The Red Tractor ACCS referendum

[homefarm]

In this case the "they go elsewhere" means they don't buy UK grain produced to your "new scheme" standard, they simply buy from those that produce to RT standard. You can't make them buy your grain. It would be ironic if you're new scheme had the effect of pushing RT grain up in price!! That said, if you're correct that nobody REALLY wants RT, then your new scheme will put them of of business quite quickly. Although if true, wouldn't non assured UK grain be doing that already?

We accepted RT 20yrs ago but they keep increasing the standards.

I question wether all buyers require these new standards, RT say they do but there is no other lower standard in the market place.

I want a new simple scheme to run along side and in competition with RT.
I will offer two prices one equal to imports for the simple scheme and a slightly higher one for RT.

Giving the customer choice is what marketing is all about.
How many lines of the same product do the supermarkets run?
They all have a basic cheaper range and something perceived to be better

We will give them choice and let the market decide, just normal marketing. Something farmers need to do more of.

 

[MrNoo]

If RT adds nothing to your bottom line, then leave. I would. Why would you be a member of something that costs money but adds nothing? I've said this many times before!!!

Because if you grow milling wheat or malting barley you have to or there is zero market for it unless you sell for feed. Wake up, you drivel on and on and on, when it has been explained numerous times on here in black and white and still you persist. Have you tried taking up knitting?? Golf?? Crosswords?? All great pastimes

 

[Wooly]

You obviously can't prove that a pile of wheat claiming to be RT assured is and that someone hasn't mixed it with non RT stuff, or even that non of it is. But I thought it was being suggested that the rules allow RT to be mixed with non RT stuff and then sold on as RT? The rules allow non assured livestock to be magically converted to RT by the miracle of time. But grain/crops cannot.

We all know that Non RT grain is mixed with RT grain............ but it doesn't make the pile any unsafer.

We also know the livestock buyers in markets that can only buy RT livestock, are suddenly buying Non RT livestock when they need to fill their lorries and killing plants up due to a shortage.......... I expect they know which ones they are once the head and tags are removed !?! They are also no less safe.

Shoppers don't care about Assurance at the best of times, let alone when the shelves are getting empty. They weren't really bothered that their beef burgers were made from the faller at the 3.30 at Kempton Park, as they are cheap burgers.

Time to end this facade. End off

 

[tullah]

AiC and the mills say UK grain must be RT/SQC. Concomitantly the imported stuff gets a lab test to say it is within pesticide residue limits, then it is entered into the assured food/feed chain. The RT and the imported stuff can then all be tipped onto one big heap, loaded into a lorry and delivered to the mill as assured by the TASCC merchant.

Yet we are still trying to get through to people this farce. Why will they not understand logic?

 

[Grass And Grain]

FA due end of Feb, I rang SAI Global (my RT certification provider) yesterday, told them I wasn't renewing for 1st March, as rules were getting too onerous for a small grower and inspection charge too high. They're even going to increase their charges in a couple of months time!

Said I would give it some thought as to wheather I renew in a few months or not.

Suggest everyone does the same.

 

[texelburger]

Your last para....I think if something is written down then you are more likely to be breaking a rule.
Ask those wonderful 4% in favour when and how they fill in the counting insects and mice droppings box. It's laughable.

I wonder if those 4% include RT farmer board members and a few from the NFU who hold a position and hope,one day,they might get on the RT money ladder.I see there're a grand total of 22 on this referendum, so they could all be RT and NFU members of positions.

 

[Old apprentice]

The Northern Ireland Beef and Lamb Farm Quality Assurance Scheme rule 3.12 states:-

Home grown and farm purchased feed grain or pulses must be certified under the NI Farm Quality Assured Cereals Scheme...

View attachment 943141

Sad

 

[principal skinner]

No I'm not. But that's what you're assuming about them, which is why you get so angry. They are an assurance group. Part of assurance is an independent audit. That's the main part of an assurance scheme in any industry. Nobody is assuming you're a liar, or not trusting you or trying to catch you out. But any assurance scheme (worthy of the name) requires audit.

You may claim that RT is too easy to pass and anyone can con their way through the inspection. I think you may well be right. But that invites tighter standards, not lower ones. Basically you don't want inspections. That's fine (although very naïve in this day and age IMO for a food producer) but many of the buyers of your produce along the chain want assurance. That's a statement of fact. So you either give them what they want or they go elsewhere. Supply and demand CANNOT be ignored. You are a seller so you must dance to the buyers tune, whether that be a consumer, a supermarket, a slaughterhouse or a grain mill. I don't see how you can alter that?

I will only feed the troll once @FarmyStu but you are very very wrong with the statement in bold as I have first hand experience of it during an inspection

 

[db9go]

The Relationship between NFU and Red Tractor – The Facts
With out having to go back through the whole of this thread has any one ells had it sent to them
Am i aloud to put it on here

 

[steveR]

FA due end of Feb, I rang SAI Global (my RT certification provider) yesterday, told them I wasn't renewing for 1st March, as rules were getting too onerous for a small grower and inspection charge too high. They're even going to increase their charges in a couple of months time!

Said I would give it some thought as to wheather I renew in a few months or not.

Suggest everyone does the same.

As a lot of us are doing with our NFU membership...

Focus minds a bit.

 

[steveR]

The Relationship between NFU and Red Tractor – The Facts
With out having to go back through the whole of this thread has any one ells had it sent to them
Am i aloud to put it on here

Start a new thread, @db9go

Mkes it easier to see and respond to.

 

[Grass And Grain]

As a lot of us are doing with our NFU membership...

Focus minds a bit.

It's doing some good.

The language is changing.

 

[Barleymow]

Are you stating that RT assured grain is allowed to be mixed with non-assured grain and then sold as RT assured? Are you sure about this? Really sure?

You're right, I do have skin in the game. My father in law "asks" that I complete his fert plans and records etc. I'm paid in tea and biscuits. If he wasn't RT I guess I'd dip out on the tea and biccies.

Imported GM soya is in most feed rations fed to red tractor pork

 

[Barleymow]

If RT adds nothing to your bottom line, then leave. I would. Why would you be a member of something that costs money but adds nothing? I've said this many times before!!!

Can't sell milling wheat without it or sugar beet

 

[FarmyStu]

About a hundred pages back I said I'd stop posting in this thread. It was going round in circles and I think that's where we're at again now. Plus I'm getting called a troll etc. I said it would become an echo chamber in here. It did. It will again. So no more posts from me for another hundred or so pages!

I'll just make the one point before I leave.

The main thrust of why a new, less onerous scheme, will work seems to be that the current setup is in some way illegal. Its "suggested" quite regularly. I'm yet to see anything concrete, posted by anyone, let alone by anyone legally trained. This subject has generated considerable footfall on Clives website which won't harm his ability to generate income from advertisers. I hope after all the hot air, excitement and hopes raised, that there is at least some benefit to others too.

 

[SilliamWhale]

About a hundred pages back I said I'd stop posting in this thread. It was going round in circles and I think that's where we're at again now. Plus I'm getting called a troll etc. I said it would become an echo chamber in here. It did. It will again. So no more posts from me for another hundred or so pages!

I'll just make the one point before I leave.

The main thrust of why a new, less onerous scheme, will work seems to be that the current setup is in some way illegal. Its "suggested" quite regularly. I'm yet to see anything concrete, posted by anyone, let alone by anyone legally trained. This subject has generated considerable footfall on Clives website which won't harm his ability to generate income from advertisers. I hope after all the hot air, excitement and hopes raised, that there is at least some benefit to others too.

Red Tractor isn't a legally produced or legally binding scheme either

 

[steveR]

It's doing some good.

The language is changing.

I am hoping so. My Group Rep is being very proactive...

Still waiting for an acknowledgement from an email to the County Chair and Regional rep though.... Probs bounced it uphill

 

[Green oak]

Just out of interest. Why can’t we buy a loaf of bread with a red tractor logo on it. I thought kws Montana was a Canadian style high protein wheat. And somewhere down the line I remember Camgrain supplying a supermarket for there in-house bakerys. Did that have a red tractor logo on it. If the traditional milling wheat parts of this country just grew Montana with a good premium would the mills go for it. Instead of hauling it across the Atlantic. What a great advert that would be for reduced foodmiles. Really don’t now what to make out of this red tractor symbol. I’m sure we will now more tomorrow at 12pm.

 

[theboytheboy]

In this case the "they go elsewhere" means they don't buy UK grain produced to your "new scheme" standard, they simply buy from those that produce to RT standard. You can't make them buy your grain. It would be ironic if you're new scheme had the effect of pushing RT grain up in price!! That said, if you're correct that nobody REALLY wants RT, then your new scheme will put them of of business quite quickly. Although if true, wouldn't non assured UK grain be doing that already?

I think most members would be happier if RT assured grain went up in price.....then they would be getting the premium!

 

[Dave645]

No I'm not. But that's what you're assuming about them, which is why you get so angry. They are an assurance group. Part of assurance is an independent audit. That's the main part of an assurance scheme in any industry. Nobody is assuming you're a liar, or not trusting you or trying to catch you out. But any assurance scheme (worthy of the name) requires audit.

You may claim that RT is too easy to pass and anyone can con their way through the inspection. I think you may well be right. But that invites tighter standards, not lower ones. Basically you don't want inspections. That's fine (although very naïve in this day and age IMO for a food producer) but many of the buyers of your produce along the chain want assurance. That's a statement of fact. So you either give them what they want or they go elsewhere. Supply and demand CANNOT be ignored. You are a seller so you must dance to the buyers tune, whether that be a consumer, a supermarket, a slaughterhouse or a grain mill. I don't see how you can alter that?

I think why your not seeing what others are trying to tell you is because, you under some false assumptions.
1. You think mills treat RT feed wheat differently to imported wheat.
2. You think that RT wheat and crops are not mixed with imported crops to make feed for animals. That get RT approval to be used by RT animal producers.
3. You think RT creates premiums.
4. You think without RT we all become cowboys that break every rule going.
While those are my guesses, I guess these because from your posts so far that is the impression your giving.


Ok 1
Under current rules mills can buy crops that have been imported and self assure them and mix them with RT assured crops and they are allowed to sell them to RT animal producers. A note here animal producers have no option but to buy RT assured feed, that includes any crops they grow them selves, which will actually be RT assured while feed they buy in can have imported crops blended in or can be entirely made up from imported crops and sold as Assured.
2. Mixing crops in mills, ok the only segregation at mills is crop type, everything else goes in stores and is mixed because under current rules they can self cert any crop they take in, under the the imported crop assurance schemes.
That self cert the only barrier is if imported then it has to be tested (supposedly) I say supposedly as I doubt very much every 30t load is the way ours is tested.
3. Under RT there are no premiums, only assurance schemes that offer premiums are the ones that are run by supermarkets themselves, so the M&S assurance but that’s because they are required if you want to do business with M&S and the farmer will have a contract and part of that contract will require they comply to M&S assurance.
But again even then it’s not a premium for the farmer as much as it’s a cost of doing business.

4. I see that you think RT as making things better and actually creating a premium product through paper pushing and inspections.
This is like saying having a police force means we have no crime, and that without one, everyone will become a criminal.
This has never been the case criminals will be criminals regardless, of if there is a police force or not, and law abiding citizens will not become criminals if the police force disappeared. That is our point, we are saying that even without a policing of us to make sure we have paper work proof of every aspect of the rules RT require, that the majority of farmers are not being criminal when it comes to actual crop safety, we don’t import illegal agrochemicals and are applying to crops which is what imports are tested for and the only thing they are tested for!
Next the very simple rules to avoid in store crop contamination are very simple anyone that has had a single RT inspection will be complying, for ever from a buildings point of view.
That only leaves controlling vermin and bugs, these are a basic and only good management of stores can do, but it’s in the farmers own interest to do if, if they don’t they run the risk of there crop being rejected at the mill if crop contamination is found. So even when we are assured the mills don’t take our word for it they test it per load, which is more than can be said for imported crops that come in in 9000t bulk boat loads.