Beef farmers ‘unconvinced’ by lifetime assurance plan

Beef farmers remain unconvinced by plans to introduce tougher standards for beef, according to the National Beef Association (NBA).

Red Tractor Assurance (RTA) wants to introduce lifetime assurance for beef in 2016, which would require animals to spend their whole lives on an assured farm to be sold as Red Tractor beef.

Currently, animals must spend 90 days on an assured farm to qualify for the Red Tractor logo.

See also: Lifetime assurance for beef to make a return

Beef farmers and farming organisations have condemned plans to toughen beef certification standards, claiming it would increase costs and bureaucracy, with no evidence it would bring additional financial returns from the market.

But RTA has defended the plans, insisting they are an “important objective to protect the integrity of the Red Tractor brand”.

Following a meeting of the NBA’s policy committee to discuss members’ concerns about the plans, its chief executive Chris Mallon said the committee stood by its decision to reject the proposals outlined in the Red Tractor consultation.

Without proper infrastructure and a voluntary option in place, Mr Mallon said the NBA could not support Red Tractor proposals for whole-life assurance.

However, the committee agreed it could support the plans if certain conditions were met, including:

• Cattle EID being implemented (with minimum of 95% of breeding herd EID registered)
• The existence of a suitably forensically tested database
• A minimum of 90% of all unassured beef suckler and store producers must have subscribed voluntarily to an assurance scheme
• An agreement from retailers/processors to stop imposing discounts on mainstream product ranges on cattle residing on more than four holdings during their lifetime.

Earlier this year, an NBA survey of more than 500 beef farmers found that Red Tractor lacked the support needed to move forward with the whole-lifetime assurance scheme, as it proposed.

“The results of our own and other national surveys are consistent, demonstrating around 70% of farmers oppose the RTA proposals,” said Mr Mallon.

“This weight of feeling has even been identified in Red Tractor’s own independent (Spedding/Gatward) review which stated that ‘clearly more responding farmers are against the proposals than supported them’.”

“I find it deeply disappointing that they [Red Tractor] have chosen to ignore not only the majority of farmers who have taken part in this process but also processors, auctioneers and other industry organisations who see little value in these proposals”
Ian Marshall, Ulster Farmers’ Union

See also: The big beef debate: Arguments for and against lifetime assurance

Other farming organisations have voiced concerns on behalf of their members at the conclusions reached by the RTA management following their review of the consultation responses.

Ian Marshall, president of the Ulster Farmers’ Union, said it was clear that more farmers were against than in favour of the proposals.

“I find it deeply disappointing that they [Red Tractor] have chosen to ignore not only the majority of farmers who have taken part in this process but also processors, auctioneers and other industry organisations who see little value in these proposals,” he said.

The RT consultation lacked detail about where the demand for lifetime assurance was coming from, how they expect to deliver it and how it will bring any financial benefit to farmers, he added.

Red Tractor said that any progress on lifetime assurance on beef would be done carefully and in consultation with key partners and trade associations in the supply chain.

In a statement, Red Tractor confirmed it had begun a dialogue with the NBA, adding: “Our intention was never to rush into this, but to work closely to achieve the move to lifetime assurance in a way that does not disrupt supply and is completed within a realistic timescale, at minimum costs to all links in the supply chain, not least farmers.”