Government response
Introduction
The Government welcomes this report of the Environment,
Food and Rural Affairs Committee on Food information. This
response to the Committee's recommendations is submitted on behalf
of the Government by the Food Standards Agency, since most of
the recommendations made to the Government fall within the Agency's
responsibility.
Responsibility for food information policy within
Government
Recommendation 2
We recommend that the Government explicitly
task one government department with lead responsibility for co-ordinating
food information policy across both central and local government,
and for representing the position of the UK Government at EU level.
We consider that Defra would be the most suitable department to
assume this role. (Paragraph 31)
The Government recognises the importance of effective
co-ordination, but does not consider that this means there needs
to be a single lead Department. In particular, the 'Choosing Health'
White Paper makes significant progress in the co-ordination of
Government policy on nutrition and health including, amongst other
things, food information policy. The White Paper Delivery Plan
and Choosing a Better Diet: a food and health action plan published
on 9 March 2005 sets out how White Paper commitments on food information
will be delivered in a co-ordinated fashion and identifies which
Government department leads. As indicated in the Delivery Plan,
cross-departmental governance arrangements are to be established
to co-ordinate delivery of work, including food information policy.
We also recommend that Defra assume joint responsibility
for achieving the Public Service Agreement target of "halting
the year-on-year rise in obesity among children under 11 by 2010
in the context of a broader strategy to tackle obesity in the
population as a whole", alongside those departments already
responsible for achieving the target (the DoH, the DfES and the
DCMS). (Paragraph 31)
The Government believes that lead responsibility
should remain with DH, DfES and DCMS, but recognises that many
Government Departments will need to contribute. In Defra's case,
as industry sponsor, it proactively encourages industry to play
a full and constructive role with regards to government policy
objectives, including obesity. It will also be one of a number
of participants in cross-departmental governance arrangements
to be set up under the 'Choosing Health' Delivery Plan to deliver
key nutrition and health goals, including obesity.
Recommendation 3
We recommend that the Government investigate
whether it is indeed the case that local authorities are being
deterred from taking prosecutions for breaches of food law, particularly
food labelling law, and, if so, that it establish the reasons
why. The Government must ensure that local authorities are sufficiently
well-resourced to be able to take prosecutions against food manufacturers
and retailers, whose legal budgets are of a size that does not
prevent them from fully using the law to defend their interests.
(Paragraph 32)
The Government recognises the importance of consistent
and proportionate enforcement of food law and has established
a fighting fund to support Local Authority (LA) prosecutions in
this area. However, the Food Standards Agency will work with the
Local Authorities Co-ordinators of Regulatory Services (LACORS)
to investigate whether LAs are being deterred from appropriate
enforcement action, particularly in relation to prosecutions under
food labelling law.
Prosecutions are just one of a range of actions available
to LAs to deal with infringements of food law. LAs also subscribe
to the principles of the "Enforcement Concordat" which
states that, before formal enforcement action is taken, LAs will
give businesses the opportunity to discuss the circumstances of
the case and, if possible, resolve points of difference, unless
immediate action is required.
Food safety and hygiene
Recommendation 5
We welcome recent legislation improving
allergen labelling requirements. However, the new legislation
applies only to allergens which have been deliberately added to
food: labelling of foods which may inadvertently contain allergens
remains unregulated. We recommend that the Government move quickly
to consider how this legislation can be supplemented to regulate
the defensive use of allergen warnings, so that consumers with
food allergies are provided with clear and helpful allergen information.
The Government should also ensure that proper channels of communication
are in place between the food industry and medical scientists
to allow for the effective flow of information about the latest
scientific findings on allergies. (Paragraph 52)
The Government agrees that the overuse of defensive
labelling restricts consumer choice unnecessarily and can undermine
valid warnings. The Food Standards Agency has made a commitment
in its Strategic Plan 2005-10 to developing authoritative Best
Practice Guidance on the appropriate and proportionate use of
such labelling by 2006. This is being taken forward in discussion
with all relevant stakeholders, including food manufacturers,
retailers, enforcers, consumer support groups and clinical experts,
and will include a full public consultation during 2005.
The Government considers that the development of
voluntary Best Practice Guidance is more appropriate than a statutory
approach in this situation. The presence of allergenic contaminants,
unlike chemical contaminants, cannot at present be regulated using
risk assessment systems. This is because, as noted by the European
Food Safety Authority[1]
in March 2004, there is significant variability in sensitivity
to particular food allergens between individuals, and also on
different occasions in the same individual. In addition, for ethical
reasons, highly sensitive individuals cannot be tested to establish
thresholds for triggering allergic reactions. Thus, the information
needed to determine the highest amount of allergen that would
not cause an adverse effect currently cannot be determined.
The Food Standards Agency funds a significant programme
of research in the area of food allergy and intolerance, the findings
from which are made public. The information obtained from this
research and that conducted by others world-wide, underpins the
Government policy on food allergens and is also used in negotiations
on any new EU legislation in this area. This ensures that the
labelling required of food manufacturers reflects current scientific
knowledge.
Recommendation 6
We recommend that the Government undertake
a speedy investigation into the events which resulted in the illegal
dye, Sudan 1, making its way into the UK food chain. We are particularly
concerned that the Government should establish the length of time
for which the adulteration of chilli powder is likely to have
gone undetected and why UK authorities did not detect this adulteration
in a product used so extensively in UK food processing. The Government
and the FSA should also carry out work to determine the best way
of communicating with the public about questions relating to the
degree of risk actually associated with issues like Sudan 1. (Paragraph
53)
The FSA announced on 12 May that it will convene
a high level Task Group, with representatives from the consumer,
enforcement and industry stakeholder communities, to consider
ways of strengthening controls in the food chain to reduce the
likelihood of future contamination events occurring. It will also
commission an independent, external review of the Sudan 1 incident.
Several Local Authorities are, with the Food Standards Agency's
assistance, carrying out investigations, which may lead to prosecution
of certain companies involved in this incident. In order not to
prejudice the outcome of these investigations the external review
of the incident involving Sudan 1 in Worcester sauce has been
deferred until these investigations, and any possible resulting
legal action, have been completed.
The Government agrees with the Committee that it
is important to undertake work to determine the best way of communicating
with the public and other stakeholders on food risk. The Food
Standards Agency already undertakes and participates in a range
of such activity itself, with OGDs and with others, including
industry, and will continue to do this so that approaches can
be continuously refined and lessons learnt for the future.
Food labelling: prepacked foods
Recommendation 8
We consider that provision of information
about the nutrient content of food should be mandatory on all
prepacked foods. For such provision to be mandatory, legislative
change at EU level will be required. We therefore welcome the
Government's recent undertaking to press vigorously for legislative
change within the EU on this matter, and we urge the Government
to make this a high priority matter for the UK's forthcoming presidency
of the EU. (Paragraph 79)
The Government welcomes the Committee's recognition
of its decision to press the EU Commission to introduce mandatory
nutrition labelling in a format that is easy for consumers to
use.
We consider that such mandatory nutrition information
should be extensive and should therefore state values for the
following nutrients: energy (expressed in both calories and kilojoules),
protein, carbohydrate, including what proportion of the carbohydrate
is sugars, fat, including what proportion of the fat is saturated
fat, fibre, salt and sodium. (Paragraph 79)
The Government agrees that amounts of energy, sugars,
fat including saturated fats, and salt should be stated on all
prepackaged foods to help consumers make informed choices about
the foods they buy.
Recommendation 9
We consider that nutrition information should,
in so far as practicable, be presented in a standard, tabular
format, to assist consumers in identifying the information easily
and in making comparisons between products. Exemptions from the
requirements to use a standard format may be necessary in the
case of small packs, although we would then expect nutrition information
to be given in a linear format where practicable. Information
should be given in plain English, with common names rather than
(or in addition to) scientific names. (Paragraph 80)
The European Commission has produced a discussion
paper indicating that a proposal expected next year is likely
to include mandatory nutrition labelling on all pre-packaged
foods, salt declarations instead of sodium, and modifications
to the permitted formats for nutrition labelling to make them
more useful to consumers. The UK will draw on the results of consumer
research in deciding which format to support.
Recommendation 10
We have recommended that values for
both salt and sodium should be stated. We consider this is the
best means of addressing the current confusion amongst consumers
about the relationship between the two. We commend the Government
for the action it has taken to date to have food manufacturers
and processors cut the level of salt in processed food. As a supplement
to this action, we recommend that the Government carry out a specific,
targeted programme of public education to inform consumers of
the health implications associated with sodium intake. (Paragraph
81)
The Government recognises that consumers find salt
levels more helpful than sodium, and is pressing the EU Commission
to require salt levels to be declared on the nutritional labelling
panel.
The Government welcomes the Committee's recognition
of the work it is undertaking to encourage food manufacturers
and retailers to reduce the level of salt in processed foods.
The Government has had positive feedback from the
evaluation of the first phase of the Food Standards Agency's campaign
to raise public awareness of salt as a health issue which was
undertaken in 2004. The Agency is planning to launch the second
phase in September 2005.
Recommendation 11
Although important, mandatory provision
of information about the nutrient content of food will be of limited
use to the consumer without the provision of more general nutrition
information. Such general information needs to enable consumers
to establish the relevance of nutrient values to their own individual
circumstances. We consider that it is primarily the role of the
Food Standards Agency to formulate and promulgate this information,
but we also consider that the food manufacturing and retail industry
has a role to play in promulgation. In terms of labelling requirements,
we consider that the inclusion on labels of guideline daily amounts
for energy consumption should be mandatory, and we recommend that
the Government push for the requisite legislative change at EU
level. In respect of other key nutrients—fat, sugars, and
salt—we consider that the inclusion on labels of guideline
daily amounts should be the rule, rather than the exception. (Paragraph
82)
The Government agrees that consumers need access
to clear nutrition advice to enable them to make informed food
choices and that the food industry and Government should work
together to disseminate consistent healthy eating messages. The
Food Standards Agency produces a range of resources aimed at specific
population groups including ones specifically addressing issues
of salt, fat and sugar. It has recently launched a consumer friendly
web site (www.eatwell.gov.uk) that provides a wide range of information
for consumers on food related topics to promote achievement of
a balanced diet.
The Clear Labelling Guidelines produced by the Food
Standards Agency recognise that the guideline daily amounts (GDAs),
including for energy, developed by the Institute of Grocery Distribution,
can provide consumers with helpful supplementary nutritional labelling
information and recommends their use on food packaging. Two ways
of presenting GDA information on the front of packs have been
included amongst the signposting options currently being tested
with consumers.
Recommendation 12
We are strongly supportive of the introduction
of a UK-wide system of front-of-label nutrition signposting, to
assist consumers in making healthier choices 'at a glance'. The
traffic light system has much to commend it but, whatever signposting
system the Government decides to adopt, the determining factor
should be clarity, rather than comprehensiveness, although any
system should, of course, be as scientifically sound as is practicable.
(Paragraph 99)
The Government agrees that any voluntary UK-wide
signposting scheme must be clear and easily understood by the
consumer, have a sound evidence base and build on ongoing work
by the food industry. The consumer-focused research being carried
out by the Food Standards Agency is central to this work and will
be the basis for the development of an appropriate signposting
scheme. The Choosing Health White Paper includes a commitment
to introducing a system in early 2006.
Recommendation 13
More broadly, because any signposting
system will necessarily oversimplify the very complex information
about what constitutes a healthy diet for each individual, in
the context of his or her lifestyle, it is crucial that any UK-wide
system be implemented in the context of a wider education campaign
providing consumers with more detailed information about nutrition
and healthy diets. For such a campaign to be effective, the Government
and the food industry will need to work co-operatively in disseminating
consistent messages. (Paragraph 100)
The Government agrees that any voluntary UK-wide
signposting system needs to enable consumers to make practical
use of dietary advice in a way which fits their individual circumstances.
The Choosing Health White Paper includes a commitment to discuss
with the food industry how it might contribute to funding national
campaigns to promote healthy eating, and to encourage industry
involvement in campaigns to reach people when they are making
choices.
Recommendation 14
Speedy action by the Government is
required on the introduction of a nutrition signposting system.
We would hope that the industry will, in consultation with the
FSA and government, initially introduce such a scheme on a voluntary
basis, as a mandatory system would take some time to be put in
place because of the need for legislative change at EU level to
achieve this. However, even if such a voluntary scheme were to
be achieved, we consider that a mandatory scheme, applying at
EU level, would still be necessary. We therefore recommend that
the Government pursue legislative change at EU level to ensure
that such a comprehensive and mandatory scheme of nutrition signposting
is introduced. (Paragraph 101)
The Government has made a commitment to develop and
introduce a voluntary UK- wide signposting scheme by early 2006
and welcomes the Committee's endorsement of this approach. The
Food Standards Agency is currently undertaking consumer research
into a range of options and will base its recommendations on the
evidence obtained. The Government's aim is for there to be a clear
straightforward system in common use. If a voluntary approach
is not successful then the Government will consider pursuing legislative
options at EU level.
Recommendation 15
We commend the initiatives being used
by some of the major supermarkets in introducing their own nutrition
signposting schemes. We trust that the Government will endeavour
to work with these retailers to learn from their experiences in
piloting nutrition signposting schemes, prior to finalising its
own signposting scheme. (Paragraph 102)
The Food Standards Agency has engaged with food manufacturers
and retailers who have developed their own signposting schemes
and sought their advice and input into the development of a UK-wide,
Government-sponsored, signposting system. It has undertaken extensive
consultative activities to provide an opportunity for all stakeholders
to contribute their views and experience in this area.
Recommendation 16
However, in order to be successful,
we consider that any nutrition signposting system needs to be
introduced across the board, so that consumers can draw meaningful
comparisons between products. We trust that, once the Government
has announced its preferred system of nutrition signposting, the
major retailers will endeavour to comply with that system as soon
as possible, to avoid consumer confusion. (Paragraph 103)
Once the research to identify the most appropriate
signposting option has been completed, the Food Standards Agency
will undertake a consultation on the proposed signposting format,
and implementation arrangements. The Government agrees that it
would be beneficial for consumers if the retailers and manufacturers
were to work with Government to ensure adoption of the agreed,
practicable signposting scheme across the UK.
Recommendation 20
Currently, manufacturers of alcoholic
drinks are exempt from listing their ingredients on the label,
although ingredients may be stated on a voluntary basis. We recommend
that the Government report to us on whether any action is currently
being taken at EU level to require compulsory labelling of ingredients
on alcoholic drinks and, if not, whether it has any plans to raise
the matter at EU level itself. (Paragraph 116)
The Government supports ingredient labelling which
is both clear and meaningful to the consumer. In February 2005
the Government wrote to the Commission urging them to include
ingredient listing on alcoholic drinks in their forthcoming proposals
for the review of EC food labelling legislation. The Commission
has indicated that it is favourably disposed to making proposals
in this area.
Food labelling: non-prepacked foods
Recommendation 22
We recognise that it may not be feasible
to provide the same range of nutritional information at point
of sale to purchasers of non-prepacked foods as to those of prepacked
food. Nevertheless, we believe that the Government should be working
to ensure that clear and meaningful nutrition information is provided
to the extent that it is feasible to do so on all foods purchased
by consumers, including food purchased in the eating out sector
and other food sold loose or prepacked for direct sale. The Government
should work at the EU level to achieve policy change on these
matters. In the interim, the Government should take action to
encourage increased voluntary provision of nutrition and other
information. (Paragraph 131)
The signpost labelling system which is being developed
by the Food Standards Agency is expected to apply to pre-packaged
food in the first instance. However, once the scheme has been
introduced, the Agency will consider what needs to be done to
address consumer's nutritional information needs in relation to
non-prepacked foods, including in the food service sector. The
Government will also press for the provision of meaningful nutritional
information in respect of non-prepacked foods to be considered
at the EU level as part of the review of EU food labelling, which
is due to start later this year.
Recommendation 23
We consider that those who sell or
otherwise provide food in the eating out sector must take responsibility
for providing healthy choices to their customers, and for highlighting
those choices as healthy. We recommend that the Government work
with the eating out sector to develop a 'green light only' nutrition
signposting system to highlight healthy food choices. The Government
should devise appropriate nutritional standards to underpin this
model. (Paragraph 134)
The Government agrees that the catering and service
sector should provide healthy food choices to their customers
and information to help them to be able to identify these options.
How this might best be achieved is an issue which the Food Standards
Agency will consider with stakeholders once the UK-wide signposting
scheme for pre-packaged foods has been agreed and implemented
effectively.
Recommendation 25
We recommend that where it is feasible
to do so, the level of nutrition information which we have recommended
be required in respect of prepacked food should apply equally
to food sold loose and food sold prepacked for direct sale in
supermarkets and other food shops. We consider that it would be
desirable for the same information about nutrient content to be
provided, in the same standard, tabular format that we recommend
above, although we do recognise that there may be some situations
where it is not practical or necessary to provide as full a range
of information as is provided on pre-packed products. Again, this
should assist consumers in identifying the information easily
and in making comparisons between products. Likewise, any nutrition
signposting system which may be adopted in respect of prepacked
foods should also apply to food prepacked for direct sale. (Paragraph
137)
Once work on the signpost labelling system has been
completed, the Food Standards Agency will consider what needs
to be done to address consumers' nutritional information needs
in relation to non-prepacked foods, including in the food service
sector.
Recommendation 26
We received virtually no evidence relating
to catering services in institutions such as hospitals and schools.
Nevertheless, we do not see any reason why the same principles
should not apply to such institutions, and we recommend that the
Government report to us on what work it is currently undertaking
towards achieving such an outcome. (Paragraph 138)
The Government agrees with the Committee that principles
of good nutrition should apply across major institutions. The
Choosing Health White Paper commits the Government to developing
guidance on good practice in public sector food procurement and
nutritional standards for all foods provided by the NHS, schools,
the Prison Service and the Ministry of Defence. There is a key
objective in the Public Sector Food Procurement Initiative to
increase the consumption of healthier options, with advice given
on its web site, including a link to the "Choosing a Better
Diet: a food and health action plan" with steps for delivering
the White Paper. Specific commitments, including significa ntly
increased funding, have already been made in relation to school
meals.
Verifying food information: food assurance schemes
Recommendations 27 and 28
It is not at all clear that food assurance
schemes are currently providing useful and meaningful information
to consumers, and the proliferation of such schemes adds to the
confusion. Few consumers are in a position to inquire into the
veracity or reliability of the schemes' claims. Furthermore, even
where schemes are sound, they may certify nothing more than that
required minimum standards have been met—something consumers
should be able to take for granted without the need for assurance
by an external, private body. We believe that most consumers are
likely to assume that the fact that a food carries an assurance
scheme mark means that it has exceeded legal requirements in some
respect. (Paragraph 155)
We recommend that the Government should ensure
the central registration of food assurance schemes. All schemes
should have to be registered and approved by an identified body.
The FSA would be an obvious candidate for the task. The purpose
of such schemes should be to certify that the product carrying
the mark has either been:
- produced or manufactured in a way which exceeds
minimum legal standards— for example, in respect of the
environment or animal welfare—or
- has a 'special characteristic', such as meeting
organic or vegan/vegetarian production requirements.
The registration body would have to satisfy itself
that the operators of the schemes had appropriate verification
systems in place to ensure that producers taking part in a scheme
were fully meeting its requirements. We further recommend that
the Government, in consultation with stakeholders, consider ways
in which this kind of registration could limit the numbers of
schemes in operation, and introduce some common elements in labelling,
in order to make it easier for consumers to understand the schemes.
(Paragraph 156)
The Committee's recommendation would potentially
cover a wide range of diverse certification and branding schemes.
The Government believes that there would be practical difficulties
in seeking to define and register such schemes, and is not convinced
that such an approach, with its attendant bureaucracy, is either
desirable or necessary.
The Government notes the Committee's views on the
proliferation of schemes and understands the Committee's concerns.
However it believes that it would be wrong to erect barriers to
the introduction of schemes that seek to address the specific
concerns of different groups of consumers by providing assurance
that food has been produced in a particular way. The Government
nevertheless welcomes initiatives that seek to help consumers,
such as the introduction of the single Red Tractor logo to signify
food produced in accordance with the standards laid down in the
main farm assurance schemes.
The Government agrees that claims made by schemes
must be valid and accurate. But it believes that the existing
regulatory and voluntary controls on claims, labelling and advertising
are sufficient to ensure this is the case.
The Food Standards Agency produced Guidance on Food
Assurance Schemes in August 2003 to promote best practice and
the provision of clear information to consumers on the objectives
and advantages of the schemes. This Guidance resulted from an
earlier review of food assurance schemes and the Agency will conduct
a further review in 2006 to assess the extent that assurance schemes
have adopted this Guidance. The need for any further action to
be taken to protect the interests of consumers, including registration
and approval, will be reviewed in the light of the outcome of
this survey.
Other sources of food information
Recommendation 29
In order to improve consumers' knowledge
and understanding of nutrition and diet, a broader education campaign
about these matters is required, driven forward by both the Government
and the food industry, working in partnership with each other.
Consumers are often faced with a range of contradictory messages
about nutrition and diet, from a wide range of sources. Consequently,
if consumers are ever to trust messages about diet and food, such
messages must be presented in a coherent and authoritative manner.
A consistent approach between industry-run consumer awareness
programmes and Government-funded consumer education must be adopted,
with a shared aim of delivering clear and consistent messages
to consumers. (Paragraph 170)
The Government fully agrees with the Committee's
views on the need for government and industry to deliver clear
and consistent consumer messages on nutrition and diet. The White
Paper Choosing Health envisages development of a series
of campaigns jointly funded by government and industry and commits
the Government to developing an obesity awareness campaign in
conjunction with a range of stakeholders including the food industry,
to present clear and consistent messages on healthy eating and
physical activity. The Food Standards Agency is already working
with retailers and NGOs in particular to develop plans to deliver
the second phase of the Agency's salt campaign in 2005. If successful,
this approach could be seen as a model for more general campaigns
on healthy eating.
Recommendation 31
We consider that implementation of
our earlier recommendation, that the Government explicitly task
one government department with lead responsibility for co-ordinating
food information policy across both central and local government,
would assist enormously in achieving this consistent approach
between the Government and the food industry. The industry should
be able to rely on a definitive position on food information policy,
issuing from a single source. The Government needs to provide
the industry with a single agenda with a clear list of priorities
that both the Government and industry can work towards achieving.
(Paragraph 172)
See response to recommendation 2.
Food Standards Agency
6 July 2005
1 www.efsa.eu.int/science/nda/nda_opinions/catindex_en.html Back
| 
