House of Commons - Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Select Committee on Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Seventh Report

The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs's co-ordinating role

29. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has "an overarching role to co-ordinate measures against illegal imports",[81] although it is just one of a number of organisations with responsibilities for the importation of foodstuffs. The others are: the Food Standards Agency, Local Authorities, port health authorities, the State Veterinary Service, the Plant Health and Seeds Inspectorate, HM Customs and the Meat Hygiene Service.[82] In short, organisation of the management of food import controls is complex, with different agencies leading on particular issues. We received representations in favour of a single border control authority from among other the Airport Operators Association,[83] and the Food Standards Agency proposed that imports of products of animal origin should come under its control.[84] The Association of Port Health Authorities argued that "there should be one agency to co-ordinate" but suggested that whilst the control of imports of products of animal origin should rest with the Food Standards Agency, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs should retain responsibility for animal health.[85]

30. In the Action Plan, the Department undertook to "provide a published guide on the roles, responsibilities and powers of relevant agencies for preventing and detecting illegal consignments of products of animal origin".[86] Protecting our Livestock and Plants from Pests and Diseases was published on 1 July 2002.[87] The guide summarises the controls on imports into Great Britain of animal products, plants and plant products from non-European Union countries, and explains the roles of the agencies who enforce those rules.[88] Lord Whitty told us that the Government is currently "reviewing the roles of the various agencies" and that the process would "last into the autumn".[89] He did not rule out structural changes but highlighted that whatever the structure there will need to be "serious management and co-ordination".[90] We agree. In the longer term there is a case for greater integration of agencies and management, and we recommend that Government bring forward a model of a single agency. In the medium term agencies should commit themselves to improving the way they work together. In the short term it would be helpful if the terms of the review of the roles of the agencies involved in dealing with food imports was published.

31. During our visit to Heathrow, we were surprised to learn about the difficulties in organising operations to target specific flights on which large quantities of illegal personal imports were suspected. The Association of Port Health Authorities described a similar process being followed at Gatwick Airport. The decision on which flights to target was made "on the basis of information received and experience", and each operation was undertaken in co-operation with HM Customs and Excise[91] because they have the powers to stop and search. However, the co-ordination of such exercises was, in Gatwick at least, down to a port health authority official who rang around to check the availability of staff of the other agencies concerned.[92] In contrast, at Heathrow we were told that the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs had begun to be involved in co-ordinating such activities. We are concerned that despite well-placed, intelligence-based suspicion, operations to check flights are often only mounted when a team can be put together through the efforts of one official from the port health authority. There is clearly a need for much higher level co-ordination of such activity, since it appears that the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs is not currently fulfilling its 'overarching role' in this area. Operations against particular flights would also benefit from agreed commitments, from all the agencies involved, to the amount of time they are able to devote to operations against illegal meat imports. We acknowledge that there may be times when HM Customs and Excise officers, in particular, would be diverted to more critical work but feel that the higher-level co-ordination we propose would be better able to take account of such problems. Moreover, although we acknowledge that other agencies, including the Food Standards Agency, feel that they should become responsible for these matters, we are inclined to believe that the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs should be the lead body in dealing with illegal imports of meat and other foods.

32. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs is already the central competent authority, in European Union terms, for the co-ordination of border inspection posts. The National Farmers' Union drew our attention to the European Commission Food and Veterinary Office's report on such posts,[93] which considered that "the performance of the competent authorities in respect of overall efficiency of the import control system in the United Kingdom need considerable improvement".[94] We summarise below the Food and Veterinary Office team's main findings. Lord Whitty contended that some of the criticisms were "exaggerated" although "we do accept that we do need a better system to allow the oversight of the effort, and we have agreed with the port operators, with the [inspection post] operators, a detailed action plan".[95] The report, together with the team's recommendation that the European Commission consider the withdrawal of approval for all the border inspection posts examined,[96] does give rise to concern about overall co-ordination and direction. That said, we welcome the Government's response to the report.[97]

33. We heard evidence that at small ports and airports there was no regular presence of port health officers. This does not mean that this channel for illegal importation of meat products is unimportant. Indeed if more effective measures are taken at the larger ports and airports the threat of greater use being made of these channels will grow. It is vital that a full investigation is undertaken of both the scale of illegal imports through this source and of the measures that are in place to deal with them. There is a particular need to improve co-ordination in these localities and to recognise the resource implications of increased demands.

Table 2: Border Inspection Posts - Food and Veterinary Office Inspection Findings[98]

Border Inspection Post	Number of Staff	Training Staff	Facilities		Equipment	Hygiene*	Documentation	Registration	Identification/ Selection	Procedures
			P	LA
Belfast port	C	M	M	-	C	M	m	m	m	M
Belfast airport	C	M	M	-	m	M	m	m	m	m
Aberdeen	C	m	M	-	C	M	m	m	m	M
Milford Haven	C	M	M	-	m	M	M	M	m	M
Bristol	C	m	M	M	M	M	m	m	m	M
Hull	C	M	M	-	m	M	m	m	m	M
Grimsby Immingham	C	m	M	-	M	M	m	m	m	M
Thamesport	m	m	M	-	M	M	C	C	C	m
Heathrow	M	m	M	M	M	M	m	m	M	M

M = Major non-compliance

m = minor non-compliance

C = Compliance

- = not applicable

* Hygiene covers the observed situation on the spot including e.g. cleaning, maintenance and hygienic necessities as well as the hygienic operation of the BIP

⁸¹Memorandum submitted by The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Ev 40, para 26. Back

⁸²Memorandum submitted by The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Ev 37, para 5. Back

83 Memorandum submitted by the Airport Operators Association, Ev 75, para 3. Back

84 Memorandum submitted by the Food Standards Agency, Ev 69, para 15. Back

85 Evidence taken on 2 June 2002, Q.156. Back

86 Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs News Release 127/02. Back

87 Protecting our Livestock and Plants from Pests and Diseases - A New Guide for Importers, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs New s Release 260/02, 1 July 2002. Back

88 The new guide is available on DEFRA's website: http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/illegali/topics/enforcement.htm. Back

89 Evidence taken on 2 July 2002, Q.220 and Q.227. Back

⁹⁰ Evidence taken on 2 July 2002, QQ.220--221. Back

91 Evidence taken on 2 July 2002, Q.108 and Q.106. Back

92 Evidence taken on 2 July 2002, QQ.159-161. Back