Select Committee on Agriculture Fourth Special Report

FOURTH SPECIAL REPORT

The Agriculture Committee has agreed to the following Special Report:

The Committee has received the following memorandum from the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, constituting the Government's Reply to the Fourth Report from the Committee of this Session, Food Safety, made to the House on 22 April 1998.

* * *

Introduction

The Government welcomes the Agriculture Select Committee's report on Food Safety. This memorandum represents our response to the wide-ranging recommendations set out in that document. It comments in turn on each of the recommendations in the report.

Pre legislative scrutiny

(a)  We would welcome any comments, from Members and others, as to how we might best undertake scrutiny of the draft Food Standards Agency bill (paragraph 9)

The Government welcomes the House's intention to undertake pre-legislative scrutiny of the draft Food Standards Agency Bill. As the Committee will be aware, arrangements for pre-legislative scrutiny are currently still under consideration.

In parallel with the process of pre-legislative scrutiny, the Government will be inviting comments on the draft Bill from interested parties outside the House, with a view to securing the widest possible scrutiny of our proposals from the outset. As indicated in the White Paper, we also intend to consult separately on the question of funding, and expect to do so shortly.

The Committee has made a number of recommendations relating to the Agency, which are addressed in the paragraphs below. Where we identify a need for further consideration in the light of the ongoing process of consultation and review, the Committee's views will be taken fully into consideration when we make decisions on the final form of our proposals.

The FSA's credibility

(b)  In our view, the main challenge which the FSA will face is in establishing its credibility with the public as swiftly as possible. The Agency must not only make our food safer, but be seen to do so. It must also ensure the correct balance between advice and enforcement. This will require it to set clear priorities for its first years in existence. The onus on the Government will be to ensure that the FSA will be properly financed, well managed and effectively led (paragraph 11).

The Government agrees. Its aim in setting up the Agency is to strengthen food safety and standards policies and procedures so as to improve food safety and thereby rebuild the public's trust. It would expect the Agency to determine its own priorities to meet this objective, although its corporate and business plans will be produced in consultation with Ministers, published and laid before the House.

The incidence of food poisoning

(c)  We recommend that the Government explore means of devising research projects to provide a fuller understanding of the different rates of food poisoning in the constituent parts of the UK. The absence of clear conclusions on these discrepancies is inexcusable, and must be remedied if the Agency's work is to be underpinned by a real understanding of the incidence and causes of food poisoning in the UK (paragraph 18).

The Government acknowledges that the apparently different rates of food poisoning across the UK are not adequately explained. We accept that further work is required in this area.

(d)  Under-notification by GPs is only one part of the wider jigsaw of under­ascertainment of infectious intestinal disease in the UK, but it is an important part, and the Government must both ensure that GPs are advised of developments in foodborne illnesses and their symptoms, and continue to press GPs to meet their responsibilities in respect of notification. This task will be a crucial one if the Agency's work is to be informed by accurate statistical information and not just by hunches and guesswork (paragraph 19).

All doctors have a professional obligation to keep their professional knowledge and skills up to date, an obligation for which they are accountable to the General Medical Council (GMC). The GMC has recently strengthened its guidance in Duties of a Doctor to make it clear that "if serious problems arise which call your registration into question, these are the standards against which you will be judged". Doctors also have statutory obligations, including in respect of the notification of communicable diseases, which encompass foodborne disease. The Government intends to explore with representatives of the medical profession ways of encouraging GPs to fulfil this obligation. Health Authorities are expected to remind GPs annually of their legal obligation to notify such illnesses.

(e)  Professor Brian Duerden, Deputy Director of the PHLS, argued that "laboratory notifications should become a statutory responsibility". We agree. Such measures are essential in improving public health and food safety policy (paragraph 20).

The Government agrees. It intends to make notifications by laboratories a statutory requirement, subject to the Parliamentary time being available to introduce the necessary primary legislation.

(f)  The publication of the DoH's infectious intestinal disease report should be extremely important in understanding the true prevalence of food poisoning in the UK (paragraph 22).

The objective of the Infectious Intestinal Disease study, which we expect to publish later this year, is to achieve a more precise estimate of the incidence of infectious intestinal disease presenting to GPs and in the community in England and Wales. It will therefore provide an important indicator of the extent of food poisoning. A separate study, to be published by the end of the year, will provide information about the incidence in Scotland.

Microbiological hazards

(g)  UK food safety policy must aim, as far as is reasonably achievable, at the elimination of pathogenic bacteria from the food supply chain (paragraph 28).

The Government accepts the need to reduce the prevalence of pathogens throughout the food chain as far as is reasonably achievable. Our Memorandum indicated the progress which has already been made. Current policy initiatives are designed to build on these achievements.

(h)  We would propose that the Government, through the Food Standards Agency when it is established, should effectively apply the HACCP principle to the food-chain in its entirety, identifying the most appropriate points of intervention and control in the context of the methods of production and the characteristics of particular dangerous pathogens. The resources which the Agency allocates in this area should be distributed on the basis of that analysis (paragraph 33, 34).

The Food Standards Agency will have responsibilities which extend throughout the whole of the food chain and will therefore be well placed to take an overview and focus attention on the critical areas. Together with MAFF, the FSA will also continue to encourage the application of HACCP principles to the reduction of pathogens throughout the food chain.

(i)  The Government has proposed the establishment of an Advisory Committee on Animal Feedingstuffs to support the work of the Food Standards Agency. We warmly welcome this decision, which should provide the necessary impetus to achieve wholly Salmonella-free feed in the future (paragraph 35).

The Government welcomes the Committee's support for the new arrangements. Work to establish the Advisory Committee on Animal Feedingstuffs is under way, with a view to its holding its first meeting before the end of the year.

(j)  In its response to this Report, the Government should address the problem of formulating strategies against specific bacteriological hazards, as well as the detailed elements of those strategies which we have proposed (paragraph 35).

The Government accepts the need to formulate specific strategies to control certain bacterial hazards, and these have already been introduced where the necessary knowledge base is in place. For example, a series of measures have been introduced to reduce the potential for meat to become contaminated with E. coli O157 both in the abattoir and at other subsequent stages of the food chain. The recommendations of the ACMSF's Poultry Meat Report are being taken forward with a view to achieving the ACMSF's target that the proportion of UK-produced raw chicken on retail sale that is contaminated with Salmonella is less than 10%. A Working Group of ACMSF has been established to examine the reasons why the prevalence of Salmonella in eggs has not fallen since 1991, and will start its work shortly. As the Committee has noted, in other areas more needs to be known before effective strategies can be formulated, and these gaps in knowledge are being addressed by research and surveillance. As the White Paper on the Food Standards Agency makes clear, it is proposed that this general approach to the reduction of the prevalence of specific pathogens in the food chain will continue.

(k)  The establishment of a rigorous, scientific and statistically reliable national food surveillance system will be an essential component of an effective food safety policy in the future. Ideally these surveys should discriminate between foods produced according to different methods (one example amongst many would be battery and free-range eggs) to provide information which can be used to better effect in influencing policy further down the food chain; they should also discriminate between UK-produced and imported foodstuffs. The results of such surveys must be published regularly (paragraph 36).

The Government recognises that a sufficiently comprehensive microbiological surveillance programme of pathogens throughout the food chain will be needed to inform policy initiatives. The White Paper envisages that on-farm surveillance will be given a high priority and co-ordinated by a joint FSA/Agriculture Departments Committee. All microbiological surveillance must be carefully planned and executed so that the defined objectives are specifically addressed. This will include the need to discriminate between different production methods and origins as appropriate. The results of all surveys are published as a matter of routine, and it is envisaged that this will continue.

(l)  No one can predict when or if new micro-organisms, or new virulent strains of known bacteria, will emerge. A major food poisoning incident, resulting from such an emergent threat, in the early years of the Agency's existence could hardly be blamed on the Agency (paragraph 37).

The Government agrees. However, the Agency will be expected to take all reasonable steps to minimise the risks of such an outbreak occurring and to stand ready to assist food authorities should the need arise.

(m)  We consider the evidence of transfer of antibiotic-resistant micro-organisms from animals to humans through food to be approaching conclusiveness, and with the consequences of this potentially so serious, we favour a ban on the use of antibiotics in farming as growth promoters, and tighter restrictions on their use for subtherapeutic or prophylactic purposes. Every effort should be made to develop vaccines as alternatives to antibiotics for therapeutic purposes (paragraph 40).

The Government notes that the Committee favours a ban on the use of antibiotics as growth promoters in animal production. This use of antibiotics is governed by an EU system of authorisations and the European Commission and the UK Government receive expert advice respectively from the Scientific Committee on Animal Nutrition and the Veterinary Products Committee (VPC). The Committee's report has been drawn to the attention of the VPC. Further advice is also expected later this year from the Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food. The Government will act in the light of the advice of its scientific committees.

In considering the use of antibiotics as veterinary medicines, the VPC has consistently followed the principles established in the 1969 Swann Committee report on the use of antibiotics in animal husbandry and veterinary medicines. The VPC's policy has been that new antibiotics should not necessarily be precluded from therapeutic use in animals but that their prophylactic use should be discouraged.

(n)  We see no proof yet of problems in respect of food safety in relation to the practices of disposal of sewage sludge and other organic waste on to agricultural land, but these practices must be kept under close and continuous review in the light of the ACMSF's findings (paragraph 42).

The Government recognises the potential risk of the transfer to pathogens to food via the spreading of sewage sludge and other organic wastes on agricultural land, and is aware of the concerns which were expressed to the Committee. The Government therefore proposes to carry out a structured programme of further research and risk assessment into the use of all organic waste on land, and will continue to keep these matters under close and continuous review. In addition, the Government will be amending the Sewage Sludge (Use in Agriculture) Regulations 1989 and the associated Code of Practice in the light of the comprehensive review of the controls on the use of sewage sludge, which is nearing completion.

Imported food

(o)  We have no evidence to suggest that imported food in general is now, or is likely to become in the future, any less wholesome and safe than UK produce. Multiple retailers, for example, audit and inspect their foreign suppliers on the same basis as their UK suppliers. We do consider, however, that the arrangements for surveillance of food imports, and for ensuring their traceability on an absolutely equal basis with domestically-produced food, will be important issues for the new Food Standards Agency to address, both at the EU level and with local port health authorities. The Agency cannot afford to have domestic producers feeling that the "playing field" is not level. Nor can it rest content with any inspection regimes in other countries which are not as thorough as in the UK (paragraph 44).

The Government agrees. However, it is important to remember that many areas of food law are harmonised at European level. The European Commission is responsible for ensuring that Community legislation is enforced consistently by all Member States. The UK will continue to support the Commission in this role and press it to ensure that all cases of inadequate enforcement are properly addressed so that the health of the consumer is safeguarded at home and abroad, and that no UK company is put at a competitive disadvantage.

Economy products

(p)  The British Meat Manufacturers' Association called for greater regulation and enforcement of hygiene at the lower price end of the meat manufacturing industry. We agree with the BMMA, and others who gave evidence to us, that all consumers have a right to expect their food to be safe from contamination, irrespective of price. It will be a major test of the Food Standards Agency to raise the safety standards of lower-priced food, meat and non-meat products alike, to those of more expensive and controlled foodstuffs (paragraph 46).

The Government agrees that consumers have the right to expect all food to conform to proper standards of safety and hygiene. Achieving this objective will be one of the Agency's most important tasks.

Pesticides

(q)  We consider that public confidence in the safety of food in respect of pesticides and veterinary medicines residues would be enhanced if the surveillance programmes were carried out by the FSA wholly independently of the authorities responsible for product approvals. We further consider that the Agency should actively promote the results of its surveys in the consumer media (paragraph 49).

The Government is clear that the Agency will need to have extensive involvement in the arrangements for pesticides and veterinary medicines surveillance, and the White Paper sets out one way of achieving this objective. However, in the light of the Committee's comments and other responses to the White Paper, we intend to re-examine our proposals before reaching final conclusions. On the Committee's final point, we have recently announced that brand names of food products containing residues of pesticides or veterinary medicines will be published for the first time.

Genetically modified organisms

(r)  It is our view that consumers have a right to know if foods contain genetically modified organisms, or if there is a possibility that they may contain them, and we fully support the Government's labelling policy for such foods. GMOs also have potential environmental consequences, but these matters lie outside the scope of this Report. We strongly support Dr Cunningham's call for continued vigilance both on the food safety and environmental consequences of GMOs. These are issues to which we may return in a later inquiry (paragraph 51).

The Government agrees and welcomes the Committee's support. The Government's first priority is to ensure consumer safety. It is also important for consumers to be able to make an informed choice when purchasing such foods, and the recently agreed EU regulation requiring the labelling of all foods containing genetically modified ingredients derived from soya and maize, which was based on a compromise promoted by the UK Presidency, will help to ensure this.

The food chain

(s)  The Food Standards Agency will need to secure hygiene improvements throughout the food chain by a variety of methods, including a strategic review of the different sectors in the food chain to identify research priorities with clear targets and objectives to bring about the desired improvements in pathogen reduction and control. At the same time, it must not shrink from re-appraising the hygiene control strategies which are already in place when it begins its operations. The Agency must come to its own judgements about the hierarchy of risk within the food chain and may choose to adapt the existing regulatory framework to reflect that risk, balancing the need for regulation against producers' legal responsibilities to exercise "due diligence", under the Food Safety Act, in ensuring the safety of their produce and consumers' reasonable obligations. The Agency should also commission research on the practicability and desirability of simplifying and shortening the food chain with the aim of reducing risk (paragraph 54).

The Government agrees that the Food Standards Agency will need to secure hygiene improvements throughout the food chain by a variety of methods. It will be for the Agency itself to determine the best strategy for achieving this, taking account of the best available expert advice. .

(t)  Full observance of basic and well-established hygiene rules by caterers and domestic consumers would slash the incidence of food poisoning in this country. However, particularly bearing in mind the fact that many food products are eaten raw or purchased already cooked the onus to prevent incidents of food poisoning must not be placed solely upon the consumer. As the Chairman of the ACMSF has said: "ordinary household and small caterer hygiene cannot be expected to deal on all occasions with the unacceptable incidence of food pathogens found in the output of animal production and spread further in slaughter and primary butchery of carcasses" (paragraph 55).

The Government accepts this point and will continue to promote the importance of the basic rules of food hygiene in food preparation, and the reduction of the prevalence of pathogens throughout the food chain.

HACCP

(u)  The full implementation of HACCP will not, of itself, rid the food chain of microbiological hazards, but it will make a significant contribution to food safety, in conjunction with adequate training of food business managers and food handlers. We also consider that the sixth and seventh stages of HACCP should be made mandatory legal requirements. Nevertheless, the focus of HACCP on the processes adopted by individual businesses does not obviate the need for measurement of levels of microbiological contamination of businesses' raw material inputs and processed outputs, and for a co-ordinated approach to the reduction of pathogens throughout the food chain as a whole (paragraph 59).

The Government accepts the need to make the sixth and seventh principles of HACCP mandatory requirements and is pursuing this in current negotiations over amendments to the EU General Food Hygiene Directive. In the meantime, draft Regulations were issued for consultation on 23 February which would require the introduction of hazard management systems based on all 7 principles of HACCP in butchers' shops.

The application of HACCP principles will indicate the extent to which the microbiological status of raw material and processed outputs needs to be monitored. End product testing on its own cannot ensure microbiological safety.

The Government accepts the need to reduce the prevalence of pathogens throughout the food chain as far as is reasonably achievable.

Agricultural and farming practice

(v)  Definitive information is needed on what the current pathogenic levels are in animals destined for food production and the potential for reduction associated with different intervention strategies. This is a task which the Food Standards Agency will need to address urgently (paragraph 60).

The White Paper proposes that on-farm surveillance will be co-ordinated by a joint FSA/ Agriculture Departments Committee, and it is envisaged that the current programme of such surveillance will be expanded in order to obtain a better understanding of the prevalence of pathogens on farm. The Government recognises that the results of such surveillance will be required to inform policy initiatives.

(w)  We believe that MAFF, together with the Food Standards Agency, will need to review the relationship between modern farming practices and food safety, once the basic research on carriage of pathogens in livestock has been carried out. While we do not consider the licensing of livestock producers to be necessary, we are in favour of the promotion of HACCP principles within the farming industry. It is important to remember that extensive and intensive livestock production methods, in food safety terms, both raise their own specific problems which the FSA and MAFF must address on their merits (paragraph 61).

The Government agrees that the reduction of pathogens on farm should be an important objective, and the promotion of HACCP principles is part of this. This objective is a priority for MAFF, and is already being taken forward through the development of codes of practice. The Agency will also give it a high priority, as the White Paper indicates clearly.

Slaughter and primary processing

(x)  It is essential to have sound objective measurements of the value of the meat hygiene inspection process, so that judgements can be made about the proportionality of the slaughterhouse inspection regime to the food safety risks involved. In the context of this and other inquiries, we are particularly concerned about the poor-quality "tail" of slaughterhouses with low HAS scores which exists in this country. We recommend changes to the licensing system for slaughterhouses to make it far more difficult for slaughterhouses with unsatisfactory hygiene levels to operate, by banning individuals with a record of running unhygienic establishments from gaining or retaining licences. This should punish the guilty without imposing undue regulation on well-run smaller slaughterhouses (paragraph 63).

The Government shares the Committee's concerns about slaughterhouses with poor hygiene standards. The Government has made it clear to the industry that meat must be produced to high standards, and that those plant operators which do not follow acceptable hygiene routines and practices in the production of meat will have their operating licences revoked. The Meat Hygiene Service (MHS) has been instructed to ensure that the meat hygiene regulations are enforced rigorously, that poor practices are eliminated, that no meat is health marked if it shows any signs of faecal contamination, and that veterinary supervision is increased in slaughterhouses with low Hygiene Assessment System (HAS) scores. Measurable improvements have already been achieved in respect of abattoir hygiene standards, and the number of slaughterhouses in Great Britain with a HAS score of more than 65 has risen from 61% in April 1997 to just over 94% by the end of March 1998. Several slaughterhouses have had their operating licences revoked on the grounds of unacceptable hygiene standards.

The Government accepts, however, that more remains to be done and will continue to push the industry to further improvements and the elimination of bad practices. In addition, the MHS has been given a further set of rigorous operational targets for 1998/99 aimed at continuing to drive up hygiene standards in British slaughterhouses.

The Government notes the Committee's recommendation for changes in the slaughterhouse licensing system which it will consider together with other possible changes in meat hygiene legislation.

---

---

Prepared 2 July 1998