Board meeting minutes: 13 February 2003

Sir John Krebs, Chairman
Ann Hemingway, Acting Deputy Chairman
Richard Ayre
Karol Bailey
Jeya Henry
Valerie Howarth
Iain MacDonald
Robert Rees
Vernon Sankey
Michael Walker
Sandra Walbran

Apologies were received from Michael Gibson.

Officials attending:
Jon Bell - Acting Chief Executive
David Statham - Director of Enforcement & Food Standards
Group (item 4 only)
Richard Harding - Head of Food Chain Strategy Division (item 5 only)
Sue Hattersley - Chemical Safety & Toxicology Division (item 6 only)
Mark Bush - Board Secretary
Sue Johns - Board Secretariat

1. The Chairman noted that this was the last open Board meeting that Karol Bailey and Jeya Henry would be attending as members of the Board. The Chairman also noted that this was the first open meeting that Ann Hemingway and Jon Bell were present as Acting Deputy Chairman and Acting Chief Executive respectively.

2. The Chairman reminded Board members of their obligation to declare interests before discussion of relevant items. This applied to discussions in both the open session and the closed session (which dealt with internal management matters).

3. There were no items raised for discussion under AOB.

(Paper FSA 03/02/01)

4. Minutes of the meeting held on 12 December at the Congress Centre, London were considered. These were confirmed as an accurate record of the meeting. Board members asked about the progress of two matters:

• TSEs in other species, paragraph 11 - discussions were on-going with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra); the need to act as quickly as possible was noted. An oral update would be given at the next meeting. Action: Jon Bell
• Chlorpropham residues in potatoes, paragraph 13 - The Chairman had written to Defra Ministers expressing the FSA's concern. Defra shared this concern, and officials for both departments had met with industry to discuss the matter. Industry was investigating ways of reducing residues.

5. In considering matters arising and the table of follow up action, Board members noted that

• In relation to the note of SRM breaches in imported meat, FSA officials had raised the matter once more with Commission officials at a recent Working Group. The Commission had instructed all Member States to check thoroughly meat emerging from intervention. The Board noted that it was difficult to detect SRM in frozen carcases and that the Agency, in conjunction with counterparts in Germany had been reviewing the methodology. This work had made good progress and it was hoped to issue further guidance to other Member States. Board members were reminded that only about one-third of meat in intervention had been released so far. It was also agreed that past UK breaches would be included in the note.
• With respect to guidance material for magistrates, an issue that arose as part of the discussion on unfit food, it was hoped that it would be possible to circulate a note shortly.

GM Debate
6. The Chairman introduced the item by briefly recounting the history of the Government's GM debate so far. Launched by the Secretary of State for Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) last year, this consists of three main strands: the public debate, a science review and an economics review. The FSA was planning an independent but linked and complementary exercise to discover the public¿s current views on GM food. A booklet providing information on GM technology and its use in food production would be published the following day. The FSA would also be focussing on young people and those on low incomes for their views through a series of events:

• Citizens Jury, Slough
• Schools Debate, Durham University
• School Video, Acland Burghley Comprehensive, North London
• Discussion groups with young people and people on low incomes, Scotland

Full details of the FSA's debate would be announced shortly.

BSE in Sheep
7. The Board was reminded that the Agency review of precautionary measures that might be taken to reduce exposure to BSE, should it be present in sheep, had recommended that the Agency should be pro-active in communicating the possible risk to those communities that are major consumers of mutton and older goat meat. This was necessary as mutton and older goat meat could be expected to contain higher amounts of infectivity, if BSE were present. A series of briefings with opinion formers from a range of organisations representing the Asian, Muslim and African-Caribbean communities had taken place and generated a number of articles in the ethnic media.

8. The Chairman had given a presentation to Imams in a joint venture with the Islamic Cultural Centre on 30 January to some 40 participants from all over the country. He had stressed that BSE had not been found naturally in sheep or goats and the Agency was not advising against the consumption of sheep meat. However, if BSE were present the risk would be likely to be reduced by avoiding meat from older animals. Summary sheets of the key points translated into relevant languages had been given to the Imams so they could use them to brief their congregations and the FSA had also offered to check any material that the Imams prepared themselves. The Board asked for feedback on how those attending the briefings had communicated the issue to people in their communities. Action: Neil Martinson (COMS)

Over Thirty Month (OTM) Review
9. The Chairman had agreed to keep Board members informed of progress with the OTM review. The rule had been introduced as a BSE control measure in 1996 and stopped meat from cattle over the age of thirty months entering the food chain. The FSA had held one public meeting (in summer 2002) and seven meetings of the stakeholder working group so far. A further public meeting was planned for 7 March 2003 to present emerging findings, following which a report would be produced for formal consultation.

Dr Jon Bell reported on the following issues.
Shellfish Testing
10. For some time now tests had shown the presence of what appeared to be an unknown toxin in shellfish from UK waters. The priority now was to determine its potential human toxicity. A laboratory willing to undertake this work had been identified and it was anticipated that the contract would be signed shortly. There was no standard protocol for testing for this toxin and the
laboratories currently carrying out testing in the UK were to meet soon to discuss the matter further. The new toxic substance was not exclusive to UK shellfish and had been detected in other countries. The FSA was working with other experts in shellfish toxins. The Agency was also discussing the matter with the Shellfish Association of Great Britain and its expert consultant.

11. The UK shellfish beds were tested frequently and closed immediately positive results were reported. The impact of closures on the industry had been reduced by 'zoning' the beds wherever possible, thereby allowing shellfish to be continued to be harvested from zones that had negative results. The industry had, however, protested that the FSA's action was too precautionary and that the results of the tests did not necessarily mean that humans were at risk. The Board confirmed its opinion that the precautionary approach was appropriate in order to reduce any potential risk to public health while the investigations continued.

Traceability in the Food Chain Update
12. The Board had discussed a paper on traceability in July 2002 and agreed that the Agency should provide clear guidelines on the legal requirements, and explore with industry the scope for strengthening current traceability arrangements in a proportionate way, such as through the identification and spreading of appropriate best practice. On the guidance, the FSA had been
in touch with the Department of Trade and Industry about the new General Product Safety Regulations, which would come into force in January 2004, as these would introduce some traceability requirements for food businesses ahead of the General Food Law Regulation, which was due to come into force in January 2005. The aim was to ensure that any action on traceability was consistent across government.

13. The FSA had written to all the stakeholders who were involved in the traceability consultations in 2002 with a view to involving them in the development of FSA advice on best practice. A number of meetings with industry stakeholders were planned for the spring of 2003, and the production of Agency advice was expected to be completed by the summer. Board members noted that there was considerable experience of traceability in the pharmaceutical industry and suggested that their expertise should also be sought. Likewise, Board members noted that small catering businesses should also be included at an early stage. Dr Bell noted these points and agreed to report back to the Board in July 2003. Action: Jon Bell

SRM in Ewe Carcases
14. Dr Bell reported that, during a recent inspection at Smithfield, SRM had been found in two split ewe carcases. This was the second such incident involving ewe carcases. Whilst the on-site Official Veterinary Surgeon (OVS) had spotted this contravention and stopped the meat entering the food chain, the carcase should not have arrived at Smithfield in that state. A full press release, including details of the slaughterhouse involved, had been circulated on 12 February. The MHS inspector involved had been moved to other duties at another site and a full independent investigation was underway.

Nickel in Water
15. Board members noted an article that had appeared in the Guardian newspaper on 7 February reporting elevated levels of nickel in water boiled in kettles with nickel plated elements. The work had been carried out on behalf of the Drinking Water Inspectorate (DWI). The results showed that these levels dropped significantly after the kettle had been used for a month. This was not a food safety issue but nickel was known to exacerbate contact dermatitis in those allergic to this metal. Another significant find was that the acidity of the water influenced the amount of nickel that leached into it. Variations in acidity can arise naturally and furthermore jug filters can increase acidity. However, DWI was carrying out further work to investigate the effects of acidity.

16. The Committee on the Toxicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment (COT) had been asked to consider the implications of this data and its report and the accompanying FSA advice were on the Agency's website. Board members asked whether boiled cooled water given to babies and toddlers might pose a problem. The COT had considered this issue and concluded that babies and toddlers were not at greater risk than the rest of the population. Some Board members were concerned that once the situation was no longer the focus of media attention that the message might be lost to consumers sensitive to nickel. One possibility was that a warning could be printed on new appliances.

National Nutrition Strategy for Wales
17. Dr Bell welcomed the launch of this Strategy on today by Jane Hutt, the Welsh Assembly Government Health and Social Services Minister. The strategy had been prompted by concern over relatively high rates of diet related chronic diseases. The joint initiative between the FSA and the Welsh Assembly advocated a combination of information and training and the Action
Plan was aimed particularly at helping people on low incomes. It was available from the Agency website and in hard copy in both Welsh and English from the FSA office in Cardiff.

(Paper FSA 03/02/02)

[Prior to the discussion of this item Michael Walker declared an interest as a Public Analyst who earned fees from the analysis of food samples and would therefore not participate in relation to that issue to the extent that it might arise. Sandra Walbran declared an interest as a Food Law Enforcement Officer. Robert Rees declared an interest as a caterer subject to Local Authority inspection. Karol Bailey declared an interest as a food producer subject to Local Authority inspection. Subject to that, Michael Walker, Sandra Walbran, Robert Rees and Karol Bailey participated in discussion and determination of this issue.]

18. David Statham introduced the paper by reminding Board members that 2001 had been a particularly difficult year or Local Authorities (LAs) because of the Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD) outbreak. The data showed some interesting trends. The total number of inspections had fallen whilst the number of food premises subject to at least one full inspection had increased by seven percent. The number of prosecutions had decreased, as had the number of food businesses found to be contravening regulations. The use of improvement notices, an alternative enforcement method to prosecution, had increased. The number of food samples taken had continued to fall: in comparison to the number taken in 1999 there had been an eight percent
decrease in 2000 and a fourteen percent decrease in 2001. The most surprising statistic had been a large increase (twenty four percent) in the total number of food outlets. The paper also highlighted issues of recruiting and retaining qualified officials as well as matters relating to the audit process itself.

19. Board members noted the dramatic increase in the number of food premises and queried whether this was real or an artefact of the way in which the data were collected and/or collated. An increase of nearly a quarter would be quite surprising if it were real. The accounting process itself was still relatively new and there had been continued teething problems in 2001, which were
principally software related; those now appeared to have been resolved. There was insufficient information to be able to judge whether these new premises were high or low risk outlets. If the majority were low risk outlets then the observed increase would be of less concern. Further details were being sought which would allow a more accurate assessment of the situation to be made. The categorisation of premises as high/low risk was currently being reviewed and a new Code of Practice would be issued in due course. This would re-examine the inspection programme and would consider taking certain extremely low risk premises off the inspection programme completely.

20. Board members acknowledged that there were serious resource issues facing LAs. Annex 2 to the paper illustrated that many of the LAs reporting unacceptably low levels of enforcement had done so because of staff shortages. Likewise, the decrease in food sampling was also indicative of reduced resources for and the low profile of food safety enforcement. If the dramatic increase in food premises were all in the high risk category then the burden placed on staff would become even greater. The FSA was working with the Local Government Association (LGA) and Local Authorities Co-ordinators of Regulatory Services (LACORS) to try and raise the profile of food safety work with key people in local authorities. For example, the Chairman had agreed to speak at an LGA conference in the summer. This was particularly important as some elected members still appeared to be hostile to transparency. Another important way to maximise the effectiveness of limited resources was the sharing of best practice. The FSA was working with LAs to promote and encourage this.

21. Board members welcomed the proposed incremental increases in the measures of enforcement activity used by the FSA. One Board member expressed concern that stakeholders had not been consulted prior to this proposal being made and that it was inappropriate to ask the Board to endorse such a proposal until full consultation had taken place.

22. The Board agreed that the current level of fifty percent of planned inspections of high risk premises being carried out was used to identify LAs with clearly unacceptable levels of enforcement. This was a minimum and the FSA had consistently stated its intention that that level would increase. Prior to the establishment of the Agency there had been no systematic audit of food enforcement so initial targets had had to be set. The Agency recognised that under the Statutory Codes of Practice local authorities were required to carry out one hundred percent of planned inspections. However, as many did not achieve this level targets had to be set which were realistic but also challenging. The proposal was considered to meet those criteria, but the FSA would consult key stakeholders.

23. The point was made that eventually the FSA's audit process itself would be reviewed. In the meantime the system of checks built into the process was thought to be adequate.

24. Some Board members noted that the data implied that more than forty percent of all premises were failing to comply in full with food law. Whilst the trend showed a gradual decrease in the percentage of failures, there was nonetheless potential concern if the premises were failing on serious breaches of the law rather than for example minor technicalities. There was insufficient information presented to allow a more detailed analysis but the indication was that the great majority of infringements are relatively minor.

25. Some Board members commented on the reduction in prosecutions and asked whether the reasons behind this were related to resource issues, e.g. time and cost. Enforcement officers frequently chose to pursue alternative options before resorting to prosecutions, and often found formal cautions and improvement notices more effective in affecting change in businesses. These options carried the force of law and had the additional bonus of being a more effective use of resources than prosecution cases.

26. Following on from the July 2002 Board meeting when Cllr Reg Smith had joined the Board for a discussion on LA enforcement issues, the Board had recently been circulated a copy of Cllr Smith's paper on issues pertaining to the recruitment and retention of enforcement officers. The Board wished their thanks to Cllr Smith for preparing the paper be recorded. Board members
asked what action was being taken to address the issues raised in Cllr Smith's paper and noted that the FSA was working closely with LACORS on a number of initiatives. For example enforcement officers were to be offered placements in central government departments and the FSA was currently looking at qualification issues with professional bodies.

27. The Chairman summarised the main points raised in the discussion. The Board:

• accepted the proposal for incremental increases in the minimum inspection level, key stakeholders should be consulted on these issues;
• agreed to the proposed measures in relation to those LAs carrying out less than fifty percent of planned inspections, failure to take samples or failure to provide data;
• and requested that the next annual report contain:
  • further explanation of what had led to the large increase in premises;
  • illustrations of sharing best practice; and
  • progress on the issues surrounding recruitment and retention of enforcement officers.

The Acting Chief Executive undertook to circulate an interim report on establishing better key performance indicators before the next annual report. Action: Jon Bell

(Paper FSA 03/02/03)

[Prior to the discussion of this item Robert Rees declared an interest as a caterer and participant in several groups involved in HACCP training/funding. Sandra Walbran declared an interest as a Local Authority Enforcement Officer. Karol Bailey declared an interest as a food producer and retailer. Robert Rees, Sandra Walbran and Karol Bailey participated in discussion and determination of this issue.]

28. Richard Harding introduced the paper by highlighting the key principles on which the Agency's HACCP strategy was based, as set out at paragraph 9, and emphasised the importance of preparing good guidance for businesses of all sizes. The current priority was the catering sector, because they comprised the majority of business outlets in the UK, and also because it was in this sector that most progress needed to be made.

29. Board members noted that the FSA had agreed in its Service Delivery Agreement (SDA) to achieve a target of thirty percent of food businesses to have implemented HACCP by April 2004. However, when that target had been set the number of food outlets was estimated at 600,000. In the light of data in the previous paper, Board members sought clarification on whether the thirty percent target applied to the number of premises when the agreement was made or the current number of premises. Board members were reminded that, because the thirty percent target was part of the FSA's SDA, it could not be altered retrospectively. They therefore agreed that the aim should be to achieve HACCP uptake in 180,000 premises (thirty percent of the originally estimated 600,000 premises) by the April 2004 deadline.

30. Board members commended staff for the work that had been carried out to date, and stressed the importance of developing a robust system that was applicable to different types of businesses and was capable of being audited. It was important to take care to develop an approach that worked in the long term. As well as robustness, Board members acknowledged the need for simplicity; a proliferation of forms would not aid the successful implementation of HACCP principles, particularly in small businesses. Board members were reminded that current figures showed that more than eighty five percent of catering businesses employed ten or fewer people; and the strategy for engaging with these businesses needed to meet their needs.

31. With the imminent implementation of regulations relating to HACCP on an EU-wide basis Board members asked whether guidance and resources were likely to be made available at European level to assist Member States, but were informed that this would not be the case. Looking at the progress achieved in other Member States Board members noted the UK was at the forefront of this work. However, within the UK the devolved countries were progressing at different rates, due to a variety of reasons , including availability of resources.

32. The Board noted the importance of training, not only of catering workers but also of enforcement officials, in the successful implementation of HACCP. It was noted that any training package developed needed to be suitable for people working in small catering businesses. Annex 1 of the paper set out a variety of options for training throughout the UK. Some Board members suggested that universities and colleges of further and higher education be considered as potential training providers.

33. Board members accepted that resources were a factor governing implementation. The FSA had unsuccessfully bid for extra funds to implement HACCP schemes in England and Wales, in contrast to a similar successful bid in Scotland. However, it was planned to progress the work in a way in which, should extra funding become available, could be easily ratcheted up . It was noted that despite HACCP having a role as a business development tool, there was no extra funding or support available from other government departments with an industry sponsorship role.

34. During its initial discussion in November 2001, the Board had decided not to pursue licensing but to revisit this in the light of the progress made in implementing HACCP by other means. It was agreed that an appropriate time to do this would be in the first half of next year after the target date for the implementation of HACCP in thirty percent of food premises had been reached. Action: Ann Goodwin (LAED)

35. Summarising, the Chairman noted the progress made and that the Board had endorsed the revised plan with the following comments:

• that key performance indicators should be identified
• that the thirty percent target (of 180,000) be retained
• that an update on progress should be provided in November.

Action: Richard Harding (FCSD)

(Paper FSA 03/02/04)

[Prior to the discussion of this item Michael Walker declared an interest as a Public Analyst who earned fees from peanut testing work. Robert Rees declared an interest as a caterer and General Governor of the British Nutrition Foundation. Karol Bailey declared an interest as a food producer and retailer. Michael Walker, Robert Rees and Karol Bailey participated in discussion and determination of this issue.]

36. Sue Hattersley introduced the paper drawing Board members' attention to the fact that this was the first time they had discussed food intolerance and allergy. Both food intolerance and food allergy could have a major impact on the lives of individual sufferers and their families. Current estimates put the number of people with food intolerances at one to two percent of the UK's adult population. It was important that consumers who believed they had a food intolerance or allergy should seek a proper clinical diagnosis. This would provide specific information about the foods to which they were sensitive. Accurate and comprehensive food labelling was a key to handling food intolerance and allergies; a point raised by Board members in earlier discussions on food labelling. It was recognised however that choice was more difficult in catering outlets, where such information was not as readily available. The paper set out a strategy to protect consumers through a better understanding of the issues and by providing information to consumers, industry and enforcement authorities.

37. Board members noted that fatal reactions mostly occurred in young adults whilst eating out. There was an immediate link here to the previous paper on HACCP; catering staff need to be fully aware of the potentially life threatening implications of food intolerances. Some Board members stressed the role of enforcement officers in developing a greater level of understanding and knowledge in this area. However, before the officers could train others there was a need for them to be fully briefed. Material was being produced for the Agency's Food Standards Update Course later this year. In addition, the FSA was currently pulling together a range of information for a new page on its website. The aim would be to help consumers understand the issues and it would also include useful contacts. On the catering side, some Board members also noted that there was also an opportunity to enhance the coverage of the subject in the curriculum for catering National Vocational Qualifications.

38. Board members noted that the paper included a section on the issues of food additives and behaviour in children, and asked whether the Agency was taking any precautionary measures in relation to the risk. In response it was pointed out that food additives were not a life threatening issue, unlike food allergies and, in addition, the advice of the COT, the relevant expert advisory committee, was that the evidence for any adverse effect of food additives was inconclusive. Consumers had a choice and, by looking at the ingredients listed on the label, could avoid particular additives if they wished.

39. Board members sought assurance that the Agency's research portfolio was addressing the question of adverse reactions to food additives. Some Board members called for a double blind randomised controlled trial of food additives (that is, where treatments were assigned at random and neither the person delivering the test nor the test subject was aware of whether the additive or a placebo was being used). Such trials had already been attempted, although none of them was without problems in their experimental design. Board members noted the strict rules controlling the use of children as experimental subjects. The Agency had established an ad-hoc working group to consider this matter further and to help decide if a definitive study could be devised. The group included external scientific experts and consumer groups.

40. Board members commented on the proposed strategy in Table 1. The first objective, to gain a better understanding of food intolerance including food allergy, was commended, especially the research programme. However, the objective relating to protecting consumers was considered to lack detail in its present state. The proposed strategy made no reference to targeting young adults. A detailed Action Plan should be produced to include informing and training enforcement officials and possibly also building food intolerance into the FSA's HACCP guidance. These activities needed to be practical in their approach and measurable in their delivery, with meaningful targets.

41. The Board commended the work being done by the Anaphylaxsis Campaign in raising the profile of food intolerance with industry and working alongside them to inform vulnerable consumers. Likewise the work being carried out by the British Nutrition Foundation in schools with eleven to fourteen year-olds was highlighted.

42. In summary, the Chairman noted the Board:

• endorsed the two-pronged approach in Table 1, with the proviso that the second objective be strengthened
• requested a further report in the autumn, including a full action plan.

(Papers FSA 03/02/05, FSA 03/02/06 & FSA 03/02/07)

Wales
43. The Chairman of the Advisory Committee for Wales (ACW) thanked Dr Bell for his support in drawing attention to the Nutrition Strategy launch and noted that the production of the strategy had resulted from a good collaborative effort between the FSA and the Welsh Assembly Government.

44. She noted that the ACW had decided to conduct a review of its current mode of operation, including the 'open meetings' that reflected the FSA Board's practice. The ACW Chairman would inform the Board of the outcome.

Northern Ireland
45. The Chairman of the Northern Ireland Advisory Committee informed Board members that the March agenda would also include a discussion of the Waste Food Task Force report.

46. A similar review to the one in Wales was also underway. The Advisory Committee had recently undertaken a video briefing with an official at Aviation House. This had proved to be most successful and an effective use of time and resources.

Scotland
47. As Michael Gibson was unable to attend the Board meeting, there was no oral report from the Chair of the Scottish Food Advisory Committee. Board members' attention was drawn to the written report provided (FSA 03/02/07).

48. The Chairman reminded members that they were welcome to take up specific points with the author(s) of information papers.

AOB
49. There were no items of Any Other Business.

50. The Chairman thanked Karol Bailey and Jeya Henry, the retiring members for their work, and especially for the part each had played in establishing the FSA and ensuring that its core values were adhered to. He wished both every success in the future.

Date of Next meeting
51. The next meeting would be held on 13 March 2003 in London.