AHDB Article: Assurance of imported grain

[Vader]

IIRC 5% of levy payers within a sector have to write to them requesting a ballot within a 3 month period.

Can it be organised?

 

[B'o'B]

Can it be organised?

If it is going to be done then it needs to be done quickly. The AHDB consultation indicates that Government is going to try and remove the right for levy payers to vote on getting rid of the levy.

I am hugely disappointed in the tone of this report (although not overly surprised). But I really don’t know what to do for the best.

Throw the baby out with the bath water and start again? I think UK Ag is going to have tough times in the near future and these organizations do Di some good in some ways.

Would we end up with no representation at all at this pivotal time? And end up worse off?
Or should we just bring all the pain in at once and rebuild from scratch once the smoke has cleared?
It’s a dilemma.

 

[lazy farmer]

Sorry this isn’t my fight. But could there be a third option on any ballot paper. To maintain the levy but cut all ties with red tractor?

 

[Tarw Coch]

Can it be organised?

I think that is effectively what @White rabbit did for the potato and horticulture sectors

 

[SilliamWhale]

Sorry this isn’t my fight. But could there be a third option on any ballot paper. To maintain the levy but cut all ties with red tractor?

Thats certainly a good option but the issue is those on the merry go round won't have so many backs to scratch which is what it is all about.

 

[SilliamWhale]

If it is going to be done then it needs to be done quickly. The AHDB consultation indicates that Government is going to try and remove the right for levy payers to vote on getting rid of the levy.

I am hugely disappointed in the tone of this report (although not overly surprised). But I really don’t know what to do for the best.

Throw the baby out with the bath water and start again? I think UK Ag is going to have tough times in the near future and these organizations do Di some good in some ways.

Would we end up with no representation at all at this pivotal time? And end up worse off?
Or should we just bring all the pain in at once and rebuild from scratch once the smoke has cleared?
It’s a dilemma.

You say they "do some good" but at the end of the day what is the point in having them if they are not going to support their levy payers with market access?

We may have tough times in the future but we've a tough issue to sort out now and the AHDB are not working with their levy payers today so I don't think their is evidence of being any good in the future.

Some people don't like the suggestion that they are corrupt but they are especially at the top - all the decisions guys who met with them have been told have been met with deflection or shoulder shrugging and decisions are made between NFU (not the elected leaders either the permanent staff), RT boards, AIC board and AHDB. They're laughing at us.

 

[Chris F]

Basically they've created a story to enable Red Tractor to pretend to continue to be respectable. A farmer could be red Tractor assured and still use these mythical illegal pesticides, they're hardly going to declare anything are they?

It's a bit of a shame to say it in one way but we really would be better off without the AHDB and their compromised ways. They may have some good staff but the organisation isn't really any good at a fundamental level if they can't support their own levy payers with fair market access.

Does it really cost £10-15 to do a moisture test?

They tell you personally that they are going to stand up to Red Tractor and the NFU. But then you read summaries like this or the press releases that come out. As an orgaisation AHDB stand firmly with Red Tractor and NFU. Everything that comes out reflects this regardless of what the like of Will Jackson say at a personal level. AHDB are responsible for what farmers think of them. They control their own narrative. They need to change their tune if they want the support of farmers not just whine about what farmers are saying when we see and read there is blatant collusion.

Ken Boyles - you said you love reading the forum - and you said in our last face-to-face meeting there was change coming. This was your excuse as to why things hadn't happened as they should in the past. Is this really what change looks like? As it looks like more of the same to me.

 

[SilliamWhale]

I've been mulling over this article a bit more.

So the situation is as follows:

Imports can enter the food chain because they have the blessing of a "grain superintendent" either side of the port and somehow this person is able to sprinkle gold dust on the produce to make what would otherwise be ineligible to enter the food chain - eligible. It may or may not be subject to a range of tests for the consumer but there is certainly no obligation for the produced grain to comply with any laws of the country of import. I don't know the qualifications of the grain superintendents - does anyone? All the grain superintendent does in practice is stand by the produce - whatever that really means.

However the farmer in this country has to not only comply with any laws of the country (known as legal obligations which have worked in society for aeons) but we have to pay to be able to access our markets.

If a grain superintendent can turn water into wine with a few checks why can professional farmers who have skin in the game both in terms of profitability and legal obligations not act as their own grain superintendents, after all they have grown it? Its not in their interest for the customer not to have the specifiaction agreed but equally they shouldn't have their access to market blocked by an NFU/RT group of spivs.

If the AHDB cannot help in any way at all with this then not only does it shame them but they needing disbanding.

 

[Grass And Grain]

I've been mulling over this article a bit more.

So the situation is as follows:

Imports can enter the food chain because they have the blessing of a "grain superintendent" either side of the port and somehow this person is able to sprinkle gold dust on the produce to make what would otherwise be ineligible to enter the food chain - eligible. It may or may not be subject to a range of tests for the consumer but there is certainly no obligation for the produced grain to comply with any laws of the country of import. I don't know the qualifications of the grain superintendents - does anyone? All the grain superintendent does in practice is stand by the produce - whatever that really means.

However the farmer in this country has to not only comply with any laws of the country (known as legal obligations which have worked in society for aeons) but we have to pay to be able to access our markets.

If a grain superintendent can turn water into wine with a few checks why can professional farmers who have skin in the game both in terms of profitability and legal obligations not act as their own grain superintendents, after all they have grown it? Its not in their interest for the customer not to have the specifiaction agreed but equally they shouldn't have their access to market blocked by an NFU/RT group of spivs.

If the AHDB cannot help in any way at all with this then not only does it shame them but they needing disbanding.

And throw this into the mix. Paragraph under the table.

What do we understand by this? EFISC-GTP (one of the schemes which shippers use to assure non-assured imports) allow the grain to be both totally non-assured when going to a flour mill, and the mill simply does their own intake tests?

 

[B'o'B]

It reads that each load of imported grain/oilseed going into the human food chain must be tested anyway, whether certified or not, and therefore "gate keeper" protocol does not apply.

Grains into animal feed can enter using "gate keeper" protocols.

I have only skim read the AHDB article late Monday night (which I regretted doing!) this would appear to make the whole AHDB article redundant. Must read it properly one morning with this nugget in mind.

 

[teslacoils]

Ahdb - vote to scrap.
AIC - competition commission
RT - as above
NFU - why anyone other than a Chelsea tractor driving home counties llama smallholder is a member is beyond me

All the above work against you, the farmer, and get fat dining out at your expense.

I suggest very seriously considering if enough farmers can trigger a vote to abolish the Ahdb.

 

[farmerm]

i would say it seem to be so purposely complicated that it would make it very difficult for any consignment to be rejected. Taking an average price for every test listed totals £930. ship containing 5000t = 18p per ton
20000t = 4.5p

When the decision and costs around testing are in the hands of the same company that stands the financial problem if a load gets rejected, they are not clearly not going to look too hard at what has arrived ship.

 

[teslacoils]

I'd be interested to know, perhaps via a foi, how many boats of imported grain have been rejected over say the last ten years?

 

[milkloss]

Who was it on here giving it the large about writing their own assurance declaration for buyers and claiming it was accepted no problem?

while ago now I think.

 

[Flat 10]

Heads need to roll. I’m paying a not inconsiderable sum pa and getting zero representation. At least when we pay our taxes we get a chance every five years to choose who gets to lead. It’s a total sh!t show. It will be like the EU all over again (sorry I went there) because we were served platitude after platitude and if Cameron had actually achieved change I suspect the vote would have gone the other way. I can’t stand being patronised by people who promise the world and deliver nothing. Keep twisting the knife @Grass And Grain .
Ps @robbie can you share any of the adhb titbits you heard?

 

[carbonfibre farmer]

Of course they are lining their wagons up nicely to rebuff at the moment.

Had an email today to register with AHDB to be able to participate in the vote on the direction and work that we would like them to do. Direction of travel. NOT on whether we retain them.

What strong ethics they have and are showing by demonstrating their keeness to engage.........

Or is it to have a list of people registered to vote on matters. So as to not have as many levy payers available to unite together to get the minimum numbers to enact on their disbanding or not?
Cynical thinking.........?

 

[teslacoils]

Was the email directly from ahdb? Where did they get your details from? Asking for a friend.

 

[carbonfibre farmer]

Was the email directly from ahdb? Where did they get your details from? Asking for a friend.

From them directly.

I'm on the data bases of quite a few organisations.

 

[teslacoils]

I'm on the data bases of quite a few organisations.

No comment!

 

[texelburger]

I've pretty much come to the conclusion that they are all disingenuous and constantly try to bluff themselves out of tight corners.Why AHDB don't want to represent the majority of their levy payers is beyond me,I just don't understand.