Scottish Food Advisory Committee – Oct 2008

Peter Midgley of FSA Scotland gave a presentation giving an overview and update of current legal processes and practices relating to the enforcement of food law in Scotland.

Obligations on Business:-
• to produce safe food
• to have traceability
• to initiate withdrawals
• not to obstruct inspections
• not to apply misleading descriptions

For hygiene this means:-
• to register or apply for approval
• to use and maintain appropriate facilities
• to implement food safety management procedures

Official controls
1. Inspection and audit of premises and procedures
2. inspection of food, food labelling
3. sampling of food
4. guidance to businesses

Other essential enforcement functions-
• Imported food controls
• Incident management

Inspection planning cycle -DAY1
– Number at risk/scale
– Inherent hazards
– Vulnerability of consumers

Factors under business control
o Level of compliance
o Management Systems
o Track record of compliance

All this derives a risk score that determines the frequency of inspection

Between 60 and 65% of food hygiene inspections are programmed / planned.

OPTIONS AND RESOURCES AVAILABLE

1. A warning letter from EHO has no statutory standing.
2. Improvement notices
3. Prohibition notices are stop notices, not necessarily everything.
4. Seizure and detention (only for food safety)
5. Suspension of approval ( only where premises are subject to approval )
6. Prosecution (proceeding depends on Procurator Fiscals opinion)

95% of outcomes are warning letters.

Q from Chair – What is the level of consistency across the 32 local authorities in Scotland?

A Mechanism –

314 EHOs deployed in Scotland i.e. average of 10 per authority.
Practice Guidance and Audit Regimes are the means of providing consistency.
No concrete evidence of inconsistency.

Argument of UK gold plating, especially in EU content.

Q What evidence is there that the enforcement regime actually improved food safety?

A Assessment of risk attempts to control affects on food safety. Compliance is not directly related to food poisoning incidents but hygiene standards are. There is only an assumption that these are related but almost impossible to prove. Enforcement regime will have contributed to a reduction in food borne infections.

SFMTA has recently not received the volume of complaint from its 450 shops in membership across all 32 local authorities in Scotland. Any consistency issues are taken up with FSAS and SFELC the same could not be said about the experiences of abattoirs and approved premises under MHS control.

This all comes down to interpretation of guidance. As a training provider Scottish Meat Training delivering vocational qualifications in Meat and Poultry Processing, our assessors on a monthly , are brought together to discuss standards and acceptable evidence of achievement. Over and above that there is an Internal Verifier and an External Verifier whi oversee what these assessors accept and how they do it.

Given that inconsistencies do exist within the same local authority and from one MHS vet to another, and from one local authority, abattoir or approved premises to another.

What methods are deployed to ensure standardisation of interpretation of guidance by inspectors?

A FSAS and MHS are aware of accusations of variances. Retailed guidelines, something taken very seriously and looked at very carefully.

Update on Meat Hygiene Service – Lydia Wilkie

Charging consultation has not yet been issued. Because of Euro implications. Rate set on 2/9/8. Since then agency and MHS have looked at implications. FSA agreed increase of 12% at their Board meeting.

(Board discussion on increase on testing of bovines up to 48 months. Needs taken back and a mature discussion to include all stakeholders is required within the consultation process.)

Although legislation allows EU states to set their own age limits, it will be a standard of 48 months across all of the EU15.

EFSA reported that raising the age limit 48 months would have no significant impact on public health. SFAC said public health risk was “negligible”., they asked for sufficient surveillance that there would be monitoring of prevalence of BSE. DEFRA will be asked to describe their surveillance programme.

DEFRA has written to EU saying that they wish to implement the new age limit from 1st January 2009.

Scottish Government Food and Drink Policy – Update
Reaction to announcement at the 2008 RHS need to be assessed by February 2009 so that Cabinet Secretary can make updated announcement at the 2009 RHS.
Ways of contributing to the process?
“It has been remarkably quiet since the fanfare in 2008″
5 groups covering the 5 key themes have been formed.

Workstream 1 – Sustainable Economic Growth
Led by Allan Burns of Scotland Food and Drink

Workstream 2 – Food and Drink Choices
Led by Prof Annie Anderson of Dundee University

Workstream 3 – Scotland's reputation as a land of food and drink
Led by Martin Wishart, Michelin-starred chef

Workstream 4 – Walking the talk
Led by Robin Gourlay of East Ayrshire Council

Workstream 5 – Affordable, Access and Security
Led by Prof David Atkinson

These appear to be deliberating in secret without the opportunities for input from the wide audience that was promised. SFAC and industry appear now to be outside the debate. What are the subject areas of the workstream groups and who are the members of them and representative of stakeholders. Easier to comment in the formative process rather than after the workstream report.

SFAC Retirements
FSAS Director George Paterson retires in 2009, adverts have already been placed for his successor.

Professor Bill Reilly retired from SFAC after 8 years service. He takes over as President Elect of the British Veterinary Association.

Next SFAC Meeting: Wednesday 4th February