5 Food safety training
| (27866)
13371/06
COM(06) 519
+ ADDs 1-2
| Commission Communication: Better Training for safer food
|
| Legal base | — |
| Document originated | 20 September 2006
|
| Deposited in Parliament | 4 October 2006
|
| Department | Food Standards Agency
|
| Basis of consideration | EM of 16 October 2006
|
| Previous Committee Report | None
|
| To be discussed in Council | No date set
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Not cleared; further information awaited
|
Background
5.1 Regulation EC 882/2004[21]
sets out the general approach which must be taken by Member States
in enforcing feed and food, animal health and animal welfare requirements,
the underlying aim being to improve the consistency and effectiveness
of controls across the Community and to provide safeguards for
consumers. The Regulation also enables the Commission to develop
training programmes for staff from the Member States and from
exporting third countries, to complement those undertaken nationally
and to provide greater uniformity.
5.2 Having concluded that some action was needed in this area,
and that mere cooperation with national training providers would
not be sufficient, the Commission established in 2005 a strategy
for training at Community level, and it says that courses have
already been provided (under contract) during 2006, attended by
about 1,500 officials, and covering a range of issues such as
import control procedures, implementation and auditing of food
safety management systems, and avian influenza.
The current document
5.3 In this Communication, the Commission has addressed the organisation
and management of Community training for 2007 and beyond in the
four areas covered by Regulation 882/2004 and in relation to plant
health. In doing so, it has considered the possibility of contract
arrangements (by open tender); a specialised Commission Training
Service; an executive agency; and a regulatory agency. It has
concluded that, whilst contract arrangements offer flexibility,
they could lack continuity; that the costs of a Commission Training
Service would be prohibitive; and that a regulatory agency would
give rise to risks of loss of control and co-ordination. It therefore
recommends an executive agency, which it believes would allow
it to focus on its core activities without relinquishing control
and ultimate responsibility. It will now be examining this last
option further, including the practical arrangements and the possibility
of merging these activities with those of the Executive Agency
for the Public Health Programme.
5.4 In the meantime, the Commission has provided some cost estimates.
On the basis that on average about 10% of the 60,000 or so potential
trainees would participate in any given year, it suggests that,
after peaking in 2009, the average cost per year after 2011 would
be €13.2
million, to which should be added about €1.6
million for such activities as preparing tenders and selecting
training providers. These figures compare with costs of €7.5
million in the financial statement accompanying the Commission's
proposal for Regulation 882/2004 (though this assumed only 300
participants a year).
The Government's view
5.5 In her Explanatory Memorandum of 16 October 2006,
the Minister for Public Health at the Department of Health (Caroline
Flint) says that the Commission's aims are in line with key UK
policy objectives for feed and food safety — namely, the
protection of public and animal health, ensuring coherent legislation
throughout the food chain, and the introduction of proportionate
controls — and that it has broadly welcomed the establishment
of this training strategy. She says that the UK will continue
to support it, whilst pressing the Commission to ensure that training
priorities are identified on the basis of objective evidence where
skills gaps exist, and to ensure that there is a flexible approach
in order to achieve best value.
5.6 However, whilst not opposed in principle to a
training strategy for plant health, the Minister points out that
it is not subject to the main provisions of Regulation 882/2004,
and she suggests that Member States should be consulted about
its inclusion in the strategy through the Standing Committee on
Plant Health. She also points out that the Commission has opted
for the strategy to be carried out by an executive agency without
giving a clear and financial justification for this, and says
that the UK will be continuing to press for a robust, thorough
and objective assessment of the best way forward, having regard
to all the options.
Conclusion
5.7 Since more uniform application of the legislation
in this area is clearly desirable, the introduction of safety
training at Community level to complement that already undertaken
by the Member States appears to be sensible in principle. Nevertheless,
as the Minister has pointed out, there are a number of outstanding
issues relating to the inclusion of plant health, the rigour of
the analysis underlying the Commission's preference for an executive
agency, and the relationship between its cost estimates and the
available budgetary provision. Consequently, before taking a final
view on the proposal, we think it would be sensible to await further
information on these points, but, in the meantime, we are drawing
the document to the attention of the House.
21 OJ No. L 165, 30.4.04, p.1. Back
|
