The main standard being as cheap as possible?
The Red Tractor ACCS referendum
- Thread starter Clive
- Start date
The main standard being as cheap as possible?
- Location
- Herefordshire
I saw that,basically all types of food coming into the country are not assured.The guy said "they claim its been audited but by who and to what standard ?"
Got me thinking that all our RT food is gold plated and their consultation, approved by the NFU,would like to add more and more regulations.Yet food comes flooding into the country that is not assured to anywhere near our standards but is happily accepted by Supermarkets and food retailers.
The whole system is stacked ,heavily,against UK producers.
- Location
- Essex
The most reliable way to switch off red tractor is to withdraw funds and make them all redundant.
They have proved by lack of premiums and uncontrolled imports that we don't need them. It has no benefit to anyone except the staff and owners of the scheme. It's just a protection racket.
The public don't even recognise it.
They have proved by lack of premiums and uncontrolled imports that we don't need them. It has no benefit to anyone except the staff and owners of the scheme. It's just a protection racket.
The public don't even recognise it.
tullah
Member
- Location
- Linconshire
RT themselves, the merchants and everyone knows it's a racket too. Just have a friendly chat with your auditor.
The only ones coming out in public praising it are those feeding off it. What the hells going on.
As Clive says the easy painless way to do it is cease your NFU membership.
RT would never rear it's ugly head again.
The only ones coming out in public praising it are those feeding off it. What the hells going on.
As Clive says the easy painless way to do it is cease your NFU membership.
RT would never rear it's ugly head again.
- Location
- south norfolk
Read in the yellow peril this morning that Blenky had a red tractor inspection on April 1.how very convenient I’d imagine so something to put in his article in the mag.
nick...
nick...
Any non compliances ?
- Location
- Mid Norfolk
More likely someone took umbrage at being called a backstabber and reported him to get back at him. Somewhat childish but not altogether surprising? Perhaps if we all report each other we can crash the system....
On another note reading the editorial in FW I thought it was building up to have a go at RT but sadly it was a pop at elms.
- Location
- Essex
Red tractor, the AIC and the non farmers union don't like elms because they can't make money out of it
RT offered to police ELMS for DEFRA. All will get a slice of the government pie indirectly via the farmer’s pocket.
And that isn't good news. RT should have less power not more.
if that happens i’m selling up
Have the faith that the red tractor gravy train will have hit the buffers before then
- Location
- Cirencester
Well, chatted to my auditor who wanted to come and do an inspection (he is actually very good indeed) but told him not to bother as wasnt interested, more important things in life than ticking boxes. Told him that after looking at the new rules there was no way, he replied, yes when they bring them in he is expecting a lot of others to be the same. So my take from that is that these new requirements will be implemented. The consultation just a mere box ticking exercise, which I thought it would be from the off.
- Location
- Essex
Just had my it's time to renew letter. I wonder if they'll ring?
- Location
- Yorks
I've been giving more thought to RT and AIC rules.
Quite simply, most of the imported grain has no farm level assurance. It can be grown, handled and stored on a non-assured farm. It's only the shipping and merchanting that has any form of recognised assurance.
AIC allow this for every single country of the world except UK and Eire.
If AIC are happy with the quality of that grain, then it should be exactly the same for UK grain. No farm level assurance required, but merchant is assured.
There is absolutely no reason at all for AIC to single out UK producers with extra burdensome rules and costs.
Quite simply, most of the imported grain has no farm level assurance. It can be grown, handled and stored on a non-assured farm. It's only the shipping and merchanting that has any form of recognised assurance.
AIC allow this for every single country of the world except UK and Eire.
If AIC are happy with the quality of that grain, then it should be exactly the same for UK grain. No farm level assurance required, but merchant is assured.
There is absolutely no reason at all for AIC to single out UK producers with extra burdensome rules and costs.
Have you or anyone else on here asked them why they do it then ?
Matt
Member
- Location
- herefordshire, uk
See RT put their levy up this year. Just had my letter for renewal.
Hopefully selling our grain to local end users who dont need it RT.
Sorry if I missed someone already saying levy has increased
Hopefully selling our grain to local end users who dont need it RT.
Sorry if I missed someone already saying levy has increased
- Location
- Yorks
They've been asked, but won't give a straight answer to our questions.
I don't think they have a credible answer they're prepared to put their name behind.
The only reason I can think is they want to keep the farmer member fees coming in to RT and SQC. (AIC are involved in the ownership structure of SQC).
"Scottish Quality Crops is a company limited by guarantee and the members of the company are:
National Farmers Union of Scotland;
Agricultural Industries Confederation;
Scottish Flour Millers Association;
Scottish Agricultural Organisation Society;
Maltsters Association of Great Britain;
The Scotch Whisky Association;
The Malt Distillers Association of Scotland and
SRUC (Scottish Agricultural College)."