Examination of witnesses (Questions 1
- 19)
THURSDAY 16 MARCH 2000
PROFESSOR SIR
JOHN KREBS
and MR GEOFFREY
PODGER
Chairman
1. Sir John and Mr
Podger, welcome to the Committee. This is a Joint Committee of
Agriculture and Health. I must not call this a confirmatory hearing
because otherwise I shall run into constitutionally deep waters.
The purpose, your having been appointed to the Food Standards
Agency, is to find out what you think about it and how you propose
to go about it, so it is a conversation rather than an interrogation.
We have questions we obviously want to raise with you but we hope
that things will flow fairly easily so that we get a sense of
where your priorities are and where you are coming from and a
feel for how the new Agency is going to take off. Perhaps I can
begin by suggesting one or two little areas you might wish to
cover in a few introductory remarks. The obvious one is how you
are going to run it, how you respond to those who say that you
are a zoologist, not a food scientist,—I think it is greatly
to be blessed that you are not a food scientist but that is a
personal remark which I suppose I am not supposed to make either—and
what your priorities are. What does "standards" mean?
What about "Food Standards Agency"? It is a funny sort
of title. What does it mean, for heaven's sake? What is your understanding
of the precautionary principle which we are all frightfully enamoured
with? What does it mean? How do you think you should be judged
when you have been there long enough to be judged? That is a little
clutch of introductory questions.
(Professor Sir John Krebs) Have you got an hour, did
you say, for me to make comments?
2. We want to get you out in an hour and a half
if we can possibly manage it, Sir John. The Committee have been
up until about four this morning combating terrorism.
(Professor Sir John Krebs) Thank you very much, Chairman.
May I kick off with a few remarks? I will try to touch on some
of the points that you raised and perhaps some of them will come
up during the conversation. First of all, I should preface all
of this by saying that of course the Agency has not yet come into
being. My Board has not yet formally met, so it may turn out that
some of the questions you want to put to me I will have to give
the answer, "We do not yet have a view because we do not
yet exist". I just wanted to flag that up to avoid future
disappointment. I have however held two informal discussions with
the Board, so some of our ideas are beginning to take shape. What
I can tell you at this point is that the Board and the staff of
the future Agency are strongly committed to three principal values
which will be our guiding principles, namely to put the consumer
first, to operate in a way that is open and accessible, and to
be an independent voice. I could explain a little bit more about
what those mean if you would like me to.
3. I think they are likely to come up in the
conversation.
(Professor Sir John Krebs) They probably are. As far
as my personal role is concerned and, as you point out, there
are those who have questioned whether a scientist or a zoologist
is an appropriate person to run the Agency, when I was asked that
back in January I made a number of comments. One is that clearly
I am not coming with baggage from any particular sector, not from
the industry, not from any particular lobby group, nor from the
nutrition/academic community that have a particular point of view.
I think that impartiality and lack of baggage are a benefit rather
than a disbenefit. Looking more positively at my own personal
skills, a lot of the technical aspects of assessment of food safety
and standards are really about assessing scientific evidence and
the relationship between scientific evidence and policy, and that
is an area that I have had a lot of experience of in my past.
As far as our priorities are concerned, this is an area where
I have to say that it is early days, the Board has not yet formally
met, and one of the first tasks of the Board will be to establish
its priorities and to publish those, so I have to say "watch
this space" for that. As regards what does the term "food
standards" mean, Geoffrey Podger and I have had various debates,
if not arguments about this. Geoffrey feels it is unfortunate
that we should have got the name "standards", but it
is clear to me that our remit is to protect the health of the
public in relation to food, so food safety is clearly a top priority,
but also we have a very important role in making sure that consumers
have appropriate information to make informed choices about food
through labelling, through dissemination of information and, as
I say, supporting consumer choice. I see the word "standards"
as it is given to us encompassing both the consumer protection
food safety aspect and the consumer choice, informed choice, through
better labelling, through better information as well, so I would
see it as embracing both of those. The last point you mentioned
was the precautionary principle. You may want to come back to
this in more detail later. I come in my background from the environmental
area and of course the precautionary principle has been used for
some time in relation to environmental issues. In relation to
food it is less well developed, as I am sure you are aware. What
I would say at this point is that we will certainly be wanting
to take a precautionary approach but as yet the precautionary
principle has not been defined in a way sufficient that we can
translate it into an operational process for food issues. That
is something we will be working on in relation to the European
Commission's development of the statement on the precautionary
principle. I think that is all I want to say by way of introduction.
4. One final point I asked was what is the means
by which we can judge your performance? We know broadly how we
can judge a school because that is another body which talks about
standards in its title. How do we judge your standards?
(Professor Sir John Krebs) I want us to publish very
early on a set of performance indicators. Those indicators will
really be of three kinds. They will be indicators of process,
measurement of how good we are at being open, how good we are
at responding and being accessible to the public and so on. There
will be indicators that relate to outputs, things where we have
produced a positive or defined measurable output, and in the longer
term there will be indicators of outcomes. I think the outcomes
will not appear immediately because if you are going to change
something about food safety or food standards that is going to
be a process that will take some time to achieve. One other class
of indicator or outcome which will be very important to us, and
again you may wish to come back to this, is how the public see
us. It is very important that we measure how we are viewed by
people and we intend to do that through attitude surveys, starting
with an immediate attitude survey right now which is being carried
out as we speak, what do people know of the Food Standards Agency,
what do they expect of it, what do they think of it, what is their
estimation of its quality and value. We will be monitoring that
measuring ourselves in that domain as time goes by and we will
be making all of that information public.
5. Thank you very much. You will note that we
have already managed to go about eight minutes without mentioning
GM foods, which is normally a record in either of these two Committees,
I suspect.
(Professor Sir John Krebs) I did say to Geoffrey Podger
that you probably would not get very far without mentioning it.
Chairman: When we get to the precautionary principle
then obviously GM foods will loom a little bit larger in our conversation.
Mr Hinchliffe
6. May I and my Health Committee colleagues
here express our appreciation to both of you for coming to this
hearing. It is a particular pleasure to meet Professor Krebs.
If I had five pounds for every letter I have dealt with on a previous
report that you have produced I would be a very rich man. You
emphasise putting the consumer first in your opening statement.
You said that the exercise that you are about to embark upon is
related to how you are viewed by people. You may be aware of a
letter sent by the Consumers' Association to the Secretary of
State in fairly blunt terms about how they view the Agency at
this stage and I will quote from the letter to the Secretary of
State from Sheila McKechnie, the Director of the Consumers' Association.
She said: "We were promised a serious Board with a balance
of relevant food-related skills and experience that could help
the Agency work to improve food safety and standards and start
to regain consumer confidence. In reality we have a Board made
up of the `great and the good' with a distinct lack of food and
consumer expertise. Consumers need a Board that places their interests
and concerns at its heart. The appointment of a Board clearly
failing to represent consumer interests is not a good start."
She goes on to say: "The announcement of the Food Standards
Agency Board appointments will do nothing to end the conflict
of interest between protecting consumers and promoting the food
industry that has dominated UK food policy for far too long."
How do you respond to that?
(Professor Sir John Krebs) Of course I did not appoint
the Board.
7. I appreciate that.
(Professor Sir John Krebs) That was the task of the
Secretary of State for Health and the ministers in the devolved
administrations. All the Board members were appointed for their
individual properties and skills and capabilities rather than
to represent any particular sectoral interest. Whether they are
"the great and the good"—I do not think Carol
Bailey, who is a farmer's wife from Cheshire, would call herself
"the great and the good". She is an extremely effective
individual and will bring a very strong impartial view. I think
this question about consumers is one that one needs to look at
a little bit further. We are all consumers. We all go and buy
things and have views as consumers. I am a consumer; you are a
consumer; everybody else in the room is. Within that fact, that
everybody in the country is a consumer, there are certain lobby
groups that represent probably a rather specialised sector of
consumers, generally middle-class, relatively well off. What I
think is very important for us as the Food Standards Agency is
to get to the class of consumers who are less privileged, less
well off.
8. How are you going to do that? That is a very
important point. You could argue that the Consumers' Association
perhaps reflects one class of consumer. I am not arguing with
that; some people would do. How do you get to the kind of people
you have just described?
(Professor Sir John Krebs) We have not finally decided
how we are going to do that. There are existing structures and
mechanisms that have contact, for example, with inner city sink
estates. We want to work with those existing mechanisms to try
and make contact and to try and make contact in a way that relates
to the frame of reference that those consumers are used to. There
are certain kinds of language that we might be tempted to use
as privileged, relatively well off middle-class citizens that
are not necessarily the frames of reference and the language that
are understood by and relate to the lives of the kinds of consumers
I am talking about. Without being specific I would say that it
is important we use the right language, the right frame of reference
and the right mechanisms to get to the people, building on what
already exists through various other social initiatives. To round
off my response to Sheila McKechnie, my view is partly that she
would say that, wouldn't she, because none of her Council is on
my Board.
9. So you think she has got a grievance here?
(Professor Sir John Krebs) I do not think that diminishes
the capacity of my Board to represent the interests of the consumer.
They are all consumers, they are all people chosen for their individual
skills and individual talents that they bring. I can assure you
from the two informal meetings I have had with them that there
will be no domination of any particular sectoral interest.
10. You have made reference previously to meeting
with the various stakeholders. I am interested in how you achieve
a balance between the interests of all these stakeholders which
may well lead, as some have expressed, to a conflict of interests
between the consumer, the producer and in particular the public
health interest, which is where, as the Health Committee, we are
particularly concerned. How do you see yourselves achieving that
balance?
(Professor Sir John Krebs) Certainly we want to listen
to all the stakeholders. It is very important we engage in discussions
and part of our philosophy and operation of openness is to be
accessible. It is not simply to tell people but also to listen
and engage. Where we see conflicts of interest, say, between what
the industry might be telling us and what the consumer groups
might be telling us, we relate to our core values, one of which,
as I have already said, is to put the consumer first. I do not
think that that necessarily is at odds with what industry wants.
From my conversations so far with the retail industry, with the
meat industry, when I say, "Look: my job is to put the consumer
first", they say, "Well, John, that is our job as well."
I therefore believe there is not necessarily a conflict of interest.
It is in the interests of the food industry throughout the food
chain, from the primary producers through to the caterers and
retail outlets, to have high quality food, highly respected safety
and highly respected standards for United Kingdom food. It is
good for the home market, good for export markets. Although we
may hear different arguments coming to us I do not envisage there
being all the time huge stand-offs. I think it is a matter of
demonstrating that we can move to a win-win situation. Where there
are considerations coming from different points of view, my philosophy
and that of my Board will be to put the consumer first.
Mr Marsden
11. You talk about the members of the Board
being consumers. Is it not a little bit like saying, for instance,
that if there was an oil catastrophe off the coast of Britain
and millions of gallons of oil were being spilled from a supertanker,
you set up an inquiry and fill it with people from the oil industry,
oil executives, and say, "Yes, but they fill up their cars
with petrol and they take walks in the countryside. Therefore
they know what the problems are"?
(Professor Sir John Krebs) No, because the Board is
not dominated by people from the food industry. There are four
members out of the 12 on the Board (and in addition to the 12
there is the Deputy Chairman, Suzi Leather, and myself) who have
a background in the food industry or the food-related industry.
There are two people from a farming background, Vernon Sankey,
who was formerly Chief Executive of Reckitt & Colman, and
Robert Rees, who is a restaurateur. There is not a domination,
it is not a group of industry people. There are people with industry
experience but they are coming as impartial individuals. What
they bring to the Board is knowledge and expertise and background.
As far as getting more particular consumer lobby group points
of view is concerned, I want to work very closely with the Consumers
Association. I think it is very important that they help us to
achieve their aspirations for consumers as well as achieving our
own aspirations for consumers. It is an important point to say
that the expertise upon which we draw is not simply the expertise
of the Board. Scientifically of course we have the expert committees,
we have advisers, but more broadly we will be seeking consultation
with consumer groups and other interest groups out there in the
community who can help us.
12. I welcome what you are saying about reaching
out to consumers and in particular those that are disadvantaged
and may not be particularly well represented at the moment, but
I noted that when you were talking about performance indicators
you tagged on the bottom, "We should get some views from
the consumers as well as the outcomes and processes and so on",
which is a little bit worrying. You were talking about consumer
perceptions of the FSA rather than consumer perceptions of food
safety. How do you intend to draw a base line now and say what
do consumers perceive as being safe, how do you define that, where
are the issues and concerns they have, in order for you to work
out if you are succeeding in moving forward on that issue?
(Professor Sir John Krebs) I apologise; I did not
fully sketch the kind of attitude survey that we are working on.
It is partly asking people whether they think that we are doing
a good job, but it is also asking people what they think are important
food issues. I do not know whether Geoffrey would like to add
to that.
(Mr Podger) Absolutely. It has always been our intention
to go down both paths. It is essential to discover what the concerns
of people are so that we can be sure that we are addressing them.
I think one must be honest: there is always a danger that one
may become drawn into the agendas of lobby groups only to discover
later on that actually the mass of people have other concerns
which one may be neglecting. We are also very conscious of the
fact that as a body we are being set up to try and improve public
confidence in the national food safety arrangements and that is
why we do lay stress on also doing that part of the survey.
Mr Burns
13. Sir John, you stressed to colleagues of
mine in your introductory remarks the importance of the consumer.
Looking at the Board, and I accept that you have not appointed
the Board, there are a lot of eminent people with excellent qualifications
in health, in the food industry itself, whether it is agriculture
or whatever, and also in semi-retail outlets. What I do not understand
is, given the emphasis on consumers, why there is not somebody,
not necessarily from the Consumers' Association but a recognised
champion of the consumer point of view on the Board. Do you think
it is disappointing that there is the Chairman of the Commission
for Racial Equality, who was the Chief Executive of Haringey,
the Chief Executive of Childline who was a former Director of
Social Services? I accept the point that you have made, that it
is important, particularly in poorer, less well off, socially
deprived areas, to have that area of the equation properly represented
and that is right, but to have two people who have a background
which one could argue fairly conclusively are experienced in that
area but no-one specifically to represent consumers seems to me
to be slightly perverse. Are you disappointed that there is not
a direct consumer representative given your emphasis on the need
to protect and look after the interests of the consumer?
(Professor Sir John Krebs) No, I am not, because the
Deputy Chairman, Suzi Leather, comes from a consumer background,
and she very specifically brings that expertise to the Board,
having worked in consumer organisations and with consumer groups
over many years.
14. What is her background, apart from being
a consumer representative on the Board of Assured British Meat?
Everything else listed in her CV here suggests bodies like yours.
(Mr Podger) Could I come in at that point in defence
of my Deputy Chairman? Suzi Leather has a long background in food
campaigning. She was very active indeed in a variety of discussions
on food issues with the Ministry of Agriculture; she is very well
known in this field.
15. In her role as what?
(Mr Podger) As a consumer representative. She was
on the Food Advisory Committee at one stage. She has engaged in
a large number of roles. Also, she has been active in the public
health field in relation to food. That has also been a long-standing
interest of hers, and in relation to the interests of communities
on low incomes in relation to food, another area where she has
put a lot of effort.
16. What board did you say she had been on?
(Mr Podger) She was either on the Consumer Panel at
one stage—
17. Of what?
(Mr Podger) The Consumer Panel of MAFF, the Ministry
of Agriculture.
Chairman: Mr Burns, I think you can get a cup
of coffee afterwards and probably sort this out very amicably.
Mr Burns
18. It was not her I was referring to. Just
to remind you very briefly, my question was, is it not disappointing
that there is no direct consumer representative on the Board when
there are two people from a local government background and maybe
the better balance would have been to have one consumer representative
and one with a background from an inner city local authority area?
(Professor Sir John Krebs) I am saying that we do
have a consumer representative in the Deputy Chairman. As to whether
I am disappointed in the composition of the Board, I emphasised
that the Board members were appointed as individuals and I am
absolutely delighted with the quality of the individuals that
I am going to be working with.
19. We would expect you to say that.
(Professor Sir John Krebs) You would expect me to
say it but it happens to be true.
|
