impossible in 30 days - and they know it, i suspect the contractor has already been selected, that’s how ag gravy trains work
My money is on Basis taking it on
impossible in 30 days - and they know it, i suspect the contractor has already been selected, that’s how ag gravy trains work
And what has it achieved in that time?Not wanting to sound like a one man support for the VI/NROSO a quick check in companies house confirms that it is run a by a wide range of stakeholders in agriculture with representatives from National Association of Contractors, NFU, CLA, National Ag Engineers association etc etc.
It was created to prevent top down regulation - it was the industry volunteering self regulation. Lots of other industries self regulate too.
Like most self created regulation they make you tie your own noose then drop the door at their convenience. All while making you have the feel good feeling you are staving off the inevitable when actually you are just speeding it up.And what has it achieved in that time?
My money is on Basis taking it on
I've looked and about 10% of NRoSO members are already members of TFF. Would guess that about 60% read the forum at least once a year. So I'd love to put an offer together, but don't think I'll get a response from the developers in time. Needs answers quickly unfortunately.
The law does not state that the CPD is required explicitly but it does refer to the Code of Practice within statute. The code of practice is provided by the HSE in which CPD is recommended. I.E. If you comply with the Code of Practice you will be within the Law, should the worst happen.
I know you have an axe to grind with assurance etc but I would be struggling to argue against the continued training of sprayer operators to anyone not involved with farming. Every other profession sees ongoing training as a virtue, why should farming be any different.
i would not touch it with a toxic barge pole or waste good money in dev time
this rubbish needs eradicating from our industry not encouraging, it serves no genuinely useful purpose
there is a VERY simple argument why CPD is not required
imports that we complete with and are used by the same processors and sold by the same retailers do not do it
i would not touch it with a toxic barge pole or waste good money in dev time
this rubbish needs eradicating from our industry not encouraging, it serves no genuinely useful purpose
This requirement is not created by farm assurance but government bodies. The VI was set up in response from top down requirements.
Never in a million years are we going to level down in legislative terms with countries with lower standards than the UK. That is not to say that government won’t allow equal market access, but that is verging onto political matters….
They have £580k a year in income. Got to spend that on something.
NROSO is a Assurance requirement - fact
Creation of Vi was justified by NFU threat of a mythical pesticide tax ……. if government wanted to tax pesticides then they would regardless if any toothless Vi i’m sure - it was a lie told to justify another ag gravy train
NROSO is part of farm assurance but My point still stands that the code recommends CPD regardless of whether you are farm assured or not.
I disagree with your second point for points I have already set out. Probably more important is that without tangible evidence of agriculture acting to do the right thing it is very hard to lobby in its favour. That then leads us to the NFU and I know you don’t like that so at that I will leave it there….
With out nroso we would have mandatory cpd for sprayer operators
just as truck hgv drivers gas and boiler engineers ect
NROSO is considerably less onerous than that.I think boiler engineers may do 30 hours of cpd a year including "learning new job related skills" and reading related publications.
The law does not state that the CPD is required explicitly but it does refer to the Code of Practice within statute. The code of practice is provided by the HSE in which CPD is recommended. I.E. If you comply with the Code of Practice you will be within the Law, should the worst happen.
I know you have an axe to grind with assurance etc but I would be struggling to argue against the continued training of sprayer operators to anyone not involved with farming. Every other profession sees ongoing training as a virtue, why should farming be any different.
With out nroso we would have mandatory cpd for sprayer operators
just as truck hgv drivers gas and boiler engineers ect
NROSO is considerably less onerous than that.
With out nroso we would have mandatory cpd for sprayer operators
just as truck hgv drivers gas and boiler engineers ect