Why are there two reviews and what are they?
There are two reviews because they will cover separate, but related, issues.
Review 1 is for those that are directly involved with the governance of Red Tractor, such as Sector Boards, TACs (Technical Advisory Committees) and the Assured Food Standards Board. It will review Red Tractor’s decision-making procedures and its transparency, examine who is consulted by Red Tractor in its development of standards and look at the balance of this feedback, and how Red Tractor engages with these stakeholders.
Review 2 is an industry-wide review, aimed at seeking feedback from all farmers and growers about all farm assurance schemes with a view to revolutionising farm to fork assurance, and making it truly fit for the future.
What will Review 1 focus on?
Review 1 will look at the governance of Red Tractor. It will look at the way Red Tractor operates, how effective the structure and decision-making process is, and how new standards are developed.
Who will be carrying out Review 1?
Independent consultants Campbell Tickell have been appointed by the NFU to complete this review.
Who is being asked to contribute to Review 1?
Review 1 is seeking input from those people who have direct experience of Red Tractor’s governance and structures, such as the people who sit on various committees and boards. They will be contacted directly by Campbell Tickell.
Will I be able to directly contribute to Review 1?
Not directly. This review will not be seeking general input from the industry. Because of its nature, it will focus on hearing from those people who have direct experience of Red Tractor’s governance and structures, such as the people who sit on various committees and boards. We have ensured that the concerns of NFU members have been fed in via NFU representatives on these boards and committees.
I have filled in a survey for Review 1. What happens to it now?
The remit of Review 1 is to specifically investigate issues relating to governance within Red Tractor and to hear views from those with direct experience of this. Any comments relevant to this area will be fed into Review 1. Any wider comments, which are more general to the future of farm assurance, will be used to feed in to Review 2. The survey circulated for Review 1 by Campbell Tickell was neither intended nor designed for the wider circulation it received, but was aimed only at those with direct experience of Red Tractor’s governance and structures.
When will the results of Review 1 be published?
It is expected that Campbell Tickell will report initial findings to January’s NFU Council meeting, with a final report planned for the end of February.
What will Review 2 look at?
Review 2 will be a much more comprehensive look at farm assurance. It will encompass other farm assurance schemes as well as Red Tractor, highlight good and bad practice, and look at how farm to fork assurance can be made fit for the future.
Who will carry out Review 2?
Review 2 will be initiated by the NFU and AHDB and then an independent commission will be appointed to carry it out once its full scope has been determined.
Will I be able to directly contribute to Review 2?
Yes. The views of farmers and growers are really important to this review. All farmers and growers that want to take part will be able to share their thoughts on current farm assurance schemes and their views will help to shape the direction of travel for farm assurance.
How will I be able to contribute to Review 2?
The NFU will be looking to engage with members in a range of ways to ensure everybody has an opportunity to have their say. These will include things like webinars, meetings, surveys and online feedback to gather views.
When will this happen?
We are aiming to launch this process with members after NFU Conference in February, following the appointment of the independent commission.
When is Review 2 expected to start?
Plans will be considered in January by NFU Council and the NFU Food, Farming and Environment Board. More specific timelines for when the second review will start will be outlined after that.
When is Review 2 expected to report back?
Given its scope and depth, and the need for it to deliver meaningful outcomes for the sector, we anticipate that it will take a considerable amount of time gathering views and reviewing various schemes. Further timelines will be outlined by the independent commission once it is in place.
Why aren’t the reviews running simultaneously?
Review 1 is designed to be a short assessment of Red Tractor governance and investigate specific concerns raised around the development of the Greener Farms Module, which has been put on hold as a result of this process.
The scope of Review 2 is much wider and focussed on longer term and strategic issues. This means it requires more time to set up and more time to run. We also expect that there may be relevant findings from the first review which could help shape the second review. Importantly, it needs time to enable everyone that wants to have their say.