FSA Review a displacement activity?

In his presentation to the Food Standards Agency’s “Stakeholder Workshop” [on the Review of the Food Safety (Sampling & Qualifications) Regulations 1990, held last December], Dr Campbell suggested that the Review was simply a displacement activity, particularly when there is unprecedented budgetary restraint and a lack of understanding of how other EU States function.

The FSA regarded the Workshop as an opportunity to review “current provision of analytical services” and emphasised the importance of working in partnership with stakeholders. The APA is not alone in believing that the real challenge facing the FSA is to recognise that to create a network of Official Food Control laboratories is much more than providing an “analytical service”. 

Public health protection and consumer confidence are regarded as being paramount – as evidenced, not least by the promise the FSA has just made to the public:

 “… you should expect to be eating safer food and to be choosing healthier and more balanced meals …”
[FSA Strategic Plan 2010-15]

It is, however, far from clear how it will do this without the creation of a strategically-directed, appropriately-re sourced UK food control system. Amending regulations governing the qualifications of those permitted to oversee the tests which ensure public safety, confidence and trust is certainly not the first thing to be done.

The Workshop

This was attended by 43 invited participants, 15 of whom were from the FSA. Consumer groups were represented by one individual and one other represented industry. Agriculture, food retailers and caterers, however – fairly significant stakeholders –, were unrepresented.

Most of those present found the day interesting, but a request was made for another, which could look more broadly at the food control system as a whole and consider a strategic vision for it.

After presentations by the APA, LACORS and the FSA itself, three scenarios were used as a tool to explore risks and benefits of different actions (or lack of action) on the qualifications required to act as a Public Analyst.  Participants were given the opportunity to work on all three scenarios; critiquing and grouping issues as they moved from one to the other. They were encouraged to think broadly about what other issues each scenario might present and, later, to consider the risks and benefits to the entire food safety system inherent in each. A final plenary session summarised the key issues emerging.

Some key issues were raised, but were ‘parked’ as they were not considered part of the Workshop, and include the following:

• Budgets cap local authority sampling activity, it is not risk-based.
• The problems (of reduced sampling and fewer Public Analysts) are due to lack of political will and lack of cash.
• In the absence of sufficient sampling, major food safety problems (such as the next Sudan I) are likely to be missed.
• The current framework could work, if funding for local authority enforcement (inspection, sampling, analysis and examination) were channelled through the FSA.

The FSA’s report of the Workshop has now been published and comments on it – which the FSA has said it would welcome – should be e-mailed to: Standards.Support@foodstandards.gsi.gov.uk