CFG
33/05
Letter dated 12 December
2005 from Foodaware to David Gray, Food Hygiene Implementation Division,
Food Standards Agency:
Dear Mr Gray
Draft Food Hygiene (England) (No 2) Regulations 2005
The Proposals
This proposal is necessary to implement the recently harmonised EU
Food Hygiene Regulations which apply directly in the UK. It introduces
transitional measures and creates several new offences for failure
to comply with Community legislation on microbiological criteria,
legislation on Trichinella in meat, to change the rules governing
enforcement and extend provisions for remedial action and detention
notices to apply to all food businesses.
Since many of the provisions of these Regulations implement previously
adopted EU regulations, it would seem that there is little scope for
change other than in the technical drafting. We do not have any specific
drafting points to make but express some concerns about the arrangements
for inspection and enforcement that we should like you to take into
account. We are also most disappointed that there is likely to be
delay in implementing the main provisions and that many of those provisions
will not be in force until 2010. We very much hope that meanwhile
the implementation of necessary training will not be delayed.
Risk-based Food Law Enforcement
Foodaware previously welcomed the Commission’s proposals to
simplify the EU hygiene regulations and the introduction of a risk-based
system built on HACCP principles. As these principles are not yet
fully embedded in hazard- control arrangements in all businesses,
especially on farms, the FSA should monitor the effectiveness of the
new regime. It can then contribute on an informed basis to the EU
review which is due to take place 4 years after implementation of
the Regulations.
It is highly regrettable that the enforcement arrangements under the
legislation remain vague, as significant changes in food enforcement
are currently under consideration, and this legislation needs to cover
future arrangements. Provision is made in the Regulations for enforcement
to be carried out either by the FSA or the food authority in the area
where the business is located depending on the nature of the business.
It also covers the activities of the Meat Hygiene Service in relation
to meat hygiene requirements. The regulatory impact assessment could
have given more information on the options being considered and the
potential consequences of each.
Foodaware believes that alongside the requirement for a risk-based
approach, a robust system for inspection needs to be developed. We
would expect to see a comprehensive enforcement plan produced by the
FSA indicating precisely where responsibility lies and its expectations
of the appropriate level of activity. Registration of businesses will
be necessary and they will need to be risk-rated by enforcement authorities
so that their resources can be appropriately directed. While low risk
businesses should not need to be regularly inspected, they should
benefit from occasional inspection, and in any case must not think
that because they pose a low risk, that they are exempt from control.
The ability to extend the use of remedial action notices and detention
notices to all food businesses including primary producers could be
a particularly valuable tool. The FSA should make periodic reports
on progress in registration, inspection and enforcement so that progress
can be monitored.
An ongoing programme of education and information will need to supplement
the legislative changes particularly for small and medium-sized businesses
so they are clear about their obligations. We welcome the commitment
to help equip businesses and enforcers to implement HACCP principles,
and note that a statutory Code will guide the approach to enforcement.
We also understand that in Wales no additional resources are being
made available for HACCP training and as a result not all businesses
will meet their obligations to implement a HACCP plan. This would
be a missed opportunity to raise standards. Members also consider
that the FSA should seek to ensure that NVQ competencies in hygiene
and food preparation at levels 2,3 and 4 are revised to take account
of risk-based assessment and HACCP.
From farm to fork
We strongly support the extension of the regulations to cover primary
production and note the reclassification of egg packing stations so
they are no longer considered primary production. The legislation
proposes that as a result enforcement of the hygiene requirements
would be more appropriately carried out by food authorities than by
Defra’s Egg Marketing Inspectorate. We agree with this judgement,
but it is important that the resources and relevant skills are also
transferred.
Time-scale for implementation
The Regulations are due to come into force on 1 January 2006. Despite
the consultations that have taken place to date, this is a remarkably
short time for industry and enforcement authorities to train staff
on the implications of these highly technical new rules and their
application. Consumers would expect a relatively seamless transition
between the old legislation and this co-ordinated approach, but that
could be put at risk because of the short time-scale and the extent
of change underway in some sectors, particularly the meat trade. We
understand that as a result a number of the main provisions will be
delayed to 2010, but it is unclear which these are. This makes it
particularly difficult to comment accurately and effectively to the
consultation.
Foodaware is content for this response to be made publicly available.
Yours sincerely,
Barbara Saunders
pp Susan Knox
Chairperson
|
