Meeting of the Parliament

Meeting date: Thursday, February 28, 2013

Official Report 655KB pdf

---

Food Safety Body

Good afternoon. The first item of business is a statement by Michael Matheson on Scotland’s new food safety body. The minister will take questions at the end of his statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions.

I would like to update Parliament on the specific action that the Government is taking to reinforce and improve the food safety and standards regime in Scotland, and on the horsemeat scandal.

Members will be aware that work is on-going in relation to the horsemeat scandal, which has affected at least 14 European Union member states and has had an impact here in Scotland. Following the discovery of horse DNA in a frozen burger that was supplied to Cumbernauld high school, local authorities have been advised to hold the use of all frozen beef products pending further investigation.

Mr Russell and Mr Lochhead are meeting the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities next week to discuss how we can work together on the standards and processes that are in place for school meals and to discuss ways in which we can drive up standards and quality even further. In the meantime, by close of play today, local authorities will have completed all but one of the inspections of premises that manufacture processed meat products in Scotland, with no evidence to date of horsemeat food fraud occurring.

Turning to the reasons for my statement, the scandal has made it clear that a single independent public body should have clear responsibility for all aspects of food safety and standards. In 2010, the United Kingdom Government moved responsibility for food labelling policy in England from the Food Standards Agency to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. It also moved responsibility for nutrition to the Department of Health. Although the Food Standards Agency is a shared public body, those changes took place without consultation with the devolved Administrations. As a result, three different bodies were dealing with food labelling in England. The confusion was highlighted by Westminster’s Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee in its criticism of the decision to split responsibility for food.

The changes had significant consequences for Scotland. The staff in the Food Standards Agency headquarters who were responsible for labelling and nutrition were removed from the FSA and taken into Whitehall departments that are responsible for England only. At a stroke, the FSA lost much of its capacity to support us on labelling and nutrition policy. Given the negative impact that that would have on Scotland, I asked Professor Jim Scudamore, the former Scottish and UK chief veterinary officer, to set up an expert panel to consider how the Food Standards Agency should operate in Scotland, in light of the changes in Westminster.

Last year, Professor Scudamore recommended that nutrition, labelling and food safety should be considered together, and that advice should be focused on protecting consumers and should be evidence based, transparent and independent. He also recommended that we should create a new stand-alone food body here in Scotland.

We accepted all the recommendations, and I announced in June last year that we would create a new food body. Our vision for Scotland’s new food body is that its primary focus will be consumer protection. It will make sure that food in Scotland is safe to eat and it will improve the diet and nutrition of people in Scotland. The new body will be independent, open and transparent and will base its advice on the best available science and evidence.

There is much at stake, as the food that we eat is vital to ensuring that we live longer and healthier lives. Bad eating habits are the second major cause of ill-health in Scotland after smoking. Scotland has one of the highest levels of obesity in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries, and obesity increases the risk of diabetes, heart disease and cancer.

We will give the new body the ability to be more responsive to Scottish needs. The new food body will be the basis of decisive action to improve diet and nutrition—just as we are making progress on reducing smoking and drinking.

The new body will carry out the devolved functions that are currently delivered by the UK-wide Food Standards Agency: food safety and standards; feed safety and standards; nutrition; food labelling; and meat inspection policy and operational delivery.

Most of us think about food safety only when there is a problem. We rightly expect the food that we eat to be safe. However, it is estimated that 124,000 consumers contract food-borne diseases each year. Around 2,300 people will be hospitalised and around 43 will die. We can do better, and I expect the new food body to identify ways in which we can be more effective in tackling food-borne diseases in future.

The new body will take a risk-based approach, using the best intelligence and evidence, to ensure that inspections are as well targeted as possible, within the European framework. That will, in turn, support the Scottish food and drink industry in growing its strong international reputation for safe, quality food.

As the horsemeat scandal has shown, food supply chains cover the world. The new food body will work closely with the FSA, other European food safety bodies and the European Food Safety Authority on many issues, such as dealing with food incidents, European developments and collaboration on science and research.

This afternoon we are publishing a consultation on the roles, responsibilities and functions of the new food safety body. As part of the development of the consultation, the Government carefully considered the implications of the horsemeat scandal. The consultation will run for 12 weeks and presents an opportunity for consumers as well as industry to tell us what they think that the new food body should do. The new body will take on existing Food Standards Agency functions, but we are interested in hearing views on whether it should have a broader role and new responsibilities. We also seek views on how the new body’s independence from Government and the food industry can be assured. I am open to creative and innovative ideas about all those issues.

The consultation will give us a solid basis on which to build to ensure better food safety and standards in future. However, creating a new body and passing legislation take time, and people in Scotland rightly want improvements now. Therefore, today I am announcing that I have asked Professor Scudamore to lead a short-life expert group to consider the lessons that have been learned from the recent horsemeat scandal. The interests that are covered by the membership of the group will be consumer protection, the meat industry, food retail and enforcement. I have asked Professor Scudamore to recommend improvements in the food safety and standards regime that can be made quickly, ahead of the creation of the new body, and I have asked for recommendations before the summer recess.

The short-life expert group will focus on the regulation of food, but there are broader issues to consider. Richard Lochhead has asked Ray Jones, the chairman of Scotland Food and Drink, to lead a food expert group. The group’s remit will be to explore what is required to extend to the whole Scottish meat supply chain the excellent principles of traceability, assurance and provenance that are associated with primary red meat production. The food expert group will also provide recommendations before the summer recess.

We have the opportunity to learn from the current situation. The short-life expert group that I am announcing today will identify lessons from the horsemeat scandal, so that we can improve our food safety and standards regime. We want our new food body to be as effective as possible. Through the consultation, we will ensure that in designing the new body we draw on the best ideas and expertise.

Given the importance of food safety and the value of the Scottish food industry to our economy, we must ensure that we have robust regulatory regimes for food in Scotland. Eating safe, healthy food will help people in Scotland to live longer and healthier lives.

The minister will take questions on the issues raised in his statement. I intend to allow around 20 minutes for questions, after which we will move on to the next item of business.

I thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement. We welcome the establishment of a food standards agency in Scotland, which will be separate from Government and the food industry, and the fact that we in Scotland are not proposing to follow the UK Government’s decision to split up the FSA’s functions.

However, we are sorry that, despite Professor Scudamore’s report in April 2012 and the minister’s statement in June 2012 that such a body would be set up, we are only now having a consultation, which will run for another 12 weeks, as well as having two expert groups. One is left with the firm impression that action is occurring with a great deal more speed now only because we have a crisis. Of course, Scotland, along with the rest of the UK, has faced many crises, such as with BSE and E coli, and I am sure that the horsemeat scandal will not be the last.

Given that a full range of responsibilities will now fall to the new FSA and that the minister said the other day that the underspend that occurred related only to research, will the new, free-standing FSA have the resources to replace the labelling and nutrition staff who were moved to Westminster, for example, and ensure that adequate laboratory facilities are available?

Will the minister ensure that we have a debate on the areas to be covered by the new FSA and its relationship with the UK and EU bodies? Previously, the Scottish part of the FSA was linked strongly with the English part.

It appears that the new legislation will not be available until well after the summer recess or even next year. Will the minister guarantee that the public can have confidence that they will be fully protected in the intervening period?

I thank Richard Simpson for welcoming the approach that we are taking in establishing a new food body here in Scotland. He referred to the timeframe since the publication of the Scudamore review, which was towards the end of June last year. I am sure that he will appreciate that creating a new food safety body is a very complex task and that it is important that we take the time to ensure that we manage that properly.

We have been engaging with stakeholders. At the end of last year, the Food Standards Agency held a major event with 57 different organisations, which all had a view on how the new food safety body in Scotland should be shaped. We wanted to take the time to gather those views and feed them into the consultation that we are now undertaking as part of our move towards legislating in this area.

I reassure Richard Simpson that this is nothing to do with the horsemeat scandal; it is part of the process that we were following anyway. We have taken a bit of extra time over the past couple of weeks to make sure that the consultation document that we are publishing this afternoon reflects some of the issues around the horsemeat scandal that have been picked up over the past few weeks.

Richard Simpson asked about the provision of lab facilities and resources. One of the things that the expert group that I am setting up, which will report before the recess, will do is engage with local authorities and others to look at current capacity to see whether additional capacity needs to be provided here in Scotland. It will also feed into the consultation exercise views on what immediate action we can take and what further action the new body should take.

We have protected the FSA’s resources here in Scotland. The underspend that I referred to was due to the fact that some research and consumer affairs engagement programmes did not materialise as intended. We have given a commitment to maintain the budget going forward. If we add further functions to the new food standards agency, we will have to reflect on the resources that are deployed to allow it to carry them out effectively.

The people of Scotland can have great confidence in the way in which the Food Standards Agency in Scotland has performed over the past couple of weeks in relation to the horsemeat scandal. They can have confidence that it will continue to function effectively as we move towards creating the new body in Scotland. It is appropriate that we take our time to do that in a managed way, so that we can make sure that we have a system that is robust and in which the public can have confidence.

I, too, thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement. I welcome his intention to set up a short-life expert group to consider what might be learned from recent events.

Given that the horsemeat scandal is not simply confined to the UK, let alone just to Scotland, what measures will he take to ensure that the Scudamore expert group does not sit in isolation when it comes to co-operation with our European partners and, indeed, other countries such as Russia? Does the minister agree that, to avoid such an episode ever happening again and for the sake of food safety, we must share the outcome of the group’s findings with all nations affected by the scandal?

Does the minister also agree that as this appears to be a case of international fraud, to make the work of the group effective he perhaps needs to include representatives of the legal system?

One of the things that were considered in Professor Scudamore’s review of the changes to the FSA and the changes that should take place here in Scotland was how the system would fit in with the wider European agenda. The review consulted the European Commission, which was quite clear that it had no concerns about Scotland moving towards having its own food safety body.

In the second part of her question, Nanette Milne answered the first part of her question. The horsemeat scandal is a matter of fraud and, by its very nature, fraud can be difficult to detect. However, more than 14 member states are affected by the scandal. The regulatory bodies in all those countries—some of which have several regulatory bodies on food safety—are all dealing with the issue. It is therefore extremely important that the European Commission ensures that there is an effective co-ordinated response from those bodies.

With a food standards body in Scotland, we can ensure that we co-operate well with European agencies, UK agencies and other international agencies on food safety and share intelligence, good practice and research. Such broad co-operation will allow us to ensure not only that we are plugged into the international agenda but that we have a system that is geared towards dealing with the specific challenges and issues that we face in Scotland.

Many members wish to ask the minister a question. I make a plea for questions that are as brief as possible and, minister, for answers that are as brief as you can make them. In that way, I hope to get through everybody who wants to ask a question.

Will the minister expand on what the Food Standards Agency in Scotland and the Scottish Government have learned from the recent food scandal?

The scandal has highlighted the extent to which individuals will go to defraud the system and a weakness in the actions and responsibilities of manufacturers and retailers in respect of the authenticity testing that, as suppliers, they are meant to undertake.

We need to ensure that the industry recognises that when an individual buys a product, what it says on the packet should be in that product. We must consider what further measures may be necessary to ensure that robust mechanisms are in place to identify such issues much earlier and that manufacturers and retailers are undertaking their responsibilities effectively and consistently.

As the minister will know, the number of meat inspectors has halved since 2008. While that is partly due to a reduction in the number of premises requiring inspection, there has been a move towards lighter-touch regulation, with a reduction in the number and frequency of inspections.

Only today, we hear news of banned mechanically separated meat being used in the UK to count towards meat content. Will the minister respond to Unison Scotland’s warning against the introduction of a new body that promotes lighter-touch regulation? Will he give an assurance, particularly given what we now know about the food chain, that the new system, with a robust regulatory framework that puts consumers’ interests first, will prevent future scandals of this nature?

I hope that the member has been reassured by my statement that the primary focus and overall objective of the new food safety body in Scotland will be consumer protection.

The member asked about the number of meat inspectors. Meat inspectors are provided at a UK level and operate throughout UK, rather than specifically through the Food Standards Agency in Scotland. Their numbers have changed for a variety of reasons. For example, the number of abattoirs has reduced. In addition, during incidents such as the BSE and foot-and-mouth outbreaks, inspectors were put into premises but, once the restrictions that followed those incidents were reduced or removed, the number of inspectors that had to be present in those premises also reduced.

The new food body in Scotland and the review group that I have set up give us the opportunity to look at what we have at the moment. Are there ways in which we could do things better? Do we need to look at how we can improve the inspection and regulatory regimes to get them fit for purpose in a way that best suits Scotland’s needs?

There is no intention of having a lighter touch with existing regulation, but we need to make sure that we have a proportionate, intelligence-based system that uses the best science and evidence to support its work.

Will the minister provide details of the additional powers that the new food body would require to make retailers display in full their quality standard ratings and the origins of their food?

A lesson that we can learn from the current incident is that the public would like to be made much more readily available information about the type of testing that retailers and manufacturers undertake on their food products. Progress has been made on that, with retailers providing test results to the FSA, as they will do every three months. I detect that retailers recognise that the public want more information in this area. The new food body and the review group have an opportunity to look at whether we should take that further in Scotland, and whether there is a need for more regulation in this area or whether the industry is prepared to take action itself to provide the public with greater reassurance and greater availability of such information.

I thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement and I commend the approach to the issue that he has outlined to Parliament today. I also commend the appointment of Ray Jones and Jim Scudamore, who appear eminently suited to the tasks that the minister has outlined.

Does the minister accept that procurement policy has to be part of the reviews that he has outlined to Parliament, particularly in the context of the question that I asked him during topical question time on Tuesday? Can he say anything about the costs of the new body? Will it be Government funded or will the costs ultimately lie with industry and, indeed, consumers?

The new food body in Scotland will be funded in the same way that the FSA in Scotland is funded, which is through the consolidated grant to the Scottish Government.

The horsemeat scandal gives us the opportunity to look at procurement in much more detail. On Tuesday, I mentioned that the Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and the Environment and the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning are keen to explore some issues with local authorities. The percentage of public sector contracts that include Scottish produce has increased from the mid-30s up to almost 50. There is an opportunity to look at getting more Scottish produce into public sector procurement contracts. We have to look at the most effective way of doing that.

The expert group that Richard Lochhead has set up gives us an opportunity to look at how we can shorten the food chain. Some of the issues that have arisen over the horsemeat scandal demonstrate the scale of and distances involved in the food chain. Any opportunity to reduce those will be good for the consumer and good for public health.

The minister referred to

“a broader role and new responsibilities”

for the new food body. Will the minister—or, indeed, a ministerial colleague—therefore take this opportunity to review the provision of slaughterhouses and processing plants and consider whether there are opportunities for more local facilities? I believe that that would enhance traceability and food security. Indeed, the issue might come within the ambit of the new food body.

Christine Grahame raises a very important point. Some Scottish abattoirs have found the UK regulations that have been introduced challenging—there has been a disproportionate impact on some of our smaller abattoirs. The move towards having our own stand-alone food safety body gives us the opportunity to make sure that the way in which we implement regulations is proportionate and reflects the different nature of the Scottish industry. If we can get that right, it will create the opportunity to have more local abattoirs in different parts of the country.

As the minister said in his statement, there is much at stake. After all, the food that we eat is vital in ensuring that we live longer and healthier lives. Does the minister therefore acknowledge the significance of East Ayrshire Council’s Soil Association-accredited food for life catering mark for providing food that is as far as possible locally sourced? What plans does the Scottish Government have to develop similar support across the public sector? Moreover, in view of the importance of the traceability of food—-

I am sorry, Ms Beamish—I think that you have asked your question.

The East Ayrshire example can certainly be discussed by Richard Lochhead and Mike Russell at next week’s meeting as they explore whether lessons learned from one local authority’s procurement of particular food products can benefit other local authorities. If we can encourage more local produce to be procured, it will be good for the children, those who benefit from those public sector contracts and, indeed, the Scottish industry.

I remind members that they should ask only one question.

I note that the minister has said several times that this is about consumer protection and proportionality. Does he agree that it is less about inspections and more about having good-quality assurance processes in the supply chain? If that kind of good system is in place, we will only be inspecting something that is working well.

I entirely agree. One benefit of our quality Scottish produce is its traceability and the farm-to-plate quality assurance programmes that have been built in over the number of years. Richard Lochhead’s working group gives us an opportunity to examine how we might extend that approach to other meat products in Scotland in order to make the system much more comprehensive and to give the public even greater confidence in the quality of the products that they purchase.

The minister’s statement, for which I thank him, suggests that the new body will have a much wider remit than the current Food Standards Agency in Scotland. Given that and the fact that the Government has reduced its contribution to the running of the FSA, I want to press the minister a little more for any detail that he can give on the new body’s likely costs.

First of all, we have not reduced our funding for the FSA; indeed, over the term of this Government, we have probably increased our proportion of spend on the agency in Scotland. We have not reduced its budget, but there have been marked reductions in the Food Standards Agency’s budget at a UK level.

That aside, I am open to considering the wider areas in which the FSA could play a role. I have said that it could play a greater role in public health, in improving diet and in promoting healthy eating in Scotland, and I encourage it to move in that direction. The consultation on the new body’s establishment provides an opportunity for people to give their views on how the agency’s role should be further expanded, and we can consider how those suggestions sit with the new body itself.

Of course, if any expansion of the body’s role requires further resources, we will have to reflect on how we will provide that additional funding. However, I am open to looking at any aspect of expanding the new body’s role; indeed, I am open to considering a range of suggestions, if they are constructive.

What further assurance can the minister provide to current FSA staff that as staff members of the new agency their employment will continue, with their terms and conditions, including pension provision, fully protected?

When I announced that we were accepting Jim Scudamore’s recommendations and moving towards the creation of Scotland’s own food safety body, the staff were one of the first groups to be informed of the decision to ensure that they were fully versed in the Government’s intentions. We have no plans to change the location of the FSA; the new body will be based in Aberdeen and it is likely that its creation will require additional staff. The staff in the Aberdeen office and those who are involved in meat inspection can rest assured that their jobs remain important to us and that it is likely that we will have to add to the staff complement to allow the new body to carry out the new functions that we intend it to have.

I thank the minister for early sight of his statement and for its content. Who will sit on the food expert group with Ray Jones? Will there be space for groups such as the Federation of Small Businesses, Nourish Scotland and the Fife Diet, or will they continue to be squeezed out by the supermarkets?

We have announced who will be chairing both the expert groups. I am more than happy to ensure that we write to all members who have an interest in the matter to inform them of the full details of those who will sit on those groups. The expert group that has been set up by Richard Lochhead is very much focused on the meat producer side of the industry, to give particular focus on traceability in that area. However, I would be more than happy, once we have the full details of the membership of both groups, to inform the member about those details.