Red Tractor Fight, Campaign Resources
- Thread starter Grass And Grain
- Start date
- Location
- Portsmouth
I've got them all if needed
- Location
- Acton Scott, South Shropshire
I had a very polite response from the top man at AHDB yesterday to acknowledge my email (below) and confirming that he had received several others on the subect. He said he had spoken to AIC and was going to be consulting with colleagues about how best to help us.
"Dear Sir,
I write to you as one of a number of farmers who are increasingly dissatisfied with the unlevel playing field we are forced to compete on with regard, in particular, to grain sales, but other sectors of agriculture as well. I attach a letter I have sent to Red Tractor asking for their support in asking AIC to review their unfair (and potentially illegal) differential in the way standards are applied to UK and imported grains. I hope you will feel able to add your concerns at this unsatisfactory situation, especially as AHDB contribute such significant sums to Red Tractor. I am sure you would want to know that the funds you send to Red Tractor – which comes from the levies I and other farmers pay to you – are used to help and not hinder British farmers.
On a slightly different tack, I am a big supporter of AHDB – not a popular stance at times – but I am very unhappy to think that my levies are being used to support Red Tractor which is no longer fit for purpose. It was sold to Farmers as a way of getting a premium for our produce and would make a significant impact upon shopping habits. It has since become nothing more than a stick to beat farmers with burdening us with extra cost and administration over and above the legal requirements for no benefit. Food manufacturers largely cant be bothered to display the red tractor symbol, Sainsburys haven’t used the Red Tractor label for some years and consumers largely aren’t even aware of its presence on products on the shelf.
Red Tractor have to keep adding pointless targets to justify their own existence, gold plating assurance standards that already exceed the legal requirements and importing standards for no benefit other than their own coffers.
I hope I have given you some idea of how strongly I and others feel on the subject and will consider our concerns when you next think about funding Red Tractor
Yours sincerely,"
"Dear Sir,
I write to you as one of a number of farmers who are increasingly dissatisfied with the unlevel playing field we are forced to compete on with regard, in particular, to grain sales, but other sectors of agriculture as well. I attach a letter I have sent to Red Tractor asking for their support in asking AIC to review their unfair (and potentially illegal) differential in the way standards are applied to UK and imported grains. I hope you will feel able to add your concerns at this unsatisfactory situation, especially as AHDB contribute such significant sums to Red Tractor. I am sure you would want to know that the funds you send to Red Tractor – which comes from the levies I and other farmers pay to you – are used to help and not hinder British farmers.
On a slightly different tack, I am a big supporter of AHDB – not a popular stance at times – but I am very unhappy to think that my levies are being used to support Red Tractor which is no longer fit for purpose. It was sold to Farmers as a way of getting a premium for our produce and would make a significant impact upon shopping habits. It has since become nothing more than a stick to beat farmers with burdening us with extra cost and administration over and above the legal requirements for no benefit. Food manufacturers largely cant be bothered to display the red tractor symbol, Sainsburys haven’t used the Red Tractor label for some years and consumers largely aren’t even aware of its presence on products on the shelf.
Red Tractor have to keep adding pointless targets to justify their own existence, gold plating assurance standards that already exceed the legal requirements and importing standards for no benefit other than their own coffers.
I hope I have given you some idea of how strongly I and others feel on the subject and will consider our concerns when you next think about funding Red Tractor
Yours sincerely,"
- Location
- Yorks
@ploughman1963 thanks for taking the time to send an email, and for posting it here. Good work, and will add weight to the cause.
I've spent the day reflecting, trying to work out what might be a sensible next strategic move. We've written directly to AIC, and I'm pretty certain they've got the message now.
AHDB cereals Mr Grantely-Smith is on the case and apparently conversing with AIC. Several people had emailed MR Grantley-Smith, which was probably the right number to be taken seriously without being too much of a nuisance. We do want AHDB to help us. So that's all good. Plus I think a couple of NFU group secretaries might have written to AIC at their members' requests. Chances of getting anyone higher up at NFU to help is slim imho.
So we've hit AIC directly, and we might have got a slight push from below from AHDB.
So next, I think we need to hit AIC from above.
Thing we've not done is use the feed mills. There's a possibility feed mills could be hurt in all this. So the next idea (and I'll never know why we didn't think to do this last week) is to get the feed mills on our side to write to AIC, so the AIC make the correct decision. Let's face it, I'd imagine it'd make feed mills very happy if they could purchase unassured.
(I'll post this exact message on the RT Referendum post, so everyone sees and discusses it there).
More instructions to follow.
I've spent the day reflecting, trying to work out what might be a sensible next strategic move. We've written directly to AIC, and I'm pretty certain they've got the message now.
AHDB cereals Mr Grantely-Smith is on the case and apparently conversing with AIC. Several people had emailed MR Grantley-Smith, which was probably the right number to be taken seriously without being too much of a nuisance. We do want AHDB to help us. So that's all good. Plus I think a couple of NFU group secretaries might have written to AIC at their members' requests. Chances of getting anyone higher up at NFU to help is slim imho.
So we've hit AIC directly, and we might have got a slight push from below from AHDB.
So next, I think we need to hit AIC from above.
Thing we've not done is use the feed mills. There's a possibility feed mills could be hurt in all this. So the next idea (and I'll never know why we didn't think to do this last week) is to get the feed mills on our side to write to AIC, so the AIC make the correct decision. Let's face it, I'd imagine it'd make feed mills very happy if they could purchase unassured.
(I'll post this exact message on the RT Referendum post, so everyone sees and discusses it there).
More instructions to follow.
snipe
Member
- Location
- west yorkshire
sent this to Forfarmers. no contact emails on their web site just a email enquiry page. Nelstrops and Allied
Good evening. A large and growing number of farmers including myself have been in contact with various organisation in the grain and agricultural industry including the NFU, AHDB and AIC. The purpose of this is to ask the AIC why it sets standards higher for UK/Eire produced grain than it does for non UK/Eire grain to be supplied to mills. And that the standards should be set equal. At present this is disadvantaging UK and Eire farmers and waisting time and money to comply with the unnecessary regulations. We are currently looking into weather these dual standards are breaking UK law in regards to the competitions Act 1988. We would like to ask you to support UK and Eire farmers by contacting the AIC and asking them to set standards for all grain supplied to mills to be equal.
Good evening. A large and growing number of farmers including myself have been in contact with various organisation in the grain and agricultural industry including the NFU, AHDB and AIC. The purpose of this is to ask the AIC why it sets standards higher for UK/Eire produced grain than it does for non UK/Eire grain to be supplied to mills. And that the standards should be set equal. At present this is disadvantaging UK and Eire farmers and waisting time and money to comply with the unnecessary regulations. We are currently looking into weather these dual standards are breaking UK law in regards to the competitions Act 1988. We would like to ask you to support UK and Eire farmers by contacting the AIC and asking them to set standards for all grain supplied to mills to be equal.
Last edited:
- Location
- Yorks
- Location
- Northumberlandia
Thanks for tagging me on this
Everyone, we're making real progress here.
Many of you have been writing letters to all the quangos. Let's step this up a bit, and make use of these letters/emails.
This purpose of this thread is simply to upload any letters you've written, so that everyone else can simply copy and paste into an email to send off.
You may also like to suggest some email addresses to send the emails to (if they are in the public domain).
Please refrain from commenting on this thread, otherwise we'll get bogged down in discussion, and the thread will lose its usefulness. Feel free to like the posts, and subscribe to the thread.
There's lots of PM's going on at TFF behind the scenes, and there's currently complete pandemonium in the farm assurance industry!
YOU can make a difference, by simply using copy and paste.
Steve
PS. Imagine you didn't notice, but was my debut video appearance
whats can i do too help?
Funny that my RT Renewal is due end of feb aswell
- Location
- Yorks
Mine due end of Feb as well. Hoping to use it to light the wood burner with.Thanks for tagging me on this
whats can i do too help?
Funny that my RT Renewal is due end of feb aswell
In the meantime we need support from anyone with clout, who will support our call to AIC. If you happen to know anyone who works at AHDB, or a monitor farmer, or group sec at NFU, or local group chairman. If you could get them to copy and paste the AIC letter, then email to AIC, that eould be a big help.
Feed mills are today's job. I've other farm work today, but will try to organise things. We need a list of feed mill contact emails and company names. Conventrate on the big boys first. We're going to get feed mills to pressurise AIC, because feed mills could potentially going to get hurt in all this.
snipe
Member
- Location
- west yorkshire
masseys feeds, Bradshaw, abn. Sent to. Unfortunately a lot of the big mills don’t have any direct email addresses on their web sites, any people in the grain trade on her with any contact info.
ollie989898
Member
There is precisely 0% chance that the wider world will magically 'jump' and try to meet RT standards. The UK doesn't consume that much stuff in the scheme of things.
- Location
- Yorks
Some UK feed mills have been contacted today, to explain to them why we think it's untenable for AIC and the UFAS scheme to keep their standards in their current form. We have asked UK feed millers to back us in this campaign. More details to follow.
- Location
- Essex
Dear CEO of grain marketing Co-op
I am writing to try and loosen the grip that the red tractor assurance scheme (RT) has on the farm sector in the uk.
It seems that a great deal of fuss is made over how wonderful RT is and what a benefit it is to farmers when in fact it is a costly time saving exercise which doesn't benefit the farmer.
As far as I can ascertain, no premiums are ever paid for farm assured produce. Grain from your co-op is known for its quality and whether it is farm assured is of less importance.
Red Tractor is nothing more than a rubber stamp on what farmers and producers are legally required to do within the law; it adds no value and as such is only perceived assurance since farming to UK standards is by and large exactly the same thing, whether it is farm assured or not.
I understand that at first glance, the customers like it, it's what everyone's used to etc, there doesn't seem much need to change anything. But at the same time, there seems no point whatsoever in continuing with the status quo. Obviously the consumers get the sticker to say it's farm assured which they like and is free, but it doesn't actually mean anything.
So the question is whether elements of the trade can be dissuaded from insisting on RT assurance, This may be easier in the feed trade in the first instance, especially as a significant element of the livestock industry are non assured.
The other idea I would like to suggest is "Your co-op Assured", could this be taken in house as a benefit to members and possibly even a commercial operation?
As you may know, there is quite a debate going on in the media so I wanted to make my views clear.
Regards
Edit: I have just noticed that I called it a time saving instead of a time wasting exercise!!! I will have to correct it with him tomorrow. You plonker Rodney!
I am writing to try and loosen the grip that the red tractor assurance scheme (RT) has on the farm sector in the uk.
It seems that a great deal of fuss is made over how wonderful RT is and what a benefit it is to farmers when in fact it is a costly time saving exercise which doesn't benefit the farmer.
As far as I can ascertain, no premiums are ever paid for farm assured produce. Grain from your co-op is known for its quality and whether it is farm assured is of less importance.
Red Tractor is nothing more than a rubber stamp on what farmers and producers are legally required to do within the law; it adds no value and as such is only perceived assurance since farming to UK standards is by and large exactly the same thing, whether it is farm assured or not.
I understand that at first glance, the customers like it, it's what everyone's used to etc, there doesn't seem much need to change anything. But at the same time, there seems no point whatsoever in continuing with the status quo. Obviously the consumers get the sticker to say it's farm assured which they like and is free, but it doesn't actually mean anything.
So the question is whether elements of the trade can be dissuaded from insisting on RT assurance, This may be easier in the feed trade in the first instance, especially as a significant element of the livestock industry are non assured.
The other idea I would like to suggest is "Your co-op Assured", could this be taken in house as a benefit to members and possibly even a commercial operation?
As you may know, there is quite a debate going on in the media so I wanted to make my views clear.
Regards
Edit: I have just noticed that I called it a time saving instead of a time wasting exercise!!! I will have to correct it with him tomorrow. You plonker Rodney!
Last edited:
- Location
- Essex
Had a long chat with a grain merchant today. He was actually quite defensive of Red Tractor. Although he made no real distinction between rt and UK standard as a reason to continue with rt.
I think there's a general complacency in the trade as they are used to it and it doesn't cost them anything.
I still believe that it will only take one buyer to take non assured to burst the dam. The best candidate for that will be a feed merchant supplying alot of non assured beef and lamb. If anyone can think of any post them up on here.
I think there's a general complacency in the trade as they are used to it and it doesn't cost them anything.
I still believe that it will only take one buyer to take non assured to burst the dam. The best candidate for that will be a feed merchant supplying alot of non assured beef and lamb. If anyone can think of any post them up on here.
- Location
- Essex
Something which came up in the conversation with the grain buyer yesterday was where we send some of our grain, iti
wouldn't matter if it was farm assured or not. But the problem would be with the screenings which go for feed, because the livestock men can't take non assured!!
It's catch 22
wouldn't matter if it was farm assured or not. But the problem would be with the screenings which go for feed, because the livestock men can't take non assured!!
It's catch 22
SilliamWhale
Member
This.
Whats in it for them to break ranks? Not a lot at the moment as they get it all for free.
However if it is found to be anti-competitive then its a different inflection
SilliamWhale
Member
They take non assured imported mixes in the cake don't they?
- Location
- Essex
Well yes, I suppose they do...
- Location
- Bedfordshire
Below is the response from farmers weekly in regards to Andrews letter
Dear Mr Skinner
Thank you for letter and I am sorry that you are aggrieved by the letter we included from Andrew Blenkiron last week.
I agree it would have been better if he had notified us of his position as vice-chair of AFS, and had I known, I’d have included it after his name when editing the pages – but I did not know.
The content of his letter and the suggestion that some have “a complete misunderstanding and naivety of how markets work” is entirely his view and free for him to express. I’m sure many will disagree.
Throughout the recent furore about Red Tractor standards and its consultation, we at Farmers Weekly have tried to remain impartial and balanced, and I believe we have achieved that. Our original feature gave equal column inches to both sides of the argument, and our Letters page last week likewise, with two letters for and two against.
The same approach will be taken with Letters this week, though I can assure you one at least will clarify that Mr Blenkiron is on the board of AFS.
Finally, I would point out that Mr Blenkiron is still a Farmer Focus writer and has actually used his piece online today (and in this week’s issue) to defend Red Tractor. We have been careful to ensure that his position of vice-chair of AFS is specified at the end. Thank you for reminding us.
Kind regards
Dear Mr Skinner
Thank you for letter and I am sorry that you are aggrieved by the letter we included from Andrew Blenkiron last week.
I agree it would have been better if he had notified us of his position as vice-chair of AFS, and had I known, I’d have included it after his name when editing the pages – but I did not know.
The content of his letter and the suggestion that some have “a complete misunderstanding and naivety of how markets work” is entirely his view and free for him to express. I’m sure many will disagree.
Throughout the recent furore about Red Tractor standards and its consultation, we at Farmers Weekly have tried to remain impartial and balanced, and I believe we have achieved that. Our original feature gave equal column inches to both sides of the argument, and our Letters page last week likewise, with two letters for and two against.
The same approach will be taken with Letters this week, though I can assure you one at least will clarify that Mr Blenkiron is on the board of AFS.
Finally, I would point out that Mr Blenkiron is still a Farmer Focus writer and has actually used his piece online today (and in this week’s issue) to defend Red Tractor. We have been careful to ensure that his position of vice-chair of AFS is specified at the end. Thank you for reminding us.
Kind regards
snipe
Member
- Location
- west yorkshire
Had a word with our local tv news, thought @Grass And Grain might like 15 mins of fame.
Hi Philip
Thank you for getting in touch- I have cc’d our business correspondent Spencer Stokes- it’s something I’m sure he would be interested in looking into.
Best wishes
Amy
| 12:17 PM (6 hours ago) | |||
|
Thank you for getting in touch- I have cc’d our business correspondent Spencer Stokes- it’s something I’m sure he would be interested in looking into.
Best wishes
Amy
- Location
- Cirencester
They were busy tweeting his article today