The move by the Scottish meat industry to create a separate, and cheaper, meat inspection featured prominently in last week’s MTJ (1 April) . The Scottish Association of Meat Wholesalers (SAMW) has developed an alternative system in a report sent to the four main political parties in Scotland.
As usual, they are ahead of the game, and it will be interesting to see what progress they can make. Once again, good luck to them.
MTJ Editor Mr Ed Bedington makes reference to this subject in his comment column. He makes a telling analysis in my view; “all the noise over the side issues must not drown out the fact that the system ( of meat inspection) the industry is saddled with is out of date, inappropriate and needs to be kicked into touch. The industry needs to work with the FSA, and vice versa, otherwise this will never be achieved.”
The Editor makes a key point in talking about an out of date system, etc, and therein lies the crux of the entire future of the slaughtering industry; his statement is clear and a welcome one from an independent perspective.
Where it falls down is when he argues for the FSA and industry to work together to bring about change. If only it was that simple, Mr Bedington, two sides sitting around a table and thrashing the arguments around until a satisfactory conclusion is reached.
It’s about understanding the mentality of the civil servants’ mind. They don’t negotiate, they don’t discuss, they don’t compromise. It is ingrained into the psyche of these people that they are above criticism and when necessary, are above the law.
A stark example of this is illustrated in the article alongside the Editor’s column. It featured Food Standards Agency (FSA) Chief Executive Mr Tim Smith and his ongoing justification of the FSA’s controversial publishing of a “cause for concern” list of abattoirs.
It is really quite scary, and perhaps indicative of the world we live in, when a Government official, without fear and with complete contempt for the people he is referring to, can get up and say the following, as he did to the FSA Board recently; “We have challenged the notion....... that central government can only change people’s behaviour through rules and regulations. We were taking a different view when we were thinking of establishing cause for concern..........”
Mr Smith seems to forget that IT IS rules and regulations that are the standard to work to, not some dogma dreamed up by a busybody bureaucrat with too much time on his/her hands and with nothing better to do. His contempt for the slaughtering industry is well documented, but now he is moving into new territory which could and should be exploited. He is now stepping outside his statutory remit with these comments, and he certainly seems brazen enough to feel untouchable.
But is he? I would suggest that under civil law, Mr Smith’s comments are actionable. If all those people on Mr Smith’s “cause for concern” list got together to start up a class action, this would send a signal to the FSA that the meat industry is no longer prepared to just lie down and be walked over. Because that’s where we are now, that’s for sure.
I’ve been at the sharp end of dealings with officialdom for something like twenty years now, first with the old Ministry of Fisheries and Food (MAFF), and more recently the MHS and FSA. I’m more convinced than ever that the only realistic counter to Tim Smith and his ilk are the Courts. That will take money, of course, to employ experts, to fight cases, to lobby the media, etc. To achieve any positive results, and however unpalatable, I remain convinced this is the only way forward.
To succeed you have to try.
Toby Baker