Board meeting minutes: 9 September 2004

Sir John Krebs, Chairman
Julia Unwin, Deputy Chair
Richard Ayre
Sati Ariyanayagam
Chrissie Dunn
Maureen Edmondson
Michael Gibson
Ann Hemingway
Valerie Howarth
Iain MacDonald
Andrew Miller
Vernon Sankey
Sandra Walbran
Nelisha Wickremasinghe

Officials attending:
Jon Bell – Chief Executive
Chris Lawson – Chief Executive (MHS)
Alan Harvey – Head of TSE Division (item 4 only)
David Statham – Director Enforcement and Food Standards (item 5 only)
Morris McAllister – Director, FSA Northern Ireland (item 6 only)
Judith Hilton – Head of Microbiological Safety Division (AOB only)
Sue Hattersley – Head of Chemical Safety and Toxicology Branch 2 (AOB only)
Keith Gregory – Board Secretary
Barbara Gallani – Board Secretariat

Chairman's Introduction

1. The Chairman welcomed Maureen Edmondson, Board member for Northern Ireland and Chair of the FSA's Northern Ireland Advisory Committee, to her first open Board meeting.

2. The Chairman also welcomed Barbara Gallani to the table. Barbara had recently replaced Sue Johns in the Board Secretariat following Sue's appointment on promotion as the Chairman's Private Secretary.

3. The Chairman reminded Board members of their obligation to declare interests before discussion of relevant items.

4. There were three items raised for discussion under Any Other Business:

• Food Hygiene Regulations: approach to application – Information Paper INFO 04/09/01 (Michael Gibson);
• Progress on the FSA's plan to help consumers with food allergies and food intolerances – Information Paper INFO 04/09/02 (Valerie Howarth); and
• Implementation of the FSA's foodborne disease strategy: annual update – Information Paper INFO 04/09/03 (Sandra Walbran).

Item 1 - Minutes of Meeting on 6 July, London
(Paper FSA 04/09/01)

5. The Board agreed the Minutes of the meeting held on 6 July at the Royal National Hotel, London as an accurate record.

6. In considering matters arising and the table of follow up action, the following issues were raised:

• Index 224, p. 23: At the meeting on 6 July, the Chairman had announced that the FSA had decided to commemorate the life and work of Dame Sheila McKechnie, Director of the Consumers' Association, by setting up an annual award for a local food project. Information about the award would be published on the FSA's website in the week ending Friday 17 September 2004.
• Index 197, p.24: An information paper on the progress made to implement the recommendations of the Waste Food Task Force had been sent to Board members on 6 September 2004 and had been published on the FSA's website.
• Index 166, p.24: The ‘Due Date' shown for this item should have been March 05.
• Index 217, p.26: An information note on progress on the mapping exercise to identify nutrition initiatives had been circulated to Board members on 6 September 2004 and had been published on the FSA's website.
• Index 91, p.24: A report on FSA research on M.Bovis in tissues from animals with localised disease was still in preparation and was now expected to be available by the end of October 2004.
• Index 216, p.25: A paper evaluating the initiatives on Catering for Health was being prepared and would be presented to the Board as an information paper at the October meeting.

7. One Board member, referring to Index 219 and Index 220, p.24, asked whether it was possible to anticipate a date for the publication of the final report of the Food and Veterinary Office (FVO) mission on food hygiene. The Chief Executive said that it was expected that the report would be published soon, but this was outside the FSA's control.

Item 2 - Chairman's Report

MHS Governance

8. The Chairman reminded Board members that, a year previously, the Board had commissioned three linked Meat Hygiene reviews: a functions review, a review of Meat Hygiene Service (MHS) efficiency, and a review of the roles and relationships between the FSA, the MHS and the Meat Hygiene Advisory Committee (MHAC). At their closed meeting in July, Board members had considered a number of options for strengthening the non-executive governance of the MHS and had agreed that circumstances had changed since MHAC was set up in 2001 and that it would now be appropriate to wind up MHAC and to establish a new governing Board for the MHS. This new body would have delegated authority to act on behalf of the Board in setting the strategic direction of the MHS and holding it to account (in effect it would function as a sub-committee of the Board). He was now consulting Ministers on this proposed change. Subject to their views, he had invited Chrissie Dunn to chair the new body, and she had agreed to take this on.

Succession Planning

9. The Chairman invited the Deputy Chair to report on the work of the Board's Succession Committee.

10. The Deputy Chair reminded Board members that the Chairman had announced in July that he would be stepping down from his post next April. The post of FSA Chair would be filled by Ministerial appointment and the process of appointment would be overseen by the Office of the Commissioner for Public Appointments. The FSA had established a Succession Committee to advise Ministers on the appointment process and help them ensure that this was carried out in an open, transparent and independent manner in keeping with the status of the FSA. She informed the Board that an advertisement for the post would be published soon.

Item 3 - Chief Executive's Report

Recent BSE Testing Failures

11. The Chief Executive informed Board members that the independent Steering Group - set up to oversee an inquiry into the failure by the MHS and the NI Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (DARD) to ensure the testing of certain designated casualty cattle aged between 24 and 30 months for BSE - had met twice since July. The Steering Group, chaired by Professor Patrick Wall, had met that week and was scheduled to meet twice more before the end of September. The Steering Group had commissioned independent auditors, PKF, to undertake the detailed fact-finding on their behalf. PFK had carried out in-depth audits at nine plants in Great Britain, five where failures had been recorded and four where they had not, and three in Northern Ireland.

A comprehensive telephone survey of some 180 plants in Great Britain had also been completed. The evidence gathered was to be considered by the Steering Group at its next meeting on 20 September following which the Group intended to agree recommendations to be presented in a report for Board members to consider at their next meeting in October. The report would be published. The Executive would then present proposals to address the recommendations made in the report at the open Board meeting in December.

Specified Risk Material (SRM) breaches at a slaughterhouse in Wick, Scotland

12. The Chairman invited the MHS Chief Executive to the table for this item. The Chief Executive informed Board members that an SRM breach had been discovered at a small slaughterhouse in Wick, Scotland, during an audit by the MHS. The audit had found traces of thymus, which is regarded as SRM, in a number of carcasses that had been health marked and that, in one carcass, a small piece of spinal cord had not been removed. Steps had been taken by the MHS to ensure that there was no recurrence at the slaughterhouse in question and that similar problems were not occurring at other small slaughterhouses across the country.

13. The MHS Chief Executive added that supervision at the plant had been provided by a single Official Veterinary Surgeon (OVS) and that he had been suspended and subsequently dismissed. Action had been taken to ensure that the plant operator retrained his staff in SRM removal in line with his responsibilities and to correct some deficient operating procedures. The plant was now being visited weekly by a Regional Veterinary Adviser (RVA) or local Senior Meat Hygiene Inspector (SMHI) to ensure there were no further problems. About seventy other similar plants where OVSs carried out all inspection work had been identified and they would be visited by the relevant RVA or SMHI to ensure that instructions were being properly applied.

14. One Board member, noting that the incident being reported had occurred in early August, expressed concern that the breach was only now being made public. Another Board member asked for clarification of the timeline for reporting SRM failures and for public notification of SRM breaches. The MHS Chief Executive confirmed that notification by the MHS to the FSA of any possible breach should be immediate. However, for small slaughterhouses such as this one, which were operating only a few days a week, delays in carrying out an investigation were sometimes difficult to avoid.
Action: Chief Executive and MHS Chief Executive

15. One Board member asked whether it was possible that newly designated, and therefore inexperienced, OVSs were sometimes employed by very small slaughterhouses. The Chief Executive (MHS) felt that it would be difficult to generalise about their abilities or their experience as many of them had gained a wide range of experience before becoming OVSs. The OVS at Wick had qualified in March 2002 and had worked in a variety of plants before moving to Scotland in January 2003.

Appointment of new Director of Consumer Choice and Dietary Health

16. The Chief Executive informed Board members that Gill Fine had been appointed as Director of Consumer Choice and Dietary Health. Gill Fine was currently Head of Food and Health at Sainsbury's supermarkets but had a broad nutrition background having also worked at the British Nutrition Foundation. She would be joining the FSA on 11 October. The Chief Executive also reported that he would be writing shortly to stakeholders to inform them of the organisational changes that will take effect from 20 September following the restructuring of the FSA.
Action: Chief Executive

New EU Commissioner

17. The Chief Executive informed Board members that the new EU Commissioner for Health and Consumer Protection (DG SANCO) was Markos Kyprianou from Cyprus. He had taken over the whole of David Byrne's brief although there had been earlier speculation about a possible split of DG SANCO into two separate Directorates. The Chief Executive and the Chairman would be meeting with the new Commissioner at the earliest suitable opportunity.

Item 4 – Review of the Over Thirty Month (OTM) Rule – The Future Testing Regime
(Paper FSA 04/09/02)

[Prior to the discussion of this item Michael Gibson declared an interest as a primary producer and butcher, which he considered sufficient to warrant his exclusion from the discussion of this issue. The Chairman agreed that this was a material interest and that Michael Gibson should not participate in the discussion and determination of this issue. Michael Gibson left the table for this item. Chrissie Dunn declared an interest as a non-Executive Director of a meat marketing company. The Chairman considered that this was not a material interest and that Chrissie Dunn should participate in the discussion and determination of this issue.]

18. The Chairman invited Alan Harvey to introduce the paper. At their meeting on 6 July, Board members had agreed that Ministers should be advised that it would be justified, on the grounds of food borne risk to consumers and proportionality, to replace the OTM Rule by BSE testing, subject to an independent group advising the FSA, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) and Department of Health (DH) that a robust testing system could be put in place.

19. Having considered this advice, Ministers had asked the FSA to take responsibility for advising them further on the robustness of the proposed testing regime. The present paper addressed the actions which might be considered necessary to secure a robust BSE testing system to replace the OTM Rule. It was proposed that an Independent Group should be set up to assist the FSA with this task, the membership being drawn from the group currently investigating the casualty testing failures being chaired by Professor Patrick Wall. The Group might be supplemented by an expert from another Member State with direct experience of BSE testing in operation, and a quality control expert with experience of the food industry. The Group's proposed remit had been set out at Annex B to the paper and would aim to build on the preparatory work for possible OTM rule change already undertaken, largely by Defra on a contingency basis. Annex B also suggested some possible draft criteria for demonstrating robustness, but the new Group would be asked to consider these criteria themselves and amend them as they consider appropriate.

Once the Group was satisfied with the criteria, it would be asked to proceed to advise the FSA on whether the testing regime could be considered robust, including any additional steps that might need to be taken to ensure this. Informed by the Group's advice, the FSA would then be in a better position to offer further advice to Ministers. The timetable suggested for the assignment was three to four months, although this would depend on how the work developed.

20. Board members suggested it would be essential to extend the membership of the Independent Group to include an expert from another Member State as well as a quality control expert with experience of the food industry, or possibly of the meat industry. Board members noted that Professor Peter Lind from Copenhagen had already been suggested as a suitable candidate due to his direct experience with BSE testing issues in Europe and had indicated that he would be able to serve on the Group if invited. The Northern Ireland Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (DARD) would also be invited to attend meetings of the Group as observers.
Action: Chief Executive

21. Board members sought assurance that the appropriate financial resources would be made available both to carry out this preparatory work and to ensure appropriate implementation of a robust testing system should Ministers decide to replace the OTM rule with testing. The Chief Executive confirmed that he had been discussing the financial implications with Defra's Permanent Secretary and that it had been agreed, in principle, that Defra would provide the necessary funding for the proposed pilot testing which was to be trialled in small, medium and large abattoirs. The FSA would meet the initial cost of the Independent Group itself. Any recommendations from the FSA to Ministers would make it clear that these were contingent on the necessary funds being made available to implement a robust system. Board members requested that when the Group's report came back to the Board there would be clarity on how the resource aspects would be addressed.

22. Some Board members suggested that the three to four months envisaged for conducting this work seemed short; it was important that the work was done properly. This had been suggested as an initial indication and it was possible the work could take longer to complete.

23. Board members agreed that the Independent Group should be asked to review the criteria outlined in the paper and notify the FSA of any changes as soon as possible. The agreed criteria should then be published. The Independent Group should be asked, as part of their review, to address also the implementation stage and the resource aspects. Board members also suggested it would be important that the final criteria should take into account the issue of traceability of cattle with regards to age and the need to minimise fraud, and the need for contingency plans to be put in place in the event of something going wrong.

24. Board members also agreed that it was very important to continue to keep stakeholders informed of progress and to consult them regularly to avoid gaps in communication. The Chief Executive agreed that the whole process should be as open as possible, that there was a need to refresh the FSA's formal engagement with stakeholders on this issue, and agreed to consider the possibility of publishing the minutes of the meetings of the Independent Group.
Action: Alan Harvey

25. In summary the Chairman noted that the Board had:

• noted that Ministers had asked the FSA to advise them further on the establishment of a robust testing system;
• noted the need for Government Departments to co-operate in taking this work forward;
• agreed that an Independent Group should be established to assist the FSA with this work;
• agreed that two additional members should be included in the Independent Group – one with experience of BSE testing in another EU country and one with experience of quality control in the food industry;
• commented on the criteria that the Independent Group would be asked to consider in providing its advice, including the need for contingency plans in the case of something going wrong, cattle traceability and the desirability and extent of any pilot work that would be required;
• requested that when the Group's report came back to the Board there would be clarity on how the resource aspects would be addressed;
• noted an initial indication that the Independent Group might complete its assignment in three to four months, and emphasised the importance of the work being done properly and to address the implementation stage; and
• requested that the process be carried out in an open and transparent way and that efforts should be made to involve stakeholders.

Item 5 – Progress report on action to improve the quality of data submitted by Local Authorities of food law enforcement activity in the UK
(Paper FSA 04/09/03)

[Prior to the discussion of this item Sandra Walbran declared an interest as a Local Authority enforcement officer, directly involved with data submissions, which she considered sufficient to warrant her exclusion from the discussion of this issue. The Chairman agreed that Sandra Walbran should not participate in the discussion and determination of this issue. Sandra Walbran left the table for this item.]

26. The Chairman invited David Statham to introduce this paper. The paper reported on action taken by the FSA to improve the quality of the data submitted by local authorities (LAs) on food law enforcement, following the discussion of this issue by the Board on 12 February 2004. He informed Board members that action had focussed on immediate changes to simplify the monitoring form; the quality of data for 2003; and the initiation of a longer term review of the monitoring system. He noted that LAs had welcomed the changes to the submission form and that the submission rate had considerably improved since the last report to the Board. About 85% of LAs had asked to amend their 2004 data, this compared with 65% that had amended their 2003 data. Only three LAs had failed to reply to the FSA call for submission. Board members were informed that, unfortunately, the performance of Oxford City Council had not improved despite several calls from the FSA to obtain data for 2003. The next step would be to call them in to give an account of their poor performance.

27. He further explained that the fundamental review of monitoring returns would reflect:

• the need to establish more outcome based measures; and
• the changes which would be necessary as a result of the new European Commission reporting arrangements which would be introduced as part of the Official Food and Feed Controls (OFFC) Regulations.

28. Board members thanked David Statham and his team for the report, and the efforts they had made in a very complex area of the FSA's work, but expressed considerable concern about the difficulty the FSA had encountered in gathering data from LAs. It was very important to secure improvements in the accuracy of the data available to the FSA on local authority enforcement performance.

29. Several Board members commented that they recognised the difficulty of changing an established system and that more time needed to be allowed before the positive effects of the work done this year to improve returns and data quality could show visible results. Board members also recognised that the paper presented a progress report on the implementation of actions that had been discussed and agreed by the Board at its meeting in February 2004. Board members agreed that it was important that under-performing LAs should be closely monitored and that those producing good quality returns should be commended and presented as examples. Training programmes were indicated as a necessary tool for improvement, especially with regard to IT problems.

30. Board members noted that the paper had not addressed the areas in which there had been improvement, focussing instead on the LAs which had failed to meet the FSA (and EU) requirements with regard to data submissions. Some Board members expressed concern that, once the data had been submitted, they would not be much used. David Statham replied that the amount of data collected by the FSA had been rigorously scrutinised to ensure that no unnecessary data were collected. However some of the information was collected to meet EU requirements and all Member States were obliged to submit the same information. The FSA had challenged the Commission to demonstrate that they made effective use of all the data required and negotiations were underway in Brussels to ensure that better use of the data was made.

31. David Statham noted that the changes made to the reporting form, including the requirement for yearly (instead of quarterly) submissions, had been welcomed by LAs. He pointed out that it was not possible to start a completely new system instantly; it was important that the efforts which were being made to secure long term improvements also ensured that the data collected were consistent and continuous.

32. Board members agreed that, in extreme cases, for example where failure to provide data on enforcement work was indicative of underlying problems in the service itself, the FSA should consider using its powers to take over the relevant activity from LAs.

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

• noted the progress made on the monitoring data for 2003, and on the immediate changes;
• expressed considerable concern at the difficulty the FSA was encountering in gathering data from local authorities;
• recognised that more time was necessary before the positive effects of the work done this year to improve returns and data quality could show visible results;
• requested inclusion in the next paper of a timescale for the achievement of expected progress and strategic objectives in terms of public protection;
• agreed that officials should continue to pursue planned work on the longer term review and on checks on future local authority data;
• agreed that a further paper should come to the Board early in 2005 to report on the 2003 data and to report on further progress on this programme of action; and
• accepted that many local authorities were doing well, but also agreed that more draconian action being taken to address very serious situations should not be ruled out, should that be necessary.

Item 6 – MHAC Chair's Annual Report to the FSA Board
(Paper FSA 04/09/04)

34. The Chairman invited Iain MacDonald, Chair of the Meat Hygiene Advisory Committee (MHAC), to introduce the paper. Iain MacDonald reminded Board members that MHAC - an advisory rather than an executive committee - had been set up at the request of the FSA Board to take a strategic oversight of the Meat Hygiene Service (MHS) and its efficient and effective operation. The paper reported on the main issues discussed at the last four meetings and on the visit of MHAC members to two slaughter premises in Northern Ireland. The main discussions over the past year had focussed on the recommendation to set new style performance targets for the MHS for 2004/05 and MHAC's own review of its work.

35. The establishment of a new governance body for the MHS meant that it was likely that MHAC's meeting the following week would be its last. Iain MacDonald thanked MHAC members and FSA officials for the services they had provided to the Committee.

36. The Chairman and Board members conveyed their thanks and gratitude to all the members of MHAC for their work over the last four and a half years under the chairmanship of Iain MacDonald and, before him, Suzi Leather. The move to a new governing body for the MHS was in no way any reflection on MHAC's work.

37. The Chairman and Board members also wished Chrissie Dunn well in her new role as Chair of the new MHS governing body and suggested that the MHAC review would contain useful information for its members.

Item 7 – Reports from Chairs of Advisory Committees
(Papers FSA 04/09/05, FSA 04/09/06 and FSA 04/09/07)

Wales

38. The Chair of the Welsh Food Advisory Committee (WFAC) informed Board members that WFAC had met on two recent occasions with stakeholders in Wales, once in Cardiff to discuss the draft Strategic Plan and once during the Annual Royal Welsh Show which had covered Hygiene on Farms. This had been a valuable occasion to meet with a group not often addressed by the members of the Advisory Committee.

39. Out of the twenty two Welsh local authorities, nineteen were coping well with the request for data on food law enforcement; only three appeared to have had some problems. This was presented as an example of how even LAs with very limited resources had managed to meet the set targets.

40. Board members congratulated Professor Robert Pickard, member of WFAC, on his recent appointment as member of the new Food and Fitness Task Group for Children and Young Persons, which had been established by the Welsh Assembly Minister for Health and Social Services.

Northern Ireland

41. The Director of FSA Northern Ireland informed Board members that no formal meetings of the Northern Ireland Advisory Committee (NIAC) had taken place because of the absence of a Chair. Members had been informed in writing of all current issues and were looking forward to re-convening at the beginning of October. The next meeting, which would be chaired by Maureen Edmondson, would look at the work programme for the Committee for the following year, EU work, Code of Practice on Openness and issues related to salt, fat and sugar in the diet.

42. The Chair of WFAC asked for clarification of the rules with regard to delegation of the Chair of an Advisory Committee. The Chief Executive offered to circulate a note on the implications of the relevant section of the Food Standards Act.
Action: Deputy Chief Executive / David Dunleavy

Scotland

43. The Chair of the Advisory Committee for Scotland (SFAC) informed Board members that SFAC had had a full agenda at their last open meeting on 2 September, which had seen the participation of officials from FSA Scotland and interaction with local authorities. The members of the Committee had also visited a local cod farm, a livestock farm and a mussel processing/smoking facility in the Shetlands.

44. The open meeting agenda had also included an item on the work of the SFAC Wild Game Working Group. Professor Andrew Miller, member of SFAC, informed Board members that the report on wild game had focussed on the definition of terms like ‘small' and ‘local' used in the new EU Hygiene legislation.

Any Other Business

45. There were three items of other business:

• Food Hygiene Regulations: approach to application (Paper INFO 04/09/01)
• Progress on FSA plan to help consumers with food allergies and food intolerances (Paper INFO 04/09/02)
• Implementation of the FSA's foodborne disease strategy: annual update (Paper INFO 04/09/03)

Food Hygiene Regulations
(Paper INFO 04/09/01)

46. In response to a question from Michael Gibson, the Chief Executive confirmed that there would be an opportunity for Board members to consider the proposed definitions for the use of terms like “local/localised” following the public consultation on how these and other terms may be meaningfully and usefully interpreted (paragraph 4 of Annex A to the paper). In response to a question from another Board member, the Chief Executive confirmed that training aspects would be addressed in the paper on food safety management based on HACCP principles, which was to be presented to the Board in the first half of 2005.
Action: Secretariat and Tom Murray

Food Allergies
(Paper INFO 04/09/02)

47. Valerie Howarth asked how the FSA was going to achieve the targets that had been set in relation to food allergies and intolerances and how it was going to measure success. She also asked whether work was being carried out in partnership with the Anaphylaxis Campaign. Sue Hattersley, Head of Chemical and Toxicological Safety Branch 2, confirmed that consumers with food allergies appeared to have problems when eating out. For this reason the FSA had focussed on improving the understanding of allergies in catering businesses and also on improving the labelling of foods provided to caterers. Part of this initiative had addressed the training of local enforcement officers. The FSA wanted to work closely with the Anaphylaxis Campaign and the wider community to measure the success of its work, and would look for suitable opportunities to conduct research to help understand the expectations of those with food allergies or intolerances, as well as to assess their views on whether the situation was improving.

Foodborne disease strategy
(Paper INFO 04/09/03)

48. Sandra Walbran asked why this paper - providing an annual update on one of the key objectives of the FSA that featured both in the present and the new strategic plans - had not been tabled for discussion by the Board. She also asked for clarification on the change in the figures on reduction of foodborne diseases since the information paper circulated in February and on whether it was possible to state that the FSA hygiene campaign had contributed to the decline in foodborne illnesses.

49. Judith Hilton, Head of Microbiological Safety Division, explained that the figures obtained by the Health Protection Agency and circulated to Board members in February had been clearly presented as interim figures. A series of outbreaks of Salmonella, many of which were associated with Spanish eggs supplied to catering businesses, had almost negated the continuing decrease in Salmonella from other sources. Campylobacter, on the other hand, had shown quite a sharp decrease, but this was not necessarily solely related to the initiatives taken in the UK, since a similar trend had been observed elsewhere in Europe.

50. One Board member asked whether it would have been more effective to focus the food hygiene campaign on cooking food rather than washing hands and cross-contamination. It was explained that FSA's research had shown that the cooking message had already been effectively conveyed to the public whilst more needed to be done on cross contamination issues.

51. One Board member asked that the different messages being put out by the FSA to consumers should be reviewed to avoid contradictions and to ensure that the Healthy Eating campaign, including information on healthy lunch boxes for school children, did take into account the FSA's advice on Food Hygiene.
Action: Rosemary Hignett

Date of Next meeting

52. The next open meeting would be held on 14 October 2004 in Belfast.