DEAR SIR: When Derek Deane speaks, farmers listen. His finest hour came in November 2015 when he became the whistle blower about ballooning remuneration levels for senior office holders in the IFA.

By November 2015, Derek was very experienced in farm politics, and as in all politics would have known that the messenger is normally first to be shot. However, he subsequently paid a heavy price for this stance in that he failed to get a nomination to contest the leadership of IFA.

In the 17 December issue of the Irish Farmers Journal, Derek outlined his thoughts on the suckler sector in a letter to the editor. I totally agree with his contention that the sector has been, “bombarded with policies trying to choke them out of business”. He might have added that we have had successive ag ministers, including the present one, who have paid lip service to protecting the sector, but nothing else.

He is totally correct when he contends that, “asking suckler farmers to reduce numbers is targeting people who are not part of the problem”, (with emissions).

However, I would respectfully disagree with him as to where to go from here. To put it bluntly, despite Derek and others having engaged in the good fight on behalf of the sector ie full-time suckling, the war is over, and we have lost.

Furthermore, there is zero evidence on the long-term horizon that suckling can improve its position in the pecking order. For these reasons, I believe it is a serious strategic error for Derek and others to dismiss, out of hand, any suggestion of a partial, voluntary cull.

Suckler farmers compete with farmers in other sectors for rented ground every year. With good ground now fetching between €400 and €500 per acre and climbing, the suckler people are out of the game. However, they will still have the stock.

With that, if the policy positions of the farm organisations, together with the similar policy position of Meat Industry Ireland are to hold sway, farmers will be forced to cull without transition supports.

Warped logic!