Suspended from Red Tractor

[Highland Mule]

I wouldn't be so anti-red tractor if it actually meant something and added value to the product at the farm-gate.

Think that through again. It obviously adds value as this forum is full of farmers stating that they can’t get a customer if they’re not RT. They could, but they’d have to reduce the price to a level they’re not prepared to sell at - ergo RT is getting them a better price.

 

[FarmyStu]

Think that through again. It obviously adds value as this forum is full of farmers stating that they can’t get a customer if they’re not RT. They could, but they’d have to reduce the price to a level they’re not prepared to sell at - ergo RT is getting them a better price.

No, no, no. They're not getting more money for being RT. They're getting less for not being RT. So they HAVE to join RT to get more money. So I think they want to ban RT so everyone gets more money (which I think is called communism). Simple really.......

 

[Werzle]

RT was supposed to increase value , instead it just de-valued non RT . The best Con tricks are always very simple

 

[FarmyStu]

RT was supposed to increase value , instead it just de-valued non RT . The best Con tricks are always very simple

I'm not sure, but I reckon less money for non RT is much the same as more money for RT. Do we have any Nobel prize winning economists on the site who could perhaps confirm this?

 

[Cowabunga]

I'm afraid you all misunderstand the real reason for the massive assurance industry that spreads across all aspects of commerce. A clue should be that in our case the main sponsor is the NFU if not the NFU Mutual insurance company.

The aim is to push blame, if something should ever go wrong, way down the line from the retail sector, down the line, past the processor to the producer and the producer's suppliers. Each level, if it conforms strictly to assurance standards, can then legitimately claim that at least they did everything properly, within their power and had all the boxes ticked.

It is purely and blame game played by insurance companies and encouraged by top tier retailers so that no mud ever sticks to them or their horsemeat.

 

[FarmyStu]

I'm afraid you all misunderstand the real reason for the massive assurance industry that spreads across all aspects of commerce. A clue should be that in our case the main sponsor is the NFU if not the NFU Mutual insurance company.

The aim is to push blame, if something should ever go wrong, way down the line from the retail sector, down the line, past the processor to the producer and the producer's suppliers. Each level, if it conforms strictly to assurance standards, can then legitimately claim that at least they did everything properly, within their power and had all the boxes ticked.

It is purely and blame game played by insurance companies and encouraged by top tier retailers so that no mud ever sticks to them or their horsemeat.

I would agree. But the facts get in the way of this particular conspiracy theory.
You mention horsemeat. Who do we think of when that gets mentioned? Tesco. It’s known as the Tesco horsemeat scandal. It probably cost them millions and still costs them reputationally. So when things go wrong, in a big way, mud sticks. Proved by president. The opposite of what you have claimed.

 

[Grass And Grain]

It comes down to the fact the organisation that says it represents farmers interests, is actually a part owner of the scheme that farmers detest.

Conflict of interests !!

But with a simple solution............... don't join either.

Problem sorted !!

Exactly!

I think we should push for member elected farmer representatives on the RT board as a starting point. Potentially make change from the inside.

NFU representing the farmers, whils co-owning, is never going to be a good way to represent the farmer members.

 

[ajd132]

I would happily adopt a far stricter assurance scheme and really raise the game if it meant a premium and proper trust with customers. Blockchain could help. RT is really nit picky in stupid areas but doesn’t actually offer the consumers anything and there isn’t any real traceability, it’s a complete waste of money and time.

 

[bitwrx]

Someone will be looking after your stock. I think on some RT schemes you have to supply 3 different contact numbers.

Grape vine says this whole unannounced inspection thing is being challenged on that basis. It's clearly impractical to oblige a sole trader with no employees to either be available to receive a spot inspection 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, or to provide three phone numbers to be contacted at any time of day or night.

With whole life assurance being talked about, maybe the writing is on the wall for the part-time farmer who checks his stock morning and night, but goes to the office or building site between-times. One does wonder how they manage it in countries where standards are high, and small part-time farms are common (Switzerland and Austria for example). Maybe FA isn't as necessary as RT and the retailers feel it is after all?

 

[traineefarmer]

RT's biggest problem is it's lack of visibility and brand awareness to the reatil buying public. Obviously it is well known to producers, processors and retailers as an industry QA scheme and despite criticisms, for those of us who want to be Farm Assured, the system mostly works well - allowing us to sign up for one scheme and sell to multiple buyers, thereby avoiding dozens of inspections and duplicated form filling.

Also as RT have finally officially admitted, they share information with the RPA and EA, so compliant membership of RT helps you avoid certain government inspections as well - and the RPA don't give you 28 days to fix non-compliance before deducting from your BPS!

As highlighted in this thread the majority of the public have no idea what the Red Tractor stands for. It has no national identification or explanation for what it is. Our exit from the EU should allow the inclusion of a flag to the logo and the word "British" somewhere and also allow RT to close the supposed loophole which meant that EU produce could not be excluded from the scheme.

As suggested earlier, a name and logo change may help, but most of all far more effective brand promotion. The much lauded recent TV advert was laughable, didn't catch your attention and taught the viewer little about what RT stood for. Compared to notable adverts promoting British produce by people such as McDonalds, Morrisons and Lidl it missed its purpose by a mile. Also where is the digital promotion on facebook and other social media platforms?

If members of RT were to see the public aware of the brand and actively seeking it in shops, it would sweeten the bitter taste of fees, paperwork and inspections that we currently criticise so much.

On the subject of promotion and the EU, hopefully now the levies we pay to the AHDB can be used to promote "British" products rather than just "Pork" or "Beef"...

 

[ajd132]

RT's biggest problem is it's lack of visibility and brand awareness to the reatil buying public. Obviously it is well known to producers, processors and retailers as an industry QA scheme and despite criticisms, for those of us who want to be Farm Assured, the system mostly works well - allowing us to sign up for one scheme and sell to multiple buyers, thereby avoiding dozens of inspections and duplicated form filling.

Also as RT have finally officially admitted, they share information with the RPA and EA, so compliant membership of RT helps you avoid certain government inspections as well - and the RPA don't give you 28 days to fix non-compliance before deducting from your BPS!

As highlighted in this thread the majority of the public have no idea what the Red Tractor stands for. It has no national identification or explanation for what it is. Our exit from the EU should allow the inclusion of a flag to the logo and the word "British" somewhere and also allow RT to close the supposed loophole which meant that EU produce could not be excluded from the scheme.

As suggested earlier, a name and logo change may help, but most of all far more effective brand promotion. The much lauded recent TV advert was laughable, didn't catch your attention and taught the viewer little about what RT stood for. Compared to notable adverts promoting British produce by people such as McDonalds, Morrisons and Lidl it missed its purpose by a mile. Also where is the digital promotion on facebook and other social media platforms?

If members of RT were to see the public aware of the brand and actively seeking it in shops, it would sweeten the bitter taste of fees, paperwork and inspections that we currently criticise so much.

On the subject of promotion and the EU, hopefully now the levies we pay to the AHDB can be used to promote "British" products rather than just "Pork" or "Beef"...

Blockchain could allow traceability back to the source farm. It could allow consumer to scan a packet, and instantly comes up with a profile about the farmer and family, how they do things etc. Could really start connecting people back to their food? Wonder if it would work?

 

[Slug Herder]

Blockchain could allow traceability back to the source farm. It could allow consumer to scan a packet, and instantly comes up with a profile about the farmer and family, how they do things etc. Could really start connecting people back to their food? Wonder if it would work?

Yes it would work but have you any idea how much energy is used to create block chains. They rely on massive calculations to create difficult to hack connections. Better to stick to pencil and paper signatures and responsibility. Stored paper is stored carbon.

 

[Tarw Coch]

Blockchain could allow traceability back to the source farm. It could allow consumer to scan a packet, and instantly comes up with a profile about the farmer and family, how they do things etc. Could really start connecting people back to their food? Wonder if it would work?

You’re having a laugh aren’t you, my milk goes on a tanker which picks up from some farms on a retailer contract and some not, it is then offloaded into a bigger tanker with more milk and transported back to the dairy where it is unloaded into a silo with yet more milk, fek knows what happens to it after that but at some point it will end up on a supermarket shelf. how did you say the consumer was going to trace their bottle of milk back to my farm??????

 

[ajd132]

You’re having a laugh aren’t you, my milk goes on a tanker which picks up from some farms on a retailer contract and some not, it is then offloaded into a bigger tanker with more milk and transported back to the dairy where it is unloaded into a silo with yet more milk, fek knows what happens to it after that but at some point it will end up on a supermarket shelf. how did you say the consumer was going to trace their bottle of milk back to my farm??????

You obviously don’t understand blockchain!

 

[Tarw Coch]

You obviously don’t understand blockchain!

No sh!t Sherlock, you were the one telling us what it could do though

 

[Highland Mule]

You obviously don’t understand blockchain!

You don’t either, if you think it would give traceability in that case.
Blockchain is just a fancy way of getting and holding QA, when you don’t trust the people who otherwise would do the form filling. Are you suggesting that you and your fellow RT farmers are untrustworthy?

 

[Bald Rick]

You obviously don’t understand blockchain!

Never even heard of it.

 

[ajd132]

You don’t either, if you think it would give traceability in that case.
Blockchain is just a fancy way of getting and holding QA, when you don’t trust the people who otherwise would do the form filling. Are you suggesting that you and your fellow RT farmers are untrustworthy?

Some are. It’s a way of cutting out masses of expense within the system and actually give it the traceability to mean something.

 

[roscoe erf]

RT was supposed to increase value , instead it just de-valued non RT . The best Con tricks are always very simple

that was just a lie fed to get you farmers to join up

 

[bumkin]

when it first started i went to a farm open day to be told what was involved we went to this far that stored its grain in an old silage bunker between two rows of cubicles you know the classic sixties set up the man told us this would be fine with a cargo net over the front to stop the birds , i asked what about the raised ridge and birds coming in from the cubicles he said he could not see a problem there so i was quite surprised when i had my first inspection.my grain store was purpose built on floor store with a constant flow grain drier and sliding door sit had been steam cleaned and looked like new, islid open the doors and the inspector looked at a nail hole in the gable end where the builder had missed the beam he said you will have to do something about that while he was stood there with the doors open a couple of sparrows flew in he said i cant help but notice you have a bird problem that's when i had a total hummore failure, what i said will have to be left to your imagination