IFA has warned national hill chairman, Flor McCarthy, that he may have “potentially breached” the association’s rules of conduct after being involved in a protest over the farm body’s approach to CAP reform.

The claim was put to Mr McCarthy at yesterday’s IFA National Council meeting – the first gathering of the governing group since the Kenmare farmer and IFA member Derek Deane protested outside IFA headquarters in Dublin last week. 

While neither of the men have been directly contacted by IFA president Tim Cullinan since airing their criticism of IFA’s CAP project team, its position on coupled supports for the suckler and sheep sectors, and its director general Damian McDonald among other senior staff members, the matter was tabled at the online meeting.

Speaking to the Farming Independent Mr McCarthy said: “We had our council meeting, the issue was raised and they took real offence to it.

"They didn’t say what specific rule I breached, but they are sending it off to the rules committee and they said they will send it to me in writing.

"I don’t believe there is any rule that they can censor me under and, to be honest, it’s very disappointing because the longer this drags on, the more the president is going to have to talk to us, we are all part of IFA.

"I was never under any illusion that I was going to turn council in my favour, I’m only operating on the grounds of what I believe is right for low-income farmers, I think they are being sold a pup on supports out of Pillar 2.

"I put my case forward as best I could, but I was stopped and interrupted, I’d much rather have a discussion in person. I’m not against IFA at all; I’ve been an IFA man for 25 years. 

"All we are looking for is guaranteed supports for suckler and sheep farmers out of Pillar 1 – not Pillar 2, which will shove up to 20,000 farmers into poverty in my region. France, Belgium and Germany are all supporting their suckler and sheep farmers out of Pillar 1, why should we be any different?

"I have no intention of standing down. I’m actually very interested about how they might try to remove me, as I said no rule was quoted to me.

"If they find I inadvertently breached a rule I will apologise and withdraw it, but as it stands, I don’t believe I made any statement that is wrong or inaccurate.”

‘Defend reputation’

In a statement issued after the national council meeting IFA reiterated that its position on CAP reform was developed by its CAP project team.

"This followed extensive discussions and engagement with members, including a full round of regional meetings in January. It was discussed and approved by the elected members of national council, which is the association’s ruling body, on May 4.

"IFA will use all reasonable means to defend the reputation of our association, officers and staff, and their families, from any inaccurate, personalised or derogatory comments. Such commentary has no place in IFA.

"IFA is a democratic organisation with established structures. We welcome robust policy debate.

"Any member who wishes to make a policy proposal within IFA can do so through their county executive or through a national committee.

“At the meeting today, the national council referred a number of potential breaches of the IFA rules and code of conduct to the national rules committee.

"The real problem with CAP reform is that the EU expect farmers to do more for less money, in real terms. EU policy makers have tried to distract from this by a host of proposals to redistribute money and divide farmers.

"IFA’s focus remains on securing the best possible outcome for farmers. We want the Government to honour its commitment to provide investment of €1.5bn for farmers from the carbon tax. This must be targeted at the low-income sectors,” the statement concluded.