Specialist
Cheesemaking
Recommendation 22: We deplore the unimaginative
and damaging prejudice that the very existence of small food producers
such as cheesemakers is inherently a threat to public health and
look to Ministers in MAFF and the Department of Health, and to
the new Food Standards Agency, to combat such attitudes with vigour
and urge the Agency to follow the example of MAFF and appoint
an official to act as liaison with the industry (paragraph 65).
Response
33. These are serious allegations which the Government
does not accept. There is no such prejudice against small food
producers. Food safety can be assured by enterprises of any size,
and cheesemaking is no exception.
34. The principal food safety issue in respect of
cheese made with unpasteurised milk is that the cheesemaking process
cannot be relied upon to destroy any pathogens that might be present
in the unpasteurised milk used as raw material. Thus it is important
to avoid contamination of the milk, e.g. by bovine faeces, during
milking. It follows that hygiene standards in the production of
unpasteurised cheese, both of milk used as raw material and the
cheese itself, must be scrupulous.
35. Far from holding damaging prejudice against small
cheesemakers, the Government has in fact given more assistance
to raise hygiene standards in the small cheesemaking sector than
in any other part of the food manufacturing industry. A campaign
to promote good hygiene practice in the production of dairy products
on farms under which cheesemakers can obtain free advice began
in February 1997, and is on-going. The Specialist Cheesemakers'
Code of Best Practice was funded by the Department of Health,
and produced with advice from both DH and MAFF. The latest initiative
is a further £50,000 programme to increase food safety awareness
among small cheesemakers, and help them meet the legal requirements
for food safety management systems based on hazard analysis.
36. The Food Standards Agency will make appointments
as it considers appropriate. However, the official seconded to
the Specialist Cheesemakers' Association by MAFF was not specifically
appointed to act in a liaison capacity with the industry. The
Specialist Cheesemakers' Association are free to give the individual
concerned any duties it wishes.
37. When the Food Standards Agency is established,
the responsibility for the sponsorship of the cheesemaking industry
will remain with MAFF.
Recommendation 23: We recommend that the Government,
including MAFF and the Department of Health, prepare a cross-departmental
audit of all regulations bearing on the specialist cheesemaking
sector to ensure that they are equitable and necessary. We further
recommend that the implementation of the new regulations on dairy
hygiene be delayed until there is convincing proof of the relevant
scientific basis and the consumer benefits of the new microbiological
standards (paragraph 65).
Response
38. On the first recommendation, the Government
does not accept that a case for such a review has been made. The
evidence reveals burdens in the following four areas.
Traceability
(i) It would appear that the burden described (Q589
- 597) relates largely to the traceability requirements of cheese
buyers rather than to the requirements of the legislation or of
those who enforce it. Traceability is not a legal requirement,
except for the need to apply a health mark to the product comprising
the approval number of the dairy establishment.
(ii) The law requires reasonable and practicable
record keeping by operators within a food safety management system.
The scale and nature of the operations will determine the extent
of documentation necessary, and guidance to the enforcement authorities
makes this clear.
Testing of batches of cheese
(iii) A further burden was said to be the frequency
of testing required. The implications of Q611 are first that it
is possible to prove that a batch of cheese is clean (presumably
meaning uncontaminated) by testing, and second that the legislation
requires a particular level of testing.
(iv) On the first point, the Opinion of the Scientific
Committee on Veterinary Matters Relating to Public Health on the
evaluation of microbiological criteria for food products of animal
origin for human consumption (cited by the Specialist Cheesemakers'
Association in their Supplementary Memorandum) states explicitly
that, "microbiological testing of end product can never assure
the safety of a food, even when large numbers of samples without
positives are tested". That is why the emphasis in the regulations
is on the control of hazards, rather than on any specific testing
regime.
(v) On the second, neither the legislation nor the
guidance issued under it requires any particular level of testing
of cheese. The regulations do envisage that sampling programmes
should be drawn up within a hazard analysis approach. It is most
unlikely that enforcement authorities would require testing of
each batch. It might be, however, that the purchaser of the cheese
requires a certain level of testing as part of a commercial arrangement.
Dairy Product (Hygiene) Regulations 1995
(vi) These Regulations are currently under review.
The draft replacement regulations were said to be even more onerous
(Q51). They would continue to implement the requirements of European
legislation. There is very little change proposed from the existing
law. The only changes that would affect cheesemakers are the introduction
of a somatic cell count limit for buffaloes' milk, and the removal
of the derogation from the microbiological criteria for dairy
products (including cheeses) with traditional characteristics.
(vii) The Government has proposed this derogation
be removed because there is no basis in European law for its continuation.
MAFF has trawled the industry twice, and is not aware of any maker
of cheeses with traditional characteristics (as defined in the
Milk Hygiene Directive, 92/46) who needs this derogation to manufacture
their cheese. Further, no such need has so far come to light in
the public consultation on the draft regulations. This is consistent
with the comment in the Supplementary Memorandum supplied by the
Specialist Cheesemakers' Association that the criteria are not
hard for cheesemakers to meet.
(viii) Even if this derogation were to be removed,
it would still be open to cheesemakers to apply for microbiological
derogations for products with traditional characteristics under
Council Directive 92/46 on dairy product hygiene. The purpose
of such derogations would be to permit the production of cheeses
that cannot meet the criteria laid down in the legislation, and
which therefore would not be able to be produced if a derogation
were not granted. It is not the purpose of the derogations to
allow the sale of cheese that, exceptionally, has breached the
criteria.
Ducketts Cheese Case
(ix) The Emergency Control Order referred to by the
Specialist Cheesemakers' Association is a power vested in Ministers
under Section 13 of the Food Safety Act 1990. The purpose of this
power is to protect the public by ensuring that food that may
be contaminated is withdrawn from sale. Following the Judicial
Review of the exercise of this power in the case in question,
the Department of Health's actions were vindicated. The High Court
found that the Department of Health was entitled to conclude that,
- Duckett's cheese was unsafe; and
- since the source and period of contamination
was unknown, and the destination of its distribution unknown,
the risk of injury was imminent; and
- bearing in mind different food authorities would
act with different degrees of urgency, and could not be compelled
to act, Section 13 was the proportionate means for providing quick
and effective protection.
(x) On the second recommendation, the opinion
of the EU Scientific Committee mentioned in evidence (Q612 and
Q51) refers to the Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Veterinary
Matters Relating to Public Health on the evaluation of microbiological
criteria for food products of animal origin for human consumption,
23 September 1999. It applies to all microbiological criteria,
and is not specific to cheese. It has no bearing on the implementation
of microbiological criteria in existing hygiene law, or on the
granting of derogations from microbiological criteria for cheeses
with traditional characteristics, which is a matter of bringing
UK legislation in line with European law. This advice from the
Scientific Committee on Veterinary Matters Relating to Public
Health is timely because the Commission is now able to take these
conclusions into account before making its proposal for the consolidation
of all hygiene directives as mentioned above. The debate on the
relevance of microbiological criteria to food safety has been
on-going internationally for years, and this report covers much
of the ground, although in the context of European legislation.
(xi) The Government has yet to decide on the outcome
of the public consultation on the draft Dairy Product (Hygiene)
Regulations. There will be an opportunity to examine all of the
provisions of the legislation when the Milk Hygiene Directive,
from which this legislation derives, is revised as a part of the
consolidation of all food hygiene legislation. The opinion of
the Scientific Committee on Veterinary Matters Relating to Public
Health is intended to inform this consolidation exercise. A Commission
proposal is expected later in the year.