Volume 1
Food safety : fourth report / Agriculture Committee.
- Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Agriculture Committee.
- Date:
- 1998
Licence: Open Government Licence
Credit: Food safety : fourth report / Agriculture Committee. Source: Wellcome Collection.
10/72
![below. Those seeking further information on these and other hazards are referred to the written evidence which we have received; (c) in chronological terms, our oral evidence programme was divided into two sections, before and after the publication of the Government’s White Paper. In the first part, we would loosely define the purpose of the sessions as to obtain information on the food safety problems which the FSA will have to address. During the second period, we have continued to gather such information, but we have also begun to identify the main questions which need to be examined and resolved in order to ensure that the FSA is as effective as possible. On publication of the White Paper, we wrote to all those who had already submitted written evidence to our inquiry, asking them if they wished to add to their comments in the light of the White Papers’ proposals. We have been anxious at all times to avoid any possibility of duplicating the Government’s own consultation on the White Paper. The two phases of evidence-gathering in this inquiry are reflected in the structure of this Report: in Section II we examine the underlying problems of food safety which the FSA will have to address, and in Section II] we consider the Government’s proposals for an Agency. 9. The purpose of this Report is to provide a bedrock of information for the House in its continuing scrutiny of the proposals to establish a Food Standards Agency, both in the pre- legislative stages and when the bill itself is before Parliament next Session. We hope to carry out “pre-legislative scrutiny” of the draft Food Standards Agency bill when it is published later this year, along the lines set out by the Select Committee on Modernisation of the House of Commons’’. We will, however, undertake such pre-legislative scrutiny only if we are convinced that we have sufficient time to perform it effectively. We would welcome any comments, from Members and others, as to how we might best undertake scrutiny of the draft Food Standards Agency bill. . There is broad support for the establishment of a Food Standards Agency, and we wish to see such an Agency working successfully and effectively. However, we would be doing a disservice to the House, to consumers and to the agricultural and food industries if we took it as axiomatic that the establishment of such an Agency would solve all existing food safety and standards problems. There are tenable arguments to the effect that many improvements could be made without radical transformation of the current system for handling food safety, although such an approach would not deal with the issues of public confidence. Similarly, the existence of an Agency will not magically resolve the complex scientific and political judgements which characterize food safety policy. Some would argue, returning to first principles, that the actual extent of food safety problems in the UK is much exaggerated, and that this results in a disproportionate allocation of resources to dealing with food safety. This is not a view we share, but we have not wished to get bogged down in the arguments in principle for and against an Agency, which will be considered by the House as a whole when the bill is introduced next Session. 11. The critical reaction from some quarters to decisions taken by the Government to protect public health shows that there is always a balance to be struck between the level of risk, public perception of that risk and the proportionality of action taken. In our view, the main challenge which the FSA will face is in establishing its credibility with the public, as swiftly as possible. The Agency must not only make our food safer, but be seen to do so. It must also ensure the correct balance between advice and enforcement. This will require it to set clear priorities for its actions in its first years of existence. The onus on the Government will be to ensure that the FSA will be properly financed, well managed and effectively led. 12. In our inquiry we received around 150 memoranda, and the majority of these are published in a separate volume to this Report, together with the transcripts of the ten oral evidence sessions which we held. During our inquiry we also made visits to the Meat Hygiene Service headquarters at York, a cattle abattoir near York, the Campden and Chorleywood Food Research 10 First Report from the Select Coxfimittee on Modernisation of the House of Commons, Session 1997-98, The Legislative Process, HC 190](https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/image/b3222106x_0001_0010.jp2/full/800%2C/0/default.jpg)
