The milk suppliers group DMSSG say they are ‘most disappointed’ to read in last week’s Avondhu what they term ‘the inaccurate information being put out by Dairygold and their PR firm’.

In a statement issued this week, they list the main points they say need addressing. “Hopefully the Press will give us fair representation. We have set up a website also to help farmers on the ground get access to the full detail of what we are saying,” the statement says. “The main points we are taking issue with are as follows:

1.Just because Dairygold board and management spent 2 years in planning and consultation doesn’t make what they have come up with ‘the right way forward’

2.Dairygold have not addressed in detail all the issues raised by our group – they couldn’t even answer two detailed queries put to them in writing so that there would be no confusion regarding the queries – i.e. (1) What percentage of the 27.5m gals processed by Dairygold for Glanbia annually is done in the peak months of May and June and (2) can we have a full breakdown as to the cost of the 7.5t dryer in Mitchelstown.

3.Our claims are not sensational, unfounded or misleading but in fact represent what farmers are saying on the ground in relation to the original survey in 2011 that gave 63.5%, ignoring the previous survey in 2010 which was 40%; also what we know the plant costs, these costs being derived from the manufacturers of that plant.

4.We didn’t refuse to meet but asked for our two queries to be answered in writing first. When they weren’t, it was obvious that the board and management were not listening.

5.Due to the fact also that the share-up has been implemented, along with Independent milk testing being non-negotiable, we had no choice but to proceed with the SGM request that the 250 signatories had signed up for.

6.We don’t know how the secretary/board/management can put a resolution in support of their post quota plan from the General Committee (i.e. 60 – and not all would sign it) into the SGM and also ahead of our two resolutions (for which the required 250 signatures to request the SGM as per the rules of our Society had been obtained).

“We encourage all members to read up on what we are saying on our website http://dmssg.webs.com/ and to come out in force on the 11th April and support our two very reasonable resolutions.

“In relation to Jim Woulfe’s comments, it shows how far removed he is from the harsh reality of farming on the ground, where farmers are struggling to make ends meet with fodder shortages the order of the day. Taking big sums of money from farmers who have helped build the co-op who are already struggling financially and are not expanding, is wrong and out of kilter with other co-ops.”