The Soil Association, the UK's largest organic certifying body and a key stakeholder in the plan, has accused the NFU of back-stabbing.

Peter Melchett, policy director at the SA said: '[NFU vice-president] Michael Paske seems to have got behind the Organic Action Plan simply to stick a knife in its back. For Michael Paske to say he is behind the Organic Action Plan is a bit like Genghis Khan saying he just popped in for a cup of tea.' Melchett was replying to a statement issued by Paske at the end of last week in which Paske expressed concern that unnamed stakeholders and members of the action plan group were trying to 'railroad' the plan when they had been 'closely consulted during its production'.

Disagreement within the group of stakeholders charged with the plan's implementation has arisen over the first three points of the 21-point plan.

The disputed points concern the make-up of an advisory committee which it is intended will be up and running by April 2003, the accreditation of certification bodies by the UK Accreditation Service, a new compendium of organic standards, and whether the certification bodies will offer certification to this compendium.

According to the NFU, a proposal came from within the group that the International Organic Accreditation Service (IOAS) could do the job of the UK Accreditation Service in accrediting bodies to certify organic production, although it carries no official recognition and many members are self-appointed.

The SA claimed that no-one on the group proposed this, although it apparently contradicts itself by saying: 'The British Retail Consortium, with support from most of the Action Plan Group, has suggested that IOAS's role in accreditation should be recognised as well as agreeing that UKAS could have an important role to play.

'Everyone from the Organic Action Plan involved in these discussions, except apparently now the NFU, has agreed with this constructive approach.' On the issue of standards, the SA accuses the NFU of wanting existing conservation standards dropped in the new compendium, an accusation the NFU categorically denied to the Journal.

Each organisation has accused the other of being 'unhelpful'.

'We never mentioned the Soil Association in our statement,' said the NFU's Joanna Jeffery. 'But the Soil Association has made accusations within its statement...it is not helpful to go head-to-head like this.' However, Jeffery insisted that the action plan is not under threat and stressed that disagreement on the plan's first three points 'does not jeopardise any other part of the plan'.

Meanwhile, the SA also suggested that there is disunity within the NFU on the issue. 'Oliver Dowding, their representative on the Action Plan Group, has agreed on most matters,' said a SA spokeswoman. 'But it seems to be the main body of the NFU that is trying to reduce confidence in the action plan...trying to score a few political points.' She also insisted that the action plan is on track. 'We will carry on as before and hopefully this engagement with Michael Paske will not happen again.' Jeffery at the NFU concluded: 'Our representative will be discussing this within the group at its next meeting in January.' Separately the Organic Farmers & Growers organisation, the UK's second certifying body behind the SA, is calling on government for a national organics policy stating that it is fully supportive of the action plan.

The call comes as a direct result of a survey carried out among its membership, which also found that UK growers are investing heavily in order to gain market share and increasingly target their produce at the prepared and processing markets.

Topics