. I could never understand the rational where a beef animal could be collected on 2-3 times while a gallon of milk or a kilo of grain could be collected only once. A lot of beef farmers especially with not just the way beef prices were going but the debacle over horse meat and its effect it had on bull beef prices. IFA gave the processors a free ride on that but beef farmers paid the price. From all this Beef plan and Hill and natura farming organisations were formed

I think that many thinking that they have gone away or had no effect on the system is disillusional. First off anyone thinking that we are worse off now as beef farmers than before BP is Not looking at the bigger picture. While price has not completely recovered neither are processors continually dropping prices. Grading improved during the summer but has fallen back a bit over last 4-6 weeks. Political pressure on processor's by Independent TD's such as mcNamara, O'Donoghue, Harkin and Fitzmaurice has been telling over the last 6-12 months and lobbying in Europe is forcing a change in direction of payments. Some of this is haveing an adverse reaction on dairy farming in particular and on intensive farming in general but its a result of IFA not dealing with these issues in house.

I not really interested whether people agree or disagree it just an analysis, it not a blame the IFA and I am not interested in retorts that it all BP fault. But the situation is that because of its actions IFA will have a huge swaths of different farming agenda's now lobbying directly like the hill farmer's or indirectly by farmers that support/no longer support BP through TD's or MEP's

kerryjack

It's gone as bad in all sectors, I work off farm for a large utilities company and I am the lad you see down a chamber or up a pole and there is about 4 other fuccks up the line creaming it and ringing me with stupid complaints about my driving or my diesel card or some other shhite on a daily basis. Farming is the same the working man is being rode to death.

wrangler

declanflynn wrote: »

if the IFA leveraged the money they wasted over the years they would have enough to buy every factory in the country with support from the farmers, they have been asleep at the wheel while the beef industry was taken over by criminals and beef farming almost destroyed, anyone who defends their action or inaction must be on Larry's/IFA's payroll

We delivered plenty over the years, It's a democratic organisation and open to any farmer who thought they could do better, they have four or five organisations now to go to if they want to get off their arse to improve things, Thankfully I'm no longer depending on farmers to protect my income.
Jokes on you now I'm afraid

wrangler

Bass Reeves wrote: »

I am keeping out of posting in this as I find that a lot of the posting descend into rhetoric with no actual analysis of either what happened to the IFA or why BP existed and its influence is still felt indirectly.

You are right in a way Punch it very hard for anyone organisation to represent all farmers. IFA feels all other organisations should be subservient to it. The last CAP round where it GS went to a meeting in the west of Ireland and threatened regionalisation of CAP funding when that section were pushing for payment convergence blew the organisation apart without many in the higher echelons realizing.

We all know at this stage that CAP funding will continually reduce. REPS funding for many farmers helped the imbalance, however the dilution of REPS into GLAS type funding with very little extra in the budget left farmers with poorer quality designated land with out adequate compensation. Instead these farmers saw larger dairy farmers as well as older semi retired farmers in better quality land area's accessing this along with having higher payments. In the last 15 years I have seen farmers that turned there noses up to REPS in the late 90's early noughties now in GLAS these farmers payments have been virtually uneffected because of this or maybe a bit better off. At the same time a farmer in a SAC may have seen 10-20 percent of the land he claimed on in the reference years now declared ineligible even though it has not changed in structure along with a GLAS payment that is 3-5k less than REPS. Add to this due to a combination of beef price and loss of punches attached to a bulls ear pre 2002 his calf not only failed to close the gap but is worth less in real terms. While IFA is not entirety to blame some of it lies with Department bureaucracy and political choices it has left a large cohort of smaller farming operations disillusioned with IFA. Whether you consider it there own fault or that they are in capable of farming is immaterial.

To these farmers deals for road compensation, inheritance tax agri relief and leasing tax refief is immaterial. They consider IFA is lobbying against them. When you look at the last Presidental elections where we had the three candidates all dealing with payment convergence as to be dealt with as upward only and then add in the reality if CAP funding staying the same at best or reducing these farmers are no longer willing to tolerate this. Now you come to the argument about changing IFA from within. The problem with this is no part-time farmer can become a County rep. Therefore at higher levels of the IFA you have only full-time deciding policy . While IFA was always afraid that dealing with convergence of payments and money being directed to environmental schemes within its structure would blow it apart, it did it anyway.

After all that you had the IFA pay scandal along with a lot of beef farmers finally realizing about the factory/mart deduction to IFA. I could never understand the rational where a beef animal could be collected on 2-3 times while a gallon of milk or a kilo of grain could be collected only once. A lot of beef farmers especially with not just the way beef prices were going but the debacle over horse meat and its effect it had on bull beef prices. IFA gave the processors a free ride on that but beef farmers paid the price. From all this Beef plan and Hill and natura farming organisations were formed

I think that many thinking that they have gone away or had no effect on the system is disillusional. First off anyone thinking that we are worse off now as beef farmers than before BP is Not looking at the bigger picture. While price has not completely recovered neither are processors continually dropping prices. Grading improved during the summer but has fallen back a bit over last 4-6 weeks. Political pressure on processor's by Independent TD's such as mcNamara, O'Donoghue, Harkin and Fitzmaurice has been telling over the last 6-12 months and lobbying in Europe is forcing a change in direction of payments. Some of this is haveing an adverse reaction on dairy farming in particular and on intensive farming in general but its a result of IFA not dealing with these issues in house.

I not really interested whether people agree or disagree it just an analysis, it not a blame the IFA and I am not interested in retorts that it all BP fault. But the situation is that because of its actions IFA will have a huge swaths of different farming agenda's now lobbying directly like the hill farmer's or indirectly by farmers that support/no longer support BP through TD's or MEP's

When I decided to specialise in sheep, I worked out if lamb price stayed at €70 I'd be a lot better off than beef farming, Where are we now, lamb price up 50% and no whingeing at the gates. Is there a message there.
There's usually 30 -35 dairy farmers at the IFA dairy meetings as well as probably in the majority at national Council meetings, I'd be very surprised if they missed a trick.
County reps can be part time farmers. even have some here on boards

declanflynn

wrangler wrote: »

We delivered plenty over the years, It's a democratic organisation and open to any farmer who thought they could do better, they have four or five organisations now to go to if they want to get off their arse to improve things, Thankfully I'm no longer depending on farmers to protect my income.
Jokes on you now I'm afraid

A foolish man thinks he knows everything, a wise man knows he doesn't

Dinzee Conlee

declanflynn wrote: »

A foolish man thinks he knows everything, a wise man knows he doesn't

What do you think should happen Declan?
Let’s offer a bit more to the discussion than the one liners

declanflynn

Dinzee Conlee wrote: »

What do you think should happen Declan?
Let’s offer a bit more to the discussion than the one liners

The IFA in the short term should leave no stone unturned in making sure the factory in Banagher opens.
Long term they need to separate themselves from the factories.
Farmers need to control the process from birth to belly.
Farmers have assets worth north of €100bn, we should be able to buy or build factories tru the IFA,
We need someone like Denis Brosnan to lead the IFA

Dinzee Conlee

declanflynn wrote: »

The IFA in the short term should leave no stone unturned in making sure the factory in Banagher opens.
Long term they need to separate themselves from the factories.
Farmers need to control the process from birth to belly.
Farmers have assets worth north of €100bn, we should be able to buy or build factories tru the IFA,
We need someone like Denis Brosnan to lead the IFA

Not wanting to have a go at you now - cos I asked you for your ideas, and you put me up...

But how you see funding for the IFA working if they don’t collect at the factories, combined with a lowering membership level...
Then, how do you propose the funding for factories happens?

Personally, I don’t think farmers funding a meat factory is a good idea at all...
They would be expected to pay more, whilst also expected to carry a higher cost base due to better working conditions, etc. And then, the factory would also be expected to deliver huge profits...
I just don’t think it would work...

On your last comment - should the IFA give up electing a farmer as president, and just get someone in?

alps

Dinzee Conlee wrote: »

On your last comment - should the IFA give up electing a farmer as president, and just get someone in?

They do have a Cheif Executive or Director General but have always taken the view of being more effective putting the farmer face forward.

Most other representitive organisations put the paid professional up front.

It's a tactical decision that has its pros and cons. The farmer is backed up by very professional coaching and advise, but for sure, today's media platform is not an easy pitch to perform on against some very senior players.

Best effort will come from those that have more to risk..

wrangler

Dinzee Conlee wrote: »

Not wanting to have a go at you now - cos I asked you for your ideas, and you put me up...

But how you see funding for the IFA working if they don’t collect at the factories, combined with a lowering membership level...
Then, how do you propose the funding for factories happens?

Personally, I don’t think farmers funding a meat factory is a good idea at all...
They would be expected to pay more, whilst also expected to carry a higher cost base due to better working conditions, etc. And then, the factory would also be expected to deliver huge profits...
I just don’t think it would work...

On your last comment - should the IFA give up electing a farmer as president, and just get someone in?

They're so small minded they'd just throw him out
Pat smith was good, he turned around the finances of IFA when he was director of Operations, brought them from broke to circa €15m, you mightn't like his methods but that's business, Farmers are such holy joes (yea right) of course that they expect IFA to have morals to fight companies that don't

wrangler

alps wrote: »

They do have a Cheif Executive or Director General but have always taken the view of being more effective putting the farmer face forward.

Most other representitive organisations put the paid professional up front.

It's a tactical decision that has its pros and cons. The farmer is backed up by very professional coaching and advise, but for sure, today's media platform is not an easy pitch to perform on against some very senior players.

Best effort will come from those that have more to risk..

Pat Smith was heavily criticised by famers for being too much to the forefront of IFA, farmers haven't a hope now

This is from Irish times 2016
When you measure Smith’s pay packet up against the €45 million in tax breaks he helped secure over the past two years alone, it starts to look like reasonable value by the warped metrics of private sector executive pay.

Few Irish executives could claim to have delivered €45 million for 88,000 shareholders over the past two years.

declanflynn

Dinzee Conlee wrote: »

Not wanting to have a go at you now - cos I asked you for your ideas, and you put me up...

But how you see funding for the IFA working if they don’t collect at the factories, combined with a lowering membership level...
Then, how do you propose the funding for factories happens?

Personally, I don’t think farmers funding a meat factory is a good idea at all...
They would be expected to pay more, whilst also expected to carry a higher cost base due to better working conditions, etc. And then, the factory would also be expected to deliver huge profits...
I just don’t think it would work...

On your last comment - should the IFA give up electing a farmer as president, and just get someone in?

Kerry group started in a caravan and look at it now
Theres no reason why a farm body cant be funded by farmers, there are loads of reasons why it shouldn't be funded by Larry.
We need a leader with a vision, a new vision, we have tried farmers at the top of the IFA, same result every time.
I dont think farmers would expect higher beef prices and huge dividends from the factory, I'd say say they would be more than one of these.

declanflynn

Dinzee Conlee wrote: »

Not wanting to have a go at you now - cos I asked you for your ideas, and you put me up...

But how you see funding for the IFA working if they don’t collect at the factories, combined with a lowering membership level...
Then, how do you propose the funding for factories happens?

Personally, I don’t think farmers funding a meat factory is a good idea at all...
They would be expected to pay more, whilst also expected to carry a higher cost base due to better working conditions, etc. And then, the factory would also be expected to deliver huge profits...
I just don’t think it would work...

On your last comment - should the IFA give up electing a farmer as president, and just get someone in?

Do you have any ideas beside knocking mine

wrangler

declanflynn wrote: »

Kerry group started in a caravan and look at it now
Theres no reason why a farm body cant be funded by farmers, there are loads of reasons why it shouldn't be funded by Larry.
We need a leader with a vision, a new vision, we have tried farmers at the top of the IFA, same result every time.
I dont think farmers would expect higher beef prices and huge dividends from the factory, I'd say say they would be more than one of these.

Larry started very humble too and look at him now,
No matter what you do you won't get more for beef than the european price

declanflynn

wrangler wrote: »

Pat Smith was heavily criticised by famers for being too much to the forefront of IFA, farmers haven't a hope now

This is from Irish times 2016
When you measure Smith’s pay packet up against the €45 million in tax breaks he helped secure over the past two years alone, it starts to look like reasonable value by the warped metrics of private sector executive pay.

Few Irish executives could claim to have delivered €45 million for 88,000 shareholders over the past two years.

can you breakdown the €45 million?

wrangler

declanflynn wrote: »

can you breakdown the €45 million?

Just quoting the Irish Times, I know from working with smith he knew where to look for opportunities, his replacement now is useless and they've employed an assistant and the two of them together wouldn't equal smith.
Mc donald was In IFA before, I knew the way it'd be as soon as I heard his name.
The joke is definitely on farmers in that case

declanflynn

wrangler wrote: »

Larry started very humble too and look at him now,
No matter what you do you won't get more for beef than the european price

I dont think any other producer would have that attitude if they had total control over the supply side of the equation

wrangler

declanflynn wrote: »

I dont think any other producer would have that attitude if they had total control over the supply side of the equation

If Ireland sent meat into England with a 10% increase in price it wouldn't be long before someone would undercut

declanflynn

wrangler wrote: »

If Ireland sent meat into England with a 10% increase in price it wouldn't be long before someone would undercut

most of our beef in British supermarkets is in special offer section of the meat fridges, we need to aim a bit a fair bit higher, our beef is high quality food.

charolais0153

declanflynn wrote: »

most of our beef in British supermarkets is in special offer section of the meat fridges, we need to aim a bit a fair bit higher, our beef is high quality food.

In a foreign market, they'd obviously buy the British beef before the Irish beef at the same price, polish beef is below ours, do you know how markets work

wrangler

declanflynn wrote: »

most of our beef in British supermarkets is in special offer section of the meat fridges, we need to aim a bit a fair bit higher, our beef is high quality food.

You can sell beef at the market value or sell no beef at the market +10% value, choice is yours.

Another quote from The Irish times.
Perhaps the answer lies in the IFA’s rather romantic vision of itself as some sort of national cultural icon, the guardian of rural Ireland and all that.

When you see it as most of us do - a machine for squeezing money out of the taxpayer for its members - Smith’s salary is no more or less troubling than that of any other successful executive.


Powerful stuff eh, farmers should've gone Cap in hand to smith before now to get him back...... whaT A JOKE

declanflynn

charolais0153 wrote: »

In a foreign market, they'd obviously buy the British beef before the Irish beef at the same price, polish beef is below ours, do you know how markets work

yeah I have a fair idea how they work.
Polish beef will never be able to compete with Irish beef in Britain.
In the British shoppers eye our beef is a very close second to British beef and close to 20% of British shoppers would see Irish beef as equal or superior to British beef, so we shouldn't be underselling our produce.

Some lads on here are great at knocking Irish beef and knocking any ideas other posters have but never put forward an idea themselves...

declanflynn

wrangler wrote: »

You can sell beef at the market value or sell no beef at the market +10% value, choice is yours.

Another quote from The Irish times.
Perhaps the answer lies in the IFA’s rather romantic vision of itself as some sort of national cultural icon, the guardian of rural Ireland and all that.

When you see it as most of us do - a machine for squeezing money out of the taxpayer for its members - Smith’s salary is no more or less troubling than that of any other successful executive.


Powerful stuff eh, farmers should've gone Cap in hand to smith before now to get him back...... whaT A JOKE

Will you throw away the Irish Times and think for yourself,
I'm beginning to think you are Mr Smith

wrangler

declanflynn wrote: »

yeah I have a fair idea how they work.
Polish beef will never be able to compete with Irish beef in Britain.
In the British shoppers eye our beef is a very close second to British beef and close to 20% of British shoppers would see Irish beef as equal or superior to British beef, so we shouldn't be underselling our produce.

Some lads on here are great at knocking Irish beef and knocking any ideas other posters have but never put forward an idea themselves...

Why didn't beef plan do what they promised, your statements there are straight out of Beef Plan. They didn't deliver because they just couldn't sell the beef into this wonderful market.
Underselling or not processors are selling a lot of beef

declanflynn

wrangler wrote: »

Why didn't beef plan do what they promised, your statements there are straight out of Beef Plan. They didn't deliver because they just couldn't sell the beef into this wonderful market.
Underselling or not processors are selling a lot of beef

Again same old cd, knock the idea without putting forward any idea yourself

Jjameson

declanflynn wrote: »

yeah I have a fair idea how they work.
Polish beef will never be able to compete with Irish beef in Britain.
In the British shoppers eye our beef is a very close second to British beef and close to 20% of British shoppers would see Irish beef as equal or superior to British beef, so we shouldn't be underselling our produce.

Some lads on here are great at knocking Irish beef and knocking any ideas other posters have but never put forward an idea themselves...

I think this is correct.
Polish beef is cheap but not cheap enough to knock enough off the retail price to tempt a British consumer.
And while Irish beef might pass off beside supporting British and so on the Irish beef is more palatable.
The catering and convenience food sector aren’t as discerning but even Mac Donald’s won’t risk deviation and that speaks volumes.

declanflynn

charolais0153 wrote: »

In a foreign market, they'd obviously buy the British beef before the Irish beef at the same price, polish beef is below ours, do you know how markets work

Did you nod off?

declanflynn

Jjameson wrote: »

I think this is correct.
Polish beef is cheap but not cheap enough to knock enough off the retail price to tempt a British consumer.
And while Irish beef might pass off beside supporting British and so on the Irish beef is more palatable.
The catering and convenience food sector aren’t as discerning but even Mac Donald’s won’t risk deviation and that speaks volumes.

Exactly