Consultation outcome

Summary of responses

Updated 14 May 2024

Introduction

Between 31 October 2023 and 22 December 2023, Defra, in collaboration with the UK Government, Scottish Government, Welsh Government and the Northern Ireland Executive, conducted a joint public consultation exploring contractual relationships in the UK egg sector.

The consultation was hosted on the online platform Citizen Space, but responses were also collected via post and email.

The consultation aimed to understand whether contract reform could provide greater certainty to egg producers, packers and others in the supply chain, by improving access to data and ensuring that clear terms and conditions are established in contractual agreements. The consultation first invited views on whether legislation in this area was needed, before a more detailed series of questions covering topics such as the availability and use of data and typical components of egg sale agreements.

This report summarises the analysis, responses received and sets out proposed next steps.

About this analysis of responses

40 responses to the consultation were received (35 responses to the online survey, and 5 email responses). One of the emailed responses followed the structure of the survey. The quantitative analysis tables in this summary of response document includes the 35 responses from the online survey and the 1 emailed response in the same format (36 in total). The qualitative narrative analysis includes all responses where comments were submitted through the online survey and email submissions.

Two responses, from the National Farmers’ Union (NFU) and the British Free Range Egg Producers Association (BFREPA), each surveyed their members and provided further evidence of the views of 122 and 102 egg producers respectively. Not all respondents answered every question, and where statistics are included in the summary, the data represents only those who responded to that question.

It is important to keep in mind that public consultations are not necessarily representative of the wider population. Since anyone can submit their views, individuals and organisations who are more able and willing to respond are more likely to participate. Because of this likelihood for self-selection, the approach of this analysis has not only been to count how many respondents held a certain view but also to include thematic analysis of the additional comments provided to understand the range of key issues raised by respondents, differences in views and the reasons for them holding their view. 

To process and summarise all the ideas submitted in the open-text responses, inductive (open) coding was used, whereby themes were developed as they arose directly from the responses. Open coding involved reading each response line-by-line and capturing the points covered. The approach assigned the same level of specificity and importance to each point raised. In each section of this report, the most common views have been summarised, reflecting where the views of respondent types were similar or differed. This summary of responses is not an exhaustive list of all ideas provided by respondents but summarises the most common concerns and opinions. Therefore, a range of qualitative terms are used, such as ‘many’, ‘some’, ‘most’ and ‘a few’. ‘Most’ refers to a majority, ‘many’ refers to when a substantial number of respondents have a similar view, ‘some’ refers to when there is a reasonable number of respondents with a similar view, and ‘a few’ refers to a small number of respondents. 

Interpretation of the balance of opinion must be taken in the context of the question asked, as not every respondent answered all the questions, and not every respondent who provided an answer to a closed question provided additional detail. In this respect, qualitative terms are only indicative of relative opinions to questions based on who responded. Therefore, they cannot be assumed to relate numerically back to the total number of respondents.

Next steps

We have heard and understood the concerns raised by those that responded to this consultation, and which are summarised in this document. The UK Government will commence work developing draft regulations for egg contracts, using the regulation making power in section 29 of the Agriculture Act 2020. To do this, we will work with industry as we develop these regulations.

These regulations will propose that written agreements are used between all producers and their buyers. We anticipate that they will ensure clear notice or termination periods are included, transparent pricing mechanisms and grading standards, prohibit unilateral changes, and mandate a dispute resolution process. Further details on our next steps are covered at the end of this document.

About the respondents

1. Would you like your response to be confidential? If yes, please give your reason.

Would you like your response to be confidential?	Count
Yes	15 (42%)
No	21 (58%)

Most respondents to the consultation did not wish for their replies to be kept confidential.

2. What type of business do you operate as? Please select all that apply.

Would you like your response to be confidential?	Count
A producer	23 (64%)
A packer	11 (31%)
A processor	0 (0%)
A wholesaler	2 (6%)
A retailer	4 (11%)
A representative organisation or trade association	7 (19%)
Other	2 (6%)
Prefer not to say	0 (0%)

Almost all of the responses to the consultation came from individuals or businesses directly involved in the UK egg industry. Several businesses identified as multiple types of organisation (for example an egg producer and packer).

In addition to those detailed in the table, 4 further responses were received by email, including 1 from the BFREPA (a representative organisation), 2 retailers, and 1 response that did not share the type of business they operated as.

Responses from the NFU and BFREPA included reference to their own surveys of egg producers. The views of these producers are not included in the above table, but their views and experiences are considered in the qualitive analysis of questions.

3. If you are a representative organisation, which part of the supply chain do you represent? Please select all that apply.

Part of the supply chain represented	Count
Producers	6 (86%)
Packers	2 (29%)
Processors	1 (14%)
Retailers	0 (0%)
Consumers	0 (0%)
Other	2 (29%)
Prefer not to say	0 (0%)

Some responses to this question came from those that did not identify themselves as representative organisations in question 2, so we are showing in the table above only the responses from those that did.

Producers are the most common business type to be represented by those completing the survey. Other types of business tended to be represented alongside producers.

4. Where is your business based? Please select all that apply.

Based	Count
England	25 (69%)
Scotland	12 (33%)
Wales	10 (28%)
Northern Ireland	6 (17%)
Other	2 (6%)
Prefer not to say	0 (0%)

Responses to this consultation came from stakeholders operating in all parts of the UK. 25 of those that responded operated only in one region, with 9 respondents operating in multiple different regions. Retailers, representative organisations and packers were all more likely operate in multiple parts of the UK compared with producers.

5. If you produce your own eggs, please specify the flock size you have for producing eggs.

Flock size	Count
Under 8,000 hens	2 (6%)
8,001 to 16,000 hens	2 (6%)
16,001 to 32,000 hens	4 (11%)
32,001 to 64,000 hens	5 (14%)
64,000 to 250,000 hens	5 (14%)
250,001 to 500,000 hens	2 (6%)
Over 500,001 hens	5 (14%)
Prefer not to say	0 (0%)
Not applicable	11 (31%)

Responses to this question showed a wide range in the size of producer that responded to this consultation, with producers from all the given flock size ranges replying and no real majority coming from any particular size.

6. If you produce your own eggs, which types of egg production does your company produce. Please select all that apply.

Egg production	Count
Enriched cage	7 (19%)
Barn	4 (11%)
Free Range	24 (67%)
Organic	8 (22%)
Other	0 (0%)
Prefer not to say	0 (0%)
Not applicable	11 (31%)

Almost all of the egg producing businesses that responded to this consultation produce free range eggs. Many egg producing businesses also produced organic and enriched cage eggs, with a smaller number producing barn eggs.

7. If you produce but don’t pack your own eggs, how many different businesses do you sell to?

Number of businesses	Count
1	11 (31%)
2	1 (3%)
More than 3	1 (3%)
Prefer not to say	1 (3%)
Not applicable	22 (61%)

For those for whom the question was applicable, that produce but don’t pack their own eggs, the majority state they only sell to a single business. The data shared from BFREPA shows an even higher percentage, with 94% of producers that don’t pack their own eggs selling to a single packer. The BFREPA response also identifies this trend “is normal in the egg supply sector.”

8. If you purchase eggs from producers, how many different producers do you buy from?

Number of businesses	Count
1 to 10	3 (8%)
11 to 25	1 (3%)
26 to 75	4 (11%)
76 to 150	2 (6%)
More than 151	3 (8%)
Prefer not to say	1 (3%)
Not applicable	22 (61%)

Contrasting with question 7, our consultation found that those who purchase from egg producers typically purchase from much greater numbers of businesses. The most common number of producers for purchasers to buy from was between 26 and 75, though in the above table the range extends from between 1 to 10 and more than 151 – both of which were the next most common response indicating a wide range in practice.

9. If you purchase eggs from producers, please specify the quantity of eggs you buy annually (where 1 case contains 360 eggs).

Cases of eggs purchased annually	Count
Under 33,000 cases of eggs	0 (0%)
33,001 to 67,000 cases of eggs	0 (0%)
67,001 to 100,000 cases of eggs	2 (6%)
Over 100,001 cases of eggs	12 (33%)
Prefer not to say	0 (0%)
Not applicable	22 (61%)

The vast majority of applicable respondents stated they purchase over 100,001 cases of eggs annually. A possible reason for the high number of applicable respondents being larger egg packers is that we had worked with stakeholders in advance of the consultation to develop these bands, some of whom were amongst the larger egg packers. Therefore, larger egg packers were likely more aware of the consultation and driven to respond compared to smaller egg packers.

10. Do the eggs you produce or purchase belong to an assurance scheme?

Assurance scheme	Count
Yes, the Lion code	28 (78%)
Yes, Laid in Britain	0 (0%)
Yes, other	1 (3%)
No	1 (3%)
Prefer not to say	0 (0%)
Not applicable	6 (17%)

Nearly all the eggs that are produced or purchased by respondents to this consultation are Lion Code assured. A small number of respondents ticked other, and stated they use other types of assurance schemes that cover produced or purchased eggs in the free text comments. Several respondents referenced the RSPCA and Organic Farmers and Growers assurance schemes alongside the Lion Code, and these were also referenced by 2 retailers that provided written evidence to the consultation. A single response also identified their eggs were assured by the Soil Association.

BFREPA’s response and the data they shared built on these findings: 89% of the members they surveyed were assured by the Lion code, 86% by RSPCA, 4% by Laid in Britain and 13% by another assurance scheme.

11. Are you currently a member of a cooperative business?

Of the 36 responses to this question, only one business identified themselves as a member of a cooperative business.

BFREPA’s shared data identified similar small proportions amongst its members (free range egg producers), with 5% stating they were members of cooperatives.

Data held by Defra shows there are no recognised producer organisations in the egg sector. One representative organisation recommended “that Defra considers supporting the egg sector within Producer Organisations (POs) schemes.”

Type of contract

12. As a seller of eggs, with whom do you make your contract? Please select all that apply.

Contract made with	Count
Packer	20 (56%)
Processor	4 (11%)
Marketing group	2 (6%)
Retail	6 (17%)
Other (please explain)	3 (8%)
Don’t know	0 (0%)
Not applicable	13 (36%)

For this question, sellers of eggs included producers and those further on in the supply chain that sell shell eggs onto other businesses.

Who do producers make contracts with?

When focusing only on responses from producers (23), most sell their eggs to packers, many directly to retailers, and some to processors and marketing groups. Of the producers that sell to packers (19), most only sell to packers, with many selling to other types of organisations as well as packers.

Data from BFREPA’s own survey shows less variation in where producers sell their eggs. A similar proportion (86%) sell to packers, but smaller proportions sell to processors (1%), marketing groups (5%) and direct to retail (3%).

Who do packers make contracts with when selling eggs?

Respondents that were packers highlight more variation compared to producers in where their eggs are sold onto. Many of the packers that responded to this question stated they made contracts with retailers and other packers. A few egg packers also reported selling to processors, marketing agents and other purchasers.

13. As a seller of eggs, what type of contract do you have? Please select all that apply.

Type of contract	Count
Written (and signed)	17 (47%)
Written (but not signed)	3 (8%)
Verbal	4 (11%)
None	0 (0%)
Don’t know	1 (3%)
Not applicable	13 (36%)

Written and signed contracts are the most common type of contract held by all businesses that sell eggs. Verbal contracts were the next most common type, followed by written but not signed contracts.

What type of contracts do producers have?

Many of the producers that responded to this question stated they have ‘written and signed’ contracts, more than any other type. As with the overall trend above, the next most common response was verbal followed by ‘written but not signed’.

Data from BFREPA and the NFU paint a similar overall picture, but both report higher numbers of producers holding verbal contracts.

• BFREPA report 79% of producers they surveyed have ‘written and signed’ contracts, 12% have written but not signed contracts and 19% have verbal contracts.
• The NFU’s survey identified “28% of producers didn’t have a written contract at all. Further exploration of this highlighted that 7% of producers felt that they had a verbal contract instead whereas 21% of producers felt that they had no contract at all (verbal or written).”

What type of contracts do packers have when selling eggs?

For packers, the most common type of contract held was again written and signed contracts. Some packers answered either ‘Not applicable’ or ‘Don’t know’ to this question without providing further details, so it remains unclear what type of contract is held for some packers who sell their eggs onwards. For those that did answer, written and unsigned contracts were more common than verbal, and instances of packers selling eggs through verbal contracts were lower than for producers.

14. As a purchaser of eggs, with whom do you make your contract? Please select all that apply.

Contract made with	Count
Producer	11 (31%)
Packer	6 (17%)
Processor	0 (0%)
Marketing group	1 (3%)
Other (please explain)	1 (3%)
Don’t know	1 (3%)
Not applicable	21 (58%)

Sellers of eggs include packers, wholesalers, retailers, and a small number of other businesses.

Who do packers make contracts with when purchasing eggs?

All of the egg packers that responded to this consultation stated they purchase from producers. Some stated they purchase from other packers as well, and a few stated they purchase from marketing agents.

Who do retailers make contracts with when purchasing eggs?

A total of 6 retailers responded to this consultation. Of the 4 retailers that responded through the online survey, all stated they purchase only from packers. One of two that responded via email purchase from an egg packer, and the other purchases directly from egg producers.

15. As a purchaser of eggs, what type of contract do you have? Please select all that apply.

Type of contract	Count
Written (and signed)	13 (36%)
Written (but not signed)	0 (0%)
Verbal	2 (6%)
None	1 (3%)
Don’t know	0 (0%)
Not applicable	22 (61%)

Written and signed contracts are the most common type of contract held by all businesses that purchase eggs. A few respondents also highlighted having verbal contracts or no contracts.

What type of contracts do packers have when purchasing eggs?

For packers, the most common type of contract held when purchasing eggs is written and signed. Some packers identified they have verbal contracts with some of those they purchase from.

What type of contracts do retailers have when purchasing eggs?

All retailers that answered this question stated they have written and signed contracts.

16. “To ensure a legal baseline across the whole sector, all contracts between producers and purchasers should be a written contract.” To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? Please give reasons for your answer.

Response	Count
Strongly agree	23 (64%)
Agree	7 (19%)
Neither agree nor disagree	4 (11%)
Disagree	2 (6%)
Strongly disagree	0 (0%)

83% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed with the statement that all contracts between producers and purchasers should be a written contract, with 64% of responses strongly agreeing. Of the remainder, only 6% disagreed that all contracts should be written contracts.

When focusing on responses from producers, the results were consistent, with the majority agreeing or strongly agreeing with the statement. All responses from packers, the most common purchaser from producers, agreed or strongly agreed with this statement.

The most common reason cited by those agreeing with this statement was that it provided clarity and clear expectations for both parties and prevents misunderstandings. A few responses cited protection or security as key reasons.

Responses from the NFU and BFREPA (and the vast majority of producers they surveyed) agreed with this statement. The NFU also highlighted it “should improve transparency between different stakeholders in the supply chain and allow businesses to make informed decisions when entering into contracts to sell or buy eggs.”

17. We are keen to understand whether alterations to contracts between producers and purchasers take place and how they are made. Please provide details related to the frequency of changes, the negotiations involved and who typically initiates and coordinates this process.

Frequency of Change	Count
Changes to contracts do not occur or are very uncommon	8 (22%)
Changes to contracts sometimes occur	16 (44%)
Changes to contracts occur frequently	4 (11%)
Don’t know	2 (6%)
Not applicable	6 (17%)

Most respondents identified that changes to contracts at least sometimes occur, though only a small proportion identified this as happening frequently.

When looking only at responses from egg producers and egg packers in isolation we see only small variations to the overall trend. Most producers report changes to contracts happening at least sometimes, with some reporting they occur frequently. For packers, most report changes happening sometimes, with none reporting changes as occurring frequently.

The predominant view within this question indicated that changes were typically initiated by packers, with a small number of responses cited changes initiated by the producer, or alterations as a consequence of changes to assurance schemes.

The NFU’s response indicated their “members who produce eggs report that mid-contract changes (including changes to egg price) are usually instigated by their packer, with little or no negotiation process.” Comments from BFREPA and the producers they surveyed agreed with this, with one producer citing: “The only time they change in my view is when it suits the packer.”

18. As a seller of eggs, where changes to contracts do take place, are these changes discussed prior to being made?

Are changes discussed?	Count
Changes are always discussed prior to being made	11 (31%)
Changes are sometimes discussed prior to being made	3 (8%)
Changes are never discussed prior to being made	5 (14%)
Don’t know	0 (0%)
Not applicable	17 (47%)

Responses to this question for whom this applied, showed a range of views on whether changes are discussed before being made. The majority of those answered that changes are always discussed beforehand. However, many of the applicable responses indicated that changes are never discussed prior to being made or discussed only sometimes. Both producers and packers that responded reported similar findings.

This was however in contrary to responses from organisations which represented a large number of stakeholders.

BFREPA’s response showed higher instances of changes made without being discussed first from its members that completed its survey. Their survey found that “only 19% of producers surveyed said that changes to contracts are always discussed prior to being made. The vast majority said that they are sometimes or never discussed before being made.”

These finding were also supported by the NFU, who stated “communication of changes in contracts is not consistent or standardised, with some members reporting that changes are always discussed, some reporting that they are sometimes discussed and some reporting that they are never discussed prior to being made. The NFU would like to see more consistency in how changes are communicated to ensure transparency and fairness across the supply chain.”

19. As a seller of eggs, where changes to contracts do take place how are these changes made?

How are changes made?	Count
In writing (and signed)	9 (25%)
In writing (but not signed)	7 (19%)
Verbally	4 (11%)
Don’t know	1 (3%)
Not applicable	15 (42%)

The majority of responses from those for whom it was applicable stated changes are made in writing, with many specifying these written changes were signed and unsigned. A small number of responses came from those who said changes were made only verbally. The same trends were seen when looking at responses from both producers and packers individually, though producers were more likely than packers to say changes were made verbally.

For producers, these are broadly consistent with findings presented by BFREPA, where “63% of  producers said changes are made in writing and 21% said that they were made verbally.”

20. As a purchaser of eggs, where changes to contracts do take place, are these changes discussed prior to being made?

Are changes discussed?	Count
Changes are always discussed prior to being made	13 (36%)
Changes are sometimes discussed prior to being made	0 (0%)
Changes are never discussed prior to being made	1 (3%)
Don’t know	1 (3%)
Not applicable	21 (58%)

Proportionally, more applicable responses to question 20 (for businesses that purchase eggs) selected that ‘changes are always discussed prior to being made’ than responses to question 18 (for businesses selling eggs). For those this question was applicable to, nearly all responses state that changes are always discussed prior to being made.

Packers, retailers and wholesalers who responded to this question all stated that changes are always discussed prior to being made. This contrasts somewhat with the responses to question 18, where some producers felt changes are made without being discussed.

21. As a purchaser of eggs, where changes to contracts do take place how are these changes made?

How are changes made?	Count
In writing (and signed)	12 (32%)
In writing (but not signed)	4 (11%)
Verbally	1 (3%)
Don’t know	0 (0%)
Not applicable	20 (54%)

As with question 20, proportionally more applicable responses to this question (for businesses that purchase eggs) selected that ‘changes are always discussed prior to being made’ than the corresponding question 19 (for those selling eggs).

Packers, retailers and wholesalers who responded to this question all stated that changes are made in writing and most responses indicated these would be signed.

22. As a seller of eggs, what contract durations have you agreed to in the past 5 years? Please select all that apply.

Contract durations	Count
Fixed term – 1 flock cycle	7 (19%)
Fixed term – more than 2 flock cycles	11 (31%)
Rolling with end date, renegotiation at specified intervals	7 (19%)
Rolling without end date, renegotiation at specified intervals	6 (17%)
Rolling without end date, no renegotiation	4 (11%)
Other (please specify)	2 (6%)
Not applicable	15 (42%)

Responses showed  variety in the types of contracts held within the egg supply chain. For those selling eggs, the most common types of contract held was a fixed term contract of more than 2 flock cycles, but responses indicate there are some instances of 1 flock cycle fixed term contracts as well as rolling contracts without an end date  and without specified renegotiation points (evergreen contracts).

Looking at contracts held by producers and packers when selling eggs showed little deviation from the overall trend stated above, with packers having slightly higher instances of rolling contracts with those they sell to.

In the evidence provided by BFREPA, producers that were surveyed identified many instances of rolling contracts without clauses for renegotiation.

23. As a purchaser of eggs, what contract durations have you agreed to in the past 5 years? Please select all that apply.

Contract durations	Count
Fixed term – 1 flock cycle	7 (19%)
Fixed term – more than 2 flock cycles	12 (33%)
Rolling with end date, renegotiation at specified intervals	7 (19%)
Rolling without end date, renegotiation at specified intervals	10 (28%)
Rolling without end date, no renegotiation	3 (8%)
Other (please specify)	4 (11%)
Not applicable	20 (56%)

Responses to question 23 demonstrated a similar spread of contract durations agreed to by those purchasing eggs (question 22). Most packers reported having fixed term contracts of 1 flock cycle, fixed term contracts of multiple flock cycles and rolling contacts with renegotiation at specific intervals, while only a few reported having rolling contracts with no renegotiations, which is consistent with what producers reported in question 22.

For retailers answering this question, many identified having fixed term contracts. Some retailers who answered ‘other’ specified that they don’t have contracts in flock cycles but have fixed term contracts of one or two years.

24. “As a seller of eggs, my contract is always honoured.” To what extent to do you agree or disagree with this statement? Please give reasons for your answer.

Response	Count
Strongly agree	4 (11%)
Agree	13 (36%)
Neither agree nor disagree	1 (3%)
Disagree	5 (14%)
Strongly disagree	1 (3%)
Don’t know	2 (6%)
Not applicable	10 (28%)

Most applicable responses to the consultation agreed or strongly agreed with this statement, though some did disagree. The level of agreement and disagreement is similar when considering producers selling eggs and packers selling eggs, with most responses from each group agreeing with the statement and a smaller number disagreeing.

Responses did not add a lot of detail into the reasons why each answer was given, particularly when agreeing with the statement.

Of the responses that did disagree, most responses cite issues around the price paid for eggs as the main area that wasn’t honoured. There were some instances of both packers and retailers not honouring their contracts.

“[Our egg packer] dropped the price of our eggs by 10p a dozen without agreement in the last two month[s] of our contract without any consultation.”

“A price for Colony Cage eggs was agreed before the shed was built. Once the market changed the price was dropped and the payback of the project then had to be extended significantly.”

BFREPA’s response to this consultation highlighted that their surveyed members broadly agreed with the findings shown above. Most of its members agreed with the statement, with some disagreeing. The examples provided by BFREPA demonstrated this again, mostly related to agreed pricing mechanisms not being adhered to. They said:

“We were on a ‘feed tracker contract’ where the prices should have been adjusted purely in relation to the feed price. Our base price was then dropped without our consent.”

25. “As a purchaser of eggs, my contract is always honoured.” To what extent to do you agree or disagree with this statement? Please give reasons for your answer.

Response	Count
Strongly agree	5 (14%)
Agree	7 (19%)
Neither agree nor disagree	1 (3%)
Disagree	3 (8%)
Strongly disagree	2 (6%)
Don’t know	1 (3%)
Not applicable	17 (47%)

Most responses from those it applied to, strongly agreed or agreed with this statement, though some did disagree or strongly disagree. The level of agreement and disagreement amongst retailers and packers, the main purchasers of eggs, differ. Packers mostly agree and strongly agree with the statement with a few disagreeing. Whilst retailers are split on this statement, with many agreeing and many disagreeing.

A few responses that agreed with the statement commented that they always fulfil contracts as purchasers.

Of the responses that disagreed, some reference contracts not being honoured during times of tight supply or when producers are losing money. BFREPA’s response also acknowledged the same issue:

“It should also be noted that producers can also fail to honour contracts. These usually occur when producers during tight market conditions make sales to wholesalers or at the farmgate in contravention to the contract.”

Contents of contract

26. “The contracts I am currently entered in to or have agreed in the past 5 years, appropriately reflect my business needs as a producer or purchaser.” To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? Please give reasons for your answer.

Response	Count
Strongly agree	6 (17%)
Agree	10 (28%)
Neither agree nor disagree	5 (14%)
Disagree	5 (14%)
Strongly disagree	5 (14%)
Don’t know	0 (0%)
Not applicable	5 (14%)

Just over half of those for whom this question applied strongly agreed or agreed that the contracts they have entered into or agreed in the past 5 years do appropriately reflect their business needs. However, many responses indicated their businesses needs weren’t appropriately reflected by the contracts they entered into, and some neither agreed nor disagreed.

Most producers and packers agreed with the statement. Retailers mostly disagreed with this statement, though in their explanations they tended to identify other reasons, such as issues with egg supply and referenced some of the obstacles to maintaining a domestic supply of eggs that meets demand, including planning.

The reasons for the different views were quite varied. The top 3 reasons respondents disagreed included: prices are too low, there’s no protection against prices being dropped or not raised as market conditions improve, and that contract offers were given on a take it or leave it basis.

“The contracts I have entered into over the past 5 years, though legally binding and honoured, have not adequately addressed my business needs as a producer. They fail to encapsulate the principles of fair trade and equitable compensation, leaving me with prices that do not cover essential production costs, depreciation, or provide any return on capital.”

Data supplied by BFREPA also identified mixed views from its surveyed members, with equal proportions agreeing and disagreeing with the statement. The NFU also expressed concern on behalf of many of their members, though did reflect the fact that market dynamics have resulted in higher prices for producers in more recent months:

“At the time of writing (December 2023), many egg producers are reporting that the price they are receiving for their eggs is delivering suitable returns for their business. However, many producers have come out of a sustained period of low or even negative margins as a result of unfavourable contracts and market conditions.”

The NFU also shared data from their 2022 NFU member confidence survey and referenced “the proportion of poultry farmers who felt their business would not survive was at a five year high of 16%.”

The role of tracker contracts came up many times in responses and was referenced in both the NFU and BFREPA’s evidence. Some of the responses that agreed explained they having pricing mechanisms that track key input costs and minimise risks, and some respondents that disagreed explained they needed these types of pricing mechanisms.

“If the contracts which have a cost tracking element are adhered to, they provide stability to my business and reduce the effect of world commodity markets on my business. If the packer changes the base price when they want to, independently of the cost tracking formula it completely undermines the benefit of these contracts and makes my business much more unstable.”

27. “As a seller of eggs, I feel empowered to negotiate terms and conditions in contracts to best suit my business needs.” To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? Please give reasons for your answer.

Response	Count
Strongly agree	2 (6%)
Agree	7 (19%)
Neither agree nor disagree	4 (11%)
Disagree	9 (25%)
Strongly disagree	2 (6%)
Don’t know	0 (0%)
Not applicable	12 (33%)

The majority of respondents agreed or disagreed with this statement, with a slightly higher proportion disagreeing. The most common theme that came up in the comments was how the position varies depending on market supply.

When isolating responses from producers and packers individually, we see both groups reporting similarly mixed views. This suggests that neither producers or packers feel relatively more empowered when selling to their respective purchasers. Evidence provided by BFREPA demonstrates a slightly stronger consensus for producers, with the majority of members they surveyed disagreeing with the statement.

Evidence from the NFU from their egg producing members builds on these findings:

“Members reported that the relative size difference and therefore bargaining power between sellers and buyers of eggs makes negotiating beneficial contract terms difficult for producers. Some members reported that they are unable to negotiate at all, with generic contracts offered by large egg packers to many or all of their suppliers without entering into discussions with individual businesses.”

Another issue raised by some respondents to this consultation and expanded on by the NFU’s response is the way ‘producer numbers’ are administered through the Lion Code assurance scheme (which applies to more than 95% of eggs laid in the UK):

“The egg packer holds the individual Lion producer number for all their supplying farms and has to release this number before an egg producer can start supplying a new egg packer. Significant concern was raised by NFU members that this position of relative power can be abused during contract negotiations or disputes, which further limits the ability for individual egg producers to enter a fair negotiation with their packer.”

28. “As a purchaser of eggs, I feel empowered to negotiate terms and conditions in contracts to best suit my business needs.” To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? Please give reasons for your answer.

Response	Count
Strongly agree	5 (14%)
Agree	9 (25%)
Neither agree nor disagree	3 (8%)
Disagree	1 (3%)
Strongly disagree	1 (3%)
Don’t know	0 (0%)
Not applicable	17 (47%)

For those whom this question was applicable, just under three quarters of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they felt empowered to negotiate terms and conditions in contracts to best suit their business needs. A few respondents disagreed with this statement.

Respondents that agreed with the statement had mixed views into the reasons why. Some highlighted close working relationships with producers and that they aimed for both parties to be satisfied in the contracts. The main reason given by those that disagreed was that it depended on market conditions, and an imbalance of supply and demand can impact bargaining power.

29. “All contracts should follow a set structure and include reference to the same type of terms and conditions.” To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? Please give reasons for your answer.

Response	Count
Strongly agree	6 (17%)
Agree	9 (25%)
Neither agree nor disagree	7 (19%)
Disagree	11 (31%)
Strongly disagree	2 (6%)
Don’t know	1 (3%)
Not applicable	0 (0%)

Responses to question 29 generated a mixed range of responses. Overall, many respondents agreed or disagreed with this statement, with the slight majority agreeing. Looking solely at responses from producers, a range of views were apparent, though slightly more agreed than disagreed. Reviewing responses from egg packers however presents different findings, with many taking both sides, but this time more disagreeing than agreeing. Of the retailers that responded to this question, most disagreed with the statement.

When viewing the reasons why respondents disagreed, most identified that contracts need to suit specific needs. Some responses proposed that the sector is too varied for set contracts to work and that the contents of a contract is commercial and should be for both parties to negotiate. A minority felt this could lead to cost inflation.

“Every situation is different. Some producers want long term fixed deals where they fix the feed and energy costs at the same time others want to move about at short notice to follow the market.”

For those that agreed with the statement, the predominant reason was that it would promote transparency and clarity to agreements, with a few also suggesting it would level the playing field. A few respondents equally felt that either, contracts required flexibility, or a set structure would offer protection and provide an equal playing field.

The response from BFREPA on behalf of its members demonstrates a stronger consensus on the statement. Most of the producers they surveyed agreed with the statement and only a small number disagreed.

The NFU “believes that contracts should be professionally drafted and include appropriate headings and a clear structure to enable all parties to make informed business decisions. Clauses relating to notice periods and termination, as well as pricing, premiums and deductions should be clear and unambiguous to allow better transparency. … However, a one-size-fits-all approach will not work for every business, so it is important to allow for flexibility in the types of contracts available as long as it suits the needs of all parties.”

Supporting those that disagreed with the statement, the British Egg Industry Council (BEIC) stated “there are already a number of different types of working contracts in place and it is a matter for the purchaser (packer) and seller (producer) to negotiate to suit their preference and business circumstances.”

30. “Legislation, rather than a voluntary approach, is needed to ensure that contract outlines are consistent across the supply chain.” To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? Please give reasons for your answer.

Response	Count
Strongly agree	4 (11%)
Agree	12 (33%)
Neither agree nor disagree	8 (22%)
Disagree	8 (22%)
Strongly disagree	3 (8%)
Don’t know	1 (3%)
Not applicable	0 (0%)

While the responses to this question demonstrate a range of views, more respondents agreed with the statement than disagreed. This remains true when looking at responses from producers only. When reviewing responses from packers, we again see many views on either side but more disagreeing in this case.

Overall, responses from England and Northern Ireland also demonstrated mixed views, whereas for Scotland and Wales over half of respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed with the need for legislation (although this is based on small sample sizes, where nationwide retailers counted for many of the responses).

Of the responses from representative organisations, the NFU strongly agreed, and the majority of producers that responded to BFREPA’s own survey also agreed. The BEIC’s view is that it is a matter for the purchaser and seller to negotiate, which was also raised by some other responses that disagreed.

In BFREPA’s response they discussed their attempts to promote a voluntary approach previously:

“The voluntary approach has not worked so legislation is required. BFREPA has promoted the voluntary approach in the past by circulating a model contract to both buyers and sellers. This model contract has not been widely adopted.”

The most common reasons shared in responses as to why respondents agreed was to help level the playing field, adding that an enforcement body would assist in rebalancing this power.

31. “Assurance schemes should be the main mechanism to ensure that contracts and their terms and conditions are fair for both parties.” To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? Please give reasons for your answer.

Response	Count
Strongly agree	2 (6%)
Agree	2 (6%)
Neither agree nor disagree	13 (36%)
Disagree	7 (19%)
Strongly disagree	11 (31%)
Don’t know	1 (3%)
Not applicable	0 (0%)

Most responses to question 31 stated they neither agreed nor disagreed, disagreed, or strongly disagreed with this statement - posing a wide range of views and reasons why. Many of those that disagreed explained that assurance schemes are not commercial organisations and not suited to such a role their main focus being food safety and animal welfare.

The BEIC, who manage the Lion Code of Practice, responded, themselves disagreeing with this statement and stating:

“Whilst the Lion Code of Practice requires a contract to be in place between purchaser (packer) and seller (producer) with a clearly defined termination clause and notice period, the Lion Code is not involved in the terms of a contract between a purchaser and seller.”

32. Are there any clauses which should be mandatory within any contract? If yes, please provide details, including any specific clauses.

Response	Count
Yes	21 (58%)
No	5 (14%)
Don’t know	10 (28%)

The majority of respondents agreed with this statement that certain clauses should be mandatory within contracts. Most of those that agreed with this statement named termination clauses and notice periods as the main clauses that should be mandatory. Meanwhile many of those that agreed also cited specific or transparent pricing mechanisms, along with fair pricing clauses (that allow renegotiation of costs in extreme market conditions), whilst some respondents stated payment terms, grading standards, volumes and dispute resolution mechanisms. A few respondents detailed other clauses, such as force majeure, contract durations, and accreditation terms.

The responses from NFU and BFREPA broadly aligned with these findings, with the NFU referencing that the mechanism for calculating egg prices, premiums and deductions should be set out transparently, as well as termination periods, processes for contract amendments, and clauses for contract reviews following assurance scheme changes. BFREPA provided their model contract that they have promoted on a voluntary basis, with many of the same clauses included.

Predominantly, retailers tended to disagree with this statement. The NFU also raised some concerns over the specifics of notice periods as they appear in contracts:

“For egg producers, where contractual agreements are in place notice periods appear to usually be a minimum of a full flock cycle and often multiples thereof. For example, in standard free-range production a flock cycle is likely to be at least 14 months, but the notice period could be significantly longer depending on what point in the current production cycle notice is given and how many flock cycles notice they have to give before exiting their contract. This means that producers often have limited options to respond to unfavourable conditions in their contract and have very little bargaining power to either instigate or respond to contract changes.”

33. Are there any clauses which should be prohibited within any contract? If yes, please provide details, including any specific clauses.

Response	Count
Yes	7 (19%)
No	9 (25%)
Don’t know	20 (56%)

The majority of responses to this question were unsure whether there were any clauses that should be prohibited from contracts. Of those that did express a preference, there were similar numbers of responses for those believing there should or should not be clauses prohibited within a contract.

Of those that did feel there should be prohibited clauses, there was a consensus that unilateral changes should be prohibited from contracts, with others covering a wide range of clauses including, penalty clauses, gag clauses, and non-compete clauses to name a few.

34. Should changes to the contract be permissible?

Response	Count
Yes	28 (78%)
No	3 (8%)
Don’t know	5 (14%)

Most respondents believed that changes to contracts should be permitted. This was a general view amongst respondents from all different business types or regions of the UK.

35. If yes, we are keen to hear your views as to what changes should be permissible, under what circumstances and the process by which contracts should be changed. Please provide detail in your answer.

Of those that agreed with question 34, the majority of the reasons provided stated that any changes would need to be mutually agreed by both parties to be permissible. Several reasons were referenced for why this should be in place, including cost inflation, market changes, legal or regulatory changes, and other unforeseen events. No reasons were given by those that answered ‘no’ to the previous question.

Formation of price

36. If you are a seller of eggs, what type of pricing mechanism appears within your contract(s). Please tick all that apply.

Response	Count
Fixed Price	9 (25%)
Variable Price	13 (36%)
Feed tracker Price	17 (47%)
A cost-plus price (or cost of production)	7 (19%)
Other (please explain)	1 (3%)
Don’t know	0 (0%)
Not applicable	12 (33%)

Responses to this question identified a range of contract types held by those selling eggs, with many respondents having multiple different types. For respondents who did have a contract, most had contracts that track feed price, and some had access to cost plus contracts (or those that track cost of production). When looking at responses from different business types, most producers and packers report having at least one feed tracking or cost-plus contract with those they sell to.

37. If you are a purchaser of eggs, what type of pricing mechanism appears within your contract(s). Please tick all that apply.

Response	Count
Fixed Price	8 (22%)
Variable Price	7 (19%)
Feed tracker Price	12 (33%)
A cost-plus price (or cost of production)	11 (31%)
Other (please explain)	2 (6%)
Don’t know	1 (3%)
Not applicable	19 (53%)

For those purchasing eggs, we see a similar range of responses, with many businesses having multiple types of contracts with those they purchase eggs from. We again see equivalent findings to question 36, with most businesses that purchase eggs having feed tracker or cost-plus prices appearing within their contracts.

For packers and retailers most packers have both these pricing mechanisms appear in their contracts with those they purchase from, and all the retailer respondents reported having contracts that track either feed or production costs.

38. “Where contracts with variable pricing are entered into, the final price given for eggs and the reasons for that price are clear and unambiguous at the point of sale.” To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? Please give reasons for your answer.

Response	Count
Strongly agree	6 (17%)
Agree	11 (31%)
Neither agree nor disagree	3 (8%)
Disagree	1 (3%)
Strongly disagree	3 (8%)
Don’t know	4 (11%)
Not applicable	8 (22%)

Most of the responses from those that gave a view agreed that within contracts with variable pricing, the final price given for eggs and the reasons for that price are clear and unambiguous at the point of sale.

 Within different business types there was some variation. Whilst, no packers or retailers disagreed with this statement, the majority of producers agreed and referenced positive working relationships with packers where price changes were notified in advance and with a clear rationale. However, a few also disagreed, citing pricing mechanisms “need clearer communication” or that “pledges [were] not honoured.”

The response from BFREPA on behalf of their members that completed the survey displays similar findings, with most producers agreeing with the statement, while some disagreed. The NFU’s response also disagreed with this statement, stating:

“NFU members generally reported a lack of transparency or that they felt transparency could be improved in the pricing mechanisms within their contracts… Vague pricing terms within contracts can leave businesses selling eggs vulnerable to unexpected changes that could have a serious negative impact on their business.”

Premiums and deductions

39. “The premiums and deductions which can be applied to the price paid per egg based on grading are clear and unambiguous at the point of sale.” To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? Please give reasons for your answer.

Response	Count
Strongly agree	9 (25%)
Agree	16 (44%)
Neither agree nor disagree	3 (8%)
Disagree	2 (6%)
Strongly disagree	1 (3%)
Don’t know	1 (3%)
Not applicable	4 (11%)

Most respondents agreed or strongly agreed with this statement, whilst a few disagreed or strongly disagreed. The main reason given by those that agreed or strongly agreed was having clear details within contracts, for instance with prices broken down by size and grade.

The NFU were one organisation that disagreed with the statement, referencing “mixed feedback from members on how transparent the process for calculating deductions or premiums based on grading is… There is also anecdotal evidence of gradings being used as a mechanism to control supply and demand with seconds rates rising and subsequently a lower price paid to the producer with no adequate explanation offered.”

The shared evidence provided in BFREPA’s response was also more mixed. The majority of producers they surveyed agreed with the statement, though many did disagree. Quotes provided directly and through BFREPA identified many instances of producers happy with their relationship with their packers, while a smaller number expressed more concern and a lack of confidence in the grading process:

“We are sent a good breakdown of our egg gradings so that makes it all very clear. The questions come in when the sensitivity of the machines is changed and suddenly you go from 1-2% seconds to 5%.”

Price reporting and transparency

40. “Existing market reporting services provide a high level of transparency.” To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? Please give reasons for your answer.

Response	Count
Strongly agree	3 (8%)
Agree	10 (28%)
Neither agree nor disagree	10 (28%)
Disagree	1 (3%)
Strongly disagree	10 (28%)
Don’t know	2 (6%)

Responses to question 40 demonstrated a wide range of views on existing market reporting services within the sector. There was a lack of clear consensus with the statement, with many respondents equally agreeing, neither agreeing nor disagreeing, or strongly disagreeing.

The relevant data collection and sharing powers are devolved so we have sought to examine responses from England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland individually, though gaining representative findings is therefore challenging due to the limited number of responses. Looking only at responses from each of these areas individually, findings again demonstrate a mixed range of views, with many respondents agreeing, many disagreeing and no real consensus either way.

When looking at the responses from different types of businesses we see a bit more variation. Many producers and most packers agreed that the existing market reporting services provide a high level of transparency, but most retailers strongly disagreed.

Many producers and some packers who agreed tended to identify the “price reporting in the Ranger, the BFREPA magazine” and which are now created by ADAS. One producer explained this “provides more transparency for the production of eggs but not the onward supply chain.”

A retailer’s comments helped explain what data would be helpful and why:

“Greater transparency and reporting of cost of production would be helpful to build a more sustainable market and support infrastructure investment.”

Some responses also identified limitations to the data published by Defra:

“While there is a substantial amount of data available, particularly for free range egg production, it is not comprehensive. The confidentiality surrounding data for cage, barn and organic eggs, coupled with gaps in certain areas of market reporting, suggests that the existing services do not provide a fully transparent view of the egg sector.”

41. “Additional data points from the supply chain, that are not currently provided, should be made available.” To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? Please give reasons for your answer and details on what data would be beneficial.

Response	Count
Strongly agree	8 (22%)
Agree	7 (19%)
Neither agree nor disagree	11 (31%)
Disagree	4 (11%)
Strongly disagree	1 (3%)
Don’t know	5 (14%)

Many respondents to this question indicated they ‘neither agreed nor disagreed’ with the statement or didn’t know. For respondents who answered outside of this, more agreed with the statement that additional data points should be made available, than those who disagreed.

For England, Scotland and Wales, more respondents agreed than disagreed, whereas for Northern Ireland respondents there was no clear consensus or agreement.

Overall, for UK responses, of those that agreed, most believed that greater transparency is a good thing, with one respondent expanding “access to comprehensive information across all facets of the supply chain is essential to establish transparency, fairness, and equitable practices.” For those disagreeing, the main argument was that the data is too variable.

In terms of the extra data respondents identified as useful, the data most requested by respondents was for the costs incurred by packers and retailers, and most specifically the price retailers pay packers for eggs.

BFREPA’s evidence supports our overall findings, with most of their surveyed members agreeing additional data points should be made available. One producer stated:

“This would be nice to know and mean that the packer would have to justify their price point to the producer. Also the retailer should know and see how much money gets back to the producer and vice versa.”

Another area raised by some respondents was that Defra’s own data should be improved with one response asking “to see data released on a monthly basis, rather than on a quarterly basis.”

The NFU also commented on Defra’s data:

“Defra should at the very least look to improve its own data collection across the supply chain so that the government is in a better position to respond to any future supply chain challenges.”

Dispute resolution

42. Please provide your views on the most effective means of dispute resolution.

A wide range of views were provided in response to question 42. The most suggested method by respondents was independent arbitration, suggested by many who responded. Following this, some respondents also suggested further commercial negotiations, and mediation services could prove effective.

The NFU also advocated independent arbitration, stating “an independent person or body appointed to oversee contract fairness and resolve contract disputes, with powers to intervene where appropriate and deliver meaningful consequences for those who do not follow the rules.”

BFREPA’s response further supported this:

“Government should authorise and oversee an arbitration panel of three specialists. One member to be a representative of a producer organisation (such as BFREPA), one representative to be representative of a packer organisation (such as the National Egg Marketing Association Limited) and one chairperson approved by Government who should be a professional arbitrator/ lawyer.”

43. Should resolution procedures be binding or advisory?

Response	Count
Binding	18 (50%)
Advisory	13 (36%)
Don’t know	5 (14%)

Half of respondents believed that resolution procedures during disputes should be binding, though many felt that they should instead be advisory.

Of the representative organisations that responded, the NFU, BFREPA and BEIC also believed that any resolution procedure should be binding.

Impact on business and consumers

44. If new legislative requirements are introduced as a result of this consultation, are you aware of any impacts to business that could arise? Please give reasons for your answer, including any additional annual costs or savings for your business and any specific impacts in one or other parts of the UK.

A wide range of views were shared in response to this question, with no single impact or consideration raised by a majority of respondents. One of the main impacts that respondents identified was that there would some extra costs associated with new legislative requirements, with a few respondents stating these would be administrative or training costs. Occasionally, respondents suggested that new regulations in this area would either result in minimal or no extra costs.

Respondents who were positive suggested that any new costs would be worth it if it levelled the playing field. Respondents who were against this indicated they were concerned that raised costs could result in more eggs being imported from outside the UK.

45. Are you aware of any positive impacts on consumers which could arise from the introduction of supply chain fairness regulations in the egg sector? Please give reasons for your answer, including any expected impacts with regards to costs, choice, and transparency of production and processing standards.

Response	Count
Yes	17 (47%)
No	12 (33%)
Don’t know	7 (19%)

Many respondents suggested potential positive impacts for consumers that could arise from the introduction of supply chain fairness regulations in the egg sector, whereas some were unaware. However, more were aware of potential positive impacts than those that were unaware.

For respondents who did perceive there could be positive impacts on consumers, specified that the introduction of supply chain fairness regulations could improve quality and standards as well as protecting UK production.

Overall there was a lack of clear consensus, with a relatively even distribution of producers, packers and retailers either suggesting perceived positive impacts, or not.

46. Are you aware of any negative impacts on consumers which could arise from the introduction of supply chain fairness regulations in the egg sector? Please give reasons for your answer, including any expected impacts with regards to costs, choice, and transparency of production and processing standards.

Response	Count
Yes	17 (47%)
No	13 (36%)
Don’t know	6 (17%)

Many respondents suggested perceived negative impacts for consumers from the introduction of supply chain fairness regulations in the egg sector, with more stating potential negative impacts than not providing suggestions. The predominant view from respondents who did perceive there could be negative impacts on consumers cited higher egg prices as the most likely impact, together with a few citing risks to supply and the potential for more imported eggs as it was felt consumers would be unwilling to pay higher prices.

Amongst the different type of respondents here was a relatively even distribution of producers, packers and retailers either suggesting perceived negative impacts or not.

Variation within the UK

47. Are there any unique circumstances within any of the constituent nations that would mean a different legislative approach would need to be taken? Please give reasons for your answer.

Response	Count
Yes	4 (11%)
No	18 (50%)
Don’t know	14 (39%)

Half of respondents believed that there were no unique circumstances that would lead to a differing legislative approach, with many respondents being unsure of any unique circumstances that would require a differing approach across constituent nations.

Respondents whose businesses were based in England, Scotland or Wales showed the same finding, with most respondents believing there would be no unique circumstances, or being unsure. In Northern Ireland however, half of respondents were unsure.

Only a few respondents added reasons as to why they felt this way, with one respondent stating “it is critically important that an unfair playing field, where one nation benefits unfairly over its neighbour, is never created.”

Additionally, a respondent from Northern Ireland noted the below:

“Northern Ireland farmers continually find unique circumstances relating to the required standards of production (dictated by EU policy).  Any legislation relating to contractual fairness should take account of this, and give an overarching provision to ensure that NI can continue to sell egg to GB on an even footing. 85% of NI egg finds its way to the GB market. This must be protected.”

Other concerns

48. How much time do you estimate would be required to implement business changes necessary to comply with any new legislation? Please give reasons for your answer.

Response	Count
Under 12 months	7 (19%)
13-24 months	10 (28%)
25-26 months	7 (19%)
Other (please explain)	2 (6%)
Don’t know	8 (22%)
Not applicable	2 (6%)

Most respondents felt that to be able to implement changes would take 13 to 24 months, followed by respondents indicating that they didn’t know how long it would take. When providing reasons, many felt that the estimated time needed to make changes would be dependent on the changes made in legislation, along with this time-period needing to align with flock cycles.

49. We are keen to hear your views on any other issues related to business relations in the egg supply chain. This may include, but is not limited to, views on the information and assumptions presented in this document or topics that have not been covered by this consultation. Please provide detail in your answer.

Respondents used this question to raise a large number of other issues relating to the sector, though with no issue being raised by more than a few respondents.

The most frequently raised issue was about how changes to assurance schemes can trigger additional costs to producers, often as a result of new elements to schemes being added, with one example raised including a new carbon audit as part of the Lion code.

Other issues that were raised included the difficulty in producers gaining planning permission for new or expanded egg farms, and concerns over poor standard imports competing against UK produced eggs.

Next steps

We have heard and understood the concerns raised by those that responded to this consultation, and which are summarised in this document. The UK Government will commence work developing draft regulations for egg contracts, using the regulation making power in section 29 of the Agriculture Act 2020. To do this, we will work with industry as we develop these regulations.

These regulations will propose that written agreements are used between all producers and their buyers. We anticipate that they will ensure clear notice or termination periods are included, transparent pricing mechanisms and grading standards, prohibit unilateral changes, mandate a dispute resolution process and introduce a new enforcement process to ensure contracts comply with the new regulations.

We will work closely with industry to explore what other provisions if any, should be mandated as part of these agreements and whether specific limits on notice periods should be set.

We will continue to engage with stakeholders and the UK Government, Scottish Government, Welsh Government and the Northern Ireland Executive to ensure that legislation works for all parts of the UK and incorporate special provision for differing circumstances, if necessary.

We will work with industry to further explore the suggestions on data collection and publishing that came up in the consultation. We will continue to explore this with the UK Government, Scottish Government, Welsh Government and the Northern Ireland Executive.

We will work with the Department for Business and Trade and the Competition and Markets Authority  on findings relating to the Grocery Code Adjudicator (GCA) and the Grocery Supply Code of Practice (GSCOP).

Annex 1: Types of responses

Online survey

Respondents were encouraged to submit an online response by completing an online survey hosted on Defra’s consultation website, Citizen Space. The online survey followed the questions asked in the consultation paper: featuring both closed (for example, tick box questions), and open questions (asking for respondents to detail their views or provide further evidence or examples). Respondents were able to answer as many or as few questions as they wanted. For the closed questions statistics are provided on the responses to each proposal. For open questions, a summary of the main themes emerging from the responses is provided within this response.

Email and post

Responses could be submitted directly by email or post. Some of these responses answered the consultation questions directly. Others provided a more general commentary on the use of contracts within the egg sector. Where responses directly answered the specific consultation questions, these have been included in the data analysis of each question. Where responses provided additional general views on the use of contracts, we have reflected these in the general analysis of relevant question areas.

Organisational responses

Organisations and stakeholder groups were able to submit responses to the consultation on behalf of their members. As with the responses obtained via email and post, some of these responses followed the consultation format, while others provided general views on the role of possible legislation in the sector. The key arguments raised in these organisational responses are included alongside individual responses in each of the relevant sections.