Meat processors anxious on FSA bid to cut inspection funding

10-Nov-2009 - Last updated on 07-Dec-2009 at 14:34 GMT

Proposals by the UK Food Standards Agency (FSA) to cut its funding of meat control inspections could be a “significant blow” to the processing sector, said a leading industry body.

The British Meat Processors Association (BMPA) has said the sector was tracking the matter closely after the FSA said it wanted to reduce the £25m annual subsidy it provides towards mandatory checks at abattoirs and cutting plants.

At present, the industry pays £24m – or 35 per cent – towards the inspection costs. The remaining £20m is funded by Government: from Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) for the costs of animal welfare and the Meat Hygiene Service’s (MHS) specified risk material controls. In Northern Ireland the controls cost £7m, of which around half is recovered from industry.

FSA programmes threatened

The FSA has warned that it will be forced to cut back or abolish a raft of other initiatives unless the Government slashes the amount it pays towards the total £69m-a-year bill. The plan is due to go before the FSA board later today.

Agency chief executive Tim Smith said: “A significant part of the FSA’s budget is required to subsidise the meat processing industry, which limits the Agency’s ability to do as much as we would like in work such as dietary health, campaigns, research and information for consumers. As financial pressures increase, the continuation of the subsidy would force the FSA to reduce or end investment in other priorities.”

However, the move by the FSA has raised fears among many that the processing industry, particularly the owners of abattoirs and cutting plants, would be forced to shoulder the brunt of any funding shortfall.

Cost burden

“There is concern and industry is watching closely because the repercussions could be huge,” the BMPA’s Philip Hambling told FoodProductionDaily.com.

He stressed that food safety was the sector’s prime concern and there would be no compromise on standards whatever the outcome of the FSA subsidy debate But he cautioned that the industry would likely be forced to fill the financial hole left by any subsidy reduction.

“In a worst vase scenario, companies would have to factor how to best cope with any cut that could be a significant blow,” said Hambling. “It is clear that in the current market conditions, meat processors would not be able to pass on any cost increases.”

It is understood that some in the processing industry feel the FSA could make some savings by improving the efficiency of its own operations.

Role questioned

The FSA has declared that it was not its role to subsidise private businesses and called for any such funding to be sourced elsewhere.

“We are asking the FSA Board to consider whether the continued provision of a subsidy by the FSA is consistent with its position as regulator,” said Smith.

The FSA has highlighted the failure of the Government to back its plans earlier this year for a 4 per cent increase in inspection charges as a factor for the current subsidy issue. It added that meat charges would need to rise by between 12-17 per cent annually from next year if the agency wanted to work to a net subsidy of £10m to industry by 2014/15.