Sir; It's good to see that The Grocer (November 10, Page 4), unlike other media, recognised that the FSA review of assurance marks will be wide ranging and cover much more than the little red tractor. But before we start culling assurance marks, we should recognise that some are not just a pretty logo on pack. They have a much more serious purpose. They go to the heart of the standards of food production in the supply chain. Despite the headlines, the Food Standards Agency does recognise the important role of assurance scheme to help deliver their objectives. They acknowledge this in the press release that announced the review. And they said the same at their open board meeting the following week. If the FSA is looking for schemes that are transparent, promote higher standards of food safety, and have independent and regular verification, they will find all of that and more in the schemes that underpin the British Farm Standard mark ­ the little red tractor. We look forward to the review. As for costs, you can't have it both ways. The FSA (and lobby groups) demand higher standards, as well as frequent and expert inspection. They do not come free of charge. But what we have in the BFS assurance schemes is an exemplar of tightly controlled, efficient, self-funded, cost-effective industry self-regulation. David Clarke British Farm Standards London WC2 {{LETTERS }}