The Other BSE Report
-October 23, 2000
This opinion was featured as a Talking Point in the November 3, 2000 issue of the Farmers Weekly
While Lord Phillips has been making headline news with BSE's Inquiry Report, Sir John Krebs' has, with less fanfare, been completing the Food Standard Agencies(FSA) BSE Controls Review. The FSA review is expected to be finalized in the next few weeks and is for the beef industry the more important of the two reports. It will shape the future rather than add a footnote to the past.
The more critical FSA review was requested by the government back in March and even before the FSA had formally taken over responsibility for BSE control measures. Beyond the hope for a reassuring report from an independent agency, the government must also have been mindful of the costs of control measures. How long the drain on the public purse would last and how soon the beef industry could be freed from some of the costly red tape involved.
What may not have been anticipated is that the FSA would choose, in order to cover all corners, to include beef imports in its review. And it is this item which is likely to cause trouble. The challenges here are two-fold.
Imported beef from areas where BSE is known or suspected is supposed to meet the same food safety standards as imposed on UK beef. There is no regulatory environment in these countries to ensure that happens. And the level of BSE in some of these countries is increasing.
In its initial review draft, which is now going through a process of public review, the FSA notes "imports should not carry a greater proportionate risk than domestic produce." And of the related food safety restrictions on imports including over 30-month beef, it admits that "the only effective check is for the UK importer to ensure that the imported product complies with the rule."
A recent report of the detection of potentially BSE infected spinal cord material in beef from Ireland was a caution. But more serious is the situation on France.
That has begun to be recognized by experts, including members of SEAC. Although the weekly BSE toll in France is still in single figures and that in the UK is the mid 20s, the statistics hide a more disturbing French situation.
About half of the French cases are being reported through its new program of random spot checks on fallen stock. The implication is that the actual incidence of BSE in fallen stock is many times that reported.
France's punitive whole herd slaughter policy, which is a strong motivation for avoiding detection, is an important consideration for outwardly healthy animals destined for the human consumption.
A 1999 EU Commission veterinary mission identified many short comings in French BSE surveillance last January.
So far the concern has been over the eating of beef in France, rather than eating French beef that has been imported. But the FSA has to be concerned about even minor risks when food safety perceptions are at stake.
This is a difficult issue for the FSA, even as an independent body. By raising it they may set in motion a process that will create another crisis in consumer confidence in beef, particularly on the Continent.
At the same time Britain is unlikely to be able to impose any more reassuring restriction on French imports very quickly. Unless it resorts to illegal beef trade restrictions as the French have done with their outright ban. The commission, which would have to be a party to the imposition of such restrictions, is unlikely to be able to deliver a politically difficult decision promptly.
But the public interest will ultimately be best served by the FSA addressing directly the safety of importing 5,000 tonnes of French beef annually under current circumstances. The French should expect no less.
top of page