Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New resources
Latest activity
Trending Threads
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
FarmTV
Farm Compare
Search
Tokens/Searches
Calendar
Upcoming Events
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
New Resources
New posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Farm Business
Agricultural Matters
Farmers Weekly : Non-assured growers should get access to feed mills, says Red Tractor
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Grass And Grain" data-source="post: 7855531" data-attributes="member: 23184"><p>Reference, Philip Case, Farmers Weekly. See link below to article.</p><p>FW doing good non-biased journalism again, sticking up for UK farmers and equivalent market access <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite24" alt="(y)" title="Thumbs Up (y)" loading="lazy" data-shortname="(y)" /></p><p></p><p></p><p>Imports can access feed mills via the gatekeeper (non audited assurance) route.</p><p></p><p><strong>Now UK grain can ALSO access feed mills via non farm level audited assurance</strong>. See FW article.</p><p></p><p>Imports also access human consumption markets via the gatekeeper route.</p><p></p><p><strong>Now this precedent has been set for feed mills, the same gatekeeper access should now be possible when sellimg to human consumption mills and crushers.</strong></p><p></p><p>Hopefully individual mills, as well as UK Flour Millers, Maltsters Association of Great Britain, biscuit, breakfast cereal and SCOPA (oilseed crushers) will consult with AHDB to help form a new assurance standard to give fair market access to UK farmers.</p><p></p><p>This standard is coming to the marketplace, so we hope processors will engage to make sure they don't miss out on purchasing opportunities.</p><p></p><p>This isn't "no assurance".</p><p></p><p>This is <strong>"better assurance" -</strong> in a way which gives us improved competitiveness to our import competitors.</p><p></p><p>Independently audited assurance schemes such as those that currently exist in the UK have inherent weaknesses. Everyone presumes that 12 month audited assurance is a fantastic industry leading standard. But it's not.</p><p></p><p>A non-conformance or suspension is only identified on the day of the audit. The farmer has 28 days to retrospectively correct that failure. YOU CANNOT RETROSPECTIVELY CORRECT A FOOD SAFETY FAILURE. It's pulling the wool over the eyes of the purchaser and the consumer.</p><p></p><p>Do farmers, mills and food brands want to be associated with that? It will affect the reputation of our grain.</p><p></p><p>We suggest AHDB developes an assured digital passport to prevent damaging the reputation of grain producers and to improve market access for levy payers. It will work in REAL TIME. That's far superior to 1 audit every 365 days.</p><p></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">NSTS certificate expires, the system flags it up.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Want to sell grain for harvest movement. Not until your mycotoxin risk assessment is completed.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">etc.</li> </ul><p>It will only look at food safety. Nimble, cheaper to comply with, instant, improved competitiveness and same market access as imports, better.</p><p></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Controlled by AHDB = in the hands of levy payers.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Not run by a third party private company.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Not out of control.</li> </ul><p>#level playing field</p><p></p><p>[URL unfurl="true"]https://www.fwi.co.uk/business/compliance/non-assured-growers-should-get-access-to-feed-mills-says-red-tractor[/URL]</p><p></p><p>P.S. AHDB has been listening to growers, and listening to the concept of setting this up. The digital passport framework is perfectly placed to facilitate this.</p><p></p><p>Thank you to Martin Grantley-Smith, (AHDB Cereals & Oilseeds Strategy Director) for all his hard work to date.</p><p></p><p>•••A digital system is our suggested method of gaining gatekeeper access. It is up to the industry to decide how or what can best work for the UK grain trade structure•••</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Grass And Grain, post: 7855531, member: 23184"] Reference, Philip Case, Farmers Weekly. See link below to article. FW doing good non-biased journalism again, sticking up for UK farmers and equivalent market access (y) Imports can access feed mills via the gatekeeper (non audited assurance) route. [B]Now UK grain can ALSO access feed mills via non farm level audited assurance[/B]. See FW article. Imports also access human consumption markets via the gatekeeper route. [B]Now this precedent has been set for feed mills, the same gatekeeper access should now be possible when sellimg to human consumption mills and crushers.[/B] Hopefully individual mills, as well as UK Flour Millers, Maltsters Association of Great Britain, biscuit, breakfast cereal and SCOPA (oilseed crushers) will consult with AHDB to help form a new assurance standard to give fair market access to UK farmers. This standard is coming to the marketplace, so we hope processors will engage to make sure they don't miss out on purchasing opportunities. This isn't "no assurance". This is [B]"better assurance" -[/B] in a way which gives us improved competitiveness to our import competitors. Independently audited assurance schemes such as those that currently exist in the UK have inherent weaknesses. Everyone presumes that 12 month audited assurance is a fantastic industry leading standard. But it's not. A non-conformance or suspension is only identified on the day of the audit. The farmer has 28 days to retrospectively correct that failure. YOU CANNOT RETROSPECTIVELY CORRECT A FOOD SAFETY FAILURE. It's pulling the wool over the eyes of the purchaser and the consumer. Do farmers, mills and food brands want to be associated with that? It will affect the reputation of our grain. We suggest AHDB developes an assured digital passport to prevent damaging the reputation of grain producers and to improve market access for levy payers. It will work in REAL TIME. That's far superior to 1 audit every 365 days. [LIST] [*]NSTS certificate expires, the system flags it up. [*]Want to sell grain for harvest movement. Not until your mycotoxin risk assessment is completed. [*]etc. [/LIST] It will only look at food safety. Nimble, cheaper to comply with, instant, improved competitiveness and same market access as imports, better. [LIST] [*]Controlled by AHDB = in the hands of levy payers. [*]Not run by a third party private company. [*]Not out of control. [/LIST] #level playing field [URL unfurl="true"]https://www.fwi.co.uk/business/compliance/non-assured-growers-should-get-access-to-feed-mills-says-red-tractor[/URL] P.S. AHDB has been listening to growers, and listening to the concept of setting this up. The digital passport framework is perfectly placed to facilitate this. Thank you to Martin Grantley-Smith, (AHDB Cereals & Oilseeds Strategy Director) for all his hard work to date. •••A digital system is our suggested method of gaining gatekeeper access. It is up to the industry to decide how or what can best work for the UK grain trade structure••• [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Farm Business
Agricultural Matters
Farmers Weekly : Non-assured growers should get access to feed mills, says Red Tractor
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top