THE FOOD STANDARDS AGENCY -

A FORCE FOR CHANGE

CONTENTS

Page

1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 1

2. THE PROPOSALS 4

3. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14

4. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS 22

ANNEXES

A. MEMBERSHIP OF STANDING COMMITTEE D

B. MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS

C. SUMMARYOF JAMES REPORT AND PUBLIC RESPONSE

D. STANDING COMMITTEE C AND D RESPONSES TO

JAMES REPORT

E. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF WHITE PAPER

"THE FOOD STANDARDS AGENCY - A FORCE FOR

CHANGE"

- GUIDING PRINCIPLES OF THE PROPOSED AGENCY

- FUNCTIONS OF THE PROPOSED AGENCY

F. MINUTES OF EVIDENCE

G. STANDING COMMITTEE C (HEALTH ISSUES)

RESPONSE TO WHITE PAPER

THE FOOD STANDARDS AGENCY -

A FORCE FOR CHANGE

1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

1.1 In the course of its Review of the Beef Industry crisis in Northern

Ireland, a report which was adopted by the Forum on 1 November

1996, Standing Committee D (Agriculture and Fisheries Issues)

expressed concern about the dramatic effect of agri-health scares on all

sectors of the agricultural industry and recommended an examination of

the administration of Agriculture in Northern Ireland and of the

potential benefits of instituting a Ministry of Food. The Committee

undertook to progress this recommendation further.

1.2 In March 1997 the Prime Minister, while leader of the Opposition,

invited Professor Philip James of the Rowett Research Institute in

Aberdeen to make recommendations on the structure and functions of a

Food Standards Agency. Professor James formally presented his report

to the Prime Minister on 8 May 1997 - a report which was

subsequently published for consultation. The Prime Minister gave firm

support to the proposals contained in the report. He said

"The public has the right to expect the very highest

standards of food safety. Confidence in the safety of the

food we eat has been severely undermined in recent years

and I am determined to rebuild that trust.

I thank Professor James for his detailed and considered

report. It provides an excellent foundation upon which the

Government can build. It confirms my belief that we will

benefit from a powerful Food Standards Agency. We

need to create a structure that is open and transparent, and

which acts - and is seen to act - in the interests of

consumers."

1.3 A summary of the "James Report" and of the public response to the

recommendations contained in the report is at Annex C.

1.4 Standing Committee D (Agriculture and Fisheries Issues) and Standing

Committee C (Health Issues) provided responses to the "James Report"

in June 1997 - see Annex D. Both Committees supported the creation

of a Food Standards Agency - but stressed the need for a separate

Northern Ireland Agency.

1.5 In its response to the "James Report" the Agriculture and Fisheries

Committee further indicated

- that agriculture interests should be represented in the proposed

Agency structures;

- that the proposed Agency should be given responsibility for

controlling imported products in addition to those which are home

grown;

- that equal authority should be placed on Ministers appointed to the

proposed Ministerial Council;

- that provision should be made for an appeal procedure to afford

protection to those who are affected by decisions of the proposed

Agency;

- that representation on the Agency Board should include not only

local food interests, but also local elected representatives.

1.6 On 14 January 1998, Dr W B Smith, Head of the Health and Social

Policy Unit of the Department of Health and Social Services wrote

enclosing a copy of the White Paper 'The Food Standards Agency - A

Force for Change', seeking views on the proposals contained therein.

Comments were required by 16 March 1998 at the latest. A copy of

the Introduction and Summary of the White Paper is attached at Annex

E.

1.7 Standing Committee D (Agriculture and Fisheries Issues) has been

gathering evidence on this topic for some time. Minutes of Evidence

taken by the Committee are attached at Annex F, and a response

prepared by Standing Committee C (Health Issues) is also attached at

Annex H. The Committee wishes to express its gratitude to all who

contributed to the production of this response.

2. THE PROPOSALS

2.1 The Agency's Guiding Principles

2.1.1 The Committee notes that the Government's aim in setting up the

Agency is to strengthen food safety and standards, policies and

procedures to rebuild the public's trust in the machinery for handling

food issues. The Committee endorses the aim of protecting public

health.

2.1.2 The Government has set out nine Guiding Principles within which the

Agency will operate, and has indicated that these Guiding Principles

will be contained in the legislation establishing the Agency and in the

Agency's Management Statement. The Committee notes and endorses

the Guiding Principles which are attached at Annex E - however it is

the view of the Committee that an important requirement has been

omitted.

2.1.3 In its earlier response to the James Report, the Committee indicated

that provision should be made for an appeal procedure to afford

protection to those who are affected by decisions made by the proposed

Agency. Unfortunately it would appear that the Committee's view on

this point has been dismissed by those responsible for the drafting of

the White Paper.

2.1.4 The Committee once again stresses its firmly held view that if the

agriculture industry is to have confidence in the proposed Agency and

its activities, it is essential to build into the Guiding Principles, an

appeal procedure which will protect those affected by the decisions

made by the proposed Agency. This point is also addressed in Section

3.

2.2 What the Agency should do

2.2.1 It is proposed that the Agency should take over responsibility from the

Agriculture and Health Departments for advising Ministers on the UK

policy framework in the areas of food safety and food standards

including important aspects of nutrition. This would also include

advising on the need for and content of legislation and implementation

of policy. In addition, the Agency would also have responsibility for

the following:

- public information;

- education on food matters;

- representing UK at EU and other international organisations;

- commissioning research and surveillance;

- monitoring standards for food law enforcement.

2.2.2 The Committee notes that in areas such as nutrition policy and food

safety issues which relate to farming practices, the Health, Agriculture

and Environment Departments will retain important policy and

statutory responsibilities. The Committee endorses this approach and

agrees with the identified need to define the relationship between the

Agency and these Departments and to put in place mechanisms for

co-ordination and collaboration which will allow the Agency effectively

to discharge its responsibility to protect the public interest.

2.2.3 The Committee also welcomes the indication in the White Paper that

the proposal to include food standards within the Agency's remit will

therefore require it to work closely with the food industry to ensure that

the public interest is properly protected in this important area.

2.2.4 A Table showing the proposed functions of the Agency is attached at

Annex E.

2.2.5 With regard to food law enforcement, the Committee notes the

Government view that the Agency needs to be in a position to exercise

influence over individual local authority enforcement activities and that

the Agency should have a proactive role in encouraging consistency

across the United Kingdom. The Committee endorses the need for the

Government to enter into detailed discussion with local authority

representative organisations and other interested parties on how the

Agency and local authorities can work together to improve consistency.

The Committee is also content that the Food Safety (Northern Ireland)

Order 1991 should be examined to ensure that the necessary powers

are adequate to deal with the new arrangements.

2.3 The Agency's Role in Food Safety

2.3.1 With regard to food safety on the farm, the White Paper states that it is

essential that the Agency promotes food safety throughout the whole of

the food chain - from plough to plate. However, the White Paper also

indicates that to give the Agency operational responsibility for all

aspects of farming practices would risk diverting it from its essential

aim of protecting public health. The Government's proposals are

therefore designed to ensure that the Agency can intervene if it needs to

where farming practices impact on the safety of food.

2.3.2 The Committee welcomes and endorses this approach.

2.3.3 With regard to the surveillance and control of pathogens in live

animals, the Committee welcomes the proposal to create a joint

Agency/Agriculture Department's Committee to co-ordinate the

surveillance programme. The Committee is also pleased to note that

the powers available to Agricultural Ministers under the Animal Health

Act will normally be the most effective vehicle for introducing statutory

measures relating to live animals on the farm and will be the only

vehicle for dealing with zoonotic diseases1

which are transmitted

through non-food routes.

2.3.4 The Committee welcomes the stress being placed by the Government

on animal feedingstuffs, and the recognition that this is an area where

public health and animal husbandry/health interests both have a place.

The Committee is therefore content with the proposals for division of

responsibility between the Agency and the Agriculture Departments -

viz the Agency will take the lead on those issues where there are close

links with arrangements for human food while Agriculture Departments

will retain operational responsibility for controls on the use of

mammalian protein in feedingstuffs.

2.3.5 The Committee particularly welcomes the proposal to create an

independent advisory Committee on animal feedingstuffs (first

proposed by Professor Lamming in 1992) and recognises the urgent

need for such a Committee, particularly because of public concerns

regarding the use of genetically modified feed ingredients.

1 diseases of animals which can be transmitted to man

2.3.6 The Committee is also content with the mechanisms and safeguards

proposed to provide the Agency with effective input to the public safety

aspects of the Pesticides Safety Directorate (PSD) and the Veterinary

Medicines Directorate (VMD) (both Executive Agencies of MAFF).

The Committee welcomes the Government's view that both PSD and

VMD should continue as Executive Agencies of MAFF, should retain

lead responsibility for authorisation of pesticides and the licensing of

veterinary medicines, and should continue to develop policy on the use

of pesticides and veterinary medicines.

2.3.7 The Committee is content with the proposals relating to Food Hygiene.

2.3.8 The Committee notes from the White Paper that responsibility for meat

and dairy hygiene in Northern Ireland will be exercised on behalf of the

proposed Agency by the Department of Agriculture for Northern

Ireland (DANI). The White Paper further explains that an agreement

will be drawn up which sets out the detail of this arrangement. The

Committee welcomes the clarification on this point provided by the

DANI representative in the course of the recent evidence session. The

Committee welcomes these arrangements and is confident that DANI

will provide a first class service to the Agency.

2.3.9 The Committee endorses the Government's view that with regard to

outbreaks of food borne illness, local investigations should continue to

be managed at local level. The Committee also notes that in Northern

Ireland, the Public Health Laboratory at Belfast City Hospital provides

public health microbiological services covering food, water and

environmental aspects. However the Committee also notes that a

review will be conducted to ensure that the necessary laboratory

services are available in Northern Ireland for food safety/standards

purposes. The Committee addresses this issue in Section 3.

2.3.10 The Committee is content with the proposals relating to novel foods

and processes, food additives, chemical contaminants in food,

radiological safety, food intolerance, food emergencies and bottled

water.

2.3.11 The Committee is pleased to note that the Government does not

consider it appropriate to give the Agency responsibility for subjects

such as animal welfare or environmental policy where the primary

focus of activity relates to issues other than food safety and standards.

2.4 The Agency's role in Food Standards and Nutrition

2.4.1 The proposal that the Agency should become responsible for food

standards (which encompasses compositional standards, labelling

requirements and food authenticity) extends its remit to include matters

concerned with food quality, consumer protection and choice.

2.4.2 With regard to labelling, the Agency will become responsible for policy

and legislation on the labelling of food at retail and catering level,

including ingredient listing, nutritional labelling etc.

2.4.3 The Committee notes and endorses the proposals in this area, in

particular those referring to the labelling of food, about which it has

strong views which are outlined in Section 3.

2.4.4 The Committee notes the differing opinions which were received in

relation to the proposals in the James Report relating to nutrition and

endorses the Government's intention to assign responsibilities in this

area between the Agency and Health Departments as follows:

- the Agency will become responsible for functions relating to public

needs about food;

- public health functions will remain with the Department of Health;

- the interface between the two will become a shared responsibility.

2.5 The Structure of the Agency and its Accountability

2.5.1 The proposed structure of the Agency is as follows:

AGENCY COMMISSION

- Headquarters to be located in London.

- Chairman plus 12 Members appointed by UK Health Ministers after

consultation with Agriculture Ministers.

- Commissioners expected to take a special interest in particular areas

of the Agency's responsibilities.

- Individual Commissioners to have special responsibility for

Scottish, Welsh and Northern Ireland interests.

- Agency to be established as a single legal entity and Commission to

be endowed with all of the Agency's policy and executive powers.

ADVISORY COMMITTEES

- New advisory committees are proposed to provide advice on the

implications of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

2.5.2 It is proposed that the Agency should report to Health Minister, and

that its Annual Report should be laid before Parliament, and in the case

of Northern Ireland, before any devolved Assembly, which would have

the powers to hold the Agency to account.

2.5.3 The Committee notes the structures for the Agency which are

proposed. This point is further discussed in Section 3.

2.6 The Agency in Northern Ireland

2.6.1 The White Paper acknowledges that the "James Report" identified the

need for the Agency's structure to reflect the constitutional

arrangements in the different parts of the United Kingdom and that it

was recommended that separate commissions should be set up in

Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. In respect of the consultation

process, the White Paper indicates that broadly speaking, respondents

representing interests in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland

supported the concept of separate structures.

2.6.2 The Committee makes further comment on this point in Section 3.

2.7 Financing the Agency

2.7.1 The Committee notes that the Department of Health is to be lead

Sponsor Department and therefore that the Health Secretary should be

responsible through normal parliamentary supply procedures for

providing grant-in-aid to the Agency. It is also noted that resources

associated with existing activities currently performed by the Ministry

of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food will be transferred to the

Department of Health and that the Agency will also be financed by

other means, eg charges to the food industry.

2.7.2 The White Paper indicates that the precise mechanisms for funding the

Agency in Northern Ireland are still under consideration, and that the

Government recognises that the Agency's work to raise standards may

lead to a need for greater expenditure at local authority level. The

Committee comments on this point in Section 3.

2.7.3 The Committee also notes that the Government believes the food

industry should bear the bulk of costs for improving food safety and

standards and considers the most effective mechanism for achieving

this is to introduce a comprehensive system of registration or licensing

with fees. This point is further addressed in Section 3.

2.8 The Way Ahead

2.8.1 The Committee notes that it is proposed to launch the Agency towards

the end of 1999, and that in the meantime the Government will continue

to take steps to strengthen the handling of food issues and to deliver

improvements in the information given to the public, the advice that

Ministers receive and the decisions that are taken.

3. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

3.1 The Committee, in its letter dated 23 June 1997 to Mr Tony

Worthington MP, (the Northern Ireland Health Minister) conveyed its

initial views on the content of the James Report on the function and

structure of a new Food Standards Agency. The Committee, while

generally satisfied with the need for the proposed Agency, raised a

number of points for the Government's consideration. These points,

and others which arise from the proposals contained in the White Paper

are addressed in the following paragraphs.

3.2 IMPORTED PRODUCTS

The Committee takes the view that if the proposed Agency is to be

effective in protecting the food which is eaten in the United Kingdom,

it must be responsible not only for the safety of food produced within

the United Kingdom, but also for food which is imported into the

United Kingdom. The Committee is particularly concerned that while

agricultural producers and processors in the United Kingdom deliver

the high standard of food safety and hygiene which is required by

consumers, the standard of food from other countries and areas is less

strictly controlled. Such a situation places UK producers at a

disadvantage, because they are unable to match the prices of cheap

imported produce. The Committee therefore wishes to be assured that

the standards which apply to farmers in the United Kingdom will be

applied to all imported food.

3.3 The Committee recognises that it may be difficult under EU and

international law to prohibit the import of sub-standard produce into the

UK, and in these circumstances the Committee recommends that the

Food Standards Agency should introduce a labelling system which

clearly draws the consumer's attention to the fact that the standard

of imported the produce they are buying may be inferior or

different to that produced in the United Kingdom. The Committee

further recommends that the Food Standards Agency should

require all UK produced food which meets the required Food

Safety and Hygiene standards to be clearly labelled to indicate its

status - perhaps by the clear display of the Union Flag or of a

generic icon on the packaging.

APPEAL PROCEDURE

3.4 While the Committee accepts that the Agency will be responsible for

public health and will report to Health Ministers, it is concerned to

ensure that the agriculture industry should be given confidence that the

process of farming and agricultural production methods will not be put

at risk. The Committee's concerns are heightened when it notes that

the "James Report" proposal for an overarching Ministerial Council

(which would inter alia include the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries

and Food) has been rejected, and also that the Government is proposing

that the Agency Commission should consist "of a body of individuals

who have a proven track record in relevant fields who together provide

a reasonable balance of relevant skills and experience and a majority of

whom come from a wider public interest background without any

specific affiliation".

3.5 The Committee accepts the need for a strong, independent Agency

which will be given the necessary powers to protect public health 'from

the plough to the plate'. However it is the Committee's view that in

creating the proposed Agency there is a clear need for Government to

balance the Health and Agriculture influences. As pointed out by the

Northern Ireland Agricultural Producers Association in its evidence to

the Committee

"there is an overkill of consumer influence in all this ......... it has to be

realised that farms are not clinically clean ......... Farmers have mud on

their boots ....... Consumer influence needs to be related to practical

agriculture, practical farming and what happens on the ground."

3.6 The Committee recognises that the Guiding Principles of the proposed

Agency indicate that decision making processes will be open,

transparent and consultative, and that before taking action, the Agency

will consult widely, including representatives of those who will be

affected, unless the need for urgent action to protect public health

makes this impossible. However the Committee, for the second

time, recommends that there is a need to amend the Guiding

Principles to include an appeal procedure which will afford

protection to those affected by decisions of the Agency.

3.7 The Committee also recommends that Government should re-draw

the constitution of the Agency Commission to make it clear that

representatives of the Agriculture industry will be eligible and

welcome to serve on the Agency Commission and on the new

Territorial Advisory Commissions.

STRUCTURE

3.8 The Committee notes that responses to the consultation document

indicated that, broadly speaking, the concept of separate structures was

supported in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Indeed, in its

initial response, the Committee supported this view. Since making its

initial response, the Committee has had the benefit of taking evidence

from a number of sources. A number of those who gave evidence

supported the creation of a separate Northern Ireland Agency - viz the

Association of Livestock Auctioneers, The Livestock and Meat

Commission, The Ulster Farmers' Union, The Northern Ireland

Agricultural Producers' Association, The Northern Ireland Meat

Exporters' Association and The Northern Ireland Food and Drink

Association.

3.9 The Committee is also aware that the Health Committee of the Forum

considered this point and concluded that an independent Northern

Ireland Food Standards Agency should be established. This conclusion

was forwarded by the Forum Health Committee to the Minister for

Health in Northern Ireland in response to the consultation document.

3.10 The White Paper proposes the creation of a UK body with full

participation by Ministers in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland

(and their successors from devolved Parliaments or Assemblies) in its

accountability mechanisms and with appropriate arrangements to reflect

the particular needs and interests of these countries. The Committee

has given much consideration to these proposals. The Committee's

initial approach, as indicated in its response to the "James Report" was

that a separate, independent Agency was required in Northern Ireland

for the following reasons:

- the much greater emphasis on agriculture in Northern Ireland as part

of the overall economy;

- Northern Ireland is the only region of the United Kingdom to share

a land frontier with another country;

- Northern Ireland's unique position within the United Kingdom, eg

separate statute book.

However the Committee listened carefully to the argument advanced by

Dr Smith of the Department of Health and Social Services in favour of

the White Paper Structure proposals (see Minutes of Evidence at

Annex F) and is satisfied that these proposals provide

"a balance between the requirements of consistency and

economy on the one hand and flexibility and responsiveness

to local conditions on the other, by providing a single United

Kingdom Agency and policy framework"

Dr Smith also explained that under the White Paper proposals,

Northern Ireland will have its own executive staff, its own advisory

committee and its own separate identity, and will operate under

devolved food safety legislation and be accountable to Northern Ireland

Ministers (currently Northern Ireland Office Ministers, but under

devolved arrangements to Ministers of a Northern Ireland Assembly or

Parliament).

3.11 The Committee is therefore content to accept the Structures proposed

in the White Paper, but in respect of Northern Ireland

representation on the Agency Commission in London the

Committee recommends that the allocation should be increased to

two places, one of which should be filled by a representative of the

agriculture industry.

LOCAL AUTHORITY RESOURCES

3.12 The White Paper proposes that the Government, local authority

representative organisations and other interested parties should enter

into detailed discussions on how the Agency and local authorities

should work together to improve consistency. The Committee is aware

that significant resources are committed to food safety and standards

work through local government funding and notes that the White Paper

recognises that the Agency's work to raise food standards may lead to a

need for greater expenditure at local authority level. The Committee

therefore recommends that if the workload of local authorities

increases as a result of the creation of the Food Standards Agency,

Government should immediately provide the additional resources

required either from public funds or from the proposed new

funding mechanisms.

PUBLIC HEALTH LABORATORY

3.13 The Committee welcomes the assurances given by Dr Smith that as a

result of a recent review of the control of communicable diseases, the

Department of Health and Social Services is examining the need to

expand and develop laboratory services including the development of a

public health laboratory in Northern Ireland which would significantly

strengthen that provided at the Belfast City Hospital. The Committee

strongly recommends that the Department should complete this

examination without delay to ensure that when the proposed

Agency is created, laboratory services of the required standard are

in place. The Committee also recommends that the necessary

financial resources are put in place without delay to fund the

developments needed.

MEETING THE COSTS

3.14 The Committee has noted that the White Paper proposals indicate that

"Against the background of a need for increased spending on

the regulatory and enforcement activities carried out at

national and local level, the Government believes that the

food industry should bear the bulk of the costs of improving

food safety and standards." (paragraph 8.15)

The White Paper goes on to state that the most appropriate mechanism

for shifting the burden of cost away from the taxpayer towards the

industry would be to introduce a comprehensive system of registration,

or licensing with fees.

3.15 The White Paper also indicates that the Government intends to seek the

assistance of local authority representatives as well as representatives

of the food industry (including small businesses) and other interested

parties in developing its proposals for a scheme.

3.16 While this consultation exercise will elicit opinions on the proposed

mechanisms for funding the Agency, the Committee wishes to record

its support for a system of registration and licensing. However, as the

beneficiaries of a successful food safety policy are the consumers,

the nation as a whole, the Committee therefore recommends that

the Government should meet the largest proportion of the cost of

the provision of public health.

REPRESENTATION ON THE NORTHERN IRELAND

ADVISORY COMMISSION

3.17 The Committee has noted that membership of the Northern Ireland

Advisory Commission will reflect a range of interests on food safety

issues. The Committee recommends that in appointing the

members of the Northern Ireland Advisory Commission, the

Secretary of State should ensure that the agriculture industry is

represented, and that local elected representatives are included.

4. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 The Committee recommends that the Food Standards Agency

should introduce a labelling system which clearly draws the

consumers attention to the fact that the standard of imported

produce they are buying may be inferior or different to that

produced in the United Kingdom. (Para 3.3)

4.2 The Committee further recommends that the Food Standards

Agency should require all UK produced food which meets the

required Food Safety and Hygiene standards to be clearly labelled

to indicate its status - perhaps by the clear display of the Union

Flag or of a generic icon on the packaging. (Para 3.3)

4.3 The Committee recommends that there is a need to amend the

Guiding Principles to include an appeal procedure which will

afford protection to those affected by decisions of the Agency.

(Para 3.6)

4.4 The Committee that the Government should re-draw the

constitution of the Agency Commission to make it clear that

representatives of the Agriculture industry will be eligible and

welcome to serve on the Agency Commission and on the territorial

Advisory Commissions. (Para 3.7)

4.5 In respect of Northern Ireland representation on the Agency

Commission in London, the Committee recommends that the

allocation should be increased to two places, one of which should

be filled by a representative of the agriculture industry. (Para

3.11)

4.6 The Committee recommends that if the workload of local

authorities increases as a result of the creation of the Food

Standards Agency, Government should immediately provide the

additional resources required either from public funds or from the

proposed new funding mechanisms. (Para 3.12)

4.7 The Committee strongly recommends that the Department of

Health and Social Services should complete its examination of the

need to expand and develop laboratory services in Northern

Ireland without delay, to ensure that when the proposed Agency is

created, laboratory services of the required standard are in place.

The Committee also recommends that the necessary financial

resources are put in place without delay to fund the developments

needed. (Para 3.13)

4.8 As the beneficiaries of a successful food safety policy are the

consumers - the nation as a whole - the Committee recommends

that the Government should meet the largest proportion of the cost

of the provision of public health. (Para 3.16)

ANNEX A

MEMBERSHIP OF

STANDING COMMITTEE D

(AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES ISSUES

ANNEX B

MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS

ANNEX C

SUMMARY OF THE "JAMES REPORT"

AND OF THE PUBLIC RESPONSE

ANNEX D

THE "JAMES REPORT"

RESPONSES ISSUED BY

STANDING COMMITTEE C

(HEALTH ISSUES)

~ and ~

STANDING COMMITTEE D

(AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES ISSUES)

ANNEX E

WHITE PAPER

"THE FOOD STANDARDS AGENCY -

A FORCE FOR CHANGE"

~~~~~~~~

1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY

2. GUIDING PRINCIPLES

3. FUNCTIONS OF THE PROPOSED

AGENCY

ANNEX F

MINUTES OF EVIDENCE

11 September 1997 - Safeway - Extract

25 September 1997 - NI Food and Drink Association - Extract

14 October 1997 - Sainsbury - Extract

6 November 1997 - NI Meat Exporters' Association - Extract

13 November 1997 - NI Agricultural Producers' Association - Extract

27 November 1997 - Ulster Farmers' Union - Extract

- Tesco - Extract

- NI Grain Trade Association - Extract

2 December 1997 - Association of Livestock Auctioneers - Extract

3 December 1997 - Livestock and Meat Commission - Extract

4 December 1997 - Marks & Spencer - Extract

26 February 1997 - Department of Agriculture for

Northern Ireland

- Department of Health and Social

Services

NB: In the time available to the Committee, it has not been

possible in certain cases to include properly corrected

transcripts of the evidence sessions.

• Response to the Government White Paper 'The Food Standards Agency - A Force for Change' by Standing Committee D (introduced on 1998-03-13 10:04:00 - CREATE_FROM - e840490) [This document] [view current proposal at this moment]
  • Motion to adopt Committee D's response to the Government's White Paper on The Food Standards Agency (introduced on 1998-03-13 10:04:00 - PROCEDURE - e840491) [view current proposal at this moment]
    • None (introduced on 1998-03-13 10:04:00 - ADOPT_PROPOSAL - e840497) [view current proposal at this moment]
  • None (introduced on 1998-03-13 10:04:00 - DEBATE_PROPOSAL - e840492) [view current proposal at this moment]
  • None (introduced on 1998-03-13 10:04:00 - DEBATE_PROPOSAL - e840493) [view current proposal at this moment]
  • None (introduced on 1998-03-13 10:04:00 - DEBATE_PROPOSAL - e840494) [view current proposal at this moment]
  • None (introduced on 1998-03-13 10:04:00 - DEBATE_PROPOSAL - e840495) [view current proposal at this moment]
  • None (introduced on 1998-03-13 10:04:00 - DEBATE_PROPOSAL - e840496) [view current proposal at this moment]
  • None (introduced on 1998-03-13 10:04:00 - ADOPT_PROPOSAL - e840498) [view current proposal at this moment]