Examination of Witnesses (Questions 120
- 125)
WEDNESDAY 29 NOVEMBER 2000
PROFESSOR SIR
JOHN KREBS
AND MR
GEOFFREY PODGER
Chairman
120. The Agriculture Committee intends to do
an inquiry into the research conclusions or implications of the
Phillips Report and into the way research is proceeding. We may
well see each other again. How do you liaise with ministers? Who
talks to who?
(Professor Sir John Krebs) I have regular meetings
with Gisela Stuart in the Department of Health who is the junior
minister with accountability for the FSA in Parliament. In the
devolved authorities, I meet or correspond with the health ministers,
Bairbre de Brun in Belfast and Susan Deacon in Scotland and Jane
Hutt in Cardiff. I also meet fairly regularly with ministers in
MAFF, either because we have particular items to discuss or just
generally to keep in touch. I think those would be the main regular
ministerial contacts that I have. They are in the form of keeping
in contact so that they know where we are moving and I know the
issues that are on their minds.
121. When you provide advice to ministers, do
ministers receive that advice first of all in draft form which
is discussed with them and then may subsequently be revised?
(Professor Sir John Krebs) Not normally. We would
just submit advice in a written form and generally, as a matter
of normal practice, our advice is available on our website. The
advice may be strictly in the form that it went to the minister
or it may be in a slightly recast form, to put it in a broader
context so that the public can understand what was going on.
122. As far as you are aware, all advice has
been published either by you or by the relevant minister?
(Professor Sir John Krebs) By us on our website.
(Mr Podger) We are not aware of the substance of any
advice we are offered which is not publicly available. That is
the test we apply. We would not want to get into a position where
the substance of our advice was not publicly available.
123. You are independent and we have all made
a great virtue of your independence but nonetheless your main
interlocutory has to be the government. The actual processes of
transmission you must be anxious to ensure are very transparent.
Otherwise, the whole purpose of the exercise becomes rather cloudy.
(Professor Sir John Krebs) Yes.
124. Finally, right at the very start you said
that your job is to tee up to ministers the advice; that they
may well have to then take a decision as to whether they accept
it or not, or there may be other factors they have to balance.
I suppose the key issue on something like implications of advice
of other relevance—for example, the read over of advice
about beef products and possible implications for trade in sheep
and lamb, must be something ministers have to take into consideration.
You have from time to time been accused of drifting into the political
arena and you have caused a great deal of what we in Yorkshire
call how's your father with some remarks about organic. Where
do you draw the line? Do you have a mentor who says, "Hang
on, John. Let's be careful on this one"?
(Professor Sir John Krebs) I am accused variously
of drifting too much into the political arena and behaving too
much like a pointy headed scientist, so it is hard to know which
bit I am getting wrong. Perhaps both. To touch very briefly on
the specifics of the organic statement we made, it was sometimes
represented as an attack on organic food and a statement that
the Food Standard Agency's view was that organic food was bad.
It was not that at all. It was simply a summary of what is the
current state of scientific knowledge about the health benefits
of organic food. Our summary did not really differ from the views
of the Consumer Association, from the British Nutrition Foundation
who looked at it, from the Advertising Standards Authority who,
as you know, looked at it.
125. The RASE has just published a compilation.
They brought together some of the leading scientists to examine
the claims stacked against conventional and integrated farming.
(Professor Sir John Krebs) I would like to see that.
We did not touch on the environmental side, whether there are
potential benefits from a move away from traditional, intensive
practice. You ask me do I have a mentor to guide me as to where
to position myself. I have a variety of colleagues with whom I
discuss things, not least the members of the board who are very
outspoken and discipline me on a regular basis.
Chairman: Since we are now drawing up our report
on organics, we expect that to be the definitive document. Sir
John and Mr Podger, thank you very much indeed. We have had a
very long session. It has been a very productive session. As always,
it has been what I prefer, a conversation more than a confrontation.
I suspect we will be seeing each other again. We look forward
to that.
| 
