>>clear market signals will be crucial to the future of the food chain - NFU president Tim Bennett
On January 1, the radical reform of the Common Agricultural Policy agreed in June last year will come into force. Listening to politicians and some journalists, you might think - so what, business as usual. But you would be wrong. This represents the largest reform of agriculture in 60 years. Indeed, I have described it as a revolution.
Since the Second World War, governments around the industrialised world have intervened to support some sectors of agriculture to ensure a guaranteed food supply. These policies are becoming less and less relevant in our ever-shrinking world.
European Union subsidies will no longer be linked to the need to keep any particular type of animal or grow any specific crop. This will push farmers to be market-driven, not subsidy-driven.
Governments paying farmers to produce food regardless of consumer preference has hindered the development of a healthy, demand-led supply chain. Politicians must have some virtues, but an ability to recognise what the consumer wants from the farmer is not one of them.
There is, however, a role for government in ensuring a fairer and more transparent food chain. As agriculture becomes more consumer-driven, greater transparency and honest labelling of food are crucial.
The government also has a role in ensuring that the standards in food safety remain high. And we, as farmers, take our food safety responsibilities very seriously.
However, the government’s role should not be to stifle the market, especially in this crucial period as we move towards greater competition. There is a danger of over-regulation, which will smother us rather than free us.
In a more market-driven rural economy, we need greater communication throughout the food chain. But I am very concerned that the chain has not appreciated the enormity of the change.
If we do not start to get the right structures in place now, it might be too late for our vital primary food supply industry.
Let me take as an example the sector within which I work: beef farming. Red meat producers, particularly beef producers, are not getting the long-term signals they now need about quantity of supply, seasonality of supply, eating quality and specification, which includes provenance.
In beef, long-term signals are essential. As
a beef producer, my cows will run with the bull this autumn; they will then calve in 2005 and it is these calves that will produce beef in 2007. So you can see how a long-term trading arrangement is essential to ensure that British beef farmers supply the right product at the right time.
There are some examples of long-term links that work well, for everybody in the chain. For example the Waitrose and Marks and Spencer beef schemes. But we still need to do more.
Most farmers, particularly the younger ones (yes, there are some!) want long-term relationships with retailers so that they can grow their businesses and have the confidence to plan any necessary changes to meet new consumer preferences.
Now that the government is, hopefully, moving out of our way, farmers must be thought of as part of a normal food supply chain. The other partners in this chain need to think of us as food producers and include us in discussions about more efficient, mutually profitable trading arrangements. The good work done by the Red Meat Industry Forum has identified cost reductions in the chain but more must be done to ensure that we deliver a top class product consistently through a world-class supply chain.
Consumer demand for British beef since the BSE crisis has grown year-on-year and indeed consumption is now higher than it was before 1996. This has been a result of the British beef industry, at great cost, delivering the assurance that our customers require. This is a great success story, which we want to continue, but this will require long-term confidence.
I cannot emphasise enough that the signals we receive during the next few months will determine the future size of the beef industry in the UK.
On January 1, the radical reform of the Common Agricultural Policy agreed in June last year will come into force. Listening to politicians and some journalists, you might think - so what, business as usual. But you would be wrong. This represents the largest reform of agriculture in 60 years. Indeed, I have described it as a revolution.
Since the Second World War, governments around the industrialised world have intervened to support some sectors of agriculture to ensure a guaranteed food supply. These policies are becoming less and less relevant in our ever-shrinking world.
European Union subsidies will no longer be linked to the need to keep any particular type of animal or grow any specific crop. This will push farmers to be market-driven, not subsidy-driven.
Governments paying farmers to produce food regardless of consumer preference has hindered the development of a healthy, demand-led supply chain. Politicians must have some virtues, but an ability to recognise what the consumer wants from the farmer is not one of them.
There is, however, a role for government in ensuring a fairer and more transparent food chain. As agriculture becomes more consumer-driven, greater transparency and honest labelling of food are crucial.
The government also has a role in ensuring that the standards in food safety remain high. And we, as farmers, take our food safety responsibilities very seriously.
However, the government’s role should not be to stifle the market, especially in this crucial period as we move towards greater competition. There is a danger of over-regulation, which will smother us rather than free us.
In a more market-driven rural economy, we need greater communication throughout the food chain. But I am very concerned that the chain has not appreciated the enormity of the change.
If we do not start to get the right structures in place now, it might be too late for our vital primary food supply industry.
Let me take as an example the sector within which I work: beef farming. Red meat producers, particularly beef producers, are not getting the long-term signals they now need about quantity of supply, seasonality of supply, eating quality and specification, which includes provenance.
In beef, long-term signals are essential. As
a beef producer, my cows will run with the bull this autumn; they will then calve in 2005 and it is these calves that will produce beef in 2007. So you can see how a long-term trading arrangement is essential to ensure that British beef farmers supply the right product at the right time.
There are some examples of long-term links that work well, for everybody in the chain. For example the Waitrose and Marks and Spencer beef schemes. But we still need to do more.
Most farmers, particularly the younger ones (yes, there are some!) want long-term relationships with retailers so that they can grow their businesses and have the confidence to plan any necessary changes to meet new consumer preferences.
Now that the government is, hopefully, moving out of our way, farmers must be thought of as part of a normal food supply chain. The other partners in this chain need to think of us as food producers and include us in discussions about more efficient, mutually profitable trading arrangements. The good work done by the Red Meat Industry Forum has identified cost reductions in the chain but more must be done to ensure that we deliver a top class product consistently through a world-class supply chain.
Consumer demand for British beef since the BSE crisis has grown year-on-year and indeed consumption is now higher than it was before 1996. This has been a result of the British beef industry, at great cost, delivering the assurance that our customers require. This is a great success story, which we want to continue, but this will require long-term confidence.
I cannot emphasise enough that the signals we receive during the next few months will determine the future size of the beef industry in the UK.
No comments yet