Will farmers gain from IFA governance restructuring?
Therein perhaps lies the nub of the argument as the IFA strives to regain the trust and confidence of its membership.
Is the IFA a political association, or a leadership organisation?
From a governance perspective, the following changes should be considered for the benefit of farmer members:
The real leaders that have emerged from the furore in recent weeks have been county chairmen and farmers in parishes across the country demanding change.
The IFA should acknowledge their fortitude, and reorganise governance structures around stronger regional representation.
Empowered regional bodies would in turn elect leaders onto a slimmed-down national executive.
A revamped leadership structure should also encourage diversity, with greater representation by women, young farmers, and include independent directors.
Perhaps the time has come for the IFA to move away from running national political-style presidential elections.
In the 21st century most co-op and corporate boards elect the best leader from within their ranks as chairperson.
Such a structural change in the IFA would help ensure greater accountability by the chairperson to the board and ordinary members at all times.
The IFA can take one positive point from its recent turmoil.
There has been a dramatic increase in attendance by farmers at local meetings.
How can the association reinvigorate participation across over 900 branches nationally?
The IFA often boasts it has over 88,000 members.
Yet, barely a third (31,726) of its members voted in the last presidential election.
This suggests a broader membership that is not fully engaged with their association.
As the largest farmer representative organisation in the country the IFA should be setting governance standards, and not just merely following them.
As a starting point, it should publish and account for every single euro paid to its elected leaders.
Such practice is not unprecedented.
One has to look no further than the farmer-owned, Drinagh Co-op, in West Cork.
It transparently publishes in its annual report the exact amount every director receives in expenses annually.
The IFA should go the extra mile, by also insisting that every external board to which its leaders are appointed, publish its remuneration figures in full.
Without exception, every member of the IFA’s leadership should be obliged to enrol and complete a certified course in corporate governance.
In recent years the DCU Ryan Academy for Entrepreneurs, has run Fetac Certified programs in corporate governance specifically geared towards farmer leaders.
At the moment I am in the Ukraine, a country that has seen two revolutions in the past decade, is currently fighting a war in its eastern provinces, had part of its sovereign territory annexed last year, and is battling oligarchy and corruption.
Yet, life goes on. Ukraine has ambitious plans to double grain output to 100 million tonnes over the next five years.
The country is also focused on improving its supply-chain infrastructure, reducing bureaucracy, and enhancing its management systems.
All of this is being delivered in the absence of farming subsidies.
The point here being, today’s agri-food sector is global, challenging, and is still moving at a rate of knots. Irish farmers should not lose sight of this fact.
The IFA was formed in challenging times.
Arguably, the original crop of IFA leaders helped inspire a revolution and revival within Irish agriculture.
Their legacy is manifested across the world today in leading global brands like Kerrygold butter, and internationally respected companies like Kerry Group and Glanbia.
Does Ireland have the same calibre of farmer leaders today? Absolutely.
Time will tell if such men and women are willing to inspire and lead our largest farmer body to the next renaissance in Irish agriculture.
Tom O’Callaghan is former CEO of the Irish Co-operative Organisation Society. He is director of development for effective investments LLC, Ukraine
