CFG
05/04
Foodaware: the Consumers’ Food Group
Minutes of the eleventh meeting – held on 12 February 2004
At the Food Standards Agency, Aviation House, Kingsway,
London
Welcome and apologies for absence
Minutes of the last meeting
Election of Chair
Food promotion to children
Food and Health Action Plan
Veterinary medicines update
EU and UK Update and campaigns
Health claims (EESC draft
opinion)
Requirements for feed hygiene (CFG
03/04)
Fish production update
Salt
Olive oil regime (CFG 02/04)
Materials in contact with food (CFG
04/04)
Any other business (incl. chicken
‘flu)
PRESENT
Members:
Erica Bargeman - European Union of Women
Judy Brander - National Council of Women
Jonathan Clogstoun-Willmott - Age Concern Scotland
Dr. John Godfrey - ERICA
Mike Jobson - Trading Standards Institute
Susan Knox -Chair, UKROFS, Meat Hygiene Policy Forum
Tim Marsh - National Federation of WI
Penny McNeill - General Consumer Council for N.I.
Helen Millar - National Consumer Federation
Sue Payne - National Consumer Federation
Jacquie Salfield - Institute of Consumer Sciences, Committee on
Toxicity of Chemical in Food
Alma Williams - EU Sheepmeat Advisory Committee and ECOSOC
Anne Wilson - Meat Hygiene Advisory Committee
Katy Waters - National Childbirth Trust
Observers:
Alistair Edwards - FSA, Imported Food Branch
Dr. A Majid Katme - Muslim Council of Britain
Hilary Porter FSA - SRM Branch
Nasreen Shah FSA - Food Contact Materials Unit
Shree Om Parkash Sharma - National Council of Hindu Temples, UK
Foodaware:
Ann Davison - Manager, Member EU Economic and Social
Committee
Lucy Harris - UK Co-ordinator
Jane Jeffreys - Administrator
Barbara Saunders - Consultant
Apologies:
Paul Allen - European Food Law Association UK
Dr. Paul Brantom - Brantom Risk Assessment
Maria Carlton - National Association of PTAs
Dorothy Craig - Veterinary Residues Committee
Janet Graham - EU Advisory Group on Veterinary Matters
Sheila Graham - Veterinary Products Committee
Donna Heaney - Scottish Consumer Council
Joanne Hobbs - Girl Guides
Dr. Catherine Humphries - The Cooperative Group
Jeanette Longfield - Sustain
Tom MacMillan - Food Ethics Council
Susan Mason - National Childbirth Trust
Dilwen Phillips - Advisory Committee for Wales
Hilary Ratcliffe - Soroptimists International of GB and Ireland
Sally Russell - Netmums.com
Michelle Smyth - Consumers’ Association
John Verrall - Veterinary Products Committee
Stella Walsh - Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition
Grace Wedekind - International Council of Women
FOODAWARE BUSINESS MEETING
1. Welcome and apologies
for absence
The Chair (Susan Knox) welcomed everyone to the eleventh meeting of
Foodaware particularly the representatives from the Muslim Council
of Britain, the National Council of Hindu Temples, and Age Concern
Scotland. She also welcomed Tim Marsh, the new NFWI representative,
and the observers from the Food Standards Agency (FSA). She thanked
FSA for hosting the meeting. She told members that Jacqui Webster
had recently moved from the Consumer Branch to the Nutrition Branch
within FSA and Jacqui’s successor, Jaswinder Bangar, would be
starting in March. Finally, she congratulated John Godfrey on his
recent OBE, awarded in recognition of his consumer protection and
representation work.
2. Minutes of the
last meeting
It was noted that a number of apologies were missing from the draft
minutes of the last meeting (CFG 19/03). These would be added to the
final version. Judy Brander requested an amendment to the wording
of the third sentence in the first paragraph on Item 5 (BSE over thirty
month rule). It should read ‘Judy Brander acknowledged that
the OTM rule needed changing as it had been suggested that most
cattle born after 1996 were considered to be free of BSE.’
The minutes were then agreed subject to these amendments.
3. Matters arising
3.1 Election of Chair
Ann informed members that, in the recent elections for Chairperson
of Foodaware, Susan Knox had been nominated by a number of organisations.
As there were no other candidates she was duly re-elected for another
term. Sue Payne thanked Susan for chairing the group so well to date
and her excellent job in representing Foodaware in such a wide variety
of fora.
3.2 Food promotion to children
Susan reported that she had represented Foodaware at two recent meetings
on this subject: the FSA Debate on Food Promotion and Children (along
with Katy Waters) and also the Westminster Diet and Health Forum seminar.
Both events had been worthwhile (reports circulated on the list-serve)
and she felt there was a growing sense of urgency that changes to
current promotional practices were needed. At the FSA meeting Katy
Water’s question, concerning the watershed and its role as a
regulatory tool, had been discussed.
Ann said that Foodaware needed to update its existing paper on children
and food promotion (CFG 12/03) that at present was rather academic.
It needed a stronger policy input in order to be a useful lobbying
document. Jacqui Salfield had offered to re-draft it and members were
invited to input through the usual channels.
In discussion, members raised a number of issues and concerns including:
- the need for healthier foods to be promoted
- a possible ‘traffic light’ system for highlighting
healthy/unhealthy foods
- the development of food profiles by nutritionists to determine
which foods could be advertised
- the fact that some foods are healthier than others needs
to be recognised (food manufacturers push the view that there
are no unhealthy foods only unhealthy diets as it is in their
interests to do so)
- the long-term health problems associated with childhood obesity
and the need for these to be discussed in schools
- the need for advertising to be included in the national curriculum
e.g. under ‘citizenship’ (need to put pressure on
the DoH and DEfS)
- the need for Home Economics to be reintroduced into the school
curriculum
- the promotional activities of certain companies in schools
- the existence of vending machines in schools and need for healthy
options
- the problem of ever increasing portion sizes and ‘two
for one’ offers
- the use of celebrities which could be used positively
- the role of retailers and the need for these to be more responsible
e.g. removing sweets etc from check-outs
- the importance of parental responsibility
- the importance of exercise.
ACTION: Jacqui Salfield to develop the existing paper
on food promotion to children into a draft policy paper and circulate
for members’ comments.
3.3 Food and Health Action Plan
Ann Davison and Sue Payne updated members on developments concerning
the government’s Food and Health Action Plan. They, together
with John Godfrey, had attended a meeting hosted by Phorum (a public
health non-government organisation) to discuss progress on this with
Department of Health (DH) officials. (See report circulated on list-serve).
It appeared that no substantial progress had been made and many issues
already submitted to the DH were restated by the organisations present.
It was noted that no consultation meeting with ethnic minority groups
had as yet taken place on this. Another consultation will be issued
in March.
3.4 Veterinary medicines update
Susan Knox informed members that a delegation from the Veterinary
Residues Committee (VRC) had met with the Chief Executives of the
FSA and the Veterinary Medicines Directorate in January at which concerns
about the operation of the committee were raised. Dorothy Craig had
since been asked to chair the meetings in 2004 and from January 2005
a new committee and chairman would be appointed. There would be places
for one or two new consumer representatives. The first open meeting
of the VRC would be held during 2004.
4. EU and UK Update
and campaigns
The UK and European Co-ordinator’s reports were briefly discussed.
EU Update
In relation to food fortification, it was noted that increasing numbers
of people were suffering food allergies and more data was needed.
One particular challenge was the diversity of populations across the
EU and differing epidemiologies resulting from this. The work already
carried out by the FSA in their report on vitamins and minerals was
relevant as was new work by the Committee on Toxicology (COT) on variability.
Members also raised their concerns about the need for clear labelling
of fortified foods, for the regulation of health claims, for ongoing
information about a balanced diet, and for clear boundaries between
foods and medicines.
ACTION: It was agreed that the existing Foodaware
paper on food fortification should be updated and promoted in relation
to the Commission’s proposals being considered by the European
Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee. Barbara Saunders
agreed to take this forward and members were invited to contribute.
UK report
Lucy explained that this paper summarized the main activities of Foodaware
since the last meeting and would form the basis of the quarterly ‘deliverables’
report sent to FSA. She noted that, as previously, the level of activity
in terms of responses to consultations and representations at meetings
was impressively high given the level of resources available.
Regarding FSA consultations, it was agreed that further consideration
should be given to those listed and any possible responses should
be circulated on the list-serve for comment. Work on food contact
materials was already in hand (see Item 10 below).
5. Health claims
(EESC draft opinion)
Ann Davison and Alma Williams updated members on developments at EU
level on the health claims dossier. They had both been involved in
European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) including Ann as the
rapporteur. The draft opinion had been published in late January and
was generally good although some compromises had had to be made in
order that agreement was reached. The main issues of contention were
the requirement for foods to have a minimum nutritional profile in
order to carry nutrition or health claims, how alcoholic drinks should
be dealt with, and the role of professional organisations and charities,
for example, in endorsing certain products. A clear north/south divide
in opinion on these had emerged in discussions.
In discussion, members asked who would compile the required nutritional
profiles and on the basis of what data. This was likely to be the
Commission with the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) having a
role in checking health claims. The EFSA’s location had now
been decided (Parma, Italy) and it had, to date, 80 staff. This number
should eventually rise to 150. At present they were particularly short
of scientists.
Members also raised concerns about the difficulties of science keeping
up with developments, the use of charities associating themselves
with certain foods, and the use of branding to make implicit health
claims.
ACTION: It was agreed that Foodaware’s paper
on health claims should be updated and used in lobbying further on
this issue. It would be helpful to look at the findings of other organisations,
e.g. NCC’s work on this.
6. Requirements for
feed hygiene (CFG 03/04)
Ann Davison thanked Mike Jobson, Paul Allen and John Godfrey for their
contributions to this draft paper. She explained that the proposal
covered traceability of feeds, identification of critical control
points, strengthening of registration and approval system for feed
establishments, the introduction of a code of good manufacturing practice,
and further controls on imported feeds. She thought Foodaware should
generally welcome the proposal but that there were outstanding issues
about how the advertising and labelling of feed would be controlled
which needed addressing. For example, it was noted that Muslim consumers
whose religion requires them to eat halal meat need to know
what the animal has eaten as it shouldn’t have eaten anything
unnatural.
Discussion then focussed on the need for full traceability of supplies
and the role of animal passports. Concerns were raised about the problems
of traceability particularly associated with small abbatoirs. The
possibility of feed contamination in ship holds was also mentioned,
as was the problem of fish feed contamination. It was agreed that
traceability had a crucial role to play in preventing future contamination
problems.
In relation to financing and sanctions, members agreed that further
consideration should be given to a range of options, including insurance
and the paying of a bond by the feed industry. Members agreed that
all operators should be registered and licensed.
ACTION: It was agreed that the paper should be further
developed over the next two weeks. Comments should be forwarded to
Ann Davison.
7. Fish production
update
John Godfrey introduced his paper on toxic contaminants in salmon.
He explained that a paper recently published in the journal Science
had provoked much discussion in the media. It had concluded that farmed
salmon from the North-East Atlantic, including Scotland, had higher
levels of organochlorines than do wild salmon and also than those
farmed in the southern hemisphere further from the sources of major
environmental pollution. This was an important study in that it was
the largest to date and had found major geographical differences in
contamination. It had been criticised because it used the standards
based on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency rather than those
of the Food and Drug Administration and there was a wide discrepancy
between these. The standards used by the UK FSA, the European Commission
and the UN were closer to those of the FDA. While this did raise concerns
about appropriate safety margins, John was not convinced that these
latter standards were necessarily unsafe. However, a review of the
standards used in Europe would be appropriate. He also argued that,
in order to encourage consumers to eat more fish, and as a precautionary
measure in relation to the possible (and as yet unknown) health risks
of such environmental pollutants, the level of organochlorines in
farmed fish should be reduced to the lowest achievable.
The discussion focussed on the problems associated with scientific
uncertainties, for example, when research results are turned into
a food scare by the media. Members stressed the importance of the
FSA and other government departments in disseminating accessible and
easily understood information in such circumstances. There was general
concern amongst members about the high level of a number of environmental
contaminants in the food chain and it was agreed that stringent standards
should be set and more effort made to reduce these.
ACTION: It was agreed that John should write a letter outlining
these concerns to the FSA, copied to Geoffrey Podger at the EFSA and
to Defra.
8. Salt
The Chair explained that Penelope Gilbert from Consensus Action on
Salt and Health (CASH), an NGO working specifically on salt issues,
had been expected to give a short presentation under this item. As
she had not arrived this item was deferred to the next meeting.
NB Apologies from Penelope Gilbert were received that morning
but a message sent via the FSA had not come through.
9. Olive oil regime
(CFG 02/04)
Ann Davison introduced this item saying that the draft paper was consistent
with ‘old’ Consumers in Europe Group (CEG) policy on the
reform of the Common Agriculture Policy, quality standards and country
of origin labelling. Members discussed the problem of the high price
of olive oil given its relatively healthy role in the diet. Questions
were raised as to the cause and whether the fact that it was normally
sold in glass bottles contributed to the high prices.
ACTION: It was agreed that the paper should be finalised
and circulated on the list-serve.
10. Materials in
contact with food (CFG 04/04)
Ann Davison introduced this item and the paper that, at present, just
described the EU proposal on which FSA was consulting. This would
be developed to take into account members’ comments and any
appropriate policy recommendations. The FSA deadline for comments
was 5 March.
There was some confusion over exactly what the proposal would cover
and how it would fit in with existing legislation on packaging materials.
Nasreen Shah explained that old framework legislation covered plastics.
This new proposal would include ‘intelligent’ packaging.
Ann said that the EESC draft Opinion was at a very early stage but
there was concern that the proposal was asking too much of small businesses.
In discussion members comments included:
- concern about packaging on microwavable foods
- concern that although some migration from packaging is inevitable,
limits must be designated
- a question as to whether there were any new substances as well
as new types of packaging?
- concern that different types of heat source may bring about
different reactions
- importance of clear labelling e.g. for suitability for microwave
etc.
- labelling when containers were not suitable for re-using in
the home.
ACTION: Ann Davison to develop a draft paper for
circulation and comment on the list-serve.
11. Any other business
(incl. chicken ‘flu)
John Godfrey introduced his paper ‘Emerging infections: what
we have learned from SARS?
Members agreed that there was a need for public assurance about existing
EU controls. It was recognised that the poultry industry needed protecting
and that this was a public health problem as well as a food safety
issue. A question was asked about whether vaccination of stock was
a good enough policy to protection against infection.
ACTION: It was agreed that John’s paper should
be sent to the EFSA together with questions about the necessary action
to protect industry, import controls and country of origin labelling.
Lucy alerted members to a vacancy for a lay member on the FSA Advisory
Committee on Animal Feedingstuffs. If anyone were interested in applying
they would need to move quickly as the deadline for applications was
19 February.
Susan Knox confirmed the meeting dates for the rest of 2004 as being
22 April, 15 July and 4 November. The location for these meetings
would be confirmed nearer the time.
The meeting closed at 4 pm.
|
