Blood sucking ahdb

Other than your first sentence I agree. The Minister has said that the Labour 2008 legislation which bought in AHDB has not worked. He has his own Agriculture Act which allows him to do almost anything to support. farmers. I am surrounded by naysayers but there is an opportunity here if we are prepared to move on from AHDB as we know it.
Austin7 which part of we don’t want ahdb or any other quango don’t you understand.
 

Austin7

Member
1 Market information. Not sure it is still going but for years in the commercial sector 'Potato Call' was published weekly - think it used to be about £100 per annum. Well I used to get a free copy faxed to me weekly by a grower, who also faxed a copy to a few of his grower mates. So how does one stop this information going elsewhere, if it were to be a subscription only service. Would the subscription service be able to obtain information of any kind, let alone reliable from the non subscription growers?

The purpose of delivering market information to growers is to strengthen their position in the marketplace. It is in nobody’s interests to keep good market information away from any grower regardless of whether they support a body or not. Collectively we need to help weak sellers and thereby help ourselves. For the last 10 years AHDB have delivered inadequate and erroneous information to the growers and so have weakened our market. I also remember Potato Call, I ceased paying for that for the same reasons. The reality is that it is much easier to acquire information from those with a buyers agenda, lazy research costs growers money. This market information failure has cost growers way more than any Levy. Not just AHDB, now too often Farming Forum talks prices down as those who are selling at good values keep their mouths shut. We sell everything on the open market. We never discuss prices with our customers, we issue a price list which we adjust about every six weeks. We put our prices up yesterday, our best are leaving the farm at £375 per ton and our cheapest at £210 which should take our average up from £296 to just over £300. Not being able to get to market because of Covid has made pricing difficult but we have somebody who will test buy our spuds back to check the mark-up. The Ministers, both with a farming background, are aware of the problem hence the Part 3 of the Agriculture Act which for the nerds I attach here. Despite all the grief I am causing certain parties on this forum, the way forward is to work together. I know Nick Saphir is also a convinced collaborator as 40 years ago I was Chairman of a Potato Cooperative and he sat beside me as Board Member. So the surprising answer is weak sellers are a danger to all so rather than keep them in ignorance force feed them true prices.View attachment Ag Act Section 3.pdf
 

Austin7

Member
That's disingenuous to the point of lying. The vote was 60/40 against. Ergo of the 4 men surrounding the deer over 2 of them decided the rabbit was of more value than the deer. The non voters are irrelevant, or at least they can be added to either side equally, you are assuming that they are effectively Yes voters as well, in that they want the deer too. When in reality they had a chance to vote and didn't so must accept the result whichever way it falls. And the public interest is irrelevant as well, unless the public is going to pony up some cash to fund the system.

So I am now an arrogant, self serving liar, how kind. I had thought we agreed that the forum is for the exchange of opinions not insults. My personal opinion is that like myself the abstainers had no home, they could not abide AHDB but saw merit in a body hence were not prepared to vote no. Regarding the public interest it is relevant only if it is lost. Way back when we were setting up the British Potato Council I argued hard that the Government should should contribute to the body for the public goods it received. From my memory I believe the PMB got paid but I might be wrong. Whether he pays or not the Minister representing the public interest has the golden vote. Hence four men surrounding the deer. I see from the forum the rabbit has escaped.
 

Goweresque

Member
Location
North Wilts
My personal opinion is that like myself the abstainers had no home, they could not abide AHDB but saw merit in a body hence were not prepared to vote no.

That may be your reason for abstaining, but you can't extrapolate your personal opinion to all those who didn't vote, for whatever reason. I could equally say that some didn't bother to vote because they considered it wouldn't matter if No won, because people like you would ensure that the status quo was maintained. And your attitude ever since the No vote wouldn't exactly have disabused anyone of that opinion. Anyone who abstains from a vote cannot be co-opted onto either of the winning or losing sides. If you chose not to make your voice known your voice gets ignored, as simple as that.

So I am now an arrogant, self serving liar, how kind. I had thought we agreed that the forum is for the exchange of opinions not insults.

I call it as I see it. You are drawing on all the bureaucrats tricks of the trade to ensure a democratic vote gets ignored and the status quo continues. By implying that the No voters were outnumbered 3 to 1 (your deer analogy) you are not being truthful - No won by a factor of nearly 2 to 1. I have no doubt that as we speak people just like you with exactly the same attitudes are discussing how they can bypass this vote and keep the gravy train rolling. And I for one will call out such undemocratic and self serving behaviour when I see it.
 

Austin7

Member
That may be your reason for abstaining, but you can't extrapolate your personal opinion to all those who didn't vote, for whatever reason. I could equally say that some didn't bother to vote because they considered it wouldn't matter if No won, because people like you would ensure that the status quo was maintained. And your attitude ever since the No vote wouldn't exactly have disabused anyone of that opinion. Anyone who abstains from a vote cannot be co-opted onto either of the winning or losing sides. If you chose not to make your voice known your voice gets ignored, as simple as that.



I call it as I see it. You are drawing on all the bureaucrats tricks of the trade to ensure a democratic vote gets ignored and the status quo continues. By implying that the No voters were outnumbered 3 to 1 (your deer analogy) you are not being truthful - No won by a factor of nearly 2 to 1. I have no doubt that as we speak people just like you with exactly the same attitudes are discussing how they can bypass this vote and keep the gravy train rolling. And I for one will call out such undemocratic and self serving behaviour when I see it.

I have no time for anyone who seeks to keep the "gravy train" rolling, nobody at AHDB would for a minute think that. It is a difficult time, too many growers are penniless, AHDB is useless. I understand your view even if you choose not to understand mine. Shall we leave it at that before we get boring.
 
I know I have mentioned this subject before but now we have won the ballot I cannot help but think we were not on a level playing field, ahdb used levy payers money to promote the yes vote , we used our money along with a few generous donations to promote the no vote , in a general election you cannot use taxpayers money for campaigning, maybe ahdb think they can do what they like with our money ( no change there then).
 

Austin7

Member
I know I have mentioned this subject before but now we have won the ballot I cannot help but think we were not on a level playing field, ahdb used levy payers money to promote the yes vote , we used our money along with a few generous donations to promote the no vote , in a general election you cannot use taxpayers money for campaigning, maybe ahdb think they can do what they like with our money ( no change there then).

White Rabbit, in fact the AHDB "campaign" helped you.
 

Austin7

Member
I very much doubt that was their intention, it only helped him if it backfired.

Absolutely it backfired. I copy here part of a long email to Nick Saphir just after the vote:
"Almost everything that was done over those months leading up to the vote was counter productive. How would a lavish advertising campaign help with an electorate fed up to the back teeth with AHDB prolificacy? All the “Town Hall” meetings did was to demonstrate how dead on its feet the organisation was. The erroneous Potato Weekly market information can only be designed to destroy grower confidence. We are continualy fed basic comic book “knowledge”. Nick, just look at https://ahdb.org.uk/knowledge-library/types-of-irrigation-for-potato-crops which has just been uploaded. Why is AHDB so intent on making a fool of itself. The body I worked to put in place has been wilfully destroyed from within. I make no apologies for being angry. Even those I know who voted “yes” did so with extreme reluctance."
 

Austin7

Member
I hope saphir doesn’t read that, he put a lot of time and effort not to mention our money into mounting that defence .

Of course he has read it, and he has replied. When we were 40 years younger Nick Saphir and I worked together in a Potato growers group. He usually knows his job, he just got this wrong, mainly because Covid kept too many of us locked up.
 

Goweresque

Member
Location
North Wilts
"Almost everything that was done over those months leading up to the vote was counter productive. How would a lavish advertising campaign help with an electorate fed up to the back teeth with AHDB prolificacy? All the “Town Hall” meetings did was to demonstrate how dead on its feet the organisation was. The erroneous Potato Weekly market information can only be designed to destroy grower confidence. We are continualy fed basic comic book “knowledge”. Nick, just look at https://ahdb.org.uk/knowledge-library/types-of-irrigation-for-potato-crops which has just been uploaded. Why is AHDB so intent on making a fool of itself. The body I worked to put in place has been wilfully destroyed from within. I make no apologies for being angry. Even those I know who voted “yes” did so with extreme reluctance."

And yet you blithely assert that the AHDB can be 'reformed' into a body that isn't both moribund and self serving. What evidence do you have that a) such is possible, or b) such has ever occurred anywhere within the public or quango sectors?

The AHDB need razing to the ground, all its inhabitants scattered to the four winds and the ground sown with salt. That might allow something more fit for purpose to arise elsewhere.
 
Of course he has read it, and he has replied. When we were 40 years younger Nick Saphir and I worked together in a Potato growers group. He usually knows his job, he just got this wrong, mainly because Covid kept too many of us locked up.
The person who should be taken to task is Peter Kendall , he ought to be stripped of knighthood, he should be held responsible for the shambles at ahdb and the Nfu, he got away with thinking he could walk on water .
And yet you blithely assert that the AHDB can be 'reformed' into a body that isn't both moribund and self serving. What evidence do you have that a) such is possible, or b) such has ever occurred anywhere within the public or quango sectors?

The AHDB need razing to the ground, all its inhabitants scattered to the four winds and the ground sown with salt. That might allow something more fit for purpose to arise elsewhere.
why are you holding back Goweresque.
 

Austin7

Member
The person who should be taken to task is Peter Kendall , he ought to be stripped of knighthood, he should be held responsible for the shambles at ahdb and the Nfu, he got away with thinking he could walk on water .

Without doubt Peter Kendall is the primary author of the current crisis in AHDB. He stepped straight from the NFU into AHDB in April 14 by January 15 the parent bodies whether they be the Horticultural Development Council, Home Grown Cereals Authority, British Potato Council, etc were swept up into AHDB re-branded sectors. Staff were homogenised and grew from just over 300 to now nearly 500. Potatoes suffered a double hit as David Piccaver who had been appointed Potatoes chair in April 13 died in the following December. David proceeded me as Chairman of NFU Potatoes, few could rival his experience, there could have been nobody better in post to see off Peter Kendall. Since then the Potatoes Chair has been taken by Fiona Fell, Sophie Churchill and Alison Levett. No doubt all capable but with almost zero knowledge of Potatoes. I know from my experience what a fiendishly complex sector it is, even if you have spent your whole life growing spuds. So, White Rabbit we agree on something quite significant, AHDB mismanagement is the issue not the principle of a body. I note your gentle dig at Goweresque but did you notice his: “might allow something more fit for purpose to arise elsewhere”. Could it possibly be that behind those kind words which usually come my way, there is some positive thinking? As I have said many times the industry must seek a consensus. Whilst I would be reluctant to lose the powers of the 2008 Act there is one option which has escaped debate so far, it is to look at the quiet success of PGRO . The 2020 Agriculture Act gives the opportunity of beefing up a PGRO type organisation and with Sutton Bridge Potatoes still have an independent base for the dozen staff we would need.

Unforgivably whilst mentioning the loss of David Piccaver I forgot the even more important loss of Ben Gill just a few months later. If Ben had still been with us no doubt he would have taken those of us orphaned from our research base and directed us towards working with the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council where he served both before he was NFU President and after.
 
Last edited:

Hindsight

Member
Location
Lincolnshire
And yet you blithely assert that the AHDB can be 'reformed' into a body that isn't both moribund and self serving. What evidence do you have that a) such is possible, or b) such has ever occurred anywhere within the public or quango sectors?

The AHDB need razing to the ground, all its inhabitants scattered to the four winds and the ground sown with salt. That might allow something more fit for purpose to arise elsewhere.

Hi, have you any ideas of 'what would be fit for purpose'

First question I ask is 'what purpose'. What services do you and your business require that are not currently available to you? Be that your own farming business / enterprises or the industry as a whole. And if you can identify those services are they currently available commercially without the requirement for a levy - be it compulsory or voluntary.

You appear to have strong views. I may answer my own question which I shouldn't really, but will and say it may be a case that many levy payers will not appreciate and realise what they require until what is currently provided is not there?

Cheers.
 
Without doubt Peter Kendall is the primary author of the current crisis in AHDB. He stepped straight from the NFU into AHDB in April 14 by January 15 the parent bodies whether they be the Horticultural Development Council, Home Grown Cereals Authority, British Potato Council, etc were swept up into AHDB re-branded sectors. Staff were homogenised and grew from just over 300 to now nearly 500. Potatoes suffered a double hit as David Piccaver who had been appointed Potatoes chair in April 13 died in the following December. David proceeded me as Chairman of NFU Potatoes, few could rival his experience, there could have been nobody better in post to see off Peter Kendall. Since then the Potatoes Chair has been taken by Fiona Fell, Sophie Churchill and Alison Levett. No doubt all capable but with almost zero knowledge of Potatoes. I know from my experience what a fiendishly complex sector it is, even if you have spent your whole life growing spuds. So, White Rabbit we agree on something quite significant, AHDB mismanagement is the issue not the principle of a body. I note your gentle dig at Goweresque but did you notice his: “might allow something more fit for purpose to arise elsewhere”. Could it possibly be that behind those kind words which usually come my way, there is some positive thinking? As I have said many times the industry must seek a consensus. Whilst I would be reluctant to lose the powers of the 2008 Act there is one option which has escaped debate so far, it is to look at the quiet success of PGRO . The 2020 Agriculture Act gives the opportunity of beefing up a PGRO type organisation and with Sutton Bridge Potatoes still have an independent base for the dozen staff we would need.

Unforgivably whilst mentioning the loss of David Piccaver I forgot the even more important loss of Ben Gill just a few months later. If Ben had still been with us no doubt he would have taken those of us orphaned from our research base and directed us towards working with the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council where he served both before he was NFU President and after.
Austin 7 Sophie Churchill is in the farmers weekly this week saying ahdb potatoes cannot keep up , when was she chair of ahdb potatoes is she shooting herself in the foot , as you pointed out I am not a potato grower so are not aware Of all the coming and goings.
 

Goweresque

Member
Location
North Wilts
Hi, have you any ideas of 'what would be fit for purpose'

First question I ask is 'what purpose'. What services do you and your business require that are not currently available to you? Be that your own farming business / enterprises or the industry as a whole. And if you can identify those services are they currently available commercially without the requirement for a levy - be it compulsory or voluntary.

You appear to have strong views. I may answer my own question which I shouldn't really, but will and say it may be a case that many levy payers will not appreciate and realise what they require until what is currently provided is not there?

Cheers.

The purpose of providing agricultural research services to people who freely want to pay for them. Not forcing everyone to pay for them regardless of whether they want them or not. The AHDB is the elephant in the room, it prevents any other voluntary funded organisations from arising. No one is going to pay for voluntary services when they are also paying statutory levies. Hence destroy the AHDB and let some natural growth occur, just like when you clear fell a wood, you find all sorts of plants that have been suppressed by the trees.

Its undoubtedly the case that people might miss parts of the AHDB if it disappeared, but thats the whole point. There would then be a genuine demand for various services that someone would attempt to fill. Demand creates supply. Rather than the monolithic Stalinist type organisation the AHDB is now - a 'Pay us or else and we'll decide what you get' type one.
 

Hindsight

Member
Location
Lincolnshire
The purpose of providing agricultural research services to people who freely want to pay for them. Not forcing everyone to pay for them regardless of whether they want them or not. The AHDB is the elephant in the room, it prevents any other voluntary funded organisations from arising. No one is going to pay for voluntary services when they are also paying statutory levies. Hence destroy the AHDB and let some natural growth occur, just like when you clear fell a wood, you find all sorts of plants that have been suppressed by the trees.

Its undoubtedly the case that people might miss parts of the AHDB if it disappeared, but thats the whole point. There would then be a genuine demand for various services that someone would attempt to fill. Demand creates supply. Rather than the monolithic Stalinist type organisation the AHDB is now - a 'Pay us or else and we'll decide what you get' type one.

Yes, I follow what you say and your sentiment. And the ballot results in Potatoes and Horticulture indicate many others do too - though I will caveat by saying the AHDB sectors fund more than just R&D and knowledge transfer. And to me to an extent this is a rerun of what happened in 1996, when The Conservative Government followed through on the Bell report and privatised ADAS. Some bits of what ADAS did (most really) withered on the vine as 'dead wood' was 'pruned' by the now paying industry having removed the 'free' advisory service that was there before. Was that for the better I leave yourself and others to pass judgement.

The question that the Minister will face (one of many I suspect) is if following your approach is there any aspect of Research (an institute or organisation) that the levy payers (farmers) do not want to, or consider worth paying for, be that now or in future, that should be protected and preserved (as that institute or research is valuable but the levy payers cannot see that) and if so how is that to be funded.

When ADAS was privatised the levy money was of course still there and co-funded many of these institutions. There has been rationalization since.

The ballots have brought those questions to the fore again.

From this thread and recent posts it seems to my observation Austin7 favours some form of ongoing R&D focussed 'core' of researchers. The poster called SPud may also be similarly minded. The No voters have made no such suggestion which is fair enough other than wish to get rid of the annual levy invoice.

An interesting issue. Cheers.
 
According to guy there as been 15 attempts to call a ballot in recent years none were able to get the 5% , maybe this is why we were made so welcome at Stoneleigh and why it as been such a shock to them they never thought it would happen and now they haven’t a clue how to deal with it.
 

Goweresque

Member
Location
North Wilts
According to guy there as been 15 attempts to call a ballot in recent years none were able to get the 5% , maybe this is why we were made so welcome at Stoneleigh and why it as been such a shock to them they never thought it would happen and now they haven’t a clue how to deal with it.

The reality is that organisations like the AHDB, Red Tractor and dare I say it the NFU have been some of the ultimate recipients of agricultural subsidies. Everyone moans about landowners being parasites on the back of farmers, well they are not the only ones to have had their fingers in the BPS till. And now that's going people are considering very carefully who is going to get their hard earned cash in future. And organisations that take cold hard cash but offer somewhat more unquantifiable 'benefits' in return will increasingly find the door being closed in their face. The times they are a changing in the agricultural industry, and its not only farmers who will face that.
 

SFI - What % were you taking out of production?

  • 0 %

    Votes: 75 43.6%
  • Up to 25%

    Votes: 61 35.5%
  • 25-50%

    Votes: 27 15.7%
  • 50-75%

    Votes: 3 1.7%
  • 75-100%

    Votes: 3 1.7%
  • 100% I’ve had enough of farming!

    Votes: 3 1.7%

Red Tractor drops launch of green farming scheme amid anger from farmers

  • 1,284
  • 1
As reported in Independent


quote: “Red Tractor has confirmed it is dropping plans to launch its green farming assurance standard in April“

read the TFF thread here: https://thefarmingforum.co.uk/index.php?threads/gfc-was-to-go-ahead-now-not-going-ahead.405234/
Top