Saphir Faces a Crisis as he is nicknamed the AHDB Undertaker

The good ship AHDB is in turmoil and looking like it could be heading for the rocks under the captaincy of Nicholas Saphir as it records its second NO vote from another levy paying sector.

The latest blow, which was no surprise, is that 66.4% of the 1196 potato growers who voted said no to the continuation of the levy. This comes only a month after an overwhelming 61% of voting Horticulture levy payers said No. 

Chairman Nicolas Saphir, who took charge 12 months ago for a 3 year term, despite strong advice from his own board not to spin the outcome of the Horticulture vote chose to present it as a YES based on levy funds contributed, and got a public pasting for it, but for Horticulture levy payers it was too late. Following the Horticulture producer vote, its inevitable the H will have to be dropped from the name AHDB.

It's certainly not a case of business as usual at AHDB, because with two sectors heading for the scrap heap, farmers and growers surely won’t pay the levy and its questionable whether AHDB will pursue non payers. AHDB can send out the invoices, but collecting it will be extremely challenging. 

George Eustice confirmed at the NFU Conference he will accept and respect the Horticulture vote as he must surely the outcome of the potato ballot. That was a bold declaration at the conference which unnerved many staff working for AHDB, many of whom are now planning to jump ship before they are pushed and as usually happens it’s the more capable staff who leave first. 

Ministers now have the task of making a decision on the future of the Statutory Potato and indeed the Horticulture levy. Among the questions to be asked, are how much it will cost AHDB to relinquish its long term lease of its Stoneleigh Park tenancy at the earliest opportunity? 

The Minister also stated he intends to plan dates for the other sectors to have their vote including Dairy. 

Ian’s guess is if Dairy had a producer ballot today it would be a brave person who bet on the outcome. For what its worth, Ian believes AHDB Dairy and its levy should be a clear yes, particularly from the market intelligence angle. Some readers see the levy as a tax but for Dairy they do provide tools and information to help on farm decisions and progress.  However, the tools are only of value if producers engage and use them.

For sure, the horticulture and potatoes No ballots potentially signal the beginning of the end for AHDB. It’s not looking good and there are now calls for heads to roll at the top as the AHDB faces a crisis. 

The spotlight is really on Chairman Nicolas Saphir, who is very much in charge, despite being employed as a non-executive Chair, with more than one senior AHDB person using the words autocratic to describe his controlling, old-skool style of leadership, and others now calling him the undertaker. 

Several close to the decision-making claim AHDB is a super tanker which takes time to change direction. Others say its now looking like the Titanic. For sure, if AHDB stays on its current route the rescue will be as challenging as re-floating the Titanic. 

Whether this was the intention when the Minister selected Nicholas Saphir as Chairman of AHDB (note his appointment was backed by the NFU) as opposed to the recommended Judith Batchelor, I guess we will never know. Saphir claims he was parachuted in by the Minister to sort out the organisation and now some are questioning exactly what his remit was. Indeed was he sent in to be the fall guy?

The AHDB board are known to be divided and have even written a letter outlining where they believe Saphir and his methods need to change, with reports some people have been humiliated in meetings and their contributions abruptly terminated.

In addition, Ian has seen the printed minutes of the 77th AHDB Board meeting dated 24th November 2020, but these do not accurately reflect the meeting where several board members raised numerous concerns that the draft minutes did not reflect what had been agreed but reflected what the Chairman perhaps wanted them to agree. This was mainly with reference as to the proposed new board formation and decision making which the Chairman proposes.   

The alternative unpublished minutes of that meeting state “It was agreed that a Secretary’s note would be added to the minutes noting the points raised”, but it hasn’t and the published minutes fail to mention this. This resulted in claims that the minutes do not accurately reflect discussions and reflect a personal Agenda.