Red Tractor ‘culture of secrecy’ driving poor decisions

Poor decision-making at Red Tractor has been driven by a culture of secrecy and a refusal to accept criticism that stretches back years, according to insiders.

Sources with experience of Red Tractor governance, who have spoken to Farmers Weekly on condition of anonymity, say they have been forbidden from talking to the press about their roles and that their concerns about the direction of travel have been disregarded.

See also: Exclusive: Batters apologises to NFU members over Red Tractor debacle 

“We go to meetings, they ask for our feedback and we give it, but it doesn’t go any further,” said one.

“They get very defensive when you question their thinking. It’s as if we’re stupid and they know the bigger picture.”

Red Tractor was also accused of influencing appointments to sector boards by changing their terms of recruitment in 2018, insisting that trade bodies put forward a range of candidates for Red Tractor to choose from. 

These candidates, once in place, would need to have regard for their responsibilities to Red Tractor’s “vision and purpose”.

Further allegations were made that Red Tractor leadership had sought to interfere with the make-up of at least one technical advisory committee (TAC), following disagreements about standards.

Unable to share true feelings

Several sources said members of sector boards and TACs were unable to share their true feelings during meetings.

One said: “The processors are unable to push back on the direction of travel because the direction of travel is coming from retailers, who are also in the room.

“Even if they would agree farmers are being pushed too much, they feel they have to push the agenda because that’s what their customers are asking for.”

There was a strong feeling among those Farmers Weekly spoke to that the controversial Greener Farm Commitment, which prompted a review into Red Tractor governance, was just the latest symptom of Red Tractor’s secrecy.

Whole life assurance

They pointed to similar attempts to bring in whole life assurance for beef animals in 2015 and the fifth standards upgrade in 2021.

One source said of the whole life assurance plan: “Then, as now, they did the work essentially behind closed doors and tried to introduce it as a fait accompli. There was a massive farmer backlash and it got kicked into the long grass.

“They are continually surprised by the views of farmers. That is clear evidence that they don’t connect with them.”

Another source said the boards and TACs were there to give “a veneer of democracy”, but “weren’t really told too much”, and information they were given was closely guarded.

“I took a few screenshots in a meeting and they told me off,” they said.

“They were very uneasy about me taking pictures of what had been presented. It was very much ‘what goes on in the room, stays in the room’.”

Secrecy concerns

One recent example of secrecy concerns the risk rating of standards, with Red Tractor refusing a request to allow sector boards to determine which standards should be deemed most important. 

“This got us absolutely nowhere, so we moved to a compromise position by asking for the criteria used to set the ratings and who is making the decision, but even that, they will not share with us,” said a source.

Minutes are also routinely shared months after meetings of the sector boards and TACs, when memories have faded. In some cases, they would only be shared days before the next meeting took place. At least one request to make minutes public has been denied.

“Why aren’t they online?” asked one source.

“I appreciate they can be a bit boring and not capture all the detail or feelings, and they have to be signed off before the chair before they go live, but there’s no reason why that couldn’t happen.”

Even members of Red Tractor’s ownership body have been unsure how the assurance body functions at times.

The then-AHDB chief executive Tim Rycroft was forced to write to Red Tractor chief executive Jim Moseley in November 2021 to clarify the board’s rights and responsibilities as an owner.

Long overdue

“This review is long overdue,” said a source.

“Things have changed so much in the last 20 years, we should be hoping for quite a change within Red Tractor to make it more relevant.”

A Red Tractor spokesperson said: “Good governance is vitally important, but it doesn’t mean that everyone agrees on every issue.

“There are more than 200 people who contribute to our sector boards and TACs. The vast majority would not recognise this description.

“The ongoing NFU governance review will give every one of those participants an opportunity to contribute directly and feed back on their experience. We continue to give that process our full support.”