Less than 48 hours after motions of no confidence in the executive board were defeated by the national executive on Tuesday, fresh motions have emerged from county executives. These latest motions call into question the confidence that grassroots members have in the national council to adequately represent their views. There is no doubt that national council is facing one of the biggest tests in the organisation’s history. If they cannot retain the confidence of their counties then the organisation will descend into total chaos.
It is time to leave egos and politics at the door and for those with influence to finally take a grip on this situation. The focus needs to shift from self protectionism and political positions to doing what is right for the membership. Farmer interests have become less and less relevant as this saga has progressed, with the advancement of political careers dominating. Events of the past 48 hours show that grassroots members can see this for what it is and are no longer prepared to tolerate it.
Members now need clear leadership – often this will not involve taking what may be the popular route. Presidential elections are naturally dominating the discussion of those inside the bubble – but what do the real grassroots members, who support the organisation through membership and levies, really want? Ultimately nothing has changed – they want good representation and for the organisation, not a president, to be tackling the issues impacting on farm income.
In the case of beef farmers, another beef forum where the only outcome is a flurry of press releases, each containing political spin as opposed to any real hard action, is of little use. Are dairy farmers looking ahead to a spring milk price of 25c/litres really that concerned as to who the IFA president will be? I imagine they are more concerned as to what the organisation is doing to ensure processors are passing the best possible price back to farmers. At a higher level, the EU Commission is set to engage within days with the Mercosur region on a trade deal that has the potential to seriously undermine Irish farm incomes – what is more important – strong representation or the election of a president?
What the IFA needs now is stability – stability to allow it go out and do its job while allowing the necessary reforms take place over the next 12 months.
What the IFA needs now is stability – stability to allow it go out and do its job while allowing the necessary reforms take place over the next 12 months. I can see the logic behind a snap election but it should be assessed in the context that an incoming president will spend most of 2016 rebuilding the organisation after the fallout of the past few months. Doing this while at the same time representing farmers in what looks set to be a very challenging year will present an extremely ambitious workload.
Those inside the “bubble” will be slow to look at delaying the election. For some, election fever has already taken hold. However, that doesn’t mean it is right – the grassroots members need strong representation. An alternative to consider would be to delay the election process until the autumn of 2016 on the agreement that the entire board would step down at this point.
Jer Bergin could either retain the current role as appointed on Tuesday or national council could elect a caretaker president. Reading the Con Lucey report in detail, it is clear that it was in fact Jer Bergin who called a stop to the remuneration practices at the top level by refusing to sign off on the former general secretary’s remuneration package. However, the process around the general secretary’s severance package and Bergin’s involvement may pose a problem for grassroots members.
Regardless, the workload of Jer Bergin at present is simply not tenable. If retaining the post as caretaker president, he should be free to represent farmers and additional duties divested. This freedom should be afforded to any candidate elected to the role. The establishment of a sub group from national council supported by outside expertise should be considered and for this group to report to the president over the next 12 months on reforming the organisation.
The rules of the organisation should not be used as an excuse against doing what is right. National council is the governing body of the organisation and responsible for safeguarding its future. They have the ability to implement the necessary changes – they shouldn’t hide behind the rule book.
Read more
Full coverage: Con Lucey report
Less than 48 hours after motions of no confidence in the executive board were defeated by the national executive on Tuesday, fresh motions have emerged from county executives. These latest motions call into question the confidence that grassroots members have in the national council to adequately represent their views. There is no doubt that national council is facing one of the biggest tests in the organisation’s history. If they cannot retain the confidence of their counties then the organisation will descend into total chaos.
It is time to leave egos and politics at the door and for those with influence to finally take a grip on this situation. The focus needs to shift from self protectionism and political positions to doing what is right for the membership. Farmer interests have become less and less relevant as this saga has progressed, with the advancement of political careers dominating. Events of the past 48 hours show that grassroots members can see this for what it is and are no longer prepared to tolerate it.
Members now need clear leadership – often this will not involve taking what may be the popular route. Presidential elections are naturally dominating the discussion of those inside the bubble – but what do the real grassroots members, who support the organisation through membership and levies, really want? Ultimately nothing has changed – they want good representation and for the organisation, not a president, to be tackling the issues impacting on farm income.
In the case of beef farmers, another beef forum where the only outcome is a flurry of press releases, each containing political spin as opposed to any real hard action, is of little use. Are dairy farmers looking ahead to a spring milk price of 25c/litres really that concerned as to who the IFA president will be? I imagine they are more concerned as to what the organisation is doing to ensure processors are passing the best possible price back to farmers. At a higher level, the EU Commission is set to engage within days with the Mercosur region on a trade deal that has the potential to seriously undermine Irish farm incomes – what is more important – strong representation or the election of a president?
What the IFA needs now is stability – stability to allow it go out and do its job while allowing the necessary reforms take place over the next 12 months.
What the IFA needs now is stability – stability to allow it go out and do its job while allowing the necessary reforms take place over the next 12 months. I can see the logic behind a snap election but it should be assessed in the context that an incoming president will spend most of 2016 rebuilding the organisation after the fallout of the past few months. Doing this while at the same time representing farmers in what looks set to be a very challenging year will present an extremely ambitious workload.
Those inside the “bubble” will be slow to look at delaying the election. For some, election fever has already taken hold. However, that doesn’t mean it is right – the grassroots members need strong representation. An alternative to consider would be to delay the election process until the autumn of 2016 on the agreement that the entire board would step down at this point.
Jer Bergin could either retain the current role as appointed on Tuesday or national council could elect a caretaker president. Reading the Con Lucey report in detail, it is clear that it was in fact Jer Bergin who called a stop to the remuneration practices at the top level by refusing to sign off on the former general secretary’s remuneration package. However, the process around the general secretary’s severance package and Bergin’s involvement may pose a problem for grassroots members.
Regardless, the workload of Jer Bergin at present is simply not tenable. If retaining the post as caretaker president, he should be free to represent farmers and additional duties divested. This freedom should be afforded to any candidate elected to the role. The establishment of a sub group from national council supported by outside expertise should be considered and for this group to report to the president over the next 12 months on reforming the organisation.
The rules of the organisation should not be used as an excuse against doing what is right. National council is the governing body of the organisation and responsible for safeguarding its future. They have the ability to implement the necessary changes – they shouldn’t hide behind the rule book.
Read more
Full coverage: Con Lucey report
SHARING OPTIONS