Examination of Witnesses (Questions 600-619)
DAME DEIRDRE
HUTTON AND
DR ANDREW
WADGE
10 MAY 2006
Q600 Chairman: Do you think that
should be a model across government departments in your personal
opinion?
Dr Wadge: I think it is something
that works well and I think it may have benefit to other departments,
yes.
Q601 Dr Turner Dame Deirdre, you
have got quite an interesting CV and you have obviously spent
a lot of time as a lay person working with scientists. You have
taken over from a pure scientist, so what do you think for you
is the role of the lay person in an organisation such as the one
that you are now Chair of, what do you set out to do? For instance,
do you see yourself, for instance, as preventing the scientists
in the Food Standards Agency from getting too close to scientists
working for the food industry, for instance?
Dame Deirdre Hutton: Fundamentally
I said that I bring a set of experiences. I suppose the other
one I bring is a lot of experience in corporate governance in
running organisations, so I do not see myself as a consumer champion,
for example, which is how I was described last night which is
very irritating. What I do see myself is as somebody who has a
lot of experience in running organisations and particularly regulatory
organisations, so what I am interested in as Chair of this organisation
is making sure that it works in the most effective possible way
and one of the things I have been saying since I have been there
is that I want the engine room of the organisation to work properly.
I see that as being about making sure that there are other proper
processes in relation to science, but an awful lot of what we
do is not science, it is around enforcement, it is around working
with local authorities. I think it is a mistake to think that
everything the Agency does is science, there is an awful lot that
goes on as well as that. It see it my job as making sure that
the board works properly in corporate governance terms, that it
sets the strategy, that it holds the organisation to account in
an effective way and that we actually deliver on our strategic
plan and our business plan. So, in a sense, my role is fundamentally
a corporate governance role and I would hope that I would have
made certain that we have the processes in place to ensure that
the scientists did not get too close to the industry. On the other
hand, I also bring a set of regulatory experiences which say that
in some areas like nutrition we do not have any power, we have
got to persuade companies to do things and so I also need to bring
an understanding of how regulation works at its best, how markets
work and how we can persuade the market to do things when we cannot
tell them to do things and I think that is a skill which is very
different from the scientific skill set which is actually rather
important, so my role is leading, nudging, steering, holding to
account.
Q602 Dr Turner You carefully describe
yourself as not actually being a consumer champion, yet you are
in a position and the whole agency is there to protect the interests
of the public.
Dame Deirdre Hutton: Absolutely.
Q603 Dr Turner In a sense you are
a champion for the public, whether you describe yourself as that
or not, and do you think that you have enough lay representation
with you on your board to fulfil that role?
Dame Deirdre Hutton: Yes.
Q604 Dr Turner How representative
do you think that you are or need to be?
Dame Deirdre Hutton: It is a very
interesting question. I think that a few years ago the thinking
would have said that what you needed on a board was a set of representatives
who came from particular constituencies and represented that constituency;
that is not actually a view I share, or what you need to have
to make any organisation run effectively. In thinking about what
that organisation does you need the right set of skills on the
board. You also need people on a board who understand about how
to make boards work and how to make systems work within an organisation,
so what I have on the board are a range of people who indeed come
with different sets of skills. For example, somebody who has an
expertise in environmental health, people who have an industry
background, somebody who comes from a micro business background,
people who have a broader public interest, but I do not see them
as representatives, I see them as people who bring a skill set
in the interests of achieving an efficient organisation. Just
coming back, as it were, to the first part of your comment, I
think what I see us as trying to achieve is consumer welfare.
I am very, very conscious as a regulator that you stay within
your regulatory objectives. We have objectives that are set down
in the Act and any regulator strays beyond those at their peril,
that is the objective we are supposed to deliver, but fundamentally
it comes down to an assessment of risk and the balance between
providing the right degree of consumer protection, together with
allowing industry to flourish, innovate and compete, because that
is the way you deliver goods and choices and value to the customer.
It is a balance, and I think it is probably true to say that regulators
are doomed never to get the balance quite right, but that is what
you are seeking to do, to find the balance between welfare and
a flourishing market.
Q605 Dr Turner Your scientific policy
almost makes itself in certain areas, like making sure we have
food which is not contaminated with bacteria or carcinogenic pesticides
or whatever, that almost thinks for itself. The area that I think
you touched on where it gets a little more blurred is nutritional
advice and there is right now, for instance, a difference between
the way in which major supermarkets and food manufacturers are
behaving in terms of nutritional content of their food and the
systems and advice that you are issuing. How do you feel about
that and what is your approach to that?
Dame Deirdre Hutton: Can I ask
you, are you referring specifically to the front of pack labelling
process?
Q606 Dr Turner Yes, and the sort
of traffic light—
Dame Deirdre Hutton: Sorry, terminology,
by front of pack labelling, I mean signposting, I use traffic
light labelling. We based our approach to traffic light labelling
on research in interviews with something like 2,600 people, it
is probably the biggest piece of research that has ever been done
in this area. We first of all talked to consumers to find out
what sort of things they would like. We then tested out the various
models that we had developed, so it was a very iterative process
in coming to the recommendation we made. What we agreed as a board
was four core principles which effectively would allow the industry
to reflect their brands, because brands are extraordinarily important
to industry, but would give consumers a sufficiently consistent
basis. You are absolutely right, there was some disparity across
the supermarkets. Waitrose, Asda and Sainsbury's, who collectively
represent about 37% of the market, are adopting a system which
is consistent with ours; Tesco has decided not to. The way we
have approached that is that I have said to the industry, "Look,
actually we are all trying to change consumer behaviour here".
In one sense this is a large experiment, we do not know what is
going to work, we are absolutely clear that we need to give consumers
clear information so they can make their own choices and make
good choices, so after a year or 18 months or whatever, my offer
to the industry is that we look at what has actually happened
in terms of consumer behaviour, do the post op research—I
am very happy to put it out under an independent academic expert—and
at the end of that year or 18 months, okay, let us find out what
has worked and if the Tesco system works better than our system,
then we should be prepared to go with it, we are an evidence based
organisation.
Dr Wadge: If I could just add
as well, I think that is a very good example of where we are doing
social sciences which is picking up the question that came up
earlier on, what is the input of social science, this is entirely
an area of social science and behavioural change so it is a very
good example.
Q607 Adam Afriyie: Can we be precise,
are you actually monitoring the impact of your traffic light labelling
scheme during the course of the next 12 months rather than waiting
until the end of 12 months to look at it, or are you waiting until
the end of the 12 month period?
Dame Deirdre Hutton: Essentially
the people who have the information about actual consumer purchasing
practice in the supermarkets is not us and that is usually confidential
information, but what Sainsbury's told us the other day is that
they are seeing changes in consumer purchasing, that people are
not boycotting red traffic lights and also, which is the underlying
purpose, he says it is having an influence on the criteria he
is using for the manufacture of products.
Q608 Adam Afriyie: I have also heard
that directly from manufacturers. Their criticism is that the
Tesco—I am glad to hear you acknowledge that there may be
other better labelling mechanisms—but the Tesco labelling
scheme had seen equally, if not larger, drops in sales of, for
example, unhealthy foods when compared to the traffic light scheme,
but there have been accusations that the traffic light scheme
is simplistic and unscientific, so I guess you are telling us
that you will wait and see what the evidence is in a year's time?
Dame Deirdre Hutton: Yes, but
I would also say that on average people buy 67 items in 27 minutes
which means eight seconds per item. You are going up and down
the aisle with screaming children, you do not have time frankly—and
I speak as somebody who has done this—you do not have time
to look at the very, very detailed information on the back of
the packet and what we are trying to do is to give people very
clear simple quick information on what the ingredients are and
at what level they appear in the product. Yes, of course it is
simple and there is the more detailed information for people who
want it, but I have to say consumers very much welcome the simple
information.
Q609 Adam Afriyie: Moving now to
junk food in schools. Your predecessor suggested that the Secretary
of State for Education's pledge to ban junk food in schools is
not founded on evidence. Would you describe the policy as evidence
based?
Dame Deirdre Hutton: We have been
assessing the nutrients that there should be in schools. I am
not quite sure that we have said that have we, Andrew?
Dr Wadge: We have a range of policies
in schools, but not a particular policy.
Dr Harris: I think the question was about
the Secretary of State's policy of banning junk food in schools.
Q610 Adam Afriyie: A while ago we
heard the Secretary of State talking about that we must not have
junk food in schools. Do you have a view on that, did that ripple
through to the FSA in any way and have you done anything about
that?
Dame Deirdre Hutton: What we are
doing is collecting evidence on what school food should contain
and there is an awful lot of movement, some of which is generated
by us, some of which is generated by the School Foods Trust. One
of the things we are also doing is we have just put out a research
call for the connection between what children eat and their behaviour
and I think it would be very good to get some good research evidence
on that.
Q611 Chairman: Dame Deirdre, the
point of this question is simply this, we are not accusing the
Food Standards Agency, we are saying that Sir John Krebs in March
said this: "There was no evidence that the Government's policy
will work, there was no scientific definition of junk food, there
was no cost benefit analysis and there was no public engagement".
That was a pretty damming statement from your predecessor about
government policy. Do you agree with it and what is the point
of having a Food Standards Agency if you are not being used?
Dame Deirdre Hutton: I have to
say I do not agree with it. I think the problem I have is that
one hamburger eaten once a week is not a problem, but if all that
is available in schools is fizzy sugary drinks and not fruit juice
and water, then the balance of what children are eating and getting
in schools is not good and not good for them. It is the distinction
between one bit of junk food and a balanced diet, I think, is
a difficult one.
Q612 Adam Afriyie: You mention fizzy
drinks at schools, but there is a huge conflict here between healthy
foods and obesity, because if you have a diet drink which may
not necessarily contain all the nutritional requirements that
you may be looking for as opposed to a fruit drink which contains
lots of sugar and high levels of calories, then there is an inherent
conflict there. How does the FSA address that conflict?
Dr Wadge: If I could just come
in. We are working with the Health Department and the Education
Department on a range of activities within schools and one of
them is about target nutrient specification which is saying, what
are the appropriate nutrients that should be available within
school meals. We are working on making sure that children learn
how to cook, they learn what sort of nutritional advice is important,
alongside food hygiene advice. We are doing surveys of school
lunch boxes, we are working on a whole range of activities. I
think the purpose of the Food Standards Agency is to try to help
and play our part in improving the diet of young people at schools,
I do not think that that is done by simplistic actions.
Chairman: Andrew, that is not our point,
our point is that we have no concerns about what the Food Standards
Agency is concerned, the purpose of this inquiry is whether, when
the Government makes a policy which it clearly did in terms of
junk food in schools, it is based on evidence, and Sir John Krebs
said it was not based on evidence at all in his lecture in which
he made very damming comments about this unscientific approach.
We have heard from Dame Deirdre that yours is an Agency that prides
itself on obtaining good scientific evidence before in fact it
gives advice. Were you asked for advice before this policy came
into being, yes or no?
Q613 Dr Harris: Can we be clear what
the policy is, because I think it has not been clear from your
previous answer, Dame Deirdre. "The Labour Party Conference
in September 2005, the then Secretary of State for Education and
Skills, Ruth Kelly, announced plans to ban foods high in fat,
salt and sugar from meals and vending machines in English schools
saying: `I am absolutely clear that the scandal of junk food served
every day in school canteens must end. So today I can announce
that we will ban poor quality processed bangers and burgers being
served in schools from next September'." And the remarks
the Chairman just made about Sir John Krebs' comment relate to
that specific policy. You are independent of the Government, what
is your view?
Dame Deirdre Hutton: That is very
helpful, thank you, all this happened before my time obviously.
My view is, as I think I said, that it is difficult to talk about
one specific food and say that is a junk food and ban it. What
we are interested in, and I repeat this, what we are interested
in is the balance of the diet that children get at school and
what we want to do is to make sure that what we have defined as
the target nutrient specification is followed within schools.
I think there is a sense in which that statement is a particularly
political statement for a particular audience in a way that frankly
as a science based organisation we do not do. What we do have
evidence for is that the diet that children have been fed at school
does not fit the target nutrient specifications that we feel they
require and that is our approach.
Q614 Adam Afriyie: The FSA had no
input into that policy that was announced at the Labour Party
Conference?
Dr Wadge: Not that I am aware
of.
Dame Deirdre Hutton: I am sorry,
I simply do not know, it was before—
Q615 Chairman: Have you commented
on it since?
Dame Deirdre Hutton: I have not
commented on that specific remark, but what we are doing is the
underpinning science which will allow school food caterers or
local authorities or whatever to try and make sure that they have
the right balance of diet in schools, that is our function.
Q616 Chairman: Dame Deirdre, I am
getting a little concerned now, because having spoken very complimentarily
about the organisation, it seems to me that you are not being
proactive when you actually see something which is blatantly wrong
being proffered as scientific in terms of government policy and
surely that should be one of your roles?
Dame Deirdre Hutton: I think that
what we are doing in talking to the Department of Health and the
Department of Education is trying to make sure they have the sound
scientific base. I mean I think that in the comment that Ruth
Kelly made in that in terms of—I am sorry I do not have
instant recall—providing a proper diet for children in schools,
it is absolutely right and we will provide her with the material
to do that. Where, I think, we would differ and indeed we have
been very careful in all our public discussions never to say "a
particular food is junk food", where we would differ from
her in a way is in the last I see as a highly political statement
which she made which is about junk food.
Q617 Dr Harris: It is a political
statement, yes, that is fine and apologies for that statement,
but it was a policy announcement, so it was a specific policy.
This issue is not about whether politicians make evidence based
statements, it is evidence based policy formulation by a government
and that is what I think was of concern.
Dame Deirdre Hutton: What I think
we are doing in this case is helping the Government exactly to
make a policy based and evidence based policy in terms of providing
the information about target nutrient specification.
Q618 Chairman: Do you ever comment
on a policy without being asked because, I mean, you would if
it was a private company, would you not?
Dame Deirdre Hutton: Yes, we do.
I suppose what I am struggling with is partly we are the generators
of the policy often, so we are the people who, as it were, are
unearthing the problem and presenting it to government and saying
something needs to be done about this, so do we then comment in
retrospect? Yes, we do.
Q619 Adam Afriyie: So if the Government
was to come up with a policy which was completely contrary to
the scientific evidence and advice that you have, you would get
out there in the media and point out that this was completely
against scientific advice?
Dame Deirdre Hutton: I think I
would probably take the slightly different approach in that you
will know that all our policy is discussed in public, the board
meets in public, I would be far more likely instead of getting
on the radio to take that policy through the science and to the
board and to say, "Is this something that we can agree with
or should we go to government and say, `We believe this is wrong'?"
| 
