Farmer's Fancy Footwork

Now that the dust has settled after the en masse resignations at the Irish Farmers Association, it seems clear that the move …

Now that the dust has settled after the en masse resignations at the Irish Farmers Association, it seems clear that the move represented a legal ploy rather than a sign of surrender. Thus far, the strategy is paying dividends. Yesterday, the High Court lifted the £500,000 daily fine on the association, after it apologised to the court for its defiance of earlier court orders. To his credit, Mr Justice O'Donovan warned that identified participants in a blockade would face the full rigour of the law. But this may not be easy.

The IFA, in court, insisted that it would desist from any confrontational action outside meats plants. But the association is now enjoying the best of all worlds; the blockades, mounted supposedly by individual farmers acting on their own initiative, are continuing but some fancy footwork means that the IFA bears no responsibility. At this juncture, it is not too difficult to envisage a scenario in which the farmers secure an improved price from the beef processors and the association's former senior officers - including the former President, Mr Tom Parlon - are returned, victorious, to office. If so, this will be a victory of which the IFA - and the political system - should not feel overly proud. For several days, the association has openly defied the will of the courts and the law of the land. Farmers have acted as though they are above the law. To make matters worse, the Government and the Opposition - instead of admonishing the IFA for its illegal actions - have been careful not to discommode a organisation which appears to enjoy unparalleled political muscle. It is hard to conceive of any other group of workers, in similar circumstances, being treated in such an indulgent manner.

All of this does not detract from the fundamental merits of the case advanced by the IFA. Farmers are, indeed, being exploited by the meat processors and there is considerable evidence that the processors are operating a cartel. The Minister for Agriculture, Mr Walsh, apparently is optimistic that some kind of solution can be brokered in the dispute. He hopes to meet the IFA to discuss a revised offer from the Irish Meat Association, which represents the processors. Certainly, there appears to be little between both sides with the processors edging towards the 90p per lb figure demanded by the farmers.

The hope must be that the dramatic events of the past 48 hours will not lead to a hardening of attitudes. This battle in Ireland's largest indigenous industry is not just a scrap between the IFA and the IMA. More than 3,000 people have been laid off at meat plants throughout the State and hard-won export markets in the EU and beyond are under threat; this damaging confrontation must be ended without delay.