Red tractor and Competition and Markets Authority

[Clive]

I know we're all very very tired of this issue but after another sleepless night from reading about Rt's expansion in to health and safety, I really feel that it should be possible to be a farmer and not be harassed by this organisation who seem to operate like the Mafia Ie. If you don't pay your protection money you aren't able to trade now I'm not saying that they're going to firebomb your Italian restaurant for non payment but the financial effect of not being able to trade is there all the same.

My point is this; do RT's practices fall foul of the Competition and Markets Authority as there appears to be no widespread access to market for UK agricultural goods that aren't RT approved.

we explored this avenue with specialist lawyers, basically way to expensive to prove

 

[Feldspar]

we explored this avenue with specialist lawyers, basically way to expensive to prove

But also that there is a strong argument that there is an infringement here. Should be the sort of thing we pay our NFU subs for so they take it on. Still waiting on that one. Eventually behind the scenes chats will work or not, but if they don't, and the AIC seem good at fobbing off, then they should force the issue.

 

[Grass And Grain]

View attachment 976174
From my last RT dairy inspection, it says in there something to the effect that it’s a requirement of RT dairy to be a member of RT beef, and you won’t get a milk contract without being RT dairy View attachment 976174

A dominant company isn't supposed to make you purchase product B in order to be allowed to purchase product A. Last bullet point...

Examples of behaviour that could amount to an abuse by a business of its dominant position include:

• imposing unfair trading terms, such as exclusivity;
• excessive, predatory or discriminatory pricing;
• refusal to supply or provide access to essential facilities; and
• tying – i.e. stipulating that a buyer wishing to purchase one product must also purchase all or some of their requirements for a second product from the dominant supplier.

 

[Hesstondriver]

Thing is, do we want RT to have competition ? Imagine 3 or 4 farm assurance companies out competing each other to bring in as many new rules as possible ?
Farm assurance needs to be binned full stop. We can then compete on a level playing field with imports.

Surley this may be what we do want , numerous options of boddies each on a 'bidding war' to offer the minimum number of rules to attract the most customers (farmers)

if RT has 1000 hoops to jump through but Joe Blogs assurance only has 500 (and still achieves assured status) which one would you opt for ?

 

[Grass And Grain]

Surley this may be what we do want , numerous options of boddies each on a 'bidding war' to offer the minimum number of rules to attract the most customers (farmers)

if RT has 1000 hoops to jump through but Joe Blogs assurance only has 500 (and still achieves assured status) which one would you opt for ?

Not certain, but I suspect you're correct. If they had to be competitive to gain farmer customers, then farmers would go with the easiest scheme.

Global GAP is an example. Seems to be based around HACCP and risk assessments, but very few daft stipulations like you get with RT. I think Global GAP is accepted by AIC for grain.

Cereal producers could use that competition to pressurise RT to make changes. I.e. we all leave RT and join Global GAP. Worth serious consideration as a strategic move next year if AIC/RT don't give us what we want.