That’s pathetic. It’s better to have people high up in RT that have a proper knowledge of farming.
Guy Smith's response to FW article on AIC rules.
- Thread starter Grass And Grain
- Start date
warksfarmer
Member
RT shouldn’t even exist so your point is pointless.
But it DOES exist. So the issue is how to moderate it, change it or close it down. If any of those goals are to be achieved it will require strong advocates that have an in depth understanding of the industry. The reality is that that understanding will have to be along the supply chain not just at farm production level.
Whether RT should exist or not, turning your back on Guy because he’s ‘not a farmer’ is pathetic.
- Location
- Yorks
I agree with that sentiment, but...
I struggle with someome who has had a genuine issue highlighted to him, to then not tackle the question, but waffle on about something else.
I don't think that's of any usefulness. It's not any senaible way of managing a problem.
Why can't he just agree there's a problem, and promise to work on a solution?
By now, it's quite obvious the problem isn't going away. Each time there's denial, obstruction, sweeping under the carpet, the farmers make even more noise.
Read the FW over the next couple of weeks. It's going to get more punchy!
- Location
- Yorks
Have 2 standards, co-existing with each other.
1. Pesticide declaration, equalling imports.
2. RT
Farmers can choose which standard they use.
End users can choose which standard they require.
Market forces will get to work. RT grain will have to provide a genuine premium over non-RT grain.
Currently, we haven't much choice but to be RT assured. RT don't have competition from a second standars. They have a bit of competition from LEAF, Global Gap etc, but that choice is assurance scheme A vs scheme B.
It needs to be a genuine choice between simple pesticide declaration vs premium end scheme like RT.
Feed mills need unshackling from being compelled to purchase only RT.
Then we've got a genuine free market.
Atm, the free market is oppressed by assurance companies who make profits from their own rules.
Tarw Coch
Member
- Location
- Bottom of Wats Dyke
As a RT assured dairy farmer I have to buy feed from a RT assured feed mill.
All RT have to do is insist any U.K. produced feed going into my cow corn is RT assured and the shackles still exist on the feed mills.
I agree that his answer was unsatisfactory, but it’s what has become to be expected by that sort of organisation, politician etc.
The reality is that some sort of inspection is not going to go away any time soon. So if some someone like Guy (broadly knowledgeable and sensible) is hounded out of his job, who is going to replace him?
- Location
- Lincolnshire
Guy Smith is just another naive victim of multinational commerce that says one thing about quality and standards but in reality buys purely on price for the lowest standard they can legally get away with. Well if all they really want is basic min legal standard, why aren’t we allowed to sell produce to that standard? Why are we selling at RT standard to get basic non legal price? Because the customers have duped RT, that’s why. They are getting higher standard produce for basic minimum legal standard price of imports and its the producers who are paying for it. If we’d sold higher spec products to our customers in industry for the same price as our competitors lower standard products we might have felt saintly for a minute or two but we would have been sacked by the commercial department. Yet this situation is now prevalent across U.K. ag. It’s not entirely down to RT either. It’s down to a populist but spineless government only too willing to impose vote winning but commercially damaging restrictions on us, while championing the import of lower cost products produced to standards that they wouldn’t accept here. #populistbutspineless
Not sure where this 10 k figure comes from , suspect you need to add a 0 .
farmerm
Member
- Location
- Shropshire
That’s what they already do, this is the very thrust of what is wrong with RT Right now RT insists domestic materials going into mill must be RT but imports only need to tick a box to self certify pesticide use. Fine if the want to insist all material must be RT then that means no imported materials...
- Location
- Yorks
Correct. That's the thing we're trying to get changed.
They allow non-RT imports, but insist on RT for UK grain, mix it all together in the feed mill. So it's pointless unless you're the accountant at RT.
- Location
- Yorks
I think we should work to achieve equal status to our competitors, who access our markets without the cost of farm level assurance. So then, no inspection necessary.
It's currently more difficult for UK growers to access UK feed mills than it is for imports. That's bonkers, and needs changing imho. RT and AIC are responsible for this situation.
Absolutely. We need ONE EQUAL STANDARD.
well I hope that doesn't happen, better to make your point to him in the strongest way you are able and if you get a load of waffle in reply tell him its a load of waffle
- Location
- Essex
He doesn't debate the issue on here any more.That’s unfair
Whatever you might think Guy has engaged on here more than any othe individual who holds high positions in representative organisations. He has argued the case for the organisation he represents. What he doesn’t need is the unnecessary personal abuse and vitriol thrown at him. We may disagree, sometimes strongly, but we should still afford him or any poster respect and decency.
You may disagree with this.
Don't forget all the imported feed goes to feed dairy cows is the producing rt milk therefore imported products going into rt ,they say imported can't be rt.
- Location
- Yorks
We want farmers on the RT boards, to help fight our corner.
If someone like Guy isn't going to support the farmers, then he's the wrong farmer to have as chairman, and imho it would be better if he went.
There's a majority retailer, processor, AIC board members, we don't want the farmer board members also hell bent intent on not standing up for the farmers.
From a farmers perspective, he's seemingly working against us. So as a farmer, he's no use to me as a chairman. In the FW article, he was just sticking up for RT and their income. Maybe not surprising of someone who's taken the RT shilling.
If someone like Guy isn't going to support the farmers, then he's the wrong farmer to have as chairman, and imho it would be better if he went.
There's a majority retailer, processor, AIC board members, we don't want the farmer board members also hell bent intent on not standing up for the farmers.
From a farmers perspective, he's seemingly working against us. So as a farmer, he's no use to me as a chairman. In the FW article, he was just sticking up for RT and their income. Maybe not surprising of someone who's taken the RT shilling.
Tarw Coch
Member
- Location
- Bottom of Wats Dyke
Yes, but where’s the market for these feed mills If their RT assured customers have to buy feed produced to the RT standards.
By imposing standards on people like me, they are being passed down the line to people like you.
he never did debate or answer much that went against his way of thinking,
I PM'd him years ago about the WLA issue and got a very disappointing reply.
spin cycle
Member
- Location
- north norfolk
i disagree......having farmers on rt gives it legitimacy and helps the myth that uk farmers are happy and behind it
get the farmers off rt....get the nfu and ufu out of it.....vote ahdb out of it......whats left?....the brc.....the real puppet masters = worthless