erik millstone quote web

There is growing concern about the FSA’s Regulating Our Future (ROF) programme. Parliament’s Efra Committee rightly signalled worries about the loopholes in the collection, collation and auditing of information revealed by the 2 Sisters scandal. Anyone in the food industry who thinks ROF is a step forward towards a business-led self-regulatory nirvana should think again. It could lead before long to the kind of breakdown in consumer trust the past 30 years of policy development has tried to prevent.

One can pity the FSA. Its budget has been slashed. The same is true for local authority environment health and trading standards officers. The FSA admits the status quo is “financially unsustainable”. Worse, it has been broken up; Scotland has gone its own way. Brexit threatens the loss of countless links to EU-wide scientific networks, and particularly Efsa and DG-Santé at the European Commission.

The FSA proposes to shift responsibility for inspections and monitoring of food business operators (FBOs) from the public sector to private companies, operating under contracts to FBOs. Local authority inspectors will mostly monitor and inspect the sub-contractors, while the FSA audits local authorities.

From the consumers’ point of view, the only welcome aspect of the proposal is to make registration of FBOs mandatory rather than voluntary. Beyond that, the proposals represent a threat to consumer protection.

The FSA insists ROF proposals do not amount to ‘self-regulation’, but the proposed model closely approximates to self-inspection. It says: “Businesses should meet the costs of regulation, which should be no more than they need to be.” FBOs will employ the cheapest service providers, and decide which checks will be ‘needed’. FBOs will employ contractors that, while satisfying the FSA’s minimum requirements, will monitor the fewest parameters and least often. The slippery slope emerges: FBOs will choose service providers they believe likely not to cause too many difficulties. Safety standards are more likely to fall than rise.

One of the worst features of ROF is its promise to FBOs that “under no circumstances will we share any data without the express permission of its owner.” It is unclear how the FSA thinks it can maintain consumer confidence that all FBOs are meeting statutory safety standards, while concealing from the public any dirty secrets FBOs or their subcontractors may reveal.

The FSA ought to be resisting and speaking out to consumers, not claiming that what it proposes will be better. It was set up to provide a clear, authoritative, trustworthy body to protect consumers and the public health. Not to hand over responsibility to the food industry again.

Industry: think before drinking from this poisoned chalice!

Erik Millstone is emeritus professor of science policy at the University of Sussex

Topics