Those who disagree with the Groceries Code Adjudicator’s move to Defra believe GSCOP is working well. For the first 14 years, I would largely agree – but its performance has declined over the last few years under Mark White’s tenure.
GSCOP’s YouGov survey remains the best tool to measure progress. This year, however, it has become harder to analyse because key measures have been quietly dropped from the GCA information pack. One of the missing elements is suppliers’ ‘willingness to report an issue to the GCA’, which had been improving until it stalled at 59% over the past two years (my suspicion is that it has since declined and therefore has not been shared).
Similarly, ‘suppliers trained’ is no longer included in the final report. Both omissions point to suppliers disengaging from the process. Meanwhile, perceived code issues have risen to 32%, up from 30% – and 29% before White took on the role.
The changing face of GSCOP
Throughout its first decade, when the Code was genuinely improving standards, there was constant pressure to extend the GCA’s remit beyond direct supermarket suppliers to secondary suppliers such as farmers and growers. Christine Tacon threatened to resign over concerns that doing so would add complexity and dilute the Code’s purpose. That was a valid argument, but fairness further down the supply chain also matters.
The Agricultural Supply Chain Adjudicator (ASCA) was subsequently introduced under Defra, with a similar remit to the GCA, but ensuring producers and intermediaries are held to fair dealing standards with their own suppliers. It is logical for these two roles to co-ordinate, so moving GSCOP under Defra makes sense. We need more intervention, and those opposing the Defra change seem to fear that.
This month, MPs ridiculed the GCA’s collaborative approach to working with retailer code compliance officers. Not fair. This method has been extremely important to progress because the most common supplier issues tend to melt away when retailers take responsibility.
The GCA also came under fire for his early treatment of the sprout farmer in the Aldi dispute. Here I agree – the stonewalling was consistent with the flawed GSCOP escalation process. To settle disputes outside of court, suppliers must engage with retailers on at least three separate occasions before the GCA can get involved. Only the most desperate suppliers will run that gauntlet and risk ruining the relationship.
MPs are right to be critical: retailer compliance figures were better before this Adjudicator took office. Code issues have risen largely because the code doesn’t address pricing moves at all. Newer codes, such as Canada’s, have addressed this, insisting timing and data requests are controlled without interfering with open-market negotiation. The UK should take note.
Predictably, under-pressure Asda and Morrisons crossed the GSCOP line more frequently last year. They and other poor performers – B&M and Iceland among them – must love Amazon for diverting attention away.
It is clear that GSCOP needs to change, with suppliers disengaging, retailers paying less attention and the escalation process discouraging those with legitimate grievances from coming forward. A change of address alone will not change this. But a move to Defra provides the opportunity for a revamp that gives the Adjudicator real teeth – as long as he uses them.
David Sables is CEO of Sentinel Management Consultants
No comments yet