Will vet assurance shake up third-party audits?

For decades, third-party assurance schemes like Red Tractor and RSPCA Assured have been central to delivering consumer trust in food quality and safety.

Established in the wake of significant animal disease outbreaks, such schemes aimed to elevate farmed animal welfare and restore public confidence in British produce.

Yet, as these programmes have grown, so too has discontent among farmers, processors, and retailers who look at the cost, bureaucracy, and whether they provide the reputational protection they claim.

Farmers who were promised a premium for participation have seen it disappear in an ever-commoditised market, while some retailers have established their own schemes involving more costly inspections.

See also: How the farm assurance review is progressing

Now the Association of Independent Meat Suppliers (Aims) believes that by harnessing advances in technology and changes in government policy, a new approach could provide a more effective alternative.

Norman Bagley, senior adviser at Aims, says: “This is an attack on the very, very expensive third-party audit system, which isn’t doing what it says on the tin.”

Single platform

The new system, Vetasure, will bring real-time data from a range of sources together into a single platform for the first time.

At its heart will be information generated by Defra-funded Animal Health and Welfare Pathway (AHWP) reviews, which are performed on farm in England by vets.

As standard, vets carrying out these reviews will collect 75% of the data requested in a Red Tractor audit.

The farmer will then be able to pay a £100-£150 top-up fee to get the vet to collect and record the rest of the information required by Red Tractor, plus any additional requirements of individual retailers. 

Because this “audit” is carried out by a competent authority – a government vet – it can also be used to certify exports.

Legal requirements

Jason Aldiss, executive director at Aims, has collaborated with a Cabinet Office team to explore an e-border system for animal-origin products, which could integrate seamlessly with Vetasure to enable smoother international trade.

The intention is that produce from farmers using the portal will be able to carry the “Quality Meat From Britain” logo, used by AHDB to market UK meat overseas.

Non-assured livestock farmers who are part of the AHWP will also automatically become assured, at minimal cost.

All of the information from these reviews will be entered into an app by the farmer, generating a QR code.

“This QR code will go all the way along the supply chain,” says Tony Goodger, head of communications at Aims.

“If you’re a consumer in the UK who wants a bit more information, you can scan the QR code and it will tell you where the meat came from.

“If you’re a processor and you need to do your traceability checks, you can also scan the QR code.

“But what is more interesting is if you’re in China or Indonesia, you can scan the QR code and it will tell you about the supply chain for this quality British meat in your local language.

“It uses GPS to identify where the person scanning the code is.”

Funding 

Though Defra intends to stop funding the AHWP reviews in three years, they are expected to become a statutory requirement at that point.

Aims estimates that these vet visits will cost the farmer about £750, but there may be an opportunity to split this cost across the supply chain as the information will be so valuable.

In the meantime, Aims believes Vetasure will allow ministers to demonstrate that the AHWP reviews have provided value for money for the taxpayer.

Though Vetasure will be rolled out in England initially, Aims is confident that the portal can be connected to similar schemes in Scotland and Northern Ireland, and that Wales will follow Defra’s lead further down the line.

Game changer

The system is expected to be a game changer for catering butchers in the food service sector, as well as retailers.

“Everyone we’ve spoken to wanted to know if this can prevent fraud,” says Mr Bagley.

“I’m not saying that this will stop fraud completely, because people will find a way, but it will go a long way to stopping substitution of imported meat and bad meat.”

The system also works in the other direction.

If a processor detected an issue with animals coming from a particular farm, for example, an alert would be sent to the vet who carried out the AHWP review.

This would then trigger a return visit to the farm to set up an improvement plan.

Mr Goodger says: “We are producing a system which will have consumer trust and preserve brand reputation, as well as offering enhanced transparency and reduced administrative costs.”

Saving

Aims has estimated the cost of third-party assurance to beef, lamb and pig farmers to be £7.2m, while primary and secondary processors are spending £45m, excluding British Retail Consortium (BRC) audit costs.

For retailers, the cost of third-party assurance is about £50m. The group believes moving to Vetasure will therefore strip at least £100m of costs out of the food supply chain.

They also claim this figure is “conservative”, as the feedback they have received from industry shows there is appetite for further integration with manufacturing systems that will save more money.  

“We’ve spoken to retailers and they are already trying to cut back on the exhausting costs of their compliance units,” says Mr Bagley.

“The retail consultant we’re working with said he would take this system on cost alone.”

Other benefits

The benefits to retailers, however, are more than cost savings.

Sophisticated artificial intelligence analysis of all data held on Vetasure will help to identify any animal disease or fraud risks in the supply chain, such as more “British” meat coming out of a processor than going into it.

If a problem is found, a red flag alert will be issued, triggering “remote witness assurance”.

“Using a phone camera, a retailer can instruct a technical manager on a site to collect samples and witness the person putting the samples into test tubes and attaching a QR code,” says Mr Goodger.

This sample will then be sent on for origin testing, with results in four to five days, instead of the current timescale of four to five weeks.

Cost to the farmer

So, how much will it cost a farmer to join Vetasure?

“When we approve the concept, we will see if there’s any additional cost in the system, which might mean a subscription of £50 or £100, but the aim is for it to be free at the point of use,” says Mr Bagley.

“The original app was actually designed for exports, so we’re piggybacking on an existing technology, which means we haven’t had to go out and spend hundreds of thousands on research.”

At the moment, the system is still being trialled by a well-known retailer and processor, but Aims has been in talks with multiple major businesses across the supply chain, as well as farming unions and AHDB.

“We have not met anybody yet that has said ‘we don’t like this’,” he says.

“And why wouldn’t you like something that can take £100m cost out of the supply chain? Defra has given us a once-in-a-lifetime gift with the AHWP reviews.

“Even in New Zealand, people are saying they can only aspire to this.”

Asked whether he thought Vetasure would spell the end for third-party assurance, My Bagley says: “We have no interest in what other assurance schemes do if the retailers buy into this.

“If they want to continue, they would have to persuade the retailers that they’ve got something to sell to them of value which necessitates an extra visit. Best of luck with that.”