AHDB recruiting farm assurance lead

[Charles.]

I suspect most of the small merchants dislike the monopoly assurance situation. I think some just accept it as a necessary evil, as many farmers have to do (as we've little choice).

I was told the assurance person from a very large national grain storage and trading co-op doesn't want any other assurance standard other than the existing RT standard. Don't know how true that is, but it's what someone told me.

It's understandable from their point of view. Much easier for them if there's only a single assurance standard/brand, and I suppose it makes it easier to upgrade to different markets.

However, that shouldn't in itself be a reason to not allow anything other than RT. To not let farmers have a choice.

For example, there's lots of growers who only grow feed grain, so why can't they have something less onerous.

^^^^ And none of the above takes into account imports. Basically the merchants, Flour Millers, AIC, etc. are happy to ship in non-assured grain and buy it. Then blend it with ours in the final product. But they won't buy UK non-assured. Makes one want to boycott some of these businesses which don't treat us fairly.

Where have the NFU been?

Nobody should refuse non farm assured grain otherwise it's illegal when they are importing non farm assured grain.

 

[Grass And Grain]

Nobody should refuse non farm assured grain otherwise it's illegal when they are importing non farm assured grain.

Assurance review will be interesting. Is anything necessary over and above the local authority inspection?

Is LA inspected grain safe to sell as food or feed? If not, and they think this grain is a danger to the public, are AHDB going to run a publicity campaign advising "don't eat non-RT bread".

If, however, LA inspected grain is considered totally safe, and given imports aren't farm assured, and also given we are under UK legislation, will the assurance review decide grain assurance is an unnecessary cost for levy payers?

We've to remember that when we're RT assured we get earned recognition, and the LA leaves us alone. But if we leave RT we pop up on the LA computer and get an inspection. Seems like NFU have supported farmers having to pay for RT, when we could have had a similar LA inspection done for free.

 

[Grass And Grain]

Assurance review will be interesting. Is anything necessary over and above the local authority inspection?

Is LA inspected grain safe to sell as food or feed? If not, and they think this grain is a danger to the public, are AHDB going to run a publicity campaign advising "don't eat non-RT bread".

If, however, LA inspected grain is considered totally safe, and given imports aren't farm assured, and also given we are under UK legislation, will the assurance review decide grain assurance is an unnecessary cost for levy payers?

We've to remember that when we're RT assured we get earned recognition, and the LA leaves us alone. But if we leave RT we pop up on the LA computer and get an inspection. Seems like NFU have supported farmers having to pay for RT, when we could have had a similar LA inspection done for free.

When I asked AIC if they would accept the LA inspection, the only excuse they could think of as to why they wouldn't accept it, was there wasn't a database to show which farms had passed the inspection and which hadn't.

If RT wanted to keep in with a job they could simply run a database of your LA inspection status.

RT happy, because they charge £10/annum to be on the database. AIC happy because you our LA inspection status is independently verified.

Job done.

 

[Charles.]

Assurance review will be interesting. Is anything necessary over and above the local authority inspection?

Is LA inspected grain safe to sell as food or feed? If not, and they think this grain is a danger to the public, are AHDB going to run a publicity campaign advising "don't eat non-RT bread".

If, however, LA inspected grain is considered totally safe, and given imports aren't farm assured, and also given we are under UK legislation, will the assurance review decide grain assurance is an unnecessary cost for levy payers?

We've to remember that when we're RT assured we get earned recognition, and the LA leaves us alone. But if we leave RT we pop up on the LA computer and get an inspection. Seems like NFU have supported farmers having to pay for RT, when we could have had a similar LA inspection done for free.

Suspect farmers would rather have LA inspection and no RT inspection and it's free too.

 

[MrNoo]

But if we leave RT we pop up on the LA computer and get an inspection.

You keep saying this but I fear you're wrong. I left RT and have never been inspected, it's been 6-7 years I've been unassured now.
I also am puzzled why you do keep mentioning assurance when the truth of the matter is we don't really need it do with imports flying in. NFU will try and keep their gravy train RT, they won't wish to rock the boat.

 

[Humble Village Farmer]

But if we leave RT we pop up on the LA computer and get an inspection.

RT can only do that if you give them permission to share your data.

No one should allow RT to share data. Remove consent at the time of inspection.

 

[Grass And Grain]

You keep saying this but I fear you're wrong. I left RT and have never been inspected, it's been 6-7 years I've been unassured now.
I also am puzzled why you do keep mentioning assurance when the truth of the matter is we don't really need it do with imports flying in. NFU will try and keep their gravy train RT, they won't wish to rock the boat.

Maybe it was just my local authority who works like that. Inspector told me they got notified, and therefore triggered an inspection. Non-RT farms have a different LA inspection regime compared to RT farms (in my LA area). Other LA might work differently.

Red Tractor have been developing a lighter touch cereals assurance. I'm not saying that's a silver bullet or what we've been wanting, but just stating the fact that they're doing so, and how that might affect things. It might be more useful to a feed only grower than the existing RT.

As you say, the above doesn't it any way make it right that mills make us be RT assured when they purchase non-assured imports. And it's even worse when we've highlighted the issue and asked if we can supply in EXACTLY the same manner as imports, and they have made excuses after excuse as to why not. You can see it in their eyes they know they haven't a leg to stand on, yet still they stand there and make pathetic excuses.

We will keep at them. Give them enough string and they'll hopefully hang themselves.

 

[Wombat]

Maybe it was just my local authority who works like that. Inspector told me they got notified, and therefore triggered an inspection. Non-RT farms have a different LA inspection regime compared to RT farms (in my LA area). Other LA might work differently.

Red Tractor have been developing a lighter touch cereals assurance. I'm not saying that's a silver bullet or what we've been wanting, but just stating the fact that they're doing so, and how that might affect things. It might be more useful to a feed only grower than the existing RT.

As you say, the above doesn't it any way make it right that mills make us be RT assured when they purchase non-assured imports. And it's even worse when we've highlighted the issue and asked if we can supply in EXACTLY the same manner as imports, and they have made excuses after excuse as to why not. You can see it in their eyes they know they haven't a leg to stand on, yet still they stand there and make pathetic excuses.

We will keep at them. Give them enough string and they'll hopefully hang themselves.

We had the EA in last year and they said they had no clue who was red tractor and it didn’t make a sh!t of difference to them.
They were very good to be fair

 

[MrNoo]

Maybe it was just my local authority who works like that. Inspector told me they got notified, and therefore triggered an inspection. Non-RT farms have a different LA inspection regime compared to RT farms (in my LA area). Other LA might work differently.

Red Tractor have been developing a lighter touch cereals assurance. I'm not saying that's a silver bullet or what we've been wanting, but just stating the fact that they're doing so, and how that might affect things. It might be more useful to a feed only grower than the existing RT.

As you say, the above doesn't it any way make it right that mills make us be RT assured when they purchase non-assured imports. And it's even worse when we've highlighted the issue and asked if we can supply in EXACTLY the same manner as imports, and they have made excuses after excuse as to why not. You can see it in their eyes they know they haven't a leg to stand on, yet still they stand there and make pathetic excuses.

We will keep at them. Give them enough string and they'll hopefully hang themselves.

Yes, that is what they're hoping RT Lite or whatever name they'll give it in the hope of quietening us peasants down. The whole thing is wrong and we should keep up the pressure. GFC so say not going ahead so they have had a lot of heat taken off them, sitting pretty, seen to have done something, same for that sham the ADHB, a few words on here, get their levy increase then bugger off, again sitting pretty. Just parasites the lot of them

 

[Grass And Grain]

We had the EA in last year and they said they had no clue who was red tractor and it didn’t make a sh!t of difference to them.
They were very good to be fair

Think they confirmed that on the EA thread on here the other week.

 

[graham mc]

RT lite prob be brought in to keep people quiet then within 2 years it will be back to where it was with new creeping each year..

 

[Charles.]

RT lite prob be brought in to keep people quiet then within 2 years it will be back to where it was with new creeping each year..

Absolutely, RT lite will keep the money supply going. The end goal is the legal right to sell our produce by choice, not illegally forced against our will into any scheme.

 

[Charles.]

Yes, that is what they're hoping RT Lite or whatever name they'll give it in the hope of quietening us peasants down. The whole thing is wrong and we should keep up the pressure. GFC so say not going ahead so they have had a lot of heat taken off them, sitting pretty, seen to have done something, same for that sham the ADHB, a few words on here, get their levy increase then bugger off, again sitting pretty. Just parasites the lot of them

Absolutely, we must continue with ACTION to force change upon the criminal cabal such we have the legal right to sell our produce how we see fit, not forced against our will into any scheme. RT lite allows the money supply to continue.

 

[JP1]

You keep saying this but I fear you're wrong. I left RT and have never been inspected, it's been 6-7 years I've been unassured now.
I also am puzzled why you do keep mentioning assurance when the truth of the matter is we don't really need it do with imports flying in. NFU will try and keep their gravy train RT, they won't wish to rock the boat.

I left and did - maybe pot luck?

 

[Flatland guy]

If the farming unions have a problem with regulations surely they would be lobbing Government. They say they are constantly speaking/ discussing various issues with Government people. So if regulations have been a major concern for some while, what have they achieved?

Maybe it was just my local authority who works like that. Inspector told me they got notified, and therefore triggered an inspection. Non-RT farms have a different LA inspection regime compared to RT farms (in my LA area). Other LA might work differently.

Red Tractor have been developing a lighter touch cereals assurance. I'm not saying that's a silver bullet or what we've been wanting, but just stating the fact that they're doing so, and how that might affect things. It might be more useful to a feed only grower than the existing RT.

As you say, the above doesn't it any way make it right that mills make us be RT assured when they purchase non-assured imports. And it's even worse when we've highlighted the issue and asked if we can supply in EXACTLY the same manner as imports, and they have made excuses after excuse as to why not. You can see it in their eyes they know they haven't a leg to stand on, yet still they stand there and make pathetic excuses.

We will keep at them. Give them enough string and they'll hopefully hang themselves.

I would strongly suggest you were causing trouble for certain individuals/organisations and they had a vendettta against you and dobbed you in to LA and got that inspector to say that if RT wouldn't have their inspection. I bet if you did FOI request to LA on RT it would not tally with what told.