The interview on Radio 4’s “You and Yours” programme with Tim Smith (Chief Executive Food Standards Agency – FSA) certainly brought the contentious issue of meat inspection charges and who should pay for them into the public domain.
Mr Smith stepped on a few banana skins when questioned by presenter M/S Winifred Robinson. During his explanation about what happens in these inspections and who pays for them, he stepped right on one when he said “....the FSA is there to protect consumers from risks that might arise during the production of meat.....” It doesn’t, of course, but it’s the same old peg that this agency hangs its hat on - our job now, surely is to let the likes of M/S Robinson know the real facts.
M/S Robinson was not frightened to ask pertinent questions. When Mr Smith revealed that roughly half of the full bill was being paid by the taxpayer, M/S Robinson asked “why then should the meat industry start paying for the whole lot now, because lots and lots of inspection regimes are funded by the taxpayer, aren’t they?”
Banana skin no. 2. “Well, no, not really. I think you’ll find...”M/S Robinson interrupted “Well, a lot of food hygiene is; it’s funded through local authorities, isn’t it?” Mr Smith had to admit this was the case. Ouch!
The discussion moved to costs, bureaucracy, etc, but banana skin no. 3 for Mr Smith came in his reply to the comment about how the meat trade...”if they’re going to meet the full bill they’d like to choose who does it and put the whole thing out to tender.” Now mention the word “consumer” and you can feel the puffing out of agency chests. “Well ,would consumers ....would your listeners want third parties to be doing something as important as this? .......what regulators do is protect consumers (the ultimate banana skin).....and if I’m thinking about my family when I’m eating out......(I’d like to) think it (meat inspection) was(done by) somebody who was being paid for..... to do the job and regulated properly by a Government body....”
Judged in risk assessment terms, Mr Smith would be better advised that when he is out eating his steak in a nice restaurant , he should be much more concerned that the chef knows his or her job in making sure that the food item is cooked adequately enough to kill any nasty little bugs that might give him food poisoning. Because for sure there is no way that any meat inspection regime of the fresh product can ever do that. No, Mr Smith, regulators DO NOT protect consumers with the reality being, in pure health terms relating to fresh meat, inspection IS NOT that important.
And we in the trade have got to have the courage to say so.
Apparently Mr Smith refused to be involved in a debate on air with industry.
I wonder why? Toby Baker.

Toby Baker