AHDB study into imported grain standards

[Grass And Grain]

The https://www.bfu.org.uk/ pushed for AHDB to do this piece of work. Project has now gone out to tender.

Not sure what I think to the wording. Anyway, here it is....

Cereals and Oilseeds Farm and Trade Assurance processes - an independent study into how assurance works and why supply chains require it. - Contracts Finder

www.contractsfinder.service.gov.uk

 

[Badshot]

It's definitely a step in the right direction.

Let's hope it shows the disparity between imports and home produced standards.

It's well overdue.

 

[Grass And Grain]

I've just emailed AHDB and asked them not to forget about the French co-op method of "assuring" grain. So we need info for this.

Al's feed grain or pulses. e.g. maize from the Ukraine, or soya from South America. And without farm based assurance, how is the Renewable Energy Directive being met?

 

[Humble Village Farmer]

If they are getting input from NFU, is it reasonable to say BFU should have a say?

 

[Grass And Grain]

If they are getting input from NFU, is it reasonable to say BFU should have a say?

I'm just a bit concerned about these phrases...

"There is a clear lack of accessible facts and insight for grower levy payers into what is required beyond the farmgate and of imported grain. The current situation presents a material risk to farm level support for farm assurance.
As such, AHDB have been asked by industry partners to commission an independent exercise into gathering evidence on exactly how assurance processes work for domestic and imported grain and why they are needed through the supply chain.
The work will have an evidence-based foundation, with a fully independent and impartial conclusion that will be respected by the industry.
The purpose of this work is to ensure that as an industry we have independent evidence of how domestic and imported assurance processes are applied and why they are needed by primary processors. The outcome we are aiming for is to create a clear evidence base for industry collaboration on the matter of how assurance standards are applied."

 

[spin cycle]

I'm just a bit concerned about these phrases...

"There is a clear lack of accessible facts and insight for grower levy payers into what is required beyond the farmgate and of imported grain. The current situation presents a material risk to farm level support for farm assurance.
As such, AHDB have been asked by industry partners to commission an independent exercise into gathering evidence on exactly how assurance processes work for domestic and imported grain and why they are needed through the supply chain.
The work will have an evidence-based foundation, with a fully independent and impartial conclusion that will be respected by the industry.
The purpose of this work is to ensure that as an industry we have independent evidence of how domestic and imported assurance processes are applied and why they are needed by primary processors. The outcome we are aiming for is to create a clear evidence base for industry collaboration on the matter of how assurance standards are applied."

don't know why you're concerned.....that more or less reads like a confession of the two tier racket being applied to uk producers

 

[Grass And Grain]

don't know why you're concerned.....that more or less reads like a confession of the two tier racket being applied to uk producers

I was a bit taken a back to read this....

"The current situation presents a material risk to farm level support for farm assurance."

@Clive @warksfarmer @L P @SilliamWhale @snipe @Barleymow @steveR

 

[spin cycle]

I was a bit taken a back to read this....

"The current situation presents a material risk to farm level support for farm assurance."

@Clive @warksfarmer @L P @SilliamWhale @snipe @Barleymow @steveR

but a/it's an admission and 2/ it's true

 

[Clive]

I was a bit taken a back to read this....

"The current situation presents a material risk to farm level support for farm assurance."

@Clive @warksfarmer @L P @SilliamWhale @snipe @Barleymow @steveR

it’s seems to be wanting to set out to protect a position before it starts with that wording - if the conclusion was uk farmers were disadvantaged then why worry about a material risk to support ?

that’s not the right way to go about these things

 

[Flatland guy]

I'm just a bit concerned about these phrases...

"There is a clear lack of accessible facts and insight for grower levy payers into what is required beyond the farmgate and of imported grain. The current situation presents a material risk to farm level support for farm assurance.
As such, AHDB have been asked by industry partners to commission an independent exercise into gathering evidence on exactly how assurance processes work for domestic and imported grain and why they are needed through the supply chain.
The work will have an evidence-based foundation, with a fully independent and impartial conclusion that will be respected by the industry.
The purpose of this work is to ensure that as an industry we have independent evidence of how domestic and imported assurance processes are applied and why they are needed by primary processors. The outcome we are aiming for is to create a clear evidence base for industry collaboration on the matter of how assurance standards are applied."

Putting something out to tender and expecting them to come up with the answer AHDB want. Then they will probably happily give that data to the likes of RT for free. So non RT growers will be paying levy to still work against them.
Obviously everyone at AHDB should know the UK Government has the necessary departments/people to oversee compliance to UK regulations/laws. It is strange how our taxes(via local authorities) effectively govern restaurants/ take aways/ pubs etc for food safety but cannot be trusted for farms/growers of the primary foodstuffs.

 

[Clive]

Putting something out to tender and expecting them to come up with the answer AHDB want. Then they will probably happily give that data to the likes of RT for free. So non RT growers will be paying levy to still work against them.
Obviously everyone at AHDB should know the UK Government has the necessary departments/people to oversee compliance to UK regulations/laws. It is strange how our taxes(via local authorities) effectively govern restaurants/ take aways/ pubs etc for food safety but cannot be trusted for farms/growers of the primary foodstuffs.

the answer AHDB should want should always be "what's best for farmers who are the vast majority of our levy income ?"

 

[L P]

I was a bit taken a back to read this....

"The current situation presents a material risk to farm level support for farm assurance."

@Clive @warksfarmer @L P @SilliamWhale @snipe @Barleymow @steveR

It's pretty much true, there is a material risk to farm level support for farm assurance because all we have is RT which is unravelling through its own doing, there is no other apparent option judging by the aic responses to you. Be very interesting to see how it pans out. Well done for getting it through.

 

[Grass And Grain]

it’s seems to be wanting to set out to protect a position before it starts with wording - if the conclusion was uk farmers were disadvantaged then why worry about a material rush to support ?

that’s not the right way to go about these things

That's how I read it. It sort of says to any consultant who might take on the contract, that they want a conclusion which might ensure there's no threat to farm level assurance continuing.

the answer AHDB should want should always be "what's best for farmers who are the vast majority of our levy income ?"

I suppose that might be a bit biased in the other direction! But yes, it shouldn't influence the consultants doing the research/review, which I think their current phrases do.

 

[L P]

I've just emailed AHDB and asked them not to forget about the French co-op method of "assuring" grain. So we need info for this.

Al's feed grain or pulses. e.g. maize from the Ukraine, or soya from South America. And without farm based assurance, how is the Renewable Energy Directive being met?

@le bon paysan , @Nigel Wellings might you be able to get your hands on French assurance requirements and possibly a list of approved chemicals? Any German producers on TFF who might be willing to pass on their assurance requirements and approved chemicals list?

 

[le bon paysan]

@le bon paysan , @Nigel Wellings might you be able to get your hands on French assurance requirements and possibly a list of approved chemicals? Any German producers on TFF who might be willing to pass on their assurance requirements and approved chemicals list?

@nxy

 

[ollie989898]

AIC will issue a 'stakeholder' message in the yellow rag and dismiss all these concerns. You wait and see.

 

[SilliamWhale]

I was a bit taken a back to read this....

"The current situation presents a material risk to farm level support for farm assurance."

@Clive @warksfarmer @L P @SilliamWhale @snipe @Barleymow @steveR

If they were needed by buyers for all produce then all assurance would be to the same standard. So Bruce in Oz, Stanislav in Ukraine and Juan in Argentina will all be recording the date of the combine cleaning

 

[Grass And Grain]

TBF, the more detailed blueprint for the work looks less biased.

 

[homefarm]

Is £38,000 to £40,000 going to get a person/organisation with the expertise and determination to do this job diligently?
There are a lot of information needed which we have found impossible to access, you will not get much more than what'we already know for £40k.in my opinion

 

[Flatland guy]

Is £38,000 to £40,000 going to get a person/organisation with the expertise and determination to do this job diligently? No
There are a lot of information needed which we have found impossible to access, you will not get much more than what'we already know for £40k.in my opinion

It is getting to the stage where the likes of AHDB, RT, AIC etc. are having back room meetings about being found out and they are sharing out the costs of reviews/study into farm assurance between their different entities but they all want reviews/study to say farm assurance is marvellous etc and much needed.
When the AHDB are asking for study but are effectively mentioning an outcome they would like, you can tell it is not impartial. If you want an impartial study you give them all access and never mention an outcome at all to avoid any bias/prejudice and leave the auditors effectively time to make an informed independent decision. Just imagine if a plant breeder asked AHDB to evaluate a variety but steer them towards an outcome before any analysis/ research is done.
Regarding cost of study, I would say nowhere near unless the AHDB are effectively hand picking the documents it want the study to be based on and basically all it is asking is for a report on their chosen documents etc which is then seen to be impartial blah, blah ,blah. Certain people have been trawling AHDB and other organisations for documents and at minimum wage would expect to have taken many, many hours, if they all costed their time would be well over 40K I bet.

Regarding AHDB and levy, AHDB really only receives levy from merchants, abattoirs, livestock markets and processors effectively all of the above collect it from farmers to forward onto AHDB. They probably pay monthly and as far as AHDB only view them as customers, ignoring the fact that the farmer/ grower/.producer makes up the most of their budget!! I have asked to see if AHDB can tell me what levy I paid within the last 12 months but not got any response, which is telling. So I cannot see if the various merchants/abattoirs/livestock markets have deducted my levies but kept them for themselves to ensure total transparency for fraud etc. None of the income for AHDB is cash I bet so obviously there are paper records, electronic documents/ transactions for all levy income but not apportioned to which business/person correctly. Personally I believe AHDB should invoice me(business) directly either I can be trusted to pay when i say xxx grain or sell so many animals or the buyers reports to AHDB that they have bought xxx and forward your details for AHDB to invoice your business etc. only then would they know who pays the levy and who can access certain information and not give valuable research away to non levy payers.