The Red Tractor ACCS referendum

Would you leave or remain a Red Tractor ACCS member ?

  • Yes, I would resign my Red Tractor (ACCS) membership and join a new "equal to imports" Scheme

    Votes: 659 96.1%

  • No, I would remain in the Red Tractor scheme

    Votes: 27 3.9%
  • Total voters
    686
D

Drillman

Member
Mixed Farmer
Doc said:
So, the only people wanting RT are RT?
Why is that?
😆
Click to expand...
Snouts in the trough....

Can anyone give a list of proven and quantifiable benefits, financial ones in particular from been a RT member?

And yes I know RT wouldn’t want to answer this question!

The fact they seem totally unwilling or incapable of answering any questions asked by paying members on any platform, suggests to me they have no defence and only goes to prove how untenable there position is!

Trial by social media it may be, but it’s a powerful tool and nothing to stop RT joining in to defend there selves!
 
Last edited:
tullah

tullah

Member
Location
Linconshire
When we shop we don't go out of our way to look for the RT logo. We do the opposite. It is not only an irrelevance but it's stifling British farming. For this reason I would prefer, and the public should be persuaded to buy produce not displaying RT.
Couldn't we fight back by funding tv advertising showing what a scam RT is to the shopper.
 
F

Fruitloop

Member
Drillman said:
That is an excellent point actually.

If RT don’t open up to all farmer members rather than just NFU ones it’s not really representative of farmers in general. And is bypassing a lot of paying RT members.
Click to expand...
As far as I remember, I think I heard the NFU (some years ago now) at an AGM saying that they had 60,000 "Farm/Grower" category members. That was before the NFU started purging non farming members from that category. I heard at least three in my area being booted out because they had joined when there was some Land Rover discount that came with NFU membership. I know one farm in Suffolk with three farmer and grower memberships based on it. Also, according to our local man it is not unusual for the non-farming landowner, as well as the farming tenant to be in membership and paying "acreage levy" on the same land. So, in theory, the NFU are probably double-bubbling in some cases.
If you take all of that into account, how many "NFU" members are there actually? Could that in any way be viewed as representative of "British Farmers" as a body, or should the NFU have been saying they were "The voice of some of British Farming?"
 
Nigel Wellings

Nigel Wellings

Member
✓
Fruitloop said:
As far as I remember, I think I heard the NFU (some years ago now) at an AGM saying that they had 60,000 "Farm/Grower" category members. That was before the NFU started purging non farming members from that category. I heard at least three in my area being booted out because they had joined when there was some Land Rover discount that came with NFU membership. I know one farm in Suffolk with three farmer and grower memberships based on it. Also, according to our local man it is not unusual for the non-farming landowner, as well as the farming tenant to be in membership and paying "acreage levy" on the same land. So, in theory, the NFU are probably double-bubbling in some cases.
If you take all of that into account, how many "NFU" members are there actually? Could that in any way be viewed as representative of "British Farmers" as a body, or should the NFU have been saying they were "The voice of some of British Farming?"
Click to expand...
I think the NFU has something like 45-50k members. If there are something like 150 000 farms in the UK. NFU only represent 1/3 of them. It is vital therefore that RT engage in dialogue away from NFU as NFU does not accurately represent UK Farmers.
 
D

Drillman

Member
Mixed Farmer
Nigel Wellings said:
I think the NFU has something like 45-50k members. If there are something like 150 000 farms in the UK. NFU only represent 1/3 of them. It is vital therefore that RT engage in dialogue away from NFU as NFU does not accurately represent UK Farmers.
Click to expand...
The same could easily be said about the poll on here,

however it does give a fairly good indication of how folks do or don’t want things done.

the only truly fair way is for RT to give paying ALL member's a say in how things are done.

will they do that?

will they hell!
 
Steevo

Steevo

Member
Location
Gloucestershire
Nigel Wellings said:
I think the NFU has something like 45-50k members. If there are something like 150 000 farms in the UK. NFU only represent 1/3 of them. It is vital therefore that RT engage in dialogue away from NFU as NFU does not accurately represent UK Farmers.
Click to expand...

Very true! NFU represents NFU members (in theory! but certainly does not represent UK farmers/farming as a whole exclusively.
 
Guy Smith

Guy Smith

Member
✓
Location
Essex
Grass And Grain said:
Just spoken to Farmers Weekly reporter with my RT views. He'd already written the article, but still took the time to listen to S and not afraid of hawhat I had to say.

Seemingly Jim Mosley and @Guy Smith had managed to find time to talk to the Farmers Weekly reporter. I suppose it's easy to make a statement to the press when you know no-one is going to debate with you and hold you to account by questioning.

If Guy and Jim and Minette are condident of their trajectory for RT and the reasoning behind it, then I'm sure they won't have any problem doing a TFF zoom question time for everyone to watch. We ask the questions, and they have the opportunity to give their reasoned and transparent responses.

NFU are holding various zoom meetings (which is great, but only NFU members) so lets get the debate in all channels to reachS offence. as wide an audience as possible by doing a TFF one.

If RT can't make anyone available it's a poor show. If RT are content with their scheme and the proposed changes, then they won't have any problems at all answering our questions.
Click to expand...

I always swore I had better things to do other then to come on TFF to correct another bout of made up nonsense bad mouthing me. But here we go.

i do not earn £500 a day in my post as Chair of The RT Cereals and Sugar Beet Board. I am paid a £10,000 yearly honorarium. For that I’m obliged to attend twenty board meetings AND I’m also expected to do whatever else is necessary to fulfill the role properly. I like to think I am conscientious in what I take on and not afraid of hard work. I took over from my predecessor as Chair
on 01/01/21. Since then I reckon I have undertaken some RT work most days. For instance last week I had two long meetings about how RT audits could be used to help farmers retain the use of urea fertiliser which the government is proposing to ban.

As far as I’m concerned I didn’t get the post through cronyism as accused on here but rather went through a proper interview and selection procedure along with others who applied. If people have good evidence this wasn’t done honestly,fairly and openly I suggest you take the evidence to the authorities - unless of course it’s just chat room hot air. I’ll admit as part of a family business I have benefitted from cronyism but I doubt I’m the only farmer guilty of that!

RT does not run a cartel or protection racket as said on here. Again if you have evidence it does then go to the authorities with your evidence as it would be considered a very serious offence.


RT does not have any power to make farmers undertake its assurance scheme as frequently suggested on here. RT is but one of several assurance schemes such as Global Gap, RSPCA freedom foods, Soil Association etc. If the people who buy from farmers choose to use RT assurance and farmers choose to sell to those people then in those instances you have to use the RT assurance scheme. It’s a commercial relationship in a free market just like most aspects of farming. If RT was as unpopular as people on here suggest then farmers and the people they sell to would stop using it and it would go out of business just as would any farmer who produced something no one wanted. If you really don’t like RT assurance then sell to those who don’t use it or persuade those you want to sell to to use another assurance scheme.

For what it’s worth I’ll give some thoughts on my role. But PLEASE don’t start thinking I run RT like my personal fiefdom. I am a bit player in a large organisation that has to deal with thousands of other players.
One frustration I have as a cereal grower is that the RT logo doesn’t appear on many consumer items - although some beers like Carling and some breakfast cereals like weetabix do. The reason for this is most outfits that process the cereals people like me grow routinely co mix them with other ingredients that arent RT assured. One of my first ambitions is to better understand this to see if there are ways RT can work harder for farmers. Unfortunately this won’t be done by banging tables or ranting on chat rooms on the social media. I will need to talk carefully to those who co mix RT assured cereals with non RT assured ingredients.

i am happy to discuss RT on here but I’m really cant be bothered with rants based on made up nonsense or silly name calling saying I paid for a new drive with all my RT earnings.

Guy
 
Grass And Grain

Grass And Grain

Member
Mixed Farmer
Location
Yorks
Guy Smith said:
I always swore I had better things to do other then to come on TFF to correct another bout of made up nonsense bad mouthing me. But here we go.

i do not earn £500 a day in my post as Chair of The RT Cereals and Sugar Beet Board. I am paid a £10,000 yearly honorarium. For that I’m obliged to attend twenty board meetings AND I’m also expected to do whatever else is necessary to fulfill the role properly. I like to think I am conscientious in what I take on and not afraid of hard work. I took over from my predecessor as Chair
on 01/01/21. Since then I reckon I have undertaken some RT work most days. For instance last week I had two long meetings about how RT audits could be used to help farmers retain the use of urea fertiliser which the government is proposing to ban.

As far as I’m concerned I didn’t get the post through cronyism as accused on here but rather went through a proper interview and selection procedure along with others who applied. If people have good evidence this wasn’t done honestly,fairly and openly I suggest you take the evidence to the authorities - unless of course it’s just chat room hot air. I’ll admit as part of a family business I have benefitted from cronyism but I doubt I’m the only farmer guilty of that!

RT does not run a cartel or protection racket as said on here. Again if you have evidence it does then go to the authorities with your evidence as it would be considered a very serious offence.


RT does not have any power to make farmers undertake its assurance scheme as frequently suggested on here. RT is but one of several assurance schemes such as Global Gap, RSPCA freedom foods, Soil Association etc. If the people who buy from farmers choose to use RT assurance and farmers choose to sell to those people then in those instances you have to use the RT assurance scheme. It’s a commercial relationship in a free market just like most aspects of farming. If RT was as unpopular as people on here suggest then farmers and the people they sell to would stop using it and it would go out of business just as would any farmer who produced something no one wanted. If you really don’t like RT assurance then sell to those who don’t use it or persuade those you want to sell to to use another assurance scheme.

For what it’s worth I’ll give some thoughts on my role. But PLEASE don’t start thinking I run RT like my personal fiefdom. I am a bit player in a large organisation that has to deal with thousands of other players.
One frustration I have as a cereal grower is that the RT logo doesn’t appear on many consumer items - although some beers like Carling and some breakfast cereals like weetabix do. The reason for this is most outfits that process the cereals people like me grow routinely co mix them with other ingredients that arent RT assured. One of my first ambitions is to better understand this to see if there are ways RT can work harder for farmers. Unfortunately this won’t be done by banging tables or ranting on chat rooms on the social media. I will need to talk carefully to those who co mix RT assured cereals with non RT assured ingredients.

i am happy to discuss RT on here but I’m really cant be bothered with rants based on made up nonsense or silly name calling saying I paid for a new drive with all my RT earnings.

Guy
Click to expand...
Guy, thank you for taking the time to respond. I do actually think you're a good person for UK agriculture, and I expect you try your hardest in fighting for our industry.

I imagine you're a busy person, so I won't expect you to spend too much time on this thread.

Could I just ask if you'd take one point away for your consideration please...

The assurance schemes insisting that we have RT assurance for grain to go to a UFAS mill, whilst also allowing non-assured imported into the same mill is unfair. And I do hope you might consider this and take action to rectify it.

Thank you.

P.S. I apologise if I/we were provoking you into a response. We have strong feelings about what we see as an unfair double standard.
 
Simon Chiles

Simon Chiles

DD Moderator
Location
Surrey/ Kent Border, UK
Guy Smith said:
I always swore I had better things to do other then to come on TFF to correct another bout of made up nonsense bad mouthing me. But here we go.

i do not earn £500 a day in my post as Chair of The RT Cereals and Sugar Beet Board. I am paid a £10,000 yearly honorarium. For that I’m obliged to attend twenty board meetings AND I’m also expected to do whatever else is necessary to fulfill the role properly. I like to think I am conscientious in what I take on and not afraid of hard work. I took over from my predecessor as Chair
on 01/01/21. Since then I reckon I have undertaken some RT work most days. For instance last week I had two long meetings about how RT audits could be used to help farmers retain the use of urea fertiliser which the government is proposing to ban.

As far as I’m concerned I didn’t get the post through cronyism as accused on here but rather went through a proper interview and selection procedure along with others who applied. If people have good evidence this wasn’t done honestly,fairly and openly I suggest you take the evidence to the authorities - unless of course it’s just chat room hot air. I’ll admit as part of a family business I have benefitted from cronyism but I doubt I’m the only farmer guilty of that!

RT does not run a cartel or protection racket as said on here. Again if you have evidence it does then go to the authorities with your evidence as it would be considered a very serious offence.


RT does not have any power to make farmers undertake its assurance scheme as frequently suggested on here. RT is but one of several assurance schemes such as Global Gap, RSPCA freedom foods, Soil Association etc. If the people who buy from farmers choose to use RT assurance and farmers choose to sell to those people then in those instances you have to use the RT assurance scheme. It’s a commercial relationship in a free market just like most aspects of farming. If RT was as unpopular as people on here suggest then farmers and the people they sell to would stop using it and it would go out of business just as would any farmer who produced something no one wanted. If you really don’t like RT assurance then sell to those who don’t use it or persuade those you want to sell to to use another assurance scheme.

For what it’s worth I’ll give some thoughts on my role. But PLEASE don’t start thinking I run RT like my personal fiefdom. I am a bit player in a large organisation that has to deal with thousands of other players.
One frustration I have as a cereal grower is that the RT logo doesn’t appear on many consumer items - although some beers like Carling and some breakfast cereals like weetabix do. The reason for this is most outfits that process the cereals people like me grow routinely co mix them with other ingredients that arent RT assured. One of my first ambitions is to better understand this to see if there are ways RT can work harder for farmers. Unfortunately this won’t be done by banging tables or ranting on chat rooms on the social media. I will need to talk carefully to those who co mix RT assured cereals with non RT assured ingredients.

i am happy to discuss RT on here but I’m really cant be bothered with rants based on made up nonsense or silly name calling saying I paid for a new drive with all my RT earnings.

Guy
Click to expand...

Guy, my post about the tarmac was meant as a joke. I’m sorry you perceived it as a rant.

Whilst you’re on here could you please answer what I think is the major question on here. Have the management at RT come to the realisation that the majority of farmers, most of whom initially thought RT was a good idea, are now starting to get more than a bit fed up with an ever increasing level of bureaucracy?
 
D

Drillman

Member
Mixed Farmer
@Guy Smith thankyou for taking the time to come on here and put some points across.

as I’m sure your aware farmers have a lot of issues with RT in its current form I hope this dialogue from yourself is just the starting point of some real and meaningful discussions between farmers and RT to see how they can not only improve there image amongst us there paying members which is at an all time low. I do believe that if RT were truly prepared to listen they may actually learn something from us all.

British farmers are the best in the world and if RT wants to be a part of that going forwards they DO need to listen.

I’ve always maintained farm assurance started out as a good idea. It needs to get back to been a good idea and have measurable benefits to us the paying members.

One further point if there are firms co mixing assured and non Assured products it is surely only fair to allow farmers and processors to sell to those outlets as non assured?

milling wheat been an example. Therefore it’s surely reasonable in the element of fairness for RT to list those outlets so we can have the choice?
 
Last edited:
Clive

Clive

Staff Member
Arable Farmer
Location
Lichfield
Guy Smith said:
I always swore I had better things to do other then to come on TFF to correct another bout of made up nonsense bad mouthing me. But here we go.

i do not earn £500 a day in my post as Chair of The RT Cereals and Sugar Beet Board. I am paid a £10,000 yearly honorarium. For that I’m obliged to attend twenty board meetings AND I’m also expected to do whatever else is necessary to fulfill the role properly. I like to think I am conscientious in what I take on and not afraid of hard work. I took over from my predecessor as Chair
on 01/01/21. Since then I reckon I have undertaken some RT work most days. For instance last week I had two long meetings about how RT audits could be used to help farmers retain the use of urea fertiliser which the government is proposing to ban.

As far as I’m concerned I didn’t get the post through cronyism as accused on here but rather went through a proper interview and selection procedure along with others who applied. If people have good evidence this wasn’t done honestly,fairly and openly I suggest you take the evidence to the authorities - unless of course it’s just chat room hot air. I’ll admit as part of a family business I have benefitted from cronyism but I doubt I’m the only farmer guilty of that!

RT does not run a cartel or protection racket as said on here. Again if you have evidence it does then go to the authorities with your evidence as it would be considered a very serious offence.


RT does not have any power to make farmers undertake its assurance scheme as frequently suggested on here. RT is but one of several assurance schemes such as Global Gap, RSPCA freedom foods, Soil Association etc. If the people who buy from farmers choose to use RT assurance and farmers choose to sell to those people then in those instances you have to use the RT assurance scheme. It’s a commercial relationship in a free market just like most aspects of farming. If RT was as unpopular as people on here suggest then farmers and the people they sell to would stop using it and it would go out of business just as would any farmer who produced something no one wanted. If you really don’t like RT assurance then sell to those who don’t use it or persuade those you want to sell to to use another assurance scheme.

For what it’s worth I’ll give some thoughts on my role. But PLEASE don’t start thinking I run RT like my personal fiefdom. I am a bit player in a large organisation that has to deal with thousands of other players.
One frustration I have as a cereal grower is that the RT logo doesn’t appear on many consumer items - although some beers like Carling and some breakfast cereals like weetabix do. The reason for this is most outfits that process the cereals people like me grow routinely co mix them with other ingredients that arent RT assured. One of my first ambitions is to better understand this to see if there are ways RT can work harder for farmers. Unfortunately this won’t be done by banging tables or ranting on chat rooms on the social media. I will need to talk carefully to those who co mix RT assured cereals with non RT assured ingredients.

i am happy to discuss RT on here but I’m really cant be bothered with rants based on made up nonsense or silly name calling saying I paid for a new drive with all my RT earnings.

Guy
Click to expand...


well £10,000 / 20 days IS £500/ day Guy maths maybe not a strong point ? expense would be covered as well, though Im sure ?


Are you going to actually answer any of the hundreds of question asked in the numerous and various Red Tractor threads here by people paying for the scheme that you are supposed to represent our views on ?

By definition it is a protection racket - as a milling wheat gower if I do not pay RT I can not sell my produce, same is true of a OSR grower. A payment that must be made to commercial company to be allowed to trade is the VERY definition of a protection racket, they have no legal remit but behave as if they have...... if I don't conform RT will shut me down for sales ....... suspension is the equivalent of sending the boys round to smash up my shop !

Yet imported none RT product ends up in the same unbranded (rt) products - there is ZERO argument that RT is a marketing tool for a cereal grower when the brand does not even appear on the end product and RT livestock can be fed on imported none RT feeds

can you maybe explain to me how RT benefits my business at all ? I want equality with the imports that also end in the bread etc my wheat does, I want a ACCS that assures to the SAME BASIC levels that imported produce does NOTHING more and NO more cost or work

cronyism is rife in UK ag -same few names on a merry-go-round between NFU, AHDB, VI and RT etc - farmers are not blind Guy, you were a dead cert for the RT job, had you left the NFU a bit earlier you would have doubtless moved into the AHDB chair role instead........ bad luck on the timing there but maybe next time hey? ....... it pays MUCH better


PS - sorry you feel you have "better things to do " than engage with those you are paid to represent ........ maybe if we offered you £500 / day to reply you would be more interested ? THIS IS YOUR JOB GUY do not make us feel you are in anyway doing farmers a favour engaging with them. WE are all paying for this
 
Last edited:
Grass And Grain

Grass And Grain

Member
Mixed Farmer
Location
Yorks
I won't tag Guy, 'cos I know he can't spend all his time on here answering questions, I'll just leave his quote here. And I think Guy makes a good point that other assurance schemes are available, although I can't think of any other cereal schemes other than RT.

"RT does not have any power to make farmers undertake its assurance scheme as frequently suggested on here. RT is but one of several assurance schemes such as Global Gap, RSPCA freedom foods, Soil Association etc. If the people who buy from farmers choose to use RT assurance and farmers choose to sell to those people then in those instances you have to use the RT assurance scheme. It’s a commercial relationship in a free market just like most aspects of farming."


In my opinion, RT and the other assurance schemes deliberately require the other assurance scheme in their standards, so that everyone gets forced into paying. The mill is forced to join an assurance scheme, because RT says the livestock farmer can only buy his compound feed from an assured mill.

The cereal farmer has to be RT, because the assured mill scheme says said mill can only use assured grain. Maybe it's a coincidence.

Is there anyone else in the UK that does combinables assurance other than RT? If so, based on the way RT conduct themselves and their standards, I'd like to leave RT.
 
Last edited:
D

Drillman

Member
Mixed Farmer
Hmm just wondering as @Guy Smith says he’s quite happy to discuss RT if it were best for the Mods to bend the rules and allow him a additional anonymous user name for that purpose?

. Keep the personal side out of it?

@Clive any thoughts on that idea

it’s need meaningful discussion to get anywhere.

fighting fire with fire and personal slanging matches rarely achieve anything!
 
Henarar

Henarar

Member
Livestock Farmer
Location
Somerset
Drillman said:
Hmm just wondering as @Guy Smith says he’s quite happy to discuss RT if it were best for the Mods to bend the rules and allow him a additional anonymous user name for that purpose?

. Keep the personal side out of it?

@Clive any thoughts on that idea

it’s need meaningful discussion to get anywhere.

fighting fire with fire and personal slanging matches rarely achieve anything!
Click to expand...
sometimes though a few fecks chucked about can produce good results
 

SFI - What % were you taking out of production?

  • 0 %

    Votes: 101 41.4%

  • Up to 25%

    Votes: 89 36.5%

  • 25-50%

    Votes: 36 14.8%

  • 50-75%

    Votes: 5 2.0%

  • 75-100%

    Votes: 3 1.2%

  • 100% I’ve had enough of farming!

    Votes: 10 4.1%
See comments…

May Event: The most profitable farm diversification strategy 2024 - Mobile Data Centres

Apr 02
  • 471
  • 0
With just a internet connection and a plug socket you too can join over 70 farms currently earning up to £1.27 ppkw ~ 201% ROI

Register Here: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/the-mo...2024-mobile-data-centres-tickets-871045770347

Tuesday, May 21 · 10am - 2pm GMT+1

Location: Village Hotel Bury, Rochdale Road, Bury, BL9 7BQ

The Farming Forum has teamed up with the award winning hardware manufacturer Easy Crypto Hunter and Easy Compute to bring you an educational talk about how AI and blockchain technology is helping farmers to diversify their land.

Over the past 7 years, Easy Crypto Hunter have been working with farmers, agricultural businesses, and renewable energy farms all across the UK to help turn leftover space into...
News
Continue…

Share this page

Top