Meeting of the Parliament 02 October 2014
Thank you, Presiding Officer, for making it clear that I am speaking this afternoon on behalf of the Health and Sport Committee, although the topics of food, animal feed and fish factories are not the normal bread and butter of our committee. That is my first pun—it is not the last, I am afraid. The debate comes at an opportune time, given that it is currently British food fortnight.
More seriously, given the work of our committee and our separate inquiry into health inequalities in Scotland, I am pleased that the new food body will seek to address the key issues of diet and nutrition and their links with obesity and ill health. We look forward to that ambition being achieved because saying it and doing it are, as we know, different things.
Earlier this year, the Health and Sport Committee conducted an inquiry into the general principles of the Food (Scotland) Bill. In producing our report, we also drew on evidence that was received by the Finance Committee and the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee, and I thank those committees for their contributions.
We held oral evidence sessions in May and June and we received a valuable insight into some of the main issues during a visit to Aberdeen, where we met the FSA, representatives of the Rowett institute of nutrition and health, and the eminent microbiologist Professor Hugh Pennington. I record my thanks and the committee’s thanks to all those who gave evidence, in person or in writing, and to everyone who engaged so fully with the committee in Aberdeen. I am also very grateful to the Scottish Parliament information centre and the committee clerks for their invaluable help in supporting the committee through its inquiry.
We received the Government’s response to our report last Thursday. I am grateful to the minister and his team for that response and, indeed, for responding in good time for today’s debate.
As we have heard from the minister, the bill seeks to establish a separate food body for Scotland—food services Scotland. The proposal was first mooted during the so-called machinery of government changes in Whitehall, when the UK Government moved some of the Food Standard Agency’s responsibilities back into Whitehall departments. Following those changes, we had a smörgåsbord of reviews, reports and consultations from the Scottish Government, which began—as we heard from the minister—with the Scudamore review, which reported on the merits of setting up a separate Scottish food agency. As we also heard, Jim Scudamore then delivered a further report on food standards and safety in light of the horsemeat incident in 2013.
Before the bill was introduced, consultations were also undertaken by the Food Standards Agency and the Scottish Government. Finally, Ray Jones, chair of Scotland Food & Drink, chaired the expert food group, which focused on red meat and looked at issues of traceability, labelling and provenance. The committee recognises the work of each of those reviews and we are certainly satisfied that the bill has been subject to sufficient consultation.
The bill covers a number of areas. However, the new food body is very much the meat in the sandwich, so I will focus my remarks on that and on three areas in particular.
First, the committee received a considerable amount of evidence on how food standards Scotland will operate in practice. Our report makes clear that there were a number of differing views on the proposed powers and scope of food standards Scotland. Nourish Scotland, for example, suggested that food standards Scotland should focus on improving the nation’s diet and nutrition. The Scottish Food and Drink Federation thought that the new body should play an active role in growing the food and drink industry in Scotland—food for thought. We took the view that Scotland already has a great reputation for its food and drink and that raising the standards and safety of our produce can only serve to further boost that reputation. The committee is therefore satisfied with the proposed powers and remit of food standards Scotland and we are hopeful that those powers will be deployed in a proportionate and appropriate way.
Secondly, the committee spent some time considering the proposed structure of food standards Scotland and we received a lot of comment about the size and make-up of the new body’s board. The bill stipulates that the board should have
“no fewer than 3 nor more than 7 other members appointed by the Scottish Ministers.”
The committee agreed with the many submissions that raised concerns that a board of three would be too small. However, the minister told us that he envisages the FSS board having a similar set-up to equivalent public bodies, with a membership of around eight. I am grateful to the minister for the reassurance that he has offered us on that front. The committee is satisfied that the structure of the board, together with a duty to report to Parliament annually, provides a sufficient level of accountability.
The third area that we looked at in detail is how the new food body will interact with other institutions here in Scotland and around the UK and Europe. We were reliably informed by Dr Jim Wildgoose, chair of the Scottish Food Advisory Committee, that
“Bugs do not observe borders.”—[Official Report, Health and Sport Committee, 27 May 2014; c 5503.]
He stressed the need for FSS to fit seamlessly into the network of food bodies in the UK and Europe. The Scottish Food and Drink Federation called for a
“consistent regulatory framework across the UK.”
The Scotch Whisky Association called for a memorandum of understanding between FSS and the FSA in the rest of the UK, and the Scottish Retail Consortium issued a plea for a robust and transparent protocol to be put in place to ensure that
“food businesses know what to expect from both FSS and FSA UK”.
The Government’s response last week indicated that a memorandum of understanding is, in fact, in the process of being drafted in time to be agreed by the incoming board of the new body in the new year, which is to be welcomed. I understand that there is to be provision within that agreement for FSS to have full access to UK research, which I very much welcome.
Other evidence highlighted the fact that a large amount of food policy has its origins in Europe, so there will be an onus on FSS to deliver an improved level of influence at a European level. The minister has offered reassurance that FSS will have
“a wider role in co-ordinating all food and nutrition research funded by the Scottish Government.”
We look forward to seeing that. We are also assured that FSS will carry a strong voice in liaising on behalf of Scottish research institutes to secure access to research funding from Europe. Likewise, the Government response tells us that FSS will retain access to UK resources such as the FSA’s advisory committees. I am sure that stakeholders such as Aberdeen’s Rowett institute of nutrition and health will be pleased to hear of those assurances.
The committee found that there is near unanimous support for the bill. There are areas where we expect the Government to take on board evidence received from key stakeholders, and I am sure that the minister will ensure that that happens. That aside, the Health and Sport Committee is content to recommend that the Parliament agree to the general principles of the Food (Scotland) Bill.