Following the results of the farm assurance review, published in January, Red Tractor has now issued a full response, promising to take stock of the findings and deliver change.
 
The independent review concluded that a “fundamental reset” of farm assurance is needed in the UK, to rebuild confidence among farmers. 
 
It came after the significant backlash against Red Tractor’s decision to introduce the Greener Farms Commitment in October 2023, which was subsequently axed.
 
The Red Tractor Board of Directors has now issued a statement responding to each of the nine strategic recommendations in the report, and outlined the actions it will take to implement the 56 detailed recommendations.

Key priorities

The 45-page response follows an “intensive period of reflection and consultation” among Red Tractor’s Sector Board representatives and independent experts.
 
Among its key priorities are: ensuring on-farm audits are reduced, simplified and delivered more consistently; embracing technology and managing data to deliver more effective farm assurance; and making farmers the driving voice in standards development.
 
It also pledged to implement a new communications strategy focused on building trust and engagement with farmers.
 
Other key asks from the review, which Red Tractor has flagged as a priority include: revising standards, implementing a right of appeal for audits and addressing the impact of audits on farmer wellbeing.

READ MORE: Christine Tacon steps down as Red Tractor chairwoman for Co-op position  
READ MORE: Controversial Red Tractor module axed 

Call to action

Jim Moseley, Red Tractor CEO called the review “a turning point” for farm assurance in the UK and a “call to action” for all schemes to deliver better outcomes. 
 
“Where possible, Red Tractor has committed to immediate action, prioritising improvements where we can have most impact,” he explained. 
 
“For more complex issues where there is a need or opportunity to work with others, Red Tractor has already written to those involved to offer collaboration and looks forward to working with them if requested to do so.” 

Reactions from members

David Exwood, industry director at NFU welcomed Red Tractor’s response and the input from all sector boards.

“It demonstrates a desire to listen and make changes where appropriate. The key now is that we collectively use this opportunity as a reset moment, giving farmers a stronger voice in assurance, delivering better outcomes for everyone involved.

“I feel we are now on the right track, ready to make positive changes at pace.”

Meanwhile, Sophie Throup, industry director from the British Retail Consortium said that while retailers support Red Tractor, for standards to work effectively, the farming sector must be engaged, listened to and well-understood.

“The Farm Assurance Review has helped surface key issues that all assurance schemes need to prioritise.

“The Red Tractor Board’s response has the collective endorsement of all Board representatives, including retail, and is one that I hope will be welcomed as we work hard to deliver our immediate and future commitments.”

Work has begun

Red Tractor said it has begun work to streamline standards, improve audit efficiency and embrace new technology, all of which should reduce the audit burden for farmers. 
 
The scheme will also focus on improving how it communicates, particularly with farmers and growers. 
 
The review’s lead commissioner Dr David Llewellyn has been appointed to monitor delivery against the recommendations. 
 
Red Tractor will be submitting updates to Dr Llewellyn directly, as well as regularly updating on progress through a dedicated page on its website: redtractor.org.uk/FAR  

Read more business news.

The post Red Tractor responds to damning farm assurance review   appeared first on Farmers Guide.

A “fundamental reset” of UK farm assurance is needed to rebuild confidence among farmers, an independent review has found.

Among its nine recommendations, the review said Red Tractor must complete the implementation of recommendations in the Campbell Tickell report on its governance.

It also calls for audits to be reduced and simplified; and for farmers to be the driving voice in standards development.

The first UK-wide, comprehensive review of farm assurance, established by the UK farming unions and AHDB was announced early last year and has published its long-awaited findings today (20th January). 

The review of UK farm assurance in general, was launched after Red Tractor faced significant backlash against its plans to introduce a Greener Farms Commitment, which was subsequently axed.

Growing frustration

Conducted independently by four commissioners, the review concludes that farm assurance is critical to the industry’s future, and is delivering necessary assurances on quality to consumers.

However, it must make some fundamental changes to address growing frustration amongst farmers in how it is delivered. 

The nine-month review collected evidence from every link in the UK food supply chain. 

Commissioners say the dissatisfaction expressed by farmers was not uniform across all sectors nor across all nations.

Assurance schemes in devolved areas were reported to work more effectively than UK-wide schemes. 

READ MORE: Controversial Red Tractor module axed

READ MORE: Red Tractor review finds “no breach of procedure”

The recommendations 

There are nine strategic recommendations in the report: 

1. On-farm audits must be reduced, simplified and delivered more consistently
2. There must be a transformational step forward in embracing technology
3. Schemes need to reset and/or restate their structures to establish farmers as the driving voice in standards development
4. A new industry-led initiative must set out the future environmental ambitions for farm assurance
5. The inclusion of regulatory requirements within farm assurance should be conditional on government agreeing a form of ‘earned recognition’
6. There must be greater collaboration between farm assurance schemes across the UK
7. Schemes must better position the UK farming industry in world food markets and in competition with imported food
8. All schemes must review and improve their communication with farmers 
9. The Red Tractor scheme must complete the implementation of recommendations in the Campbell Tickell report on its governance. 

Within these nine strategic recommendations, a total of 56 operational recommendations have also been made, with clear lead bodies and timescales. 

‘Make or break’ audits 

The review urged governments across the UK to take a more structured and active approach to the interaction between assurance schemes and regulation.

Commenting on the report, lead commissioner, Dr David Llewellyn, said the research had found “competing interests and ambitions” for the farm assurance system, which has added “complexity and stress for farmers, many of whom now struggle to identify any real benefits to their business”. 

Additionally, many farmers feel they live in a permanent state of jeopardy with “make or break” audits determining whether their businesses can operate.

“The reality is that too many farmers feel farm assurance is ‘done to them’ rather than ‘delivered with them’. It should be better than this,” he added.

READ MORE: Christine Tacon steps down as Red Tractor chairwoman for Co-op position

READ MORE: ‘This is our last push’ – East Anglia farmers will again hit the streets

“Our recommendations will be challenging”

The farmers commissioners consulted with want to produce food to the highest standards and be supported by assurance schemes. But they also want to be compensated appropriately for the considerable effort farm assurance requires of them.  

Dr Llewellyn stressed that the system is essential but must deliver to all parts of the food chain, which includes contributing to a process of continuous farming improvement.

This is something the current assurance system does not always provide, he noted.

Dr Llewellyn concluded: “Many of our recommendations will be challenging. They are about changes to organisational cultures and expectations, as much as they are about processes. 

“But we view them as integral to building a farm assurance system that is trusted, successful and underpins a profitable future for UK farming.” 

Red Tractor’s response

Responding to the review, the Red Tractor Board said: “We welcome the publication of the conclusions and recommendations from the farm assurance review today.

“From its inception, Red Tractor was set up to include most key farm sectors and all main actors in the supply chain, from farms to fork. 

“For this reason, it is extremely important that before responding, we – the Red Tractor Board – have time to fully digest and discuss the meaning of the review findings internally. 

“Ideally, we would also include feedback from our Sector Boards that meet in February and include representatives from every stage of the food chain.

“We will now take that time and respond in due course, and ask that Red Tractor is allowed the space to fully consider the outcome of this important independent review, the first of its kind in 30 years of farm assurance.”

Significant step forward 

AHDB said the report marks a significant step forward for farm assurance, and said it is optimistic about the opportunities it presents for meaningful change.

It expressed gratitude to the four commissioners and Promar International, adding:

“Their wide-ranging consultations across the industry and their ability to bring together the complex strands of farm assurance into a clear and meticulously considered report are commendable.”

NFU also welcomed the findings and both organisations will now spend time analysing the detail.

Read more business news.

The post “It should be better than this”: Farm assurance review published appeared first on Farmers Guide.

Whilst farmers may be understandably concerned about HSE inspections, all the HSE is looking for is that all reasonable precautions have been taken, Keith explains. Whilst PUWER checks can be completed by the farmer, some may find it useful and time saving to have equipment checked by an experienced and qualified inspector, who can provide a certificate and reminders of when the next inspection is due.

“LOLER checks must however be carried out by a competent person with a thorough product knowledge and experience of the equipment inspected. Our ethos of providing a thorough inspection is fully HSE compliant in covering both LOLER and PUWER,” Keith adds.

What are the rules?

LOLER – Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998 – means that lifting operations using lifting equipment (such as telehandlers and forklifts) must be:

• Properly planned
• Carried out by sufficiently competent staff, who are properly supervised
• Carried out in a safe manner.

Meanwhile, PUWER – Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 – requires equipment provided for use at work to be:

• Suitable for the intended use
• Safe for use, maintained in a safe condition and inspected to ensure it is correctly installed and does not subsequently deteriorate 
• Used only by people who have received adequate information, instruction and training
• Accompanied by suitable health and safety measures, such as protective devices and controls. These will normally include guarding, emergency stop devices, adequate means of isolation from sources of energy, clearly visible markings and warning devices 
• Used in accordance with specific requirements, for mobile work equipment and power presses.

Work equipment is defined as any machinery, appliance, apparatus, tool or installation for use at work. This could include anything from a telehandler to a loading shovel, or even hydraulic jacks which may be overlooked in the workshop.

Staying compliant

With a litany of jobs to do throughout the year, LOLER and PUWER checks can easily be missed or delayed, but they are essential for the safety of workers and demonstrating that all reasonable efforts have been made to prevent accidents.

Having grown up on a farm and later working with a dealer, Keith decided to get involved in safety inspections when, many years ago, a machine supplied by the dealer was later involved in a serious accident. The farmer was prosecuted (but the dealer was not) as the machine had not been checked or serviced in over a year and the operator was unskilled/untrained.

“When I first started doing this sort of work 15 years ago, my mentality was if we can save a serious injury or a fatality, we’ve done our job correctly,” Keith says.

“I know that people are worried if they have an HSE inspection but all the HSE are looking for – and they do tend to be reactive now, as opposed to proactive, in other words, they come out after an event has happened – is that all reasonable precautions have been taken. I can’t guarantee that an accident will never happen any more than anybody else can. All I can guarantee you is that the machine will be checked properly and it won’t be a fault with the machine that causes that accident. Which goes back to PUWER – providing the correct piece of equipment for the job in hand and making sure that piece of equipment is safe.”

However, the check alone is not enough, you must also have the certificate in place and record keeping, if there is any advisory action it must be taken, and operators must be trained and skilled to use the equipment, he adds.

Using an inspection service

For those considering an inspection service to handle their PUWER checks, the advantages include experienced and qualified inspectors, certificates and record keeping, and reminders when the next inspection is due, so it doesn’t get missed.

“We help to manage farmers’ machinery and equipment fleet in terms of record keeping, that the equipment has been checked and approved by a trained engineer with experience in agriculture. When it comes up for renewal, we’ve taken that worry away from them in that we’ll notify them when the machine is due for its next inspection.”

Contact Wessex Inspections directly for further advice.

Read more farm business news

The post Is your equipment compliant? appeared first on Farmers Guide.

The independent review of UK farm assurance in a post-Brexit world, followed hot on the heels of a backlash against Red Tractor, when it announced the launch of its Greener Farms Commitment (GFC). 

The review, however, will cover farm assurance as a whole. Commissioners have now set out the areas for investigation, developed an engagement plan and established a timeline.

Amongst other topics, the project will include: 

• An assessment of best practice
• Consideration of how methods of assurance can provide value to primary producers in a fast-changing environment
• An evaluation of the relationship between assurance and regulation.

The lead commissioner is Dr David Llewellyn, former vice-chancellor of Harper Adams University.

He will be working with three other independent commissioners:

James Withers, ex-CEO of Scotland Food and Drink, Mark Suthern, the chair of trustees of the Farming Community Network, and a fourth commissioner whose appointment is in progress.

READ MORE: ‘Time for change’: NFU and AHDB announce review of farm assurance

READ MORE: Controversial Red Tractor module axed 

Engagement from farmers welcomed

Dr Llewellyn said: “The programme of work, which will cover seven distinct stages, will be aimed at letting anyone, or any organisation, that wants to share their views on this important subject be able to do that, regardless of where they sit in the supply chain.”

He added that the commissioners welcome this engagement. 

“We expect to involve farmers and farmer organisations, policy makers, food processors, retailers and consumer groups, as well as relevant trade associations and representative bodies.”

The project will continue until the end of the year. Periodic updates on progress will be issued to the farming and food community.

Commissioners will be seeking contributions to the review over the next few months. This will be via an online survey, submissions of evidence from representative bodies and, where required, interviews and online focus group discussions.  

READ MORE: Red Tractor review finds “no breach of procedure” 

We want to understand what works

“We want to ensure that we understand what works, and what doesn’t work, with assurance systems, so as to recommend ways in which the operating environment for the farming industry can be improved,” Dr Llewellyn.

The evidence will also involve direct engagement with stakeholders across the supply chain in a series of meetings. These will be held at agricultural shows and events over the summer.  

The programme for these events, and other information about the review, can be found on the commission’s website. 

Promar International is working with Supply Chain InSites to support the work of the commissioners for the duration of the review. 

Dr Llewellyn said they will report to the commissioners, not directly to the sponsors of the review, in order to ensure its independence and transparency.

Read more business news.

The post Next steps announced for farm assurance review appeared first on Farmers Guide.

The introduction of the Fair Dealing Obligations Regulations, first announced in June 2023, has just been announced. The commencement of the regulations is due on 9th July for any new milk purchasing contract.  

Meanwhile, a period of transition to compliance for existing contracts is to be completed by 9th July 2025. 

Defra said that the regulations are a “product of evolution” from the voluntary dairy code of best practice on contractual relationships in the dairy sector that was introduced in 2012. 

Lack of legislation

FUW milk and dairy produce committee acting chair Brian Walters said that the voluntary dairy code was established to stamp out unfair contractual arrangements between milk producers and purchasers, which could in turn help stabilise the UK dairy industry. 

He added: “Despite many processors supporting the values of the voluntary dairy code, the lack of legislation meant that some processors continued with unfair and underhanded contractual expectations, leaving dairy farmers extremely vulnerable to market changes.” 

Contracts to be reviewed

In June 2020, the contractual practice in the UK dairy sector consultation was published. The responses provided direction for the newly made Fair Dealing Obligations (Milk) Regulations 2024. 

Mr Walters added: “We discussed various drafts of the regulations as a committee, and the union presented those views to Welsh Government and Defra representatives. 

“Most importantly, we managed to ensure that the regulations will apply to all milk purchasing contracts across the UK which avoids any risk of creating a two-tiered market. 

“Processors will now be required to review their contracts over the next twelve months in order to become compliant with these regulations, and I am hopeful that as a result of these changes there will be a fairer foundation for selling milk across Great Britain.” 

READ MORE: New dairy regulations promise to promote fairness

Significant step forward 

The development of the regulations has been supported by the NFU. The union’s dairy board chair Michael Oakes described the announcement as a “significant step forward” in increasing fairness and transparency across the dairy supply chain. 

He added: “For a long time, unfair milk contracts have held British dairy businesses back. These changes will give dairy farmers much needed business security and confidence, as well as helping to share risk along the dairy supply chain.” 

Read more business news. 

The post New milk contract regulations come into force later this year appeared first on Farmers Guide.

The NFU’s Tenants Conference took place today (Tuesday 16th April) at NFU Stoneleigh Headquarters.  

It was chaired by NFU deputy president David Exwood and attended by farming minister Sir Mark Spencer. 

Mr Exwood said: “Tenant farmers are some of the most dynamic and forward-thinking farmers I know.  

“I am a tenant farmer myself, and we play a vital role in producing food for the nation while delivering the government’s environmental targets, helping to grow the rural economy, and being at the heart of rural communities. 

“Just like all other sectors, tenant farmers across the country are feeling the squeeze; the cumulative loss of direct payments over the past four years and the slow transition to the Environmental Land Management scheme (ELMs), together with high input costs have created real cashflow issues.  

“However, as tenants, we don’t often have the financial capital to pivot to embrace new opportunities in the same way as non-tenant farmers, which leaves us particularly vulnerable. 

“Now we are dealing with the immense pressure of what the adverse weather is throwing at us, with months of non-stop rain and some of the worst flooding on record, causing further financial and mental wellbeing concerns.” 

Creating new opportunities for tenant farmers

The NFU deputy president also mentioned the recent rollout of the Farm Tenancy Forum as well as the implementation of the Rock Review recommendations. 

The NFU played a significant role in campaigning for the Agricultural Landlord and Tenant Code of Practice, which also launched this month. 

Mr Exwood explained that the code of practice aims to help foster fairness, address poor conduct, as well as highlight good practice, and provide a good basis for ongoing tenant-landlord relationships. 

He added: “By working together, we can and must create new opportunities for tenant farmers, which will help us to deliver a robust, vibrant, and thriving agricultural tenanted sector for the future.” 

Read more farm business news. 

The post Experts discuss future of tenant farming sector at NFU conference appeared first on Farmers Guide.

The Agricultural Landlord and Tenant Code of Practice is a product of the Farm Tenancy Forum, a group brought together by Defra to explore and provide feedback on issues relating to the tenanted farming sector in England. 

The code has been built around the idea of three key principles: 

• clarity – as to what is agreed and expected of landlords and tenants 
• communication – appropriate and effective communications between landlords and tenants 
• collaboration – encouraging a co-operative approach between landlord and tenants. 

Backing British farmers

Environment secretary Steve Barclay said: “The tenanted sector is a central part of this government’s work to back British farmers and grow the rural economy. 

“That’s why I am pleased to see the launch of this new code of practice, which will ensure the tenanted sector continues to thrive by promoting positive relationships between tenants and landlords.” 

“It continues our progress to implement the Government’s Response to the Rock Review, with over a third of the commitments already completed, and actions underway to deliver on most other areas.” 

Good start 

NFU deputy president David Exwood said that the new code of practice is a “good start” to help foster fairness, communication and good practice between landlords, tenants and agents. 

He added: “With 60% of NFU farm businesses being tenants, it was really important that tenant farmers’ views were well represented in the development of the code to help produce a standard that works for everyone.  

“I encourage all tenants, landlords and their professional advisers to embrace the code and its key principles of clarity, communication and collaboration. 

“Agricultural tenants and tenanted land play a vital role in delivering this government’s food production and environmental ambitions, and in growing our rural economies. We now need to see further recommendations from the Rock Review taken forward, including the creation of a tenant farming commissioner who, in a defined role, could take up non-compliance with the new code.” 

Read more political news. 

The post New landlord-tenant code of practice called ‘good start’ in fair communication  appeared first on Farmers Guide.

New requirements to SMETA (SEDEX Members Ethical Trade Audit) workforce audits have revealed that UK farming and growing businesses will have to pay for the recruitment and transportation fees of the seasonal workers they employ. 

The NFU is calling for the change to be paused until there is an official industry consultation, alignment on how it will be fairly implemented, financial cost impacts, as well as the risks to farming and growing businesses are fully understood.

Decided without consultation

NFU president Tom Bradshaw said: “I am shocked that a decision such as this, which could have detrimental financial implications on our farmers and growers – already struggling with high input costs, extreme weather events and challenges in the supply chain – has been decided without the consultation of the people and businesses it will affect. 

“We care deeply about the welfare of the skilled people who come to our country to help produce the nation’s food, and many horticulture and poultry producers have high numbers of workers return to their businesses each year because they are so well valued. Paying the recruitment fees of workers could mean that many businesses are no longer commercially viable and will drive food price inflation. It is unclear how the change in standard will be applied fairly and transparently across the supply chain.  

“Time and time again, we have kept up the drumbeat of the need for fairness in the supply chain, but this total lack of assessment and understanding of how farming and growing businesses will be impacted will undermine that work.” 

Mr Bradshaw added that it is vital that the proposed changes are paused until there is a full consultation with all stakeholders and a full assessment on the impacts the proposed audit changes will have to the commercial viability of growers, food inflation and UK food security. 

Read more farm business news.

The post NFU calls for halt to SMETA changes until growers are fully consulted  appeared first on Farmers Guide.

Chancellor Jeremy Hunt has recently announced that Agricultural Property Relief (APR), which allows inheritance tax to be reduced when a farmer passes on agricultural land after death, will also apply to land used for environmental schemes. 

Many farmers have been awaiting clarification of the policy to consider to what extent they use schemes such as the Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI). 

Balanced approach 

Carrie Marshall, agribusiness consultant at Fisher German, said that farmers need to have a “balanced approach” between environmental projects and land devoted to food production. 

She added: “With the phasing out of BPS, farmers need reliable sources of income more than ever. 

“The SFI scheme is a great new way for farmers to have a steady stream of cash coming into their businesses, but some were holding back on large environmental schemes because APR may not have applied to that land. 

“The Chancellor has clarified that land in environmental schemes will be eligible for APR, and although a tax advisor should still be consulted, many farmers may now be looking to increase the area of land they are planning to enter a scheme. 

“However, it is crucial that farmers take a balanced approach. It’s important to remember that the SFI scheme isn’t written in stone – it’s a government policy that could be taken away after the next election or funding could be reduced at any time. Farmers should be wary about committing their whole farm to an SFI scheme and selling surplus machinery.” 

Steady income 

Ms Marshall said that additionally, prices for commodities like wheat can be highly variable, with the war in Ukraine and the price of fuel all contributing to this uncertainty.  

“One year, crops may bring in lots of money, while in other years, prices may drop. Having unproductive land used for environmental schemes that bring in steady cash, while saving more productive land for crop growth is often the best strategy to balance the risk.  

“And while environmental schemes can bring in SFI payments, there can often be high costs involved with some of the options. It is important to look further than just the headline income figure.  

“There is not a one-size-fits-all solution that maximises value, so we would encourage farmers to seek expert advice before starting a new environmental scheme on their land,” the expert explained. 

READ MORE: Spring Budget: Removal of ELMs tax barrier warmly welcomed

READ MORE: General election: call for new government to source more food from British farms

Embracing new technology 

Aside from the monetary value, Ms Marshall said it is important that government policy encourages farmers to devote land to food production and to farm innovatively and efficiently, such as by embracing technology to drive down some of their costs.  

Considering the clients that she advises, the agribusiness consultant added that there is a wide range of efficiency and productivity across farming businesses, and when undertaking benchmarking analysis, there is a clear correlation between results and efficiency. 

Ms Marshall said: “Our country needs to strike the right balance between growing our own food and protecting our environment, and farmers clearly play a vital role in achieving both of these goals. 

“While incentives to care for the environment are undoubtedly important and can now provide a solid income for farmers, future governments must ensure grants relating to efficient food production and equipment upgrades are not overshadowed in the process.” 

Read more business news.

The post How can farmers balance green schemes with food production?  appeared first on Farmers Guide.

Earlier this month, environment secretary Steve Barclay announced plans to make food labelling “clearer and fairer” as part of his commitment to back the British farming industry.

The proposal aims to give shoppers more information about how and where their food is produced and ensure British farmers’ products get the recognition they deserve, Defra says.

It would also ensure greater transparency around the origin of food and methods of production, helping consumers make decisions that align with their values.

The consultation looks at how to improve country of origin labelling for certain goods, including how and where this information is displayed and what products should be included.

For example, if imported pork is cured into bacon in the UK and features a Union Jack, the plan will explore ways to make it more obvious to consumers that the pig was reared abroad, such as increasing the size of the country of origin text, or placing it on the front of the packet.

The plan also sets out proposals to require ‘method of production’ labelling on pork, chicken and eggs. These include a mandatory five-tier label for both domestic and imported products, which would differentiate between those that fall below, meet and exceed baseline UK animal welfare regulations, which are some of the highest in the world.

Fairer and easier  

MP Barclay, who announced the consultation at the Oxford Farming Conference in January, said: “British consumers want to buy their produce, but too often products made to lower standards abroad aren’t clearly labelled to tell them apart.    

“That is why I want to make labelling showing where and how food is produced fairer and easier to understand – empowering consumers to make informed choices and rewarding our British farmers for producing high-quality, high-welfare food.”  

Meaningful for consumers

In response, NPA pointed out that Defra pulled back from plans to consult on a tiered labelling system linked to method of production last year. This decision followed concerns from within the supply chain over the cost and complexity of the plans and fears they could mislead consumers over welfare claims.  

NPA chief executive Lizzie Wilson said: “We will need to see the full details of what is being proposed before giving our verdict on whether they are workable and are likely to achieve their goals.  

“The principle of greater transparency and clearer labelling to differentiate high quality British product from inferior imports, of course, has merit. The questions are going to be around how this is delivered in practice, without adding unnecessary costs.”  

On the method of production labelling proposals, she added that the association was a part of a widespread coalition of industry bodies that opposed these plans when raised previously by Defra.   

“It has to be meaningful for consumers and it could be very difficult to do this reliably for pigs, given that different parts of the carcase can go into many different markets, while there are real concerns over the cost and complexity that the requirement would add into the supply chain.  

“We also need to avoid falling into the trap of claiming one system is automatically better than another – method of production is not an indication of good or poor welfare. We would also question how this could be reliably applied to imports,” Ms Wilson explained. 

Defra’s proposal 

Defra is seeking views on options for changing origin labelling, including:    

• Mandatory origin labelling for minimally processed meat products, such as bacon. 
• Increased visibility of origin labelling. 
• Mandatory origin labelling for certain foods in the out of home sector, for example cafes and restaurants. 
• Greater control of the use of national flags on labels. 

The consultation also sets out proposals to require ‘method of production’ labelling on pork, chicken and eggs. These proposals include:   

• A mandatory label for both domestic and imported products with five tiers to differente between products that fall below, meet and exceed relevant baseline UK animal welfare regulations. This would underpin standards that are primarily based on method of production.   
• The label would cover pork, chicken and eggs. Labelling for dairy, beef and sheep meat will be kept under review, subject to further consultation. 
• This would apply to all unprocessed pork, chicken and eggs and certain prepacked, loose and minimally processed products with pork, chicken or egg.  

The consultation will run for eight weeks, closing on 7^th May. 

Have your opinion heard – email editorial@farmersguide.co.uk.

Read more livestock news.

The post Pig industry questions Defra’s plans to change food labelling rules  appeared first on Farmers Guide.