I don't think this is a problem caused by rt. It's the readiness of farmers to join the scheme and the trade taking the opportunity to insist on it.I think that's a pleasing statement to see. Well done AHDB. Taken on board all the points we've raised over past 10 months.
It's base requirement, but trying to be premium brand, so one level = no price premium.
It's higher standards (and cost to the farmer) than the imports which enter our market and get blended into the same end product.
Scheme is full of daft standards, some of which have nothing to do with food safety.
Will RT actually listen?
what like does he mean the whole Worlds farming industry ?
I’m happy to concur on your point that he writes “farm assurance” rather than Red Tractor in this paragraph but it does feel sometimes that the 2 are used rather interchangeably at times.I read that as Nicholas saying farming as a whole industry, not as and individual farm. Plus he says farm assurance is important. Not Red Tractor.
And sometimes it's less, as in the case of imports.AHDB are only UK - so I read it as UK. We know consumers want assurance. Sometimes that assurance is just that it is UK and legal product, sometimes its more. I talk to loads of my non-farming friends (mostly men) and very few know about Red Tractor - but they all know about a union jack on food and associate that with better standards.
I’m happy to concur on your point that he writes “farm assurance” rather than Red Tractor in this paragraph but it does feel sometimes that the 2 are used rather interchangeably at times.
If he had meant the whole industry perhaps he would have been better off writing “..farming’s success“, would have felt less personal to me!
Fingers crossed you are right.Generally it has. The "common narrative" we have read so much about in emails backs up your exact point.
This reads to me as a Red Tractor divorce though. AHDB know Red Tractor is toxic right now. ASA are investigating over allegations they have misled consumers, a possible legal challenge to market manipulation, and so on.... this is putting distance between them and Red Tractor.
Also removes £250k a year of funding.
I expect they will withdraw as guarantor as well in the future.
This is a big step for AHDB. I have said for many months this needs doing and it's great to see them doing it.
From all the Freedom of Information (FOI) requests we have seen, the words "common narrative" has been used a lot in the last year to keep NFU/RT/AHDB are singing the same tune. This approach has massively damaged the AHDB in my opinion. I have told them this.
This might be a bit watered down, but this is AHDB taking it's own stance.
It also opens the door for a new assurance scheme for Cereals to become a reality. As they say they are pro assurance and they have funded and will fund assurance in the future. But it doesn't say that assurance has to be Red Tractor.
Competition in this market is required and it's coming. That competition can now be funded by AHDB assuming it is "deemed to add demonstrable value to levy payers or help levy payers to reach agreed standards". Not sure Red Tractor can do that in the cereals market.
Nfu needs to keep well clear.There is no way assurance can be only Red Tractor alone. They are a sullied brand supported only by a few spiv farmers who are paid by them - the rest of the farmers don't like it because we see it for what it is - a market blocker and a cartel.
I don't have a problem with the principal of assurance either - but I don't think the NFU need be anywhere near it either.
I really hope Mr Saphir knows the extent of how little appetite farmers have for being bullied into accepting unfair situations and how dim a view we all take of the collusion between the AHDB, AIC, RT and NFU - its really really unethical
It's going to be all change in the FA sector. It's going to get shaken up.QMS (Scottish red meat) are stopping Lloyds register carrying out farm assurance.
SAOS are recruiting for a team to do it.
AIC mutually recognised EFISC-GTP importers scheme allows grain to be trade assured with NO farm assurance AND NO gatekeeper lab testing assurance. That's right, no assurance at all when it reaches the mill intake.I would argue there is no assurance to the consumer for imported product (unless they have their own brand). Most flour comes with no assurance, its just "legal".