Memorandum submitted by the Department
for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (F14)
SUMMARY
1. For very many years the UK has imposed
import restrictions on meat and other products of animal origin
from third countries. These rules apply to commercial consignments
and to imports for personal consumption. At first under national
legislation and subsequently under EU rules, these controls have
provided an effective barrier and the country remained free of
exotic disease. After a 20-year period of such freedom the country
was faced with outbreaks of Classical Swine Fever in 2000 and
Foot and Mouth disease (FMD) in 2001. The exact origins of these
outbreaks are unknown, but it is considered that the most likely
route is that the virus was imported into this country through
an animal product, probably meat.
2. Whilst meat or animal products imported
through legal channels remain a theoretically possible source
of infection, the likelihood is that an illicit consignment of
meat or animal products from a country with endemic FMD would
pose the greater risk of introducing infection. In recognition
of the need to improve our ability to prevent and detect illegal
imports early in the outbreak DEFRA, in consultation with other
relevant government departments and agencies increased its effort
to tackle the problem of illegal imports. This work has gained
momentum since the focus of activity shifted from fighting the
disease itself to preventing future outbreaks, leading up to the
high level Forum on illegal imports chaired by the Secretary of
State.
3. The Forum on 21 March 2002 was attended
by leaders of farming, food, trade, rural, environmental and consumer
bodies and, following further discussions resulted in the Action
Plan published on 28 March. The Action Plan commits the Government
to a range of measures including a quantitative risk analysis,
improved publicity and practical measures. The Action Plan covers
imports from third countries of plants and plant products as well
as animal products. Different elements of the Action Plan may
be taken forward over different time-scales and the results of
one may require review and refinement of an earlier action. This
iterative process will help to define control arrangements that
are appropriate to the UK and take account of developments at
the European level. The Department has created a new unit of 12
posts, supported by specialist colleagues, to take forward its
implementation taking account of the evidence and the risk assessment
and in accordance with the principles of proportionality and openness.
We are committed to acting in full discussion at all stages with
stakeholders.
4. The Department recognises the concern
of farmers in particular that strict controls on their activities
designed to prevent the spread of disease should be accompanied
by equally effective measures to prevent disease from entering
the country. It recognises that there is more to do in this area
and that action has to be taken within a wider framework of measures,
in this country and within the EU, to prevent and control outbreaks
of disease. As part of the Action Plan we are paying close attention
to controls and operating procedures in other countries. It is
recognised by all countries that it is not a simple matter to
establish appropriate and proportionate controls to prevent the
entry of disease, that no controls can be 100 per cent guaranteed
to exclude disease and separate controls that must be maintained
within each country to prevent the spread of disease.
BACKGROUND: ROLES,
RESPONSIBILITIES AND
RULES
Roles and responsibilities
5. The roles and responsibilities of the
Government Departments and enforcement agencies and concerned
with this area are as follows:
Departments
DEFRA is the lead department for animal and plant
health and protection of wildlife through regulation in trade
in endangered species. The Department incorporates the State Veterinary
Service and the Plant Health and Seeds Inspectorate.
Food Standards Agency leads on food safety relating
to imports of animal and plant products. The FSA oversees local
and port health authorities to ensure that they undertake their
duties to enforce food safety legislation.
Enforcement
Local/Port Health Authorities are responsible
for enforcing the law requiring veterinary checks on products
of animal origin, including measures to ensure that no products
evade such checks. They are also responsible for checks on properly
presented consignments entering the UK from third countries at
approved Border Inspection Posts (BIPs). Local Authorities (Environmental
Health and Trading Standards) are responsible for checks at retail
points and other establishments to ensure compliance with import
rules, food safety and labelling law.
State Veterinary Service (SVS) are responsible
for checks on live animals arriving at BIPs and for checks on
animal products not intended for human consumption where a BIP
is only authorised for products not for human consumption. The
SVS monitors standards at BIPs approved for products for human
consumption.
Plant Health and Seeds Inspectorate are responsible
for checking the plant health status of material imported from
outside of the EU.
HM Customs are responsible for ensuring that
animal products are not given clearance until all veterinary checks
have been satisfactorily completed; for documentary checks for
plant products. They are also the lead enforcement agency for
the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES).
Meat Hygiene Service carries out checks on imported
meat at cutting plants, including checks on specified risk material
(SRM).
6. Each Local/Port Health authority must
deploy its staff in accordance with the volume and nature of the
products involved, both to fulfil their obligations to carry out
the level of checks required by law and to carry out additional
checks for illegal imports. Some 196 local authority staff were
employed on import checking in November 2001 (97 Environmental
Health Officers, 48 Official Veterinary Surgeons and 51 support
staff).
Rules
7. The regime of controls, checks and enforcement
on imported animal and plant products is determined by the risk
they pose to the importing country. Different regimes apply in
respect of imports of animals, animal products, plants and plant
products.
8. Movement of animals between EU countries
and from third countries is strictly controlled and requires veterinary
inspection and certification in the country of origin and certain
veterinary checks on arrival. Animals from third countries may
only enter the EU through a Border Inspection Post (BIP) where
all animals are inspected.
9. Within the EU there is generally free
circulation of animal products between member states, although
restrictions may be imposed from time to time as a result of animal
disease in the country of origin. Products for personal use are
not restricted. Movement of some plants within the EU is subject
to a regime of checks and plant passports.
10. Commercial consignments of the majority
of animal products from third countries may only enter the EU
through a BIP and are subject to veterinary checks. The key requirements
of the veterinary checks regime applied to consignments of meat
and other animal products from third countries are:
— Pre-notification of all consignments.
— Presentation at an authorised BIP.
— 100 per cent documentary and identity
checks.
— Physical checks that depend on the
product and take account of risk (eg a minimum of 50 per cent
of poultry, game and honey and 20 per cent of beef and lamb consignments
must be checked).
— Import declarations will not be given
clearance by HM Customs until all veterinary checks are satisfactorily
completed.
11. Imports of plants from third countries
must be accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate issued by the
country of export, indicating that they have been subject to appropriate
risk mitigation measures in the country of origin and found free
of pests and diseases by inspection. Most consignments are notified
in advance by importers to facilitate clearance at the port or
airport and inspection at the place of destination. Consignments
that have not been pre-notified are held by Customs until arrangements
for inspection have been made.
12. Plant products do not currently have
to be pre-notified and may be imported through any port or airport.
Consignments must be accompanied by a full and accurate manifest
and may be subject to public health or plant health checks. Plant
products are subject to the EU Plant Health Directive and some
categories of plant material from third countries must be accompanied
by a phytosanitary certificate confirming official inspection
in the country of origin or despatch.
13. There has been considerable focus on
"personal imports" from third countries, that is small
consignments intended for personal consumption or use and which
are permitted by law. In summary, individuals may bring into the
UK from non-EU countries:
— 1 kg of meat cooked in a hermetically
sealed container;
— 1 kg of milk powder (from specified
countries only);
— 2 kg of fruit/raw vegetables*;
— 1 bouquet of cut flowers;
— 5 retail packets of seeds*;
— 2 kg of bulbs, corms, tubers and
rhizomes* **;
* not potatoes
** Euro-Mediterranean region only
14. Personal imports from third countries
within these permitted limits do not have to be reported to, or
checked by, enforcement officers. They may be identified during
checks and assessed for compliance with the law. Travellers who
have inadvertently exceeded their limits are encouraged to surrender
material in the Red Channel at Customs.
15. There has been considerable concern
expressed about imports of "bush meat". This term generally
means meat from wild animals, other than those traditionally regarded
as food animals in Europe. Personal imports of fresh meat from
any animal into the UK from a third country are prohibited. Where
bush meat derives from protected species it is also covered by
controls in accordance with the Convention on Trade in Endangered
Species (CITES) an international agreement restricting trade in
endangered species, their products or derivatives.
16. Any animal, plant, animal or plant product
from a third country that enters the UK by any route that does
not comply with these controls and restrictions is an illegal
import. The Government's programme is aimed at improving prevention
and detection of illegal imports to reduce outbreaks of disease
that may be linked to imports. The quantitative risk assessment
that commenced in March 2002 is intended to identify the risk
of importing disease within each of the enforcement regimes and
thereby to assist in targeting enforcement action (for example
it may be appropriate to increase checks on consignments of products
of non-animal origin if they are identified as a route for commercial
scale illegal imports of meat).
17. In the case of the FMD outbreak in 2001
there are essentially four possible routes by which disease could
have entered the country, bearing in mind that to present a risk
the virus must enter the country in a viable state and a minimum
infectious dose must reach a susceptible animal. Those routes
were:
— a legal consignment of meat from
a country with FMD (these imports are subject to strict veterinary
requirements to ensure that the meat poses no risk of carrying
the disease);
— illegal commercial scale imports;
— ship or airline waste not disposed
of in accordance with statutory requirements.
18. The perception of risk and the actual
risk posed by these likely routes may be very different. Legal
commercial consignments remain a theoretical source of infection,
but the production requirements and the degree of checks involved
makes this extremely unlikely. Personal imports, whether within
or over the legal limit are more likely to be used and disposed
of in domestic waste and disposed of by landfill or incineration,
although it is recognised that there is a risk that some larger
illegal consignments might be sold to the restaurant trade and
be disposed of as catering waste. Illegal consignments on a commercial
scale destined for catering and restaurants would present the
greatest risk. For these consignments to enter the country they
must either circumvent checks by being landed outside of the BIP
procedures or be deliberately concealed or described as other
goods. Since 1973 catering waste has been subject to requirements
for cooking to destroy infectious agents before feeding to livestock.
Feeding waste food is now banned.
ACTION AND
ACHIEVEMENTS (FEBRUARY
2001—MARCH 2002)
19. From soon after the beginning of the
outbreak, priority was given to raising public awareness of our
import rules in third countries and at ports and airports; and
strengthening co-ordination, intelligence gathering and information
sharing between the various enforcement agencies.
20. It was identified early in the FMD outbreak
that there was a deficiency of data about the extent of the potential
problem of illegal imports, while information obtained by the
enforcement agencies was not collected centrally. A protocol was
put in place in May 2001 between enforcement agencies for data
sharing on illegal animal product seizures, with information being
provided to DEFRA. In August 2001 the results of a simple risk
assessment of this data (based on average quantities seized, taking
into account the animal diseases present in the country of origin)
were produced, ranking the countries concerned in order of greatest
risk (for both commercial and personal imports). This ranked list
of countries was made available to enforcement officers to help
them to target their operations against illegal imports.
21. This intelligence sharing agreement
also provided the basis for a review to assess the benefits of
intelligence sharing and what additional action might be taken.
On the basis of that agreement the illegal Animal Product Seizures
(ILAPS) database was established within DEFRA. This was the first
time a database was provided to hold centralised information from
all authorities. Action is continuing to seek to improve this
system to ensure that it has the fullest and most accurate information
available to assist in targeting anti-smuggling measures.
22. The Association of Port Health Authorities
and HM Customs undertook a number of joint exercises to examine
personal baggage at airports. The ILAPS database records that
between 1 April 2001 and 7 May 2002 there were at least 942 seizures
from personal baggage of which 739 (9.47 tonnes) were of meat
or animal products, the remainder were mostly fish. Between April
2001 and March 2002 a total of 1435 seizures (55 tonnes) were
made at points of entry from commercial consignments and from
personal baggage.
23. Publicity and awareness was improved
with posters at airports and ports about specific import and export
restrictions introduced because of the FMD outbreak and early
in May 2001 by the issue of new publicity posters to main airports
to alert travellers to the limits on animal and plant products
that can legally be imported from third countries. This poster
was revised in light of experience and in February 2002 was replaced
by a new, more eye-catching poster sited more visibly at ports
and airports. In addition, in May 2001 we provided information
for Embassy staff in third countries to promulgate locally as
it is equally important to try and prevent illegal material leaving
the country of origin, as it is to detect it on arrival. Information
has been provided to people applying for a visa to enter the UK.
24. New powers were provided in May 2001
to permit enforcement officers to take action at retail points
where there was clear evidence that meat or a product of animal
origin could not have been imported legally.
THE ACTION
PLAN
25. The Action Plan (Annex to this Memorandum)
was widely welcomed by stakeholders. It contains a number of strands
of activity, each significant in their own right. They range from
short term actions to make a quick impact on the problem (for
example, through improved publicity over the summer months) to
longer term actions designed to improve the evidence base on which
to target future resources.
SCOPE, RESPONSIBILITIES
FOR ENFORCEMENT
AND DEFRA'S CO
-ORDINATING ROLE
26. DEFRA has taken an over-arching role
to co-ordinate measures against illegal imports. This role recognised
the Department's responsibility for animal health, controls over
the import of animals and animal products, plant health and the
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES).
In carrying out this role, we are working closely
with local authority associations, who are the primary enforcement
agencies, and with other partners in central Government including
HM Customs and Excise, the Food Standards Agency (FSA), the Home
Office, the Department of Transport, Local Government and the
Regions, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the devolved
administrations. When it is needed, specialist assistance is sought
from those best placed to provide it, such as the Metropolitan
Police and authorities in other countries.
RISK ASSESSMENT
27. It was recognised early in the outbreak
that there were significant gaps in the data available to help
form a picture of where the major risks from illegal imports arise
and to target control measures accordingly. A quantitative risk
assessment was recognised as necessary to provide the evidence
basis for policy making. Throughout the FMD crisis, the Government
has used risk assessment to inform its policies. It was therefore
decided to commission a study from the Veterinary Laboratories
Agency. The findings of this study will help to identify effective
control strategies and the most efficient and effective employment
of resources (including publicity) to reduce risks to animal health
from exotic diseases. Enforcement officers already use local intelligence
to make best use of inspection resources. The project was endorsed
by the Policy Commission on Food and Farming and by the Illegal
Imports Forum. It commenced in March 2002 and is scheduled to
run for six months.
28. The risk assessment is focusing on four
hazards:
— Swine vesicular disease
addressing the question
"For each specified hazard, what is the
probability per year that the importation of meat will result
in at least one infection with the specified hazard in the GB
livestock population?"
29. The analysis, which will consider commercial
consignments and personal imports, will be in three modules:
— The probable amount of illegal meat
imported each year
— The probability that meat is contaminated
with a hazard
— The probability of the import of
contaminated meat resulting in infection of GB livestock.
30. The risk assessment is being overseen
by a Steering Group including external stakeholders and the outcomes
will be published.
31. Risk assessments for exotic plant pests
and diseases are produced regularly and revised by DEFRA's Central
Science Laboratory. These risk assessments take account of both
commercial and non-commercial pathways of introduction. They are
used to inform EU plant health policy development and to raise
awareness of specific risks among growers, traders and the general
public.
PUBLICITY
32. Although the findings of the risk assessment
may help us to refine and target publicity DEFRA recognises that
there is an urgent need to improve public awareness of the need
for import controls and the rules that apply, in particular during
the peak travelling period this summer. The Department's intention
is to raise public awareness of our import rules and reasons for
them—to the same level of consciousness, for example, that
the general public has on allowances for alcohol or tobacco, or
an appreciation of the dangers of drink driving. Such changes
in attitude take time to achieve. We must also make sure that
our controls are understood and recognised by travellers from
third countries.
33. DEFRA in consultation with other Departments,
agencies and stakeholders are developing a programme which is
expected to include some or all of the following:
— market research to determine the
impact of the current message
— a short public information video
to raise public awareness—for use as a TV filler and, where
appropriate, by air lines
— multi-media messages—print,
Teletext, internet to be placed on sites that are likely to be
seen or visited by travellers
— appraisal of the siting and numbers
of posters at main airports (the main point of entry for imports
from outside the EU)
— purchase of commercial advertising
space at airports
— targeted information, for example
football supporters travelling to the Far East for the World Cup
and using that opportunity to promote the more general message
about the risk of importing disease
— dedicated pages within the DEFRA
website to improve information on the Action Plan, progress and
to make available publicity material on-line as soon as it becomes
available.
IMPROVED CO
-OPERATION BETWEEN
AGENCIES, MORE
EFFECTIVE INTELLIGENCE
AND IMPROVED LEGAL
POWERS
34. There is an urgent need to develop further
the networks for information gathering and sharing, including
the role of IT. There are several separate databases and initiatives
maintained and pursued by enforcement agencies including the Food
Standards Agency, HM Customs and Excise and the Wildlife Crime
Intelligence Unit established in April 2002 within the National
Criminal Intelligence Service.
35. The Forum identified concern that there
was a lack of understanding of the enforcement regimes and that
this was in part as a result of the number of agencies involved
and the types and frequency of checks required under the different
enforcement regimes. The Government is considering further how
best to address this. DEFRA is taking the lead in preparing a
clear and simple guide to roles, responsibilities and powers of
the agencies involved. Increased co-operation between enforcement
agencies will help to improve consistency of approach and clarify
roles and responsibilities where illicit goods are found.
36. On 22 May 2002 (in England and Wales,
a little later in Scotland) legislative changes came into effect
to extend the search powers of local authority enforcement officers
to include personal baggage and all commercial consignments, whether
or not they are described as food. The Department will provide
guidance and assistance to enforcement officers to ensure that
their powers are used properly and will work to ensure full and
proper co-operation between enforcement authorities. We are also
working with the Food Standards Agency which has produced its
own 10-point plan to tackle illegal imports.
ACTION IN
EUROPE—PERSONAL
IMPORTS
37. The UK has a long history of restrictions
on the import of meat and other products of animal origin for
personal consumption. The basic principle was that no personal
imports of meat would be permitted unless they weighed less than
1.0kg and were fully cooked in a hermetically sealed container,
thus minimising risk of importing disease. When EU rules were
introduced with the Single Market limited personal imports of
meat and animal products were permitted from non-EU countries.
The EU rules are imprecise and difficult to apply consistently
and the UK opted to maintain its existing limits. The Secretary
of State has raised our concerns about the shortcomings in the
EU rules with Commissioner Byrne on a number of occasions. We
understand that the Commission is likely to make proposals shortly.
Similar clarification and tightening of the rules is being sought
in respect of the exemption from plant health controls of some
personal imports of plants and plant produce.
38. The Department will also continue to
encourage the Commission to improve EU-wide intelligence sharing
and enforcement.
PRACTICAL MEASURES
39. In addition to general measures intended
to improve understanding of risks, improve enforcement and increase
public awareness, the Action Plan includes assessment of four
practical measures, drawn largely from established practice in
other countries.
Detector dogs
40. The Government will commence a pilot
this summer on using dogs to detect and prevent illegal imports
of meat and the Metropolitan Police are assisting us in this.
Detailed plans are being finalised that will underpin the pilot.
This will include identifying and putting in place any necessary
infrastructure, operational guidelines for the handler and back-up
teams, protocols with Customs dog units and other enforcement
agencies to ensure the pilot complements their day-to-day operational
requirements. Extra resources are being made available for this.
41. The Department was not able for practical
reasons to take up the generous offer of the use of a trained
dog from New Zealand. That was unfortunate, but the benefit is
that we now have the advantage of developing our own training
and handling expertise in close discussion with those who have
practical experience.
X-ray equipment
42. Information is being gathered about
the potential benefits of using x-ray equipment to detect and
distinguish illicit organic material from any other legal products
being imported. This includes considering with HM Customs what
further use can be made of the x-ray scanning that already takes
place of certain commercial consignments. We are also investigating
x-ray equipment for scanning personal luggage, as is used in Australia.
In doing so we must understand the operational requirements and
constraints, including the role of the operators of the equipment
to make judgements about the screen images, and the practical
implications for the operation of airports and ports of then opening
suspect containers or luggage. There is a practical balance that
must be reached between detection procedures and the commercial
operation of our ports and airports, including the world's busiest
airport.
Amnesty bins
43. We are considering the possibility of
a pilot scheme for amnesty bins in conjunction with the detector
dog pilot study. There are a range of issues to be considered
including responsibility for operating and maintaining the bins,
their misuse for discarding drugs or other prohibited material
or equipment, health and safety, siting, nuisance, safe disposal
and liaison between enforcement agencies.
Landing cards
44. Only non-European nationals are required
to complete a landing card. Implementing changes to the wording
on the card would be a matter for the Home Office. We are in discussion
with the Home Office and other Departments about what sort of
changes might be possible. In its co-ordinating role DEFRA is
gathering information on practices in other countries.
NORTHERN IRELAND
45. DARD is equally committed to taking
effective measures to prevent the introduction of disease to Northern
Ireland from personal imports. The challenges it faces are, however,
different to DEFRA's as Northern Ireland has a greatly reduced
direct threat from Third country imports, particularly in relation
to air traffic. The principal threat is from secondary imports
from travellers through transiting Great Britain and across the
land border with the Republic of Ireland. The latter presents
particular difficulties as free movement between Member States
means no effective border controls exist to prevent the import
of illegal products. In this regard DARD will be pursuing a common
strategy with the ROI authorities through the North-South Working
Groups to adopt an all Ireland strategy on the issue. DARD will,
naturally, critically examine the initiatives being developed
by DEFRA and the outcomes of the EFRA Select Committee and adopt
them where applicable to our own particular circumstances. Accordingly
it is felt inappropriate for DARD to be involved in this Select
Committee on tackling illegal imports.
CONCLUSION
44. The Government's Action Plan for reducing
risks of exotic disease linked to third country imports of animal
products, plants and plant products:
— takes account of views of stakeholders
and expert advice and is being taken forward in close co-operation
with stakeholders
— seeks evidence base for proportionate
checks and controls through identifying hazards and critical control
points
— will inform decisions on the volume
and nature of controls that will have greatest effect on reducing
disease risk
— recognises the practical and commercial
needs of traders and port and airport operators
— forms part of a wider range of measures,
including bio-security on farms and the Food Standards Agency's
ten point plan to tighten controls on foodstuffs of non-animal
origin
— includes measures, such as publicity
and pilot studies, carried out in parallel with the risk assessment
— cross-cuts Government Departments
and Agencies.
27 May 2002
| 
