The fact that 78% of respondents to an online survey recognise that there is an Agri-Food Regulator in place at the end of the first year is a positive and welcome first step. While the sample size was small with 246 people participating in the online survey, it confirms the general acceptance that people are aware that the office is now in place.
The fact that 78% of respondents to an online survey recognise that there is an Agri-Food Regulator in place at the end of the first year is a positive and welcome first step.
While the sample size was small with 246 people participating in the online survey, it confirms the general acceptance that people are aware that the office is now in place.
The fact that the survey went on to suggest a level of scepticism in the effectiveness of the office also reflects more general feedback received by the Irish Farmers Journal over recent months.
In general, people know that the office is there, but are doubtful of its benefit in tackling issues in the supply chain, with only one third of respondents believing that it can protect them against unfair trading practices (UTPs).
It is striking to learn that 61% of respondents think that UTP breaches are just a fact of life, while 27% didn’t believe that the regulator could do anything about it.
Fear of what the consequences might be for the trading relationship was a barrier for 24% of respondents - ironically, buyer retaliation is in itself a UTP.
Awareness of the office is no surprise, as it has been campaigned for for years and its establishment was widely promoted by the outgoing Minister for Agriculture Charlie McConalogue TD.
CEO Niamh Lenehan has also been actively engaging with farmers and the agri-food industry, while chair Joe Healy is well known throughout the sector.
Limitations
The office was able to claim its first significant success a few weeks ago when it secured its first conviction for a breach of the UTP regulations for the non-payment for cattle delivered to a slaughter plant.
However, when it comes to bringing transparency in the supply chain, the office found that there was little they could do when some retailers didn’t engage to the level required in producing a report on the egg supply chain.
This highlighted the difference between voluntary co-operation and being required by legislation to supply information. When retailers said no, the regulator was powerless and it led to the chair writing to the Minister in September requesting more powers.
This action effectively put the ball back in the Minister’s court and three months on, there is little sign of a meaningful response - though the general election will have been a disruption.
What needs to happen quickly is that the incoming government needs to give the Agri-Food Regulator the tools required to do the job, otherwise it risks becoming just another quango and doesn’t deliver the level of transparency the agri-food supply chain needs nor effective enforcement of the UTPs that are sent in legislation, but suppliers don’t have the confidence to use.
Comment: start made but much to do
The Agri-Food Regulator is now coming up to the end of its first year.
It has achieved a considerable profile, as evidenced by the survey, but there is little evidence of confidence in its ability to do its job.
It has to be given the tools that it has asked for and then it can be judged on results. Otherwise, it is left pretending to be something that it isn’t.
Read more
Agri-food regulator legislation falls short
Just one third of farmers confident in Agri-Food Regulator
This is a subscriber-only article
SHARING OPTIONS: