Government pledges tougher fines for food safety lapses
industries, including the food sector, promising less inspections
and more incentives for firms with a good record on quality
standards, but a crackdown on those breaking the rules, reports
Chris Mercer.
Britain currently has 63 national regulators, yet 31 of these are set to be merged into seven 'mother' organisations, including the Food Standards Agency (FSA), over the next two to four years.
A new Better Regulation Executive will also be established within the Cabinet Office to oversee the performance of regulators.
The moves were announced in yesterday's Budget report and follow the same-day publication of a review examining ways to improve business regulation by Philip Hampton, chairman of Sainsbury's.
And the government has said it will implement the review's recommendations in full, starting with a greater emphasis on risk-based regulation.
"For companies meeting high standards the Hampton Report estimates a major reduction in the number of inspections - a million fewer inspections every year, a reduction in inspections of one third. But for companies persistently breaking the rules there will be tougher penalties," said chancellor Gordon Brown in his Budget Speech.
The timing of Brown's message will hit a particular nerve in the food industry after recent food alerts over the presence of the illegal and potentially cancer-causing dye, Sudan 1, in more than 580 processed foods on shop shelves.
And food companies should pay particular attention to the Hampton Report's assertion that fines handed out to firms need to be more substantial to act as a greater deterrent. Local authorities currently bring between 650-700 cases per year against food firms.
"Neither regulators nor businesses believe that appropriate fines will result from most prosecutions. The FSA has even prosecuted some serious food offences as conspiracy to defraud, because they consider the penalities handed down under food safety legislation are ineffective," says the review.
Now, the government has promised to bring in early legislation to implement the Hampton Review's recommendations, and has already proposed to increase magistrates' power to set fines.
The maximum fine in a magistrates court for offences such as selling food below food safety standards or selling food not of the nature, substance or quality demanded is £20,000, with a possible six months in prison. Fines are already unlimited for cases heard in Crown Courts, with a maximum prison sentence of two years, though this is rarely used.
But, despite talk of tougher penalties, the government has insisted that its new regulation strategy will predominantly help firms. "The benefits of a risk-based approach are that it focuses regulators' resources in those areas where the risks to society are greatest, ensuring inspections of riskier businesses that may not otherwise take place and substantially reducing the costs incurred by the majority of low-risk businesses," it said.
However, Trish O' Flynn, senior policy officer for the Local Government Association (LGA), said the basics of this policy were already in use: "Local authorities have always worked on a risk assessment basis because we simply can't visit every premises.
"The Hampton Review helps because this policy has never really been formulated on a national basis," she said, adding that: "The government's adoption of the recommendations is a big move, probably requiring primary legislation, and it will be interesting to hear more details of how this will work - especially because there is not much extra money around from what I can see".
The government says it will accompany its new regulation strategy with a reduction in the amount of paperwork firms are required to complete for regulatory bodies; therefore relieving some of the bureaucratic burden it believes is shackling business growth. More advice on how to meet regulations will also be given to firms.
The Hampton Review, keen to promote voluntary regulation where possible, also advocates the use of "incentives for compliance" that offer rewards to food firms which improve their standards above the legal minimum.
The FSA is already piloting a similar food awards scheme for catering premises in Wales and Northern Ireland and has so far handed out more than 1,700 awards, which the review says have become held in high regard by the catering industry as a way to add value to a business.
The food agency will review the success of this idea as part of its strategic plan for 2005-2010, with a view to launching further schemes across the UK.
The Better Regulation Executive would be responsible for setting national standards for such a scheme within its role of co-ordinating regulatory authorities at a local and national level.
The LGA yesterday welcomed the plan for the executive because it should stop local authorities "being pulled in different directions by conflicting demands originating from different government departments".
But, O' Flynn warned that she was cautious about the proposed composition of the body, which is set to include more business representatives than consumer ones. "It will give a sense of real priority, though I would be cautious about a body that is in that position but has more of one interest represented than another."
The Food Standards Agency, launched by the present government in 2000, has 610 employees and is responsible for co-ordinating and overseeing inspections and food safety work carried out by local authorities, as well as providing advice and information to the public.
Local authorities are required by the EU to draw up plans for, and carry out, inspections of food outlets and factories. There are around 1,500 environmental health officers and 500 trading standards officers working on food law enforcement in the UK.
