I like to keep tabs on what farmers outside the EU are doing. If they can make money without being subsidised, then their ideas are worth looking at.

Our common climate and grass-growing ability always makes New Zealand worth looking at. They are far more grass-based than us and therefore breeding tends to be different. This is evident when comparing carcase size. Bullocks in Ireland for the 2015/2016 period had an average carcase size of 359kg, while the average weight in New Zealand was 308kg.

The difference between the Irish and Kiwi cow herds is even more stark. While both countries have close to 1m beef cows, New Zealand has almost 4.5 million more dairy cows than Ireland.

That would go a long way in explaining the difference in cow carcase weight; 374kg was the average Irish cow’s kill-out compared with 195kg for her New Zealand equivalent. I am envious of the emphasis placed on the taste of beef by our competitors in the Antipodes. Australia has Meat Standards Australia, which grades meat according to how it should taste and runs carcase competitions. The Aussies have their national beef carcase competition, while New Zealand has its Steak of Origin competition

These incentivise producers to improve their product in terms of the meat quality. They even have a focus on paddock to plate genetics. What do we have? It is interesting to note that both are focusing on taste rather than pumping out commodity beef.

Both countries are far closer to the heavily urban population centres of southeast Asia than we are, yet they are searching for niches.

Commodity production might be more straightforward at processor and marketing level, but in an evolving market we can’t afford to maintain the status quo.

Our quality assurance scheme has little to do with the quality of the meat. At farm level, traceability is excellent, but not all meat from quality assured farms is classified as such. At least not to the farmer. Agriculture is under increased scrutiny from consumers.

Urban populations will continue to rise, as will the standards they expect of food. That’s a challenge or opportunity, depending on how set in your ways you are. In Australia, just 10% of the population lives in rural areas, while urban dwellers in New Zealand are expected to reach 80% soon. At home, the 2016 census revealed that 63% of Irish citizens live in urban centres, up 16% over 50 years. Beef and Lamb New Zealand is a farmer-owned industry organisation, similar to a combination of Bord Bia and Teagasc, but is run by farmers for farmers. It’s got a from-the-ground-up approach, with a number of regional boards that meet to tailor the advisory needs of each area, which in turn feed into a national one.

Funded by farmer levies, the organisation’s very existence and method of levy collection, is voted on every six years. This means the onus is on the regional and national boards, made up of farmers and those they employ to work as advisers, to deliver. It is joined-up thinking throughout the chain.

In Ireland we have a top-down advisory sector, justified as Government and European money forms a significant part of many drystock enterprises. But would piggy-backing on the existing Teagasc structure enable a bit more farmer input? Could commercial farmers have representation at advisory area level and feed into a national steering group? Are we happy? Or is everyone content with the current formats?