The day of reckoning for the abattoir industry has finally arrived, i.e., with the Food Standards Agency(FSA) finally announcing the world's worst kept secret. That over the next 12 months or so, the Agency will be implementing its programme for full cost recovery of the costs of meat hygiene controls in abattoirs. As things stand, this will be the death knell of virtually every small to medium slaughterhouse in the country. Full stop.

Despite the fact that some trade spokesmen have been in denial, stating that full cost recovery was never going to happen, this was always going to be the outcome, and has been stated thus on numerous occasions.

Its going to be a long hard slog to try and survive because, of course, that is, and must be, our natural instinct. Putting aside for a moment the massive cost increases proposed by the FSA, my initial thoughts to the 60 page plus consultation(yes 60!) strike out in a different way.

I've never met Mr Tim Smith (FSA Chief Executive), But his covering letter with the consultation just about sums up the arrogance and disdain with which he and hitherto, his officials, treat us in the meat trade.

For example, with brain-washing monotony, he refers to the FSA myth that the shortfall between the cost of official controls and the income from charges is, in effect, a subsidy to industry. Shout it from the rooftops! This subsidy, as Mr Smith calls it, is in fact a payment from the taxpayer to maintain a typically bloated and inefficient government body, in this case, the meat inspection body, which,IN THEIR OWN WORDS, operates an outdated system based on 19th century principles. The truth is, there should be no arguement. There is no need for any kind of subsidy,to either to the FSA or the meat trade. Modernise and take abattoir controls into mainstream food law is the ultimate answer, but this would mean a big time streamlining of the FSA. This would mean some job sacrifices, so it ain't gonna happen, is it?

To put it mildly, Mr Smith makes some galling comments. To refer the FSA's decision as one of principle is inflammatory and designed to encourage hostile comment that might suggest a lack of control. Sticking to the facts is key in my view, and I would agree with Mr Smith when he infers that in the current climate the Government's objective is to reduce the deficit. He makes pious references to "delivering efficiency"........"We have already made substantial progress in recent years in reducing the costs of our operations...............!?" A few jobsworth may have been recycled somewhere perhaps, but go out and ask abattoir operators for their comments on this "substantial progress" and I would wager replies would be short, dismissive, to the point, and in most cases, unrepeatable.

In a condescending tone, Mr Smith says "Businesses can reduce their bills by making their own operations more efficient....." I'll just pass this message onto my slaughtering staff who have to work on a daily basis, under pressure not only me as their employer, but a veritable nest of innspectors who scrutinise their every move as if their the devil incarnate. They are treated are treated as rubbing-rags, the men WHO ACTUALLY DO THE WORK!

So thats a few initial thoughts off my chest. But in reality, nothing changes. Trade association lobbying and comment just nibbles at the edges. The buck stops with those of us WHO ACTUALLY RUN ABATTOIRS, WHO RUN THE BUSINESSES. Somehow, a unity of message and action has to be brought about to tackle the FSA head on. It would be a shame that, after our experiences of nearly 20 years or so and our incredibly difficult times with first the Meat Hygiene Service, and now , the FSA, that we can't formulate a coherent policy to rescue our great industry from the brink.

Toby Baker