25 Red Tractor threads....

[7610 super q]

......On the go at any one time, yet nothing ever happens.

 

[Bury the Trash]

 

[Wooly]

......On the go at any one time, yet nothing ever happens.

This reminds me of being a member of the E.U.

They took no notice of the British Government trying to say enough is enough, with all the EU's stupid rules and regulations that disadvantaged the UK.

Bet they wished they took notice now we have left and are not paying into the gravy train.

RT, take note !!

 

[Clive]

......On the go at any one time, yet nothing ever happens.

and not a representative in sight ......................... yet apparently the WAT consultation ?

 

[Bury the Trash]

As a matter of interest Is the op an RT member?

 

[roscoe erf]

As a matter of interest Is the op a member?

he is from the dark side

 

[roscoe erf]

......On the go at any one time, yet nothing ever happens.

is this no 26

 

[7610 super q]

As a matter of interest Is the op an RT member?

Yes. Woodworm farmers have no option.

 

[Northeastfarmer]

Time it was scrapped

 

[Bald Rick]

......On the go at any one time, yet nothing ever happens.

 

[kiwi pom]

It seems a strange topic to always bring up. It's not that expensive, fairly easy to comply with - according to TFF you can just sort it a few days before a visit - and is a way to tick all the boxes for most of your buyers, plus if you get something wrong, you get the chance to put it right.
It's probably pointless but so many things are today when you think about it, so why this one and why does it seem to be the 'one man bands' (plus Clive) that get so upset?

Is it because it's the one visitor a year that comes round, see's what you do every day and can be critical of it and say "actually you've done that wrong"?

I don't get it.

 

[Bury the Trash]

It seems a strange topic to always bring up. It's not that expensive, fairly easy to comply with - according to TFF you can just sort it a few days before a visit - and is a way to tick all the boxes for most of your buyers, plus if you get something wrong, you get the chance to put it right.
It's probably pointless but so many things are today when you think about it, so why this one and why does it seem to be the 'one man bands' (plus Clive) that get so upset?

Is it because it's the one visitor a year that comes round, see's what you do every day and can be critical of it and say "actually you've done that wrong"?

I don't get it.

Ok lets just give one small example of how it can kill the spirit , 'new rules to include shade for livestock when required' now will Nz or OZ lamb get shade ?

 

[Clive]

It seems a strange topic to always bring up. It's not that expensive, fairly easy to comply with - according to TFF you can just sort it a few days before a visit - and is a way to tick all the boxes for most of your buyers, plus if you get something wrong, you get the chance to put it right.
It's probably pointless but so many things are today when you think about it, so why this one and why does it seem to be the 'one man bands' (plus Clive) that get so upset?

Is it because it's the one visitor a year that comes round, see's what you do every day and can be critical of it and say "actually you've done that wrong"?

I don't get it.

its the bullying protection racket nature of it i object to mostly, i don’t think ii’m alone

and working hard to pay for the nepotism / cronyism thats is seriously holding back uk farmers now

and it’s not cheap, if i added up all costs incurred i bet its thousands on my farm - the membership fee is just a part of the true cost

 

[kiwi pom]

its the bullying protection racket nature of it i object to mostly, i don’t think ii’m alone

and working hard to pay for the nepotism / cronyism thats is seriously holding back uk farmers now

and it’s not cheap, if i added up all costs incurred i bet its thousands on my farm - the membership fee is just a part of the true cost

Bullying as in someone telling you what to do? Life's full of crap we don't want to do but have to.
I've no idea of cost though so will take your word for it.
I'm not saying it's not frustrating but that one visit a year seems like an ok way to get a license to farm, which is basically what it is, especially if you already work to that standard.
I'd say scrap it but I think your customers will always require something. Perhaps one scheme is better than a different one for each buyer?
I'm guessing you're in a situation where you could get staff to handle most of it anyway?

 

[Bury the Trash]

Bullying as in someone telling you what to do? Life's full of crap we don't want to do but have to.
I've no idea of cost though so will take your word for it.
I'm not saying it's not frustrating but that one visit a year seems like an ok way to get a license to farm, which is basically what it is, especially if you already work to that standard.
I'd say scrap it but I think your customers will always require something. Perhaps one scheme is better than a different one for each buyer?
I'm guessing you're in a situation where you could get staff to handle most of it anyway?

You have not answered the question , will NZ and OZ lamb have to have shade from the sun to pass their Farm Assurance test ?

 

[kiwi pom]

You have not answered the question , will NZ and OZ lamb have to have shade from the sun to pass their Farm Assurance test ?

No idea, I don't know what rules they have to abide by. My guess is probably not.
Every country has different rules, standards and ways of doing things, which is frustrating but if your buyer requires RT and the RT rules say that's what you have to do then that's what you do.
Do UK farmers abide by all the rules of the countries they export too?
Maybe if you all cancelled membership, requirements would get easier but they might get harder too. Look at the hoops some of the dairy guys are jumping through now, I bet RT is the easy bit.

 

[two-cylinder]

It seems a strange topic to always bring up. It's not that expensive, fairly easy to comply with - according to TFF you can just sort it a few days before a visit - and is a way to tick all the boxes for most of your buyers, plus if you get something wrong, you get the chance to put it right.
It's probably pointless but so many things are today when you think about it, so why this one and why does it seem to be the 'one man bands' (plus Clive) that get so upset?

Is it because it's the one visitor a year that comes round, see's what you do every day and can be critical of it and say "actually you've done that wrong"?

I don't get it.

With all due respect, you are commenting on something you have no first hand experience of.
To start with it's not just one visitor and check.
This is one all encompassing visit to check that you have had others, paid for this and that, printed out reams of useless copy that no one reads, and it's about to get much worse.
With regard to cost, the inspection is just the last cost of a whole list of expense.

 

[Bury the Trash]

The primary production part of the food chain is in bad shape enough without resource sapping outfits like these upsetting the applecart. even more.

 

[Jackov Altraids]

Bullying as in someone telling you what to do? Life's full of crap we don't want to do but have to.
I've no idea of cost though so will take your word for it.
I'm not saying it's not frustrating but that one visit a year seems like an ok way to get a license to farm, which is basically what it is, especially if you already work to that standard.
I'd say scrap it but I think your customers will always require something. Perhaps one scheme is better than a different one for each buyer?
I'm guessing you're in a situation where you could get staff to handle most of it anyway?

I can only speak for myself, but the problem isn't so much now, but the clear and obvious direction of travel.
It has started to over step the mark as an assurance scheme to become an NGO which is policing us to rules that are invented with no supporting evidence and no right of appeal.
It is also moving from clear rules to subjective evaluation. An inspector could soon stop you trading just because they didn't like you and you would have no right of appeal.
I fully supported and thought the origins of RT were good. It has become a self-serving parasite.
Those that want these higher standards objected to minimum standards for imports to ensure that they wouldn't have to pay the extra costs by pegging the value of our produce to it.
I know that the vast set of proposals to be introduced are the thin end of a very thick wedge which is going to get very expensive. Furthermore, they will provide no benefits to animal welfare, no benefits to the consumer and no benefit to the producer.

 

[kiwi pom]

With all due respect, you are commenting on something you have no first hand experience of.
To start with it's not just one visitor and check.
This is one all encompassing visit to check that you have had others, paid for this and that, printed out reams of useless copy that no one reads, and it's about to get much worse.
With regard to cost, the inspection is just the last cost of a whole list of expense.

No you're right I don't, I do still have contact with farms in the UK that do and they tell me it's a pain and they'd rather not do it but that's it not really a big deal. My point was all industries suffer from endless audits from customers and authorities and everything requires a lot of hoop jumping these days but it's always RT that gets mentioned.

I can only speak for myself, but the problem isn't so much now, but the clear and obvious direction of travel.
It has started to over step the mark as an assurance scheme to become an NGO which is policing us to rules that are invented with no supporting evidence and no right of appeal.
It is also moving from clear rules to subjective evaluation. An inspector could soon stop you trading just because they didn't like you and you would have no right of appeal.
I fully supported and thought the origins of RT were good. It has become a self-serving parasite.
Those that want these higher standards objected to minimum standards for imports to ensure that they wouldn't have to pay the extra costs by pegging the value of our produce to it.
I know that the vast set of proposals to be introduced are the thin end of a very thick wedge which is going to get very expensive. Furthermore, they will provide no benefits to animal welfare, no benefits to the consumer and no benefit to the producer.

Good point, it does seem to be getting carried away. I suppose the question is, is it being pushed by processors and retailers or is it just making rules for the sake of it?
What would your buyers require if RT was dropped?
Perhaps nothing.