Last week’s FSA media storm may have settled down (for now) but we’re still backing the independent food regulator. Here’s why we think the FSA should stay.
The Food Standards Agency (FSA) is being abolished, oh no it isn’t, oh yes it is, oh no it isn’t… oh never mind.
A heady mix of coalition government and eager press gave us a bit of quango panto last week, but for the moment we still have a food agency.
After the storm settled we learnt from the Department of Health that there aren’t any plans – at the moment – to scrap the FSA after all. But it is being reviewed (along with other public bodies) and there is the possibility that some elements – such as its nutrition work – may be moved elsewhere.
The food industry needs you
So does all this matter? Which? lobbied hard for the FSA in the aftermath of BSE, and it has dramatically transformed the way that food issues are handled.
The food industry thinks so too. In light of this story appearing, the Food and Drink Federation came out and reiterated its support for an ‘independent, well-funded food safety regulator’ and said the FSA had been ‘highly effective’.
Funding shouldn’t come first
They’re right. We looked at its progress when it turned 10 in April and praised it in many areas (including its nutrition work on issues such as salt reduction and front of pack nutrition labelling).
We also identified areas it could do better, such as handling new food technologies. But overall we gave it a glowing report for how it makes it decisions. It’s open, transparent and was set up to put the consumer first. So, why would you want to change that?
There’s (quite rightly) a lot of focus on short-term public funding savings at the moment. But that needs to be set against the enormous costs to health and the economy when food policy goes wrong.