Graham, fellow Dig ‘n’ Stir blogger Doug Edmeades has also argued the case for a consumer watchdog for farmers as has fellow scientist John Roche, now back at DairyNZ. I quoted them in a Farmers Weekly column in 2007: “In terms of the big three inputs that go into the farm – animal health, cultivars, fertiliser – there is no one for farmers to turn to who is independent of the advice being offered by the sellers.” They agreed with you that “the advice that farmers get in technical areas is invariably coupled with the sale of the product. Therefore, how objective is that technical advice?” Obviously the answer is “not very”. At the time Edmeades suggested a trust could gather funds from farmers and possibly other organisations to support individual’s taking actions through the courts and so on. I also spoke to then Consumers Institute Director David Russell. He said the tide had turned against farmers. Some years ago the institute looked at assistance for the farming community including the feasibility of publishing a special magazine. But so much support was available to farmers at the time that the idea was shelved. That was in the days of producer boards. “It’s really not the case now,” Russell said. “It’s quite the reverse now.”
The degree of scientific examination required to evaluate many farming products meant it could only be funded collectively, he said.
Consumer would be happy to enter into an arrangement but would need financial backing to to do it. “We’d be happy to listen, to talk, and to discuss with the farming community what their needs were and if there was sufficient financial backing we’d be in there.” So, Graham, it seems like there are others who agree with you about the need for a farmer consumer watchdog and are willing to do something about it. It’d be great to get some more comment from farmers here about what they need and how they think it could be funded and by whom.
Philippa Stevenson | July 28, 2008 |