MAIN FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

COMMENT

15. MEETING CONSUMER REQUIREMENTS

Our competitiveness ultimately depends on our capacity to meet the needs and requirements of consumers, which are becoming more complex.

Yes. Need to sell this message in a proactive manner and get people on board. Many producers see food safety/QA as a threat rather than an opportunity.

15.1: ENSURING FOOD SAFETY

 Ireland should be to the forefront of food safety and consumer protection, and should seek to be a model for other Member States.

Yes, good long term strategy – but do not generate excessive paperwork. Need more scientific approach.

 Farmers, processors, retailers and caterers must accept a shared responsibility to produce safe food.

Yes, but we need better framework for educating producers. Get the stakeholders on board. Consider tying in direct payments, grant aids etc. to food safety/quality training

 The promotional work of Bord Bia, the Irish Dairy Board and top companies in marketing Ireland as the ‘Food Island of Europe’ needs to be underpinned by robust food safety and quality initiatives.

Yes, with the above comments

 There is a need for greater coherence and clarity in voluntary quality assurance schemes, which should include a strong food safety component.

Absolutely, far too much ambiguity/overlap/ poor inspection standards

 Clear, honest labeling must be the norm in order to inform consumer purchasing decisions.

Yes- consumers must have choice

 Transparency in the assessment, management and communication of risk is imperative.

Yes, producers need to understand basic hazard analysis. Consumers need to now likely risk/damage potential.

 Ireland should fully support efforts to ensure that the animal feed industry throughout the EU complies with the highest standards of quality and safety.

Yes – feed industry is a weak link QA schemes are focusing on farm end, most problems occur pre farm

 The FSAI and FSPB should develop a National Food Safety Plan, setting out clearly the responsibilities and functions of all agencies involved in food safety and the contingency plans for dealing with food safety emergencies.

Yes

 Urgent attention is needed to develop an adequate and coordinated laboratory service to support food safety activities.

Yes

 Comprehensive surveillance data on appropriate food safety indicators should be collected and published routinely by the FSAI.

Yes

 Appropriate education and training schemes for workers at all stages of the food chain should be developed.

Very important

15.2: ASSURING FOOD QUALITY

 Preserving Ireland’s reputation as a quality food producer is essential for the future of the agri-food sector.

Yes

 The decline in cattle standards has led to some confusion in the media, where it has sometimes been incorrectly interpreted as a decline in beef eating quality, and this has been potentially damaging to our international marketing efforts.

Good point- not enough emphasis on eating quality

 There would be considerable merit in continuing and extending the current research by Bord Bia on customer perceptions of the eating and other qualities of Irish beef on European markets.

Very important to get feedback on consumers

 The results of the Bord Bia market research and of Teagasc research on the impact of breeding and feeding practices on eating quality should be widely disseminated, particularly to beef farmers and processors.

Can be difficult to give clear advice to producers on factors affecting eating quality – handling at slaughter/post slaughter is more critical

 The Committee supports the various initiatives being taken to address the issue of cattle standards, but believes that particular attention must be devoted to part-time beef producers, who increasingly dominate beef farming and who derive only a small proportion of their income from the sale of animals.

Yes – further issue is live exports of weanlings, many part-timers going this route – significant consequences

 The following issues should be pursued in order to improve the standard of cattle:

- build a production quality incentive into direct payments where possible;

- consider how the use of fertility synchronisation products can be encouraged and facilitated, particularly by lowering their cost, while maintaining high standards of control and food safety;

- launch a coordinated education programme.

Good recommendations

Need to free up synchronisation rules. Is there a food safety risk with approved progesterone products

 The Committee agrees with the conclusions of the Sheepmeat Forum. In particular there is a need to ensure a better match to consumer specifications by addressing issues of quality, timing and selection. It is important that sufficient research, advisory and other support is made available to bring about the necessary changes in production patterns.

Yes

17.5: CHANGING AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING

 There will clearly be different demands for agricultural training from full and part-time farmers.

Yes

 The fundamental overhaul of agricultural training currently being undertaken by Teagasc, and receiving detailed consideration by the task force on agricultural education and training, should be pursued urgently and subject to continued monitoring in light of future requirements.

Yes

 The Committee endorses the progress being made in the integration of agricultural training with mainstream education, and recommends that it should be subject to the same standards and certification procedures. This will require close co-operation between DAFRD, Department of Education and Science, Teagasc and the other bodies involved.

Yes

 Consideration should be given to strengthening the training conditionality for development and other grants, as recommended by the ESRI.

Yes, consider tying in food safety/quality training

18.1: ADDRESSING FARM HOUSEHOLD VIABILITY

 Future policy should be focused on farm household viability in all its dimensions, including farm and off-farm income sources.

Yes

 Government policy should aim to create and maintain viable farm households through:

- developing new approaches to supporting income from farming activities;

- providing targeted income support for the poorest farm families; and

- policies which create and maintain off-farm employment opportunities in rural areas.

Yes

18.2: DEVELOPING NEW APPROACHES TO FARM INCOME SUPPORT

 The options for achieving coherence and simplification of the various direct payments schemes should be regularly reviewed by DAFRD.

Provided there is no net loss by changing the approach

18.3: TACKLING FARM POVERTY

 The reduction of rural poverty should continue to be a key objective of the NAPS, which is currently under review.

Yes

 A specific target should be set for reducing poverty levels in low-income farm households. Progress against this target should be regularly reviewed and the results published as part of the NAPS process.

Yes

 Disadvantaged area payments to farmers, which have a major income support objective, should be targeted towards low-income households.

The implications/ consequences need to be carefully assessed.

18.4: ENCOURAGING THE DEVELOPMENT OF OFF-FARM EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES

 The successful implementation of regional policies will be crucial in providing off-farm employment opportunities in rural areas.

Yes

 In regions that have the highest dependence on part-time farming, particular attention should be paid to distributing investment to smaller centres. This approach should also be reflected in the National Spatial Strategy.

Yes