Will the FSA really pass food safety responsibility on to supermarkets?

There are serious political moves afoot to try to secure a new role for the Food Standards Agency under the Labour government, one which would see it become an independent health regulator for the food and drink industry.

But first the FSA has a job on its hands to win back trust in the job it already has: overseeing food safety.

Amid growing fears over a lack of resources on the frontline, the FSA sought radical solutions to make up for the shortage of boots on the ground. However, it has now backtracked on plans to hand control over food safety data to supermarkets and other large food companies. It was part of a plan to allow local authorities to concentrate on smaller, rogue operators while the FSA, in partnership with the food industry, oversees big data.

Board papers published ahead of its December meeting admitted it had been too slow to reveal plans for its new role for supermarkets, and that huge concern over the proposals had been expressed when it did finally consult with environmental health, Trading Standards and local government officers across England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

“One of the common themes we heard is a clear need for greater transparency around the proof-of-concept trial,” the documents say.

The FSA also announced it had set up a new steering group, made up of leading environmental health, Trading Standards and other local government chiefs from England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

That steering group held its first meeting this week, chaired by FSA director of operations Junior Johnson, and also attended by Food Standards Scotland, its equivalent from north of the border.

However, whilst the FSA has paused aspects of the work, the plans for so-called national level regulation have not been scrapped.

Indeed the FSA has stated Aldi, Asda, Sainsbury’s, Tesco and Waitrose, which all took part in the trials, are still committed to the project.

Under the “high-level objectives” set out in papers for the steering group, the FSA says the group will seek to “demonstrate assurance in the use of business insights in regulation – underpinned by robust information governance processes”.

It plans to identify opportunities to use the data gathered on food safety by supermarkets, as well as “rebuild trust across the regulatory delivery landscape”.

Fierce opposition

The FSA’s moves to hand areas of responsibility for schemes such as Scores on the Doors to supermarkets has left some outraged.

One source told The Grocer: “The fact the very mission of this steering group is to rebuild trust is a recognition – albeit one to a behind-closed-doors meeting – that the FSA has lost the trust of public health experts with these proposals.

“A lot of people were shocked when the FSA came out with the proposals that large retailers would be marking their own homework.

“But whilst the FSA’s announcement last week was an admission of that position, it is now essentially trying to corral those same people back into supporting its plan.

“The idea is of course that supermarkets have a lot of data and this could help the FSA. I would say, of course, the FSA should be able to see that data, and indeed they should have the powers to rewrite them, but they shouldn’t be using that as an excuse for not checking up.

“As we know from Horsegate, Tesco thought it had a complete data record of the supply chain, but the information it was given itself was dishonest and that all came crashing down.”

Read more:

• The FSA boss who’s bringing a ‘sense of partnership’ to Defra

• FSA food safety shake-up will ultimately come down to politics

• Food safety Scores on Doors cannot be marked by supermarkets

• FSA’s ‘risk-based’ food inspections are still a long way off

Erik Millstone, professor of science policy at the University of Sussex, also strongly opposes the FSA’s plans.

“Of course I recognise the pressures on public finances, but what we’ve learnt from austerity is that short-term savings have very large long-term costs, and you can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.

“What the FSA and government has to realise is if you don’t properly fund food safety inspections, sooner or later you’re going to get food poisoning scares. You’re going to get scares that are worse than salmonella.”

Katrina Anderson, principal associate at Mills & Reeve, says opposition to the FSA’s plans is likely to significantly delay any changes to the food safety regime.

“The latest announcement from the FSA makes it clear the focus has shifted,” she says.

“In relation to the proposals to collect and use retailers’ own data to drive a national, FSA-led inspection and enforcement regime for food hygiene, it is clear these proposals are also going to be reviewed again once further stakeholder input is gathered from across industry and local authorities. 

“In practice this means any changes to the legal regime will likely be delayed significantly.  

“They may not even happen at all if the stakeholder feedback suggests this is not the right direction of travel, and rather the focus should be on enhancing and improving local authority inspections of these businesses.”

Carmel Lynskey, head of business compliance at the FSA, claims the agency is committed to consulting widely over its proposals before making any next steps, although declined to say what power the group had to make decisions.

“Working with and through others across the food system has always been a priority for the FSA,” she says. “These relationships are vital to ensure food is safe.

“We’ve been open about the challenges in the current system. It’s our responsibility to monitor and develop our regulatory system, as the food system keeps evolving, to continue to protect consumers now and in the future.

“The trial we ran with five large retailers has shown us how a national level assessment of data can be used to help identify and mitigate risk in the system.

“We are exploring with our partners what happens next, including how we could share business insights from the large retailers with primary and local authorities to assist their inspections and enforcement.

“We’ll continue to listen to all our stakeholders as we develop our thinking, and expect to present our proposals for next steps next year to our board.”

Mixed blessing

The FSA also refused to answer what role was being played by supermarkets in the further consultation, and whether any wider trails using their data were planned.

As for supermarkets, some believe taking in a new role in helping to police food safety could be a mixed blessing. Last month a BBC investigation accused businesses including Sainsbury’s of misleading customers over their  food hygiene scores, in a scandal which showed how the Scores on the Doors ratings system has become a victim of local authority cutbacks.

The FSA later released figures showing more than 100,000 food premises, many of them supermarkets, were overdue a ratings inspection, with nearly 40,000 new food businesses having never been inspected.

As the FSA continues to lobby to take on a public health brief, the perilous state of food safety regimes is of huge concern to experts. The agency’s proposals aren’t calming nerves.