Kendall defends farm assurance

NFU president Peter Kendall has launched a defence of farm assurance schemes, but warned that costs to the farming industry need to be reduced.

His remarks were made at last week’s Kent Show, after intense frustration by a band of mainly south east fruit growers who had said the schemes were now too costly and gave few benefits.

He was attending the show following his appearance at a second British Independent Fruit Growers Association (BIFGA) meeting in Matfield, Tonbridge, on the farm assurance issue two weeks previously.

“There was a significant number of people at that meeting I attended in Kent who were against the concept of farm assurance schemes per se,” Kendall explained. “But by the end of the meeting I think I convinced them that there was a strong case for them. I said we needed to differentiate our products; we needed to strongly promote our environmental welfare. So the more resource we can put into this, the better.”

Kendall said one of his big pleas is for growers to get involved and sit on the Standards Setting Board for assurance schemes. At present it is easier to get people from the retail, processing, scientific or education communities.

He added that while farmers and growers are a vital part of the food chain and need to have a strong voice, other sectors also had a case. For example he has made a strong case to government over the voluntary initiative and sprayer testing, he pointed out.

Kendall said that the industry is showing government that it is being proactive, particularly on issues like storing fertiliser, with growers and farmers allowing inspectors in as part of farm assurance.

Kendall also stressed that he had challenged the government to reduce the regulatory burden on farms and holdings by 25 percent by 2010

“I would like to challenge all farm assurance schemes to do the same,” he said.

For example, he said that if a farmer was trained or had a certificate of confidence from the manufacturer, he could test his own spraying machine.” That is the sensible way of reducing regulatory pressure and burdens on