Follow-up letter from the Secretary of
State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
I enjoyed our discussion last week on "Food
2030" and I said I would come back to you on a number of
points.
You said that you would welcome a diagram showing
how the key committees and other bodies mentioned in Food 2030
fit together. I attach one which I hope is helpful. There are
of course many other bodies taking forward aspects of food policy
across government, but these are the key ones for delivery of
our food strategy.
You took a particular interest in the role of
DA(F) and asked whether you could have a list of agenda items
that it has discussed in the past year. I'm afraid that isn't
possible as it would be a breach of the rules which apply to Cabinet
discussions, although I'm sure you can have a pretty good guess!
You questioned the figure of £52 which
is cited on page 13 of the strategy as being the additional annual
cost to UK consumers of the CAP. The figure of £52 per person
(£207 per family of four) is based on Defra calculations
of the cost of the CAP (specifically EU market price support and
agricultural tariffs) to consumers. Tariffs and market price support
maintain British prices above world prices, making food more expensive
that it would otherwise be. The calculations are made using the
same methodology as the OECD's "Consumer Support Estimate"
(CSE). The final figure indicates the additional expenditure that
consumers make because of the UK's higher prices. This can then
be divided by the UK population to give a cost per person, which
can be used to calculate the cost per family.
The approach is simple but largely robust. On
the one hand it ignores the fact that world prices might rise
slightly if the EU were to eliminate market price support and
reduce tariffs, which would reduce the size of the final figure.
On the other hand, the calculation could be said to be an underestimate,
since it doesn't include the welfare cost to consumers who would
have purchased more food if the price had been lower. On
balance therefore the calculation gives a reasonably good indication
of the extent to which British consumers are disadvantaged by
the EU's market price support and agricultural tariffs. However,
there are two important caveats regarding interpretation of the
figure. Firstly, it is important to note that "consumer"
in this case refers to the post farm gate consumer, which includes
retailers and processors as well as the "man in the street".
Furthermore, the gap between UK and world prices is in part driven
by the EU's high tariffs, which are unlikely to be reduced to
the extent necessary to equate British prices with world prices
in the near future. The difficulties of negotiating significant
tariff reductions are clearly illustrated by the slow progress
of the current Doha Round of trade talks.
You also suggested that we should look at food
waste in the catering sector; fair point! Whilst our focus to
date has been on households, from where the majority of food waste
arises (8.3 million tonnes annually), food waste from the hospitality
sector (restaurants, hotels, etc.) is estimated at around three
million tonnes annually (2008 estimate). WRAP are currently
undertaking research to build up a clearer picture of not only
how much, but where and why this waste is occurring, and how food
waste collection from this sector (in particular SMEs) can be
made most economically viable. This, alongside current initiatives
such as development of anaerobic digestion, will enable us to
move forward in tackling food waste in this sector most effectively.
In the public sector: research commissioned
by WRAP suggests around 100,000t of food waste arises annually
in schools, around 80% of which is estimated to be avoidable.
WRAP are now piloting food waste reduction initiatives at the
schools that participated in the research. The outcomes of these
pilots will inform the development of guidance for schools more
widely.
The banning/restriction of biodegradable wastes,
and changes to the definition of municipal waste—which we
are consulting on this year—could also have profound effects
on managing food waste across these areas.
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
January 2010
| 
