Final Board Meeting Minutes 14 November 2002

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

Officials attending:
Geoffrey Podger - Chief Executive
Rosemary Hignett - Head of Labelling, Food Standards & Labelling Division (item 4 only)
Nick Tomlinson - Head of Novel Foods Division (item 5 only)
Jacqui Webster - Head of the Consumer Branch, Corporate Secretariat & Consumer Issues Division (item 6 only)
Mark Bush - Board Secretary
Sue Johns - Board Secretariat

Others attending:
Nancy Robson - Chair of the Consumer Committee (item 6 only)

1. 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).

2. Four items were raised for discussion under AOB:

• Recent article in 'The Daily Telegraph' concerning pesticides levels on potatoes (Ann Hemingway)
• Timetable for the risk assessment work as part of the OTM review relating to Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland (Michael Walker)
• Options available to discuss the various reports due to be received as part of the OTM review (Valerie Howarth)
• Fish in the diet (Sir John Arbuthnott) Taken under the report of the Advisory Committee in Scotland.

(Paper FSA 02/11/01)

3. Minutes of the meeting held on 12 September at the North Wales Conference Centre, Llandudno were considered. These were confirmed as an accurate record of the meeting, subject to the following amendment:

• paragraph 38 'second line: the word 'had' should be deleted.

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

• It had been asked whether the recently approved GM vaccine for chickens might contribute to a reduction of Salmonella in eggs. In fact this particular vaccine was not for use against Salmonella but a note on vaccine use against Salmonella would be circulated. Action: Jonathan Back (MSD)
• Paragraph 5 of the minutes referred to the Consumer Committee's plan for prioritising work on low income issues. The Board would be updated before the end of November.

Ethnic Community Stakeholder Meeting on BSE and Sheep
5. The Chairman reminded Board members of the Board's discussion of BSE and sheep in June 2002, and the Board¿s request that the FSA should be pro-active in communicating possible risk to those communities that were major consumers of mutton and goat meat. For example, though under 5 per cent of the population, the Muslim community accounts for 20 per cent of UK sheep meat consumption.

6. On 2 November the Chairman had hosted a special briefing with opinion formers from a range of organisations representing the Asian, Muslim and African-Caribbean communities. Twenty nine delegates had taken part in the discussion. The meeting had not included religious leaders, and a separate meeting with them was scheduled after Ramadan. It had been stressed at the meeting that BSE had not been found naturally in sheep or goats, but that the possibility of it being there could not be ruled out. If BSE were to be found in sheep or goats, meat from older animals could contain higher amounts of potentially infective material. The potential risk needed to be communicated to the communities that were relatively large consumers of older sheep and goat meat. The FSA did not advise against the consumption of sheep meat, but nevertheless thought consumers had the right to know that if BSE were present the risk to the food supply would be likely to be greater in meat from older animals.

7. The meeting had been very positive, and prompted a lively discussion and Q&A session. The message had been well received, and community leaders had agreed to take forward communications themselves. It was felt that where the message was seen to come directly from within the community it would be more effective than one issued by a government department as community leaders had a better understanding of how it could be put across most effectively. Whilst there was no specific funding set aside for this purpose the FSA had offered to assist and advise wherever possible.

8. Board members noted that this meeting offered a channel of communication that could be developed further. Whilst there was no formal accountability structure for ensuring that the message had been relayed to their communities, it was envisaged that contact with community leaders would be maintained. This would be the first in a series of meetings with minority ethnic communities to build stronger links. It was agreed to circulate a note for the Board on the various communication actions undertaken and available information on their impact. Action: Neil Martinson (COMS)

Organic Food Workshop
[During the discussion of this item Michael Gibson declared an interest as a meat producer and trader. Michael Gibson participated in discussion and determination of this issue.]

9. The FSA had held a stakeholder workshop on 6 November to consider possible further research or survey work that could shed further light on the possible health benefits of organic food. The meeting had been well attended with 130 delegates representing all of the major stakeholder groups, including organic producers, retailers, importers, research providers, nutritionists, agricultural experts and consumers. The two main areas of discussion had been nutrition (was organic food a better source of nutrients?) and food safety (was organic food a safer option than conventional foodstuffs?).

10. Irrespective of their cultivation method, the nutrient content of foods was less important than the bio-availability of nutrients after consumption. It had been the view of nutritional experts present at the meeting that the variation in nutrient content between organic and conventional foods was minuscule in comparison with the natural variation due to geophysical differences, e.g. soil and climatic conditions. In addition, the view was expressed that a 'shopping basket' survey was the most appropriate point in the food chain to sample for nutrient content. Harvest, storage, transportation and processing all had the potential to influence the levels of various nutrients; a 'shopping basket' survey rather than a 'field' survey would provide information on what the consumer was actually getting.

11. Some Board members suggested that comparative studies of nutrient content of produce at harvest and at point of sale would be useful. If there was a considerable discrepancy in nutrient levels between 'as harvested' and 'in the shopping basket' then questions would have to be asked about how that deterioration might be reduced. Whilst this was acknowledged as being of scientific interest, it was more important that the consumer be given advice about nutrient levels at the point of purchase in order to make an informed choice.

12. The Board recognised that consumers were especially concerned about potential food safety issues, in particular chemical residue levels, in conventional and organic food. Attendees at the workshop had been informed of two current R&D projects that the FSA was funding. The first was still on-going and aimed to develop tests to confirm that a food was genuinely organic. The second, also in progress, involved a study on Campylobacter in different chicken production types. Initial data suggested that the level of campylobacter in battery hens was considerably lower than their organic and free-range counterparts; this was thought to be influenced by the prevalence of the organism in nature. Therefore housing was the critical issue rather than whether hens were reared organically or conventionally. The Board would be informed of the conclusions when both projects were completed.

13. Board members noted that, in nutritional terms, it was important to restate the '5-a-day' guideline on the consumption of fruit and vegetables, irrespective of their production system.

14. It was agreed that a note of the recent meeting, including information on current research on 'authenticity' would be circulated to the Board. Action: Richard Harding (FCS)

Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN) Report on Salt
15. The SACN salt sub-group had been reviewing the evidence on the link between salt and health. A draft report had been issued for consultation on 4 November. The principal draft conclusions were that:

• the evidence for a link between salt intake and raised blood pressure was stronger now than when the issue had previously been reviewed in 1994
• separate targets established for children and adults for the first time
• target intakes for both adults and children should be reduced

16. As a result the FSA had initiated discussions with industry groups (including Food and Drink Federation, British Retail Consortium, British Hospitality Association and Frozen Food Manufacturers) as three quarters of consumption came from salt already added during food processing. The industry groups had indicated that they were prepared to consider ways in which a reduction might be achieved. Bread was used as an example of where effective reduction had been achieved over a period of two years. The amount used in production had been reduced gradually by a total of thirteen per cent over a period of time, thus allowing the consumer's palate gradually to become accustomed to the new, lower level.

17. Board members asked whether the FSA should be more proactive in issuing specific advice for young children. However, before issuing such advice background work on the composition of children's diets would be necessary. As a starting point the FSA should first consider what more might be necessary. Board members also noted that salt was a preservative and asked if the proposed reduction of salt levels in food might compromise microbiological safety. There was no evidence to suggest that some reduction of levels would compromise food safety.

Salmonella in Eggs
18. The Chief Executive reported that there had been a major outbreak of Salmonella resulting from consumption of eggs in London and the north west of England. To date there had been more than 300 reported cases and two deaths ¹ . This confirmed that the FSA's concern about food borne illnesses was justified. There was evidence to link these outbreaks with the use of raw egg in food preparation, for example fondant icing.

19. The source of the outbreak appeared to be in Spain, where a packing station had recently been closed down pending further investigation. The FSA was taking parallel action in the UK. Advice regarding the handling and using of raw eggs was to be re-issued and further follow up work was to be targeted at hospitals and other care institutions catering for vulnerable groups to reinforce the message.

20. Board members drew attention to the complex distribution chain of food in Europe and asked how news of the outbreak had been communicated to other Member States. The Chief Executive reported that the Commission's Rapid Alert system had been used successfully in this incident. Board members remarked on the apparent commitment at EU level to reduce the level of food borne illness throughout the Community and asked if this had been translated into real objectives. The Chief Executive acknowledged that there were aspirations in the EU to reduce food borne illness, but no concrete targets. There was increasing evidence that vaccination of laying hens was a good example of how food borne illness could be reduced successfully. Information would be shared with other Member States once fully documented.

21. Board members expressed particular concern about the number of cases reported in hospitals and asked if more needed to be done on this. Officials would raise this with colleagues in Department of Health in the following week. Action: Judith Hilton (MSD)

Specified Risk Material (SRM) in Beef
22. The Chief Executive informed the Board that, since August, there had been eight cases where SRM (spinal cord) had been found in imported intervention beef. Seven cases had been from Germany and one from France. In each case the German and French authorities had been informed and had promptly taken appropriate action. At a meeting with EU Member States on 11 October, the Commission had raised the issue and stressed that it was unacceptable. There was still clearly the need for the MHS to continue to inspect consignments of imported beef.

Local Authority Monitoring
23. The Chief Executive reported that the paper planned for the December meeting would be deferred as there were considerable problems with the reliability of the data available. The problems were not necessarily the fault of individual local authorities, who were already producing a large amount of data for the European Commission, but more a result of new computer software and hardware problems. Consequently the report would be delayed to allow for a thorough re-working of the data and investigation of the IT issues. Officials would register the point concerning the amount of data required by the Commission in the course of regular meetings.

(Paper FSA 02/11/02)

[Prior to the discussion of this item Robert Rees declared an interest as a caterer and General Governor of the British Nutrition Foundation. Michael Gibson declared an interest as a meat producer and trader. Karol Bailey declared an interest as a food producer and trader. Vernon Sankey declared an interest as Deputy Chair of a company that produces food supplements. Robert Rees, Michael Gibson, Karol Bailey and Vernon Sankey participated in discussion and determination of this issue.]

24. The Chief Executive introduced the paper, acknowledging continued consumer concern on labelling. This was a European issue and action on legislation generally had to be agreed and taken at EU level. It was also timely as Commissioner Bryne had recently announced a comprehensive review of EU labelling legislation, which the FSA welcomed as a major step forward.

25. Apart from this review, work had been going forward at both EU and UK level, and had secured welcomed advances on, for example, allergen labelling. In addition, the FSA had published for industry and enforcement authorities guidance on how labelling could be improved from the consumer's point of view, within existing legislation. This covered issues that were of importance to the UK consumer like country of origin, clear labelling (such as font size and use of plain English) as well as the use of terms such as 'fresh, pure and natural'.

26. Board members welcomed the paper with its clear indications of progress in many areas, and congratulated the team responsible. Responding to points of detail raised by Board members, officials noted that a list of major allergens had been established internationally for some time. The criteria for adoption onto the list were severity of effect and incidence of the reaction in the population. Ethnic minority groups were represented at the food labelling fora. It had been difficult to reach low income groups and officials were looking at ways of seeking their views. The FSA was pressing for labelling regulations to be extended to alcoholic drinks, as these were currently one of the few exempted groups. Claims made on health/slimming foods/supplements were raised. Meal replacement products were already covered by detailed regulation. Claims on other products were covered by the general prohibitions on false and misleading labelling, but enforcers had difficulty in identifying and challenging dubious cases. The Agency supported the Commission's plans for tight EU controls on these and other health claims, which would contribute to improved consumer protection. Board members expressed disappointment at the apparent lack of progress on rules on country of origin labelling, but recognised this had to be addressed at EU level and that the Commission's current programme of work had, correctly, given priority to work on allergen labelling, health claims and nutrition labelling. Much had already been done through 'best practice' advice to industry, and officials were working towards the inclusion of the subject in the European Commission's programme of forthcoming work.

27. Board members noted the importance of ensuring good two-way communication during policy development. The FSA held regular labelling fora, that were advertised in local press, and other initiatives were planned to help make sure that specific groups, including those on low incomes, would be heard.

28. Board members raised the promotion/advertising of food to children, noting that differences of opinion on its impact needed to be better understood. It was suggested that a summary of how industry promoted food to children would be useful, drawing out the relative emphasis on different types of food and any differences in approach across the EU. Board members suggested that it would be useful to put this information on the FSA's website. It was agreed that a note reviewing available data would be circulated to the Board which could then decide on any further action. Action: Rosemary Hignett (FLS)

29. Board members asked about recent emphasis in the press on labelling by caterers, for example, declaring the calorific value of their meals. The Chief Executive informed the Board that, contrary to these reports in the press, the FSA had not called for catering outlets and restaurants to list the calorie contents of their dishes. However, people are entitled to information when they eat out, but this should be practicable and meaningful. Identifying 'healthy eating' options on menus was an alternative example of how useful information could be passed on to the consumer. Board members noted the complexity of the catering sector, and noted that a proportionate, practical and co-ordinated approach to change was needed. A strategy for communicating with this sector would be useful, and an outline of the various activities across the FSA aimed at this sector would be drawn up. Action: Richard Harding (FCS)

30. The Chairman summarised the main points raised in the discussion:

• the importance to the UK consumer of country of origin labelling - practicality and proportionality should be built into all proposals
• the difficulty in engaging with the catering sector, and the need for a strategy to do so effectively
• transparency about the balance and impact of promotion and advertising targeted at children in different food groups.

(Paper FSA 02/11/03)

31. The Chief Executive introduced the paper, the purpose of which was to update the Board on recent developments and invite comment. Discussion was timely given the priority this subject was receiving at EU level. The discussion would concentrate on consumer related issues, reflecting the FSA's remit rather than legal issues such as the Treaty base. This raised particular difficulty as the Board held views contrary to those of UK consumer stakeholder groups simply because it had a difficult view on where the best interests of UK consumers lay.

32. Paragraphs 7 - 10 dealt with the issues that surrounded the labelling of GM derivatives. The Commission had proposed a paper based system which the FSA did not support, seeing it as impractical and easily open to fraud. Enforcement bodies shared the FSA's view. Though agreeing that labelling was desirable, the FSA did not want to see a system introduced that would be open to abuse as this would not serve consumers best interests.

33. Paragraph 15 covered the argument for the 'GM-free' option. The Chief Executive reminded Board members of the letter received from the UK Consumers' Association (CA) that had clarified its position and rectified a misinterpretation of its recent publication 'GM Dilemmas'. It was true that the report agreed with the concept of 'GM-Free' but CA was critical of the FSA's position with respect to 'GM-free' labelling. The FSA had suggested that the practical option was to start from the position of the 'niche market', i.e. products with evidence to support the claim of 'GM-free'.

34. Board members noted that the issues in the paper were not related to food safety, but concerned consumer choice. Board members pointed out that detection and identification of GM material to support current enforcement was possible, but could be costly and time consuming.

35. Board members expressed a range of opinions for and against the 'GM-free' option and the labelling of GM derivatives. On labelling derivatives, some opposed systems that were not demonstrably practical and enforceable. Others suggested that problems encountered in other sectors did not mean that any system based on paper traceability for derivatives should be dismissed. Some of those supporting the FSA's current position noted that work on improving traceability should also be taken forward. All agreed that the FSA's position should be kept under review.

36. On 'GM-free', Board members recognised the strength of consumer opinion in some quarters against GM. 'GM-free' might not be the way consumers wanted GM to be represented, and a wide debate to bring all views and alternatives into the open was needed before proceeding. The introduction of 'GM-free' labelling would need to be carefully handled so that all were aware of what it meant and what could be delivered. As with the labelling of derivatives, the background to GM issues was constantly evolving, and proposals therefore needed careful review. The FSA's proposal should be seen as a 'first draft' that, if maintained, would need further development before implementation. This should include methods of ensuring 'GM-free' status through, for example, robust traceability systems, segregation or authenticity tests. Board members also noted that creating 'GM-free' as a niche product could result in additional costs to the consumer resulting from the need for traceability or other methods of identity preservation.

37. Some Board members pointed out the increased potential use of crops to produce pharmaceutical products. Board members were informed that although conventional crops were already grown commercially to produce industrial chemicals, the development of pharmaceutical producing crops was being monitored. Some Board members asked that the FSA undertake a risk assessment on the segregation of food crops from pharmaceutical producing crops. Segregation had also been implicated in other recent food issues. In particular, it was noted that some developing countries were reportedly rejecting food aid containing GM maize because of concerns that this might jeopardise future exports to Europe.

38. Summarising, the Chairman noted that the Board's view was not unanimous. However overall, the Board had not changed its view and remained concerned about the practicality and enforceability of the Commission's proposals. More generally work to develop traceability systems for the future should continue. On the FSA's 'GM-free' proposal, further development work was needed if this was to be taken forward. Should the Commission's proposals be adopted the FSA should take up enforceability issues in detailed discussion on implementation. The Board:

• re-affirmed its position on labelling of derivatives
• noted that 'GM-free' labelling was desirable, but needed further refinement to be achievable and meet consumer aspirations.

In conclusion, officials noted that the proposals would be discussed at the EU Agriculture Council on 28 November.

(Paper FSA 02/11/04)

[Michael Walker declared an interest as a member of a consumer organisation. Michael Walker participated in discussion and determination of this issue.]

39. The Chief Executive introduced the paper, reminding the Board that this was an opportunity to review how the FSA involved UK consumers in its decision making process. The UK had probably gone further than most other Member States in introducing consumer representatives on to Advisory Committees. Early fears that consumer representatives might 'water down' Committees and reduce their scientific rigour had not been realised. Their contributions had been particularly useful, especially in framing questions making sure real consumer issues were addressed and defending the level of scientific scrutiny given to issues. The FSA had also sought to involve consumer representation at an early stage in policy making, with the result that consumer confidence had improved. Increased consumer involvement had also changed the FSA's communication style, making it better attuned to the consumer's information needs.

40. The Chief Executive introduced Nancy Robson, Chair of the FSA's Consumer Committee, who gave a brief overview of consumer involvement with the FSA and the role of the Consumer Committee. The Committee acknowledged the broad range of opportunities that the FSA had given to consumers to influence decision-making. In particular, the FSA's efforts to tackle exclusion and reach out to minority groups was welcomed and applauded. Consultation with the consumer, through whatever channel, was not just a tool for gauging public opinion. Feedback also built levels of trust and confidence, although it was important that consumers could see that their involvement had made a difference.

41. Board members confirmed that consumer involvement in decision-making was essential and that the FSA should develop a variety of ways to communicate with consumers. The FSA had made good progress in this area in a relatively short time; however, there was still more that could be done. The FSA was investigating new and different ways in which to reach the public, especially those groups that were frequently excluded. The FSA was funding a research project with the Universities of Westminster and Surrey to look at ways of reaching the excluded. Similarly there was also work on-going to investigate how 'gateway organisations' might be used to help the FSA target specific groups. Issues that related to low income and other hard to reach groups were addressed in a note that was currently being prepared for the Board on behalf of the Consumer Committee.

42. Board members drew attention to the successful, informal work that had also been undertaken, for example at food fairs and shows throughout the UK, where Board members and FSA officials were able to talk directly to consumers and noted that interaction at this 'grass roots' level should continue.

43. In summary, the Chairman noted that the Board welcomed the paper and agreed that mechanisms for evaluating methodologies for involving consumers and also evaluating their impact should be developed. The Board encouraged the Consumer Committee in the development of their strategy for achieving greater interaction with the consumer and congratulated them on their success to date.

(Papers FSA 02/11/05, FSA 02/11/06 & FSA 02/11/07)

Scotland
44. The Chairman of the Scottish Food Advisory Committee used the report as an opportunity to raise concerns that stocks of white fish would not in the future be sufficient to meet demands. In response, the Chief Executive reported that there were sufficient fish supplies at present to cope with UK demand and meet the FSA's advice to eat two portions of fish per week. It was, however, a point to keep in mind in longer term planning.

45. Finally, the out-going Chairman congratulated Michael Gibson on his recent appointment as the new Chair of the Scottish Food Advisory Committee.

Wales
46. The Chair of the Advisory Committee for Wales reported that the Food Hygiene Campaign video had been shown at a recent open meeting of the Committee. Feedback, which had not been entirely positive, had been passed on to Communications Division.

47. The Chair of the Advisory Committee had recently met the Children's Commissioner for Wales. The Commissioner was independent, appointed by the National Assembly for Wales, but could prove a useful ally in making effective contacts with young people.

Northern Ireland
48. The Chairman of the Northern Ireland Advisory Committee supplemented his written report, noting that the move to use chemical and immunological testing for shellfish toxins, rather than bioassays, had been supported.

49. He also drew attention to the third bullet point on page five of the report, that requested the FSA to ask the European Food Safety Authority for information about HACCP compliance in other Member States. It was agreed that the most effective way to obtain information would be through FSA officials informal contacts with colleagues in other Member States.

50. Board members asked for clarification about the 'HACCP Guidebook' referred to in the first bullet point on page 4. The Chairman of the Northern Ireland Advisory Committee reported that it had been based on material used by local authorities in Northern Ireland. Copies would be circulated to Board members. Action: Morris McAllister (Director, Northern Ireland)

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

AOB
Chemical Residues in Potatoes
52. Residues of an anti-sprouting agent, chlorpropham, had been found in potatoes exceeding the acute reference dose. This was clearly not acceptable and the FSA was taking the matter up with the appropriate authorities. An oral update on pesticide residues exceeding the acute reference dose would be given at the December Board meeting. Action: Andrew Wadge (CST)

Over Thirty Month (OTM) Rule Review
53. The various risk assessments being carried out as part of the OTM review would be completed and published in the following order: Great Britain, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. The phased approach was a consequence of the limited number of people who were able to carry out this work. All would be available for the review, when it came to the Board for discussion next year. The Chairman undertook to keep the Board informed on progress.

Sir John Arbuthnott
54. The Chairman noted that Sir John Arbuthnott was stepping down as a Board member. He thanked Sir John for all that he had achieved as a member of the Board and also as Chairman of the Scottish Food Advisory Committee. The depth of knowledge and wisdom he had brought to the Board had been greatly valued and appreciated.

55. In response Sir John thanked the Chairman for his kind words and remarked on how much the FSA had done in such a short period of time to restore consumer confidence in the UK on the handling of food safety issues.

Date of Next Meeting
56. The next meeting would be held on 12 December at the Congress Centre, London.

Footnote
¹ On further investigation the number of deaths due to this outbreak was confirmed as one.