The next item of business is a debate on motion S4M-11826, in the name of Maureen Watt, on the Food (Scotland) Bill.
14:52
I am pleased to open the stage 3 debate on the Food (Scotland) Bill. [Interruption.]
Order, please. There is far too much noise. We cannot hear the minister.
I thank the Health and Sport Committee for its consideration of the bill and for its careful handling of the bill at stage 2, as well as the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee for its very detailed scrutiny. I also thank the bill team and my colleague Michael Matheson for doing the bulk of the work surrounding the bill.
The Scottish Government is committed to ensuring that people in Scotland live longer, healthier lives. Ensuring that we eat a good, nutritious diet of safe food is vital to achieving that ambition. Food-borne diseases, for example, cost Scotland £140 million a year. More significantly, of the 130,000 consumers who contract food-borne diseases each year, around 2,000 will be hospitalised and around 50 will, sadly, die. Similarly, poor eating habits are one of the most significant causes of ill health in Scotland and are a major factor in obesity.
The Food (Scotland) Bill gives Scotland some of the levers that we can use to tackle those issues. First, the bill will create food standards Scotland to be Scotland’s independent food safety and standards body. We have already announced the appointment of Ross Finnie as the chair designate. I met Mr Finnie last week and will shortly announce the names of the other members.
FSS will comprise eight members, including the chair, as allowed for in the bill. I have noted concerns, which were expressed earlier, about the minimum number of members allowed for in the bill. I hope that appointing a full complement of members now demonstrates the Government’s intention to maintain a broad membership for food standards Scotland. As FSS will be a non-ministerial body, operating free from the influence of ministers, the board and chief executive will need sufficient space to prepare and develop their strategic thinking and build key relationships with partners.
We have also announced the appointment of the acting Food Standards Agency director Geoff Ogle as chief executive designate. I met him on Friday and he is keen to make progress. He is assembling his executive team and working with staff in Aberdeen to be ready for FSS to take on its full range of functions on 1 April 2015.
Food standards Scotland’s clear objectives as set out in the bill will be to
“protect the public from risks to health which may arise in connection with the consumption of food ... improve the extent to which members of the public have diets which are conducive to good health”
and
“protect the other interests of consumers in relation to food.”
To achieve those objectives, the bill sets out clear functions: to develop, and help others develop, policies on food and animal feeding stuffs; to advise the Scottish Government, other authorities and the public on food and animal feeding stuffs; to keep the public and users of animal feeding stuffs advised to help them to make informed decisions about food and feedstuffs; and to monitor the performance of enforcement authorities in enforcing food legislation.
The bill sets out specific duties and associated powers for the new body on acquiring and reviewing information through carrying out observations and inspections, monitoring developments and carrying out, commissioning or co-ordinating research.
New food law provisions are the second lever that we are introducing through the bill to tackle food issues in Scotland. They are designed to protect and improve public health and other interests of consumers by driving up hygiene standards and reducing the incidence of food-borne disease; providing safeguards against food standards incidents such as the horsemeat food fraud; and strengthening and simplifying the penalties regime for breaches of food law.
The bill provides powers to seize and detain food that does not comply with food information law. Those powers will more closely align food information powers with existing food safety powers. Currently, if food is unsafe, it can be seized or detained and the courts must order its destruction. However, there are no such powers for food that is safe but which does not comply with food information requirements.
In light of the horsemeat food fraud incidents, we have introduced the power to seize or detain food that does not meet food information requirements—in respect of labelling, for example—which will help to eliminate food fraud. Without such a power being available, a food business might still be able to pass on food that does not comply with food information law.
The bill also provides for the creation of a statutory offence of failure to report breaches of food information law. That will more closely align food standards requirements with the existing duty to report breaches of food safety legislation. Under the suggested arrangements, it would become an offence to fail to notify food standards Scotland if any person suspected that food did not comply with food information law.
The bill provides the Scottish ministers with powers to introduce a statutory scheme that, among other things, will require food businesses to display inspection outcomes. That is intended to drive up food hygiene standards and reduce the incidence of food-borne disease.
The bill will streamline Scotland’s food law enforcement regime by offering a range of new administrative sanctions so that offences will be dealt with more quickly and at less cost. That sanctions regime, which will comprise compliance notices and fixed penalties, will give enforcement officers more flexibility to deal appropriately with food offences. The use of administrative penalty options will reduce the burden on the courts and the costs to local authorities of prosecuting through the court system.
I will offer reassurances on some commitments that my predecessor gave at stage 2 to consider issues that were raised in amendments that the committee did not accept. I can confirm that, as with all public bodies, ministers will expect that as much as possible of the business of food standards Scotland in terms of board meetings and committee meetings will be conducted in public.
As a non-ministerial office, food standards Scotland will be operationally autonomous. However, to achieve transparency, section 5 of the bill requires food standards Scotland to set out, in a statement, how it will perform its functions. I will be responsible for signing off that statement and will have power to modify the statement if I consider that to be appropriate.
The statutory statement will have to include specific operational matters ranging from how consumer interests will be safeguarded to how reports are published and what business matters the board would not consider in public, and why. That statement of performance of functions will be an important mechanism, helping food standards Scotland to build public trust.
At stage 2, my predecessor also committed to exploring the practicability of introducing a scheme to encourage food business operators to report the outcomes of their testing and sampling. The Government has explored that further, and I can confirm that we will take the idea forward. Ministers already have legislative power to make regulations in that regard, so no amendment is required to the bill.
We must, first, concentrate on bedding in food standards Scotland with its current objectives and functions. However, during 2015, ministers will be expecting a public consultation on regulations to introduce a testing disclosure scheme. The details will be developed for consultation next year.
The bill will ensure that food safety is given the prominence that it deserves in Scotland by creating food standards Scotland and equipping it with the necessary functions and powers to make expedient decisions that are focused on issues that specifically affect Scotland, and to take action to improve the diet of the people of Scotland.
I move,
That the Parliament agrees that the Food (Scotland) Bill be passed.
15:02
We have had a Food Standards Agency since 1999, but as part of a United Kingdom agency. The agency has been a success and has acted on its own initiative, for example, as I said at stage 3, on standards for school meals. More recently, it has produced independent research on food fraud, on which it led the rest of the UK.
However, with the UK Tory-Liberal Democrat coalition breaking up the UK agency, consideration of the future of FSA Scotland was necessary. Professor Scudamore’s report in March 2012 strongly recommended Scotland having an independent agency. That is a classic example of powers with a purpose, and Labour has backed the general principles of the bill from the outset.
In what has become a standard Scottish approach that seeks to ensure that experts and the public are fully engaged in any new bill, we have had two consultations, and there have been two further reports following the horsemeat scandal, with Scudamore reporting again, on food and feed safety, and Ray Jones reporting on traceability, labelling, assurance schemes and provenance issues associated with primary red meat production and processing.
We have come a long way since the Swann report on antibiotics in veterinary use, which was published in the late 1960s. However, the issue of chemicals in meat production is a matter of concern. If the transatlantic trade and investment partnership is approved, we must ensure that US meat that is produced using growth hormones is controlled.
Most of the evidence that the committee received supported a new independent agency, but some people argued that the preservation of the status quo would ensure consistency of approach, communication and advice across the UK, maintain good links to the European Union and avoid duplication of effort. The committee rightly rejected that view. I believe that it is vital to Scotland’s food production that we have an agency that is seen to be independent and which can ensure that Scotland’s reputation for quality is fully protected. For example, our farmed salmon is the only salmon with the Label Rouge, making it a premium product.
As the minister said, the new agency’s powers are to be enhanced. My amendments sought to reinforce the agency’s powers on diet and nutrition, working in partnership with the Government and Health Protection Scotland, which will be important in tackling what I believe will emerge as the biggest challenge in public health.
Currently, tobacco is the main legacy issue that we are tackling. Of course, alcohol is important and progress is being made through price control and availability restriction. I hope that, with support for many of the 10 elements in my proposed member’s bill, we will continue to make progress on alcohol. However, obesity, which currently affects 27.8 per cent of adults, threatens to reverse the gains in life expectancy over the past 20 years. When I started in medicine, the level of type 2 diabetes was at 1 per cent of the population, but it is now at 6 per cent across the UK, with more than 250,000 people in Scotland affected.
The new agency will have to meet head-on the issues of food content, such as saturated fat, trans fat, salt, sugar and food density or calories. That will mean challenging the current buy-one-get-one-free approach of retailers as well as the approach of the food industry. To that end, I supported many of the amendments that Which?, one of the premier consumer bodies, suggested at stage 2. It is imperative that, in the appointments to the board, there should be a powerful consumer interest as well as an employee director, as Unison has suggested. There should also be gender balance.
Labour will seek to act if the agency fails to demonstrate sufficient power in the area of nutrition. The Health and Sport Committee noted the suggestions that it received that one role of the agency should be to help grow food and drink industries in Scotland. However, if it is to do so, it will need to ensure that its role as a regulator remains paramount. We must never forget that the feeding of brain and spinal cord to cattle as a money-saving device resulted in BSE, which, by the way, we have not seen the end of. As I mentioned, I have concerns about the use of antibiotics and growth hormone.
We are only now beginning to emerge from an era of excessive additives. Agents for anti-caking, anti-foaming, bulking, food colouring and colour retention as well as emulsifiers, humectants to prevent drying out, preservatives, stabilizers, sweeteners and thickeners—all named in Europe as E numbers—are widespread and pervasive. One example of the challenge of additives is whether certain colourants and sodium benzoate contribute to increases in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in children.
There has been significant controversy associated with the risks and benefits of food additives. Some artificial additives have been linked with cancer, digestive problems, neurological conditions, ADHD—as I mentioned—heart disease and obesity. However, the evidence is often still equivocal. Natural additives may be similarly harmful or may be the cause of allergic reactions in certain individuals. One example is the azo dye sunset yellow, which is already banned in many Nordic countries. The UK has the highest consumption by children of soft drinks containing such dyes in the European Union, and Scotland has the highest in the UK. Therefore, clarity on safety is needed if at all possible.
Of course, that is mainly a matter for the European Food Safety Authority, which rightly sets many of the regulations for us. Its expert scientific panel that deals with food additives, the panel on food additives and nutrient sources added to food—the ANS panel—has started the process of reassessing all permitted food colours, of which there are 45 in total, including six additives that, in 2009, the UK FSA called for food manufacturers to voluntarily stop using. The banning of those colourings could result in significant challenges to our producers, including AG Barr, which produces Irn-Bru. However, AG Barr already exports a Ponceau-free Irn-Bru to Canada, which has banned the UK recipe. Therefore, it is not impossible for food producers to change production without having to wait for the final results of tests.
The new agency will need to commission research, but in doing so it will need a memorandum of understanding with the remnant FSA and it will need to work closely with the European FSA, if not have a memorandum of understanding with it. My view is that the agency must lead us in a transition to a simpler approach to food and a world in which a slightly misshapen carrot or apple is regarded as equally acceptable as the pre-packaged tracer gas-filled products in supermarkets today, the packaging of which is neither biodegradable nor recyclable. We also need a world in which additives are minimised. The agency must rigorously apply the precautionary principle.
There are many other issues that I do not have time to go into. The hygiene aspect of the bill is critical, as we still have one of the highest rates of E coli 107. That is a challenge, as will be emerging bacteria or strains. My colleague Rhoda Grant will deal with the matter of local authority trading standards and Claire Baker will mention meat inspection, which we dealt with in the stage 1 debate and which is a critical part of the bill.
I could go on for some time, but my time is up. I commend the bill to the Parliament.
15:10
The Food (Scotland) Bill was welcomed by most of the people who responded to the Health and Sport Committee’s call for evidence, and the relatively few amendments to it at stages 2 and 3 indicate the general approval of its measures. I said at stage 1:
“In this day and age, when so many of us rely increasingly on processed food and ready-prepared meals, it is crucial that we can trust the safety and nutrition value of the food that we eat.”—[Official Report, 2 October 2014; c 47.]
It is also vital that we begin to tackle the very serious problem of obesity in Scotland.
Given the changed remit of the Food Standards Agency south of the border and following the horsemeat scandal, it is generally accepted that the time is right for Scotland to set up a new stand-alone body, with wider powers than the FSA that it replaces. FSS will bring together the FSA’s existing public health protection role and a new objective on diet and nutrition, and it will also have powers in relation to labelled food and non-compliance with food law.
To be effective in tackling the complexities of diet and nutrition in Scotland, FSS will have to develop a strong leadership and co-ordinating role, which can be developed only through negotiation after the new body is in place. It must be adequately resourced and work closely with the Scottish Government’s scientific advisers.
At stage 1, the importance of the existing links between the advisory committees and the UK Food Standards Agency was highlighted. Those committees will be able to pull together the significant on-going work in the UK and across Europe, and give advice through the FSA to FSS as an independent body. That makes the memorandum of understanding between the FSA and FSS crucial to the success of the new body. It must set out how the two will work together, where appropriate, and enable them to exchange data and research findings in all areas of mutual interest. I confess that I do not know whether the MOU has yet been published, although I know that it was being drafted. I would appreciate an update from the minister on its development.
The memorandum of understanding with the UK FSA and the European FSA is being prepared. It will be one of the first things that the new board will sign off.
I look forward to hearing about that in due course.
I would also welcome a progress report on the Scottish Government’s monitoring of the food hygiene information schemes in Northern Ireland and Wales, and an indication of when such a scheme might be set up in Scotland.
Some concerns were expressed at stage 1, following which the consumer organisation Which? has welcomed the plans agreed at stage 2 to enhance enforcement powers through FSS working proactively with local authorities to drive up standards. Which? also welcomes the decision to allow the new agency to have improved access to food testing from retailers and manufacturers, which will allow action to be taken swiftly when and where food adulteration is detected, to protect consumers and other businesses that rely on the same supply chain. It is concerning that, just a few months ago, Which?, in its mystery shopping activity, found evidence of food adulteration and misrepresentation in a number of takeaways and fish and chip shops across the UK. It goes without saying that constant vigilance is required in relation to the contamination of chickens with the campylobacter organism, which Professor Hugh Pennington described in evidence as the commonest cause of food poisoning today.
A number of witnesses commented on the board size, which, at three plus the chairman, they believed to be too small. I am disappointed that Richard Simpson’s amendment to increase the minimum number to four was defeated. I hope that the Government’s faith that the board will always operate with enough expertise and will be consumer focused in all its work is justified, and I hope that the Government will monitor that, to be assured that the fears are unwarranted. I am pleased that the first board will have seven members plus the chairman, if I heard the minister correctly.
One important, as yet unresolved concern for the retail sector is the absence of robust appeals mechanisms for both fixed-penalty notices and compliance notices. The sector very much regrets that the Government would not agree to set out details of the appeals process or to provide safeguards for retailers in the bill, and it would like assurances from the Government that it will work with retailers on any secondary legislation to ensure robust appeal systems for FPNs and compliance notices. Both the Scottish Retail Consortium and the Scotch Whisky Association have offered to comment on, or assist with, the drafting of regulations and guidance that will accompany the bill, and I hope that that offer will be taken up.
I will not go into detail on why retailers believe that the burden of proof for FPNs must be set beyond reasonable doubt and that a robust appeal system is important to ensure that decisions are based on the same level of evidence that is required for a criminal, rather than civil penalty, because I know that officials have been in talks with the retail sector about that as the bill has progressed through Parliament. Likewise for compliance notices, the lack of a strong appeal process could have very serious implications for the livelihoods of smaller producers.
I ask the minister to assure us that those concerns will be considered when any secondary legislation is under discussion and that the Government will explicitly consult organisations such as the SRC and the SWA, which have consistently stressed the importance of a clear and robust appeals process being available.
If those residual concerns are addressed, taking into account the pledges that the minister has made today, I think that the Food (Scotland) Bill can be a very effective piece of legislation in meeting the interests of food health protection and nutritional support in Scotland. I look forward to its implementation, assuming that it is approved at decision time today, and to hearing about the activities as food standards Scotland develops in the months and years ahead.
We come to the open debate. Speeches should be of four minutes please. I call Christian Allard, to be followed by Claire Baker.
15:15
I am delighted to speak today at the last stage of the very welcome Food (Scotland) Bill.
I first put on record my sincere congratulations to our new Minister for Public Health, the member for Aberdeen South and North Kincardine, Maureen Watt. In the stage 1 debate, I spoke a lot about the north-east and, of course, I recognise that the minister has promoted the north-east of Scotland as the country’s natural larder many times before me. The minister’s experience of the food industry and how to support food producers in the north-east and across Scotland will be a great help in her new role.
I believe that the bill will help Scotland become a healthy nation and a good food nation.
I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate the minister’s predecessor, Mr Matheson, on his announcement of the two senior appointments to lead food standards Scotland: Ross Finnie and Geoff Ogle will bring their own experiences in the food industry. I recently met Geoff Ogle in his office in Aberdeen and I am delighted with the two appointments. My meeting with Mr Ogle, then acting director Scotland at the Food Standards Agency, was to get reassurance that food producers will get a fair deal from any changes that this bill will bring.
The Health and Sport Committee visited one of those producers, a seafood producer based in Aberdeen, in the same street as Maureen Watt’s office in Torry. I know that the minister will be familiar with Joseph Robertson, the family seafood company, founded in 1892, which produces the very best quality sea-to-plate produce. Michael Robertson, the managing director, shared with the committee his concerns about the possible increasing costs for food producers that are associated with this bill. I trust the new agency headed by Geoff Ogle to reassure the industry on that point.
Scotland does not operate in a vacuum at home or abroad. Our Scottish producers have to be able to compete. That is why I believe that new labelling and regulations in Scotland must be accepted in the rest of the UK and in the EU if they are to be enforced.
Richard Simpson talked about a simpler approach to food. There is a need for clarity and transparency. I want to clarify a point that I made in October when debating this bill. The committee reported a discussion with Michael Robertson, managing director of Joseph Robertson, about inspection, in which the important point was made that local authority inspections were not as high quality as retailers’ own inspections. That is why I ask food standards Scotland to show leadership on the issue.
John Sleith, the chairman of the Society of Chief Officers of Environmental Health in Scotland, wrote to me and shared his members’ concern that I agreed with Michael Robertson. Let me reassure Mr Sleith that I do not consider major retailers to be above environmental health inspectors, but Mr Robertson has a point—the new agency must provide the benchmark for everyone dealing with food safety.
Food producers, particularly small and medium-sized food producers, cannot afford to spend the amount of money that they spend today on responding to the constant demands of major retailers. To protect the consumer, it is imperative that inspections are of the same quality across Scotland and, to protect the food producers, it is imperative that they are accepted by all major retailers.
I agree with the minister rejecting amendments that would have increased the pressure on health inspectors and the local authorities that fund them.
I believe that the new agency will have a prime role to play. My plea to all members is to support our food industry and to remind Scottish consumers to buy locally and to eat the very best of healthy Scottish food.
15:19
I am pleased to make a contribution to the debate.
The Parliament recently held a food and drink debate. There is a growing recognition that the public health agenda and the food and drink sector need to be more closely aligned. The “Becoming a Good Food Nation” consultation indicates a different Scottish Government focus. It attempts to tie together the debates on growing food as a strong sector of our economy and how we address our domestic food challenges with regard to income and knowledge. That is to be welcomed.
It can be challenging to work successfully across Government, and the new food standards Scotland organisation, which will have responsibilities in public health as well as regulation of the food sector, is an example of the need for closer working and to produce food policies across Government portfolios that relate meaningfully to each other.
What are the challenges facing the new body? This afternoon will confirm the creation of the new organisation. Along with the chair, a board will soon be appointed, notwithstanding the debate about the board’s make-up. The organisation’s policy direction and focus will then be created. Therefore, the debate now moves on to what the new body will achieve.
The Parliament has led public debate on tobacco and alcohol and we need to turn our attention to food. By 2030, we will be spending £3 billion on tackling obesity if we continue the way that we are going. At a time when our overseas food export market has the potential to expand, with the development of new emerging markets, we will be fighting battles about food at home.
Alongside obesity, there are health issues associated with poor diet and food poverty. There needs to be realignment of our diets, and the new body has a role to play here. How do we have that debate? In the “Becoming a Good Food Nation” consultation, the Government proposes a food commission.
Debate around food in Scotland can be difficult, and Richard Simpson has the tabloid scars to prove it whenever he talks about a soda tax. A commission could provide the space for a reasonable, evidence-based assessment and proposals. I ask the minister to say how it would relate to the new food standards body. Also, if the new body is to have a greater public health role, how will it co-ordinate the work with the national health service to prevent duplication?
At the cross-party group on food and drink a few weeks ago, someone said that we should have not a good food nation but a good diet nation. In our parliamentary debate a few weeks ago, members took us on culinary tours of their constituencies. The focus was very much on pastries, pies and tablet. Does it matter if we consume such products as long as they are part of a balanced diet?
Will the member give way?
I am very tight for time.
Are people clear about what a balanced diet means? A focus on fad diets, even by the First Minister, does not change long-term habits and build good health.
The new body has a role to play in providing trusted information and the Government needs to support it in getting out that message. No coffee or kitchen-table book will be produced by the new body that competes with those that promise the latest starlet figure if people drink maple syrup—or whatever the latest fad is—but the Government and all partner agencies have a responsibility to promote clear messages and to do all that they can to support that by working with producers and suppliers.
We need to look at child obesity in particular. The reasons for such obesity are complex, but there is a lack of information for parents on portion size, calories and activity levels. Advice needs to be tailored and different from that provided to adults.
In the stage 1 debate, I focused on the organisation’s regulatory role and its responsibility for meat inspection. I say again that that must be robust and resourced. We have seen cuts in staff and inspection numbers; we have also seen such cuts at local authority level among environmental health officers. The new organisation will be challenged in reconciling capacity and demand to ensure food safety.
The reputation of Scotland’s food and drink sector is strong and the new organisation has an important role to play in keeping it that way.
15:24
I thank my fellow Health and Sport Committee members for making this such an enjoyable and interesting piece of legislation to work on.
After what I might describe as the demise of the FSA in England and its reduction to a shell of its former self, this Parliament has the opportunity to put in place an organisation and regime in which the public and people at all levels of the food industry can have trust, which is incredibly important given the problems that we have had in past years. The recommendations in the Scudamore report have been accepted, and a single body, with clear responsibility for all aspects of food safety and standards, can be developed.
One of the most fascinating aspects of the committee’s work has been learning about the body’s ability to take on many of the problems that we face in this country. We know that people have had poor diets for a number of years. Dr Simpson made a number of good and valid points about matters that food standards Scotland will have to consider.
I welcome the minister’s announcement on the size of the FSS board, which is good news. The board will be the right size and will be led by the right person. I look forward to seeing the FSS develop to become the force in the industry that we really need. Trust is everything. Our food and drinks industry is vital to our country’s economy and we cannot see it go downhill because of a lack of legislation, food fraud and, frankly, dangerous behaviour in relation to infectious disease and the like.
Aside from all that, probably the most informative visit that the committee made was our visit to Aberdeen. As members said, we met the management at Joseph Robertson, who gave us an insight into the business aspects of the industry. The management team had serious concerns about labelling, our ability to maintain research funding and the like—at that point, prior to the referendum, some political points were being made about that—and how the bill would impact on transport, food identification and so on, which is where problems have arisen.
We considered the horsemeat scandal and food fraud, which must be fought. The FSS cannot deal with such issues just in this country; we must be international in outlook. As we were told, bugs do not operate within borders—or something along those lines. An international approach is critical if our food industry is to maintain its position at the top of the tree for people who regard it from outside.
We are a bit short of time, so I will just say that I am delighted that the bill will help local authority enforcement officers, who have had a tough job. Some of the fines that were handed out in the past did not come close to the profits that were being made. Anything that helps local authority enforcement officers is to be welcomed.
15:28
I was at my local bakery a couple of weeks ago; Mrs Carlaw and I are quite partial to its potato scones. Other, inferior, potato scones are no doubt available elsewhere. I was there during the local school’s lunch hour, which was quite an eye-opener. One pupil ordered a mutton pie and haggis in a roll. That was a combination that I had not hitherto heard of. The pupil ordered sauce—tomato and brown—and demolished the whole thing in short order. That made me think about the underlying obesity issue. One does not want to be po-faced about the occasional treat; I have had a mutton pie from time to time, and I like haggis, although I have never had the two combined in a roll, with two types of sauce.
It is easy for us to be intellectual and high-falutin’ about the responsibilities of food standards Scotland in relation to better diet. As we as a Parliament have found in grappling with many other cultural issues, such habits are deep-seated. It is quite a tall order—but nonetheless necessary, over time—that we address significantly within the broader health portfolio what we now understand to be an emerging crisis for the health service. When the Parliament was founded, we would not have included that issue on the agenda for future legislation.
Would Jackson Carlaw like to give way?
I will—as long as it is not about an alternative brand of potato scone.
Absolutely not. I am sure that Jackson Carlaw would like to take the opportunity to disassociate himself from the comments of his Westminster colleague who said that the poor cannot cook nowadays.
Naturally, I would: the Mary Berry skills of the average Scot are exemplary.
I must say that the announcement of Ross Finnie’s appointment had passed me by—I missed it. Some of us on the Conservative seats in the chamber had thought that the Deputy Prime Minister might have seen fit to ennoble Mr Finnie, but instead he saw in colleagues from past sessions of this Parliament talents that some of us had not fully appreciated.
Thankfully, Mr Finnie has now found favour with the Scottish Government, which has given him a useful occupation. I thought that he might have joined us in the gallery today, but obviously the meter is not running yet. Nonetheless, I wish him every success in exercising his responsibilities. He is a serious player and he will, given his experience, be a first-class appointment. Those basal tones that have been lost to us here, which used to revive debates at that late hour in the afternoon as they boomed forth, will no doubt be well founded in his new role.
I hope that I do not sound too irreverent, because the bill is an important piece of legislation. As Nanette Milne said, the very fact that there were so few amendments underpins the broad cross-party consensus that exists.
In my years in the motor trade, we used to carry out customer satisfaction surveys. It was interesting, because people in the west of Scotland were never 100 per cent satisfied with anything, but we had to phone them up and tell them that they were, because sums of money depended on whether people were completely satisfied. I have always been very suspicious of those surveys ever since.
I bring that experience to bear on the issue of the subjectivity that will underpin fixed-penalty notices. It is very important that, in the forthcoming secondary legislation, there will be a common standard and understanding with regard to how fixed-penalty notices will be applied and the criteria that will underpin them. I hope, on a serious note, that the minister will ensure that that is the case, because many small businesses could find themselves being adversely affected if variable and subjective criteria are applied.
Nonetheless, I very much welcome the bill. I know that the minister will be grateful that it has not been the most difficult bill that she has inherited and has had to take through Parliament, and we look forward to supporting it in a few minutes’ time.
I note that Nanette Milne is missing from the chamber. I respectfully remind members that if they participate in a debate, they should be here for the closing speeches.
15:33
I thank committee members, and the committee clerks and support staff, for their help in working through the bill in the Health and Sport Committee. I also thank Joseph Robertson, the Food Standards Agency in Aberdeen and the other organisations that hosted the committee’s visit. It certainly made our job easier to see how the bill will impact in practice. The bill could have been very dry and difficult to deal with, but when we saw how companies had to put food standards and labelling into practice, that made it a lot easier for us to scrutinise the legislation.
I congratulate Ross Finnie on his appointment as chair of food standards Scotland; it is very welcome, and every member in the chamber has been happy to congratulate him on it, and wish him all the best in his new role.
We are supportive of the bill and recognise the need for it following the breaking up of the Food Standards Agency at UK level. We hope that it will provide a really robust regulatory regime that protects consumers, because consumers needs and protection must be at the heart of everything that food standards Scotland does. Those high standards not only protect consumers but help to promote our produce and protect our producers, as they give them the reputation—which other members have mentioned in the debate—that allows them to sell their products not only in Scotland but throughout the UK, in Europe and beyond.
I ask the minister to bring forward a procedure for appeal against the fixed-penalty notice, which a number of members including Nanette Milne and Jackson Carlaw mentioned. It is important that justice is seen to be done and is seen to be fair. Many people are keen on the fixed-penalty notice because it cuts through bureaucracy, time and cost, but it also needs to be fairly administered to ensure that any errors can be picked up and that people have a right to appeal against any judgment that is made.
I turn—as Richard Simpson said I would—to trading standards officers. An awful lot of the regulation will come from food standards Scotland, but we must ensure that it works and that the inspection and examination are done by local government, through trading standards officers, meat inspectors, food hygiene inspectors and environmental health officers. All those professionals have vital roles to play in protecting consumers and making sure that the work of food standards Scotland is carried out properly and is regulated at ground level. However, local government is facing cuts, and the worry is that the regime that food standards Scotland implements will not be properly policed at council level. We are looking for some reassurance that that will happen in order to protect consumers and producers alike.
I reassure Rhoda Grant that one of the functions of food standards Scotland will be to provide training to gear up people in local authorities so that they can do their job better.
I am grateful for that reassurance.
I will turn quickly to the public health role of FSS, which was touched on by Claire Baker. It is important that it will have that role, although we will have to see how it is developed. We are keen to see how it will interact with other public health roles in the national health service and so on. It is important that we look at public health. Richard Simpson talked about the increase in type 2 diabetes, which is enormous and needs to be tackled, and Claire Baker asked whether we should be a good diet nation rather than a good food nation.
I admit that I was one of those who took the culinary tour of the Highlands and Islands during the food debate a couple of weeks ago, and Jackson Carlaw continued that today with his promotion of tattie scones from his local baker. However, while we promote what is good—there is the old adage that a little of what you fancy does you good—we need to look at how we tackle obesity, especially childhood obesity, as well as people’s knowledge of nutrition. We get a lot of nutrition information on packaging, but it is not always understood that a child’s nutritional needs are quite different from an adult’s nutritional needs. We need to do more to promote that distinction on food labelling. Indeed, some of the food that is designed for children is loaded with sugar, which is not very good for them.
We need to think about how food is promoted and packaged; labelling plays an important role in that. Part of food standards Scotland’s remit will be to ensure that food is labelled properly and gives the right advice. It must be consistent with labelling in the rest of the United Kingdom and in line with EU legislation as well as legislation for other markets, because we want our produce to be sold further afield, but it is important that food labelling advises people what they should eat—in addressing imported foods from other parts of the world, Richard Simpson talked about antibiotics, additives and the like. We need to ensure that food labelling does all that, as well as promoting our food.
Food standards Scotland will help us to continue to build on the excellence that we have in the Scottish food industry. I hope that, at its heart, it will protect consumers but will also promote excellence within our industry.
15:39
I thank members for their contributions. I welcome the breadth of support that the bill has received through all its parliamentary stages and the constructive nature of what members have said in the debate.
I share Richard Simpson’s concerns about TTIP, which I discussed with officials before I came to the chamber. The European Commission has repeatedly stated that consumer health and safety and environmental standards will not be lowered and that there is, for example, no prospect that genetically modified crops or hormone-treated beef will be allowed into the EU. We will keep watching that space to make sure that that does not happen.
On having an employee director on its board, ministers will ensure that employee representation arrangements will be included in the statement of performance of functions that food standards Scotland will be required to produce.
I completely agree with Richard Simpson about the provenance of food and use of additives, which is why we need to encourage use, as far as possible, of good wholesome food from local sources.
I say to Nanette Milne that ministers will ask FSS for detailed advice on the introduction of the food hygiene information scheme through regulations, which will probably take place in late 2015.
On appeals against administrative sanctions, I remind members that it is a legal requirement that all food law is fully consulted on. I give an assurance that the appeal mechanism for compliance notices will be consulted on, but I know from having spoken to the industry that no appeal mechanism is possible in relation to fixed penalties.
The bill offers us a chance to make a real difference on food safety and healthy diet, which are areas of significant concern to the public. Setting out in the bill a nutrition and diet objective for FSS will give the body a more transparent and strategic role in this area. Having a clearer remit will give FSS the impetus to lead partnerships with other public bodies to tackle specific food and diet issues. That clear remit will help to clear up confusion about roles and responsibilities among partners.
I remind members that, with the bill, we are not simply rebadging the Food Standards Agency in Scotland. As well as giving FSS a clearer and wider remit on diet and nutrition, we are safeguarding the link between food safety, nutrition and labelling here in Scotland. Food standards Scotland will take on all the functions that are currently exercised in Scotland by the Scottish division of the UK-wide Food Standards Agency. The remit of the Scottish division has been wider than that of the FSA south of the border for some years. In 2010, the UK Government removed responsibility for labelling and for nutrition policy from the English arm of the FSA. In Scotland, we maintained the link between those aspects and food safety. The UK Government’s decision was subsequently seen to have been a factor that hindered its response to the horsemeat scandal in 2013. The horsemeat scandal demonstrated the importance of having a single body that has clear responsibility for all aspects of food safety and standards.
It is important to note that the bill also requires FSS to operate in a way that is proportionate, transparent and accountable, and to carry out good decision making, which includes consulting people and making its decisions publicly available. That will help to build a new relationship with consumers, and is one example of how FSS will operate differently from how the FSA currently operates.
Another key new feature of the arrangements that we are making in Scotland involves making Scottish research more joined up. The FSS will play a more involved role in co-ordinating all grant-funded research into food and diet that is carried out by Scottish research bodies such as the Rowett institute of nutrition and health, and the James Hutton Institute.
Claire Baker is not in the chamber at the moment, but she asked about co-ordination of effort. It is proposed that there will be better co-ordination between the NHS and food standards Scotland. Through its creation, we can have better co-ordination between the FSS, the NHS and the Scottish Government.
I also agree with Claire Baker that we have, as a nation, lost our way on food portions. In our house, we were recently replacing chipped dinner plates, and I made sure that they were replaced with smaller ones. We will wait to see whether it makes a difference.
Linking grant-funded research to its research will provide FSS with a much wider knowledge base and a greater ability to co-ordinate efforts and focus. We will not lose the links with the rest of the UK and Europe. The UK Government and the FSA have given written assurance regarding access to scientific advice and representation in Europe for FSS.
Knowledge sharing goes two ways, of course. There are areas of expertise in Scotland—for example, on shellfish and E coli—which our colleagues in the rest of the UK will still wish to tap into.
I will now reflect on some of the issues that we have considered in the debate today. First, I will recap on the importance of section 5 and the statement on performance of functions. As I said in my opening speech, food standards Scotland will be operationally autonomous, so the statement will achieve transparency and will, we hope, build public confidence and trust. The statement is where we will find assurance on operational matters such as the method of publication of reports.
I give members a firm assurance that I will make certain that the issues that have been raised in the debate and that were proposed through stage 3 amendments will be considered carefully for inclusion in the statement on performance. That will hopefully offer clarity on a number of the issues that have been raised today.
Members have made very helpful contributions today. I thank them for all their input throughout all the bill’s stages. As Jackson Carlaw mentioned, I have picked up the Food (Scotland) Bill only now, at stage 3, and I am glad that it has been fairly uncontentious. I hope that it will be passed unanimously at decision time today.
Previous
Food (Scotland) Bill: Stage 3