I am referring to the practice of giving producers inflated prices over the phone in order to attract their business – when the actual market price is much lower. The market agent then has to scurry around to cover his transgression in an attempt to keep the farmer happy.
There is no real solution for the agent. One lie leads to another and the whole thing ends up a mess. The market agent may even be tempted to start manipulating consignments or indulging in some other illegal activity. Only the other day I heard of a veteran market agent who does this. I could not believe it. With all his years of experience he should know better!
Serious light
Act 12 of 1992 is clear about giving a farmer incorrect information and if this behaviour were to be reported to the Agricultural Produce Agents Council (APAC), it would be viewed in a very serious light. However, the matter has to be reported by the farmer, with supporting evidence, before the APAC can take action. A complaint over the phone is not enough, but it is better than nothing. At least the APAC will be aware of the incident and the perpetrator.
But is that where the problem lies?
Are farmers not reporting these incidents? If so, they must carry a large share of the blame. By not reporting the matter, they allow the market agent to get away with it and he will simply carry on with this behaviour. In the meantime, the farmers wonder why they don’t get top prices on the market.
Regular visits
It comes back to the farmer paying regular visits to the market and building a sound relationship with the market agent. If the agent is a dubious sort the farmer will soon enough pick it up and find someone trustworthy. Top farmers on a market are successful because they visit the market, build sound relationships with their market agents and know how the market operates. Those who do not bother to visit the market, are either very rich, lazy or ignorant.
