Skip navigation
Food Standards Agency
Saturday 4 July 2009
Safer food better business banner
AZ-Directory
What's New
Review of openness
Wednesday 27 September 2006
open sign on shop door
At its meeting on 21 September 2006, the Board of the Food Standards Agency agreed the scope of a review of openness.
Originally set up because of loss of public confidence in food safety, the Food Standards Agency has now been in existence for six years.
Much has happened in those years and the Agency has experience of living by its core values of being open and accessible and of putting consumers first.
The review needs to consider how successful it has been, the lessons it has learned, and whether it has modified its approach as a consequence.
Openness and transparency do not come without incurring additional running costs. The review also needs to look at the costs of the methods chosen by FSA, the benefits they have brought, and whether these represent good value for money.
Other organisations have not remained static during this time.
The Agency provided a model that others have tried to emulate and the Freedom of Information legislation, which received Royal Assent on 30 November 2000 and has since been progressively implemented, with the final stage of implementation taking place on 30 November 2005. It has imposed a wider statutory requirement for organisations to be open.
Against this background it is timely to ask whether the Agency is still setting the pace, whether it can learn anything from other regulatory organisations in their approach to openness, including how they have managed the costs, and what it needs to do to position itself for the next six years.
An important issue here will be to consider the extent to which openness aids or undermines the FSA�s regulatory purpose.
When considering future action, attention will need to be paid to the risks that any changes in the methods the Agency uses to deliver openness could be portrayed as less open than those currently used.
Back to top
The review will cover the Food Standards Agency and its operational executive agency, the Meat Hygiene Service.
It will explore the following issues, and, in each case, will attempt to provide clear, evidence based answers to a series of questions.
The meaning of openness
-
What characteristics would one expect to see in an open and accessible organisation?
-
What are the benefits of openness?
-
What does the Agency mean by openness?
-
Has this definition changed during the life of the Agency?
-
How does the Agency demonstrate openness?
Is it consistent?
-
How does the Agency use openness as a regulatory tool?
Comparison with other organisations
-
How well does the Agency score against the characteristics of an open organisation compared to other benchmark organisations?
-
Is the definition still relevant or should it be changed in some way in the light of these comparisons?
Expectations and obligations
-
Has the Agency met its statutory obligations on openness set out in the Food Standards Act?
-
Has the Agency met its statutory obligations under the Freedom of Information Act, and what are the implications of the recent internal audit of its activities in this area?
-
Has the Agency met the expectations on openness in the Phillips' Inquiry into BSE and in the James' Report?
-
How have the recommendations relating to openness in the 2005 Review of the Food Standards Agency, (undertaken by the Rt Hon Baroness Brenda Dean), been taken forward?
-
Is the Agency trusted by a) individual consumers, b) consumer organisations, c) press and media, d) the food industry e) other government departments f) external scientists with whom it works?
-
To whom is the Agency accountable and how is this demonstrated?
Achievements and lessons learned
-
What lessons have been learned from applying the principles of openness and accessibility? Are there different experience and lessons from the Agency�s operations in the different countries of the UK? Evidence will be collected through a case study approach.
-
In what way have these lessons been translated into new ways of working?
-
To what extent are individual consumers involved in the policy making process?
-
What requirements on openness does the Agency have of its contractors and local authority partners?
Risks
-
What are the risks of not being open?
-
What are the risks associated with openness?
-
How are both these sets of risks managed by the Agency?
-
How do the Agency's core value of openness, and the means by which the Agency demonstrates it, impact on its other values of putting the consumer first and being an independent voice?
Where are the areas of synergy and conflict?
-
How do the Agency's core value of openness, and the means by which the Agency demonstrates it, impact on its ability to work in partnership with others?
Costs and benefits
-
What are the benefits and costs of openness?
Does openness, and how the Agency practices it, improve its decision-making?
Does the Agency's commitment to openness change what it does or how it does it in a way that impacts on the Agency's efficiency?
-
How do these costs compare to those in organisations that are not as far along the spectrum of openness and accessibility as the Agency?
-
How do the methods used by the Agency to work openly impact on their ability to apply the principles of sustainability?
Back to top
Evidence will be gathered from existing published reports, both from within the Agency and from other organisations. There are numerous surveys, reviews and reports which can usefully inform the review.
This will be supplemented by a number of interviews and workshops which will be particularly helpful when looking to compare the Agency against other organisations on delivery of openness.
The following organisations have been initially selected for that comparison. They have been chosen as each has functions and that parallel at least one of the key roles of the Agency undertakes, for example as:
-
a non-Ministerial Government Department
-
a regulator/policy maker
-
a
national food safety agency and competent authority for EC food law
-
a public health promotion organisation
Another operational body will also be selected against which the Meat Hygiene Service can be benchmarked.
Name of organisation
Reason for selection
Health and Safety Executive
An operational Non Departmental Public Body.
Two local authorities
Regulators with a different statutory basis to central government.
European Food Safety Authority
Established after FSA and benefiting from their early experience.
Set up for similar reasons i.e. to restore consumer confidence.
Involved in risk assessment and management and working with scientific advisory panels.
Potentially liable to pan-European influences from member states with different attitudes to openness.
National food agencies in other countries, including the Canadian Food Inspection Agency,
a Scandinavian food agency, and one other European food agency.
Direct comparison of the position in other countries.
The Charity Commission
Another 'public law' organisation, which has the same status in government as does the FSA and transparency as one of its seven principles.
The Office of Fair Trading
A non-ministerial government department with a remit to protect consumers.
Ofgem
A regulator of the electricity and gas markets whose stated aim includes the phrase 'Protecting consumers is Ofgem's first priority'
Two Ministerial government departments: Defra and Department of Health
Both have close links with FSA and work in related fields. Both had suffered damage to their reputations during the BSE crisis. Comparisons can be made on whether there is any longer a difference between Ministerial departments and an independent body at arms length from Government now the FOI Act is in place.
Centre for Public Health Excellence within the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE).
They aim to promote good health, healthy lifestyles and reduce the risks of ill health. It is likely that they face similar challenges of audience penetration and their success at reaching minority groups will make an interesting comparison with FSA.
Healthcare Commission
The Healthcare Commission is an independent body, set up to promote and drive improvement in the quality of healthcare and public health.
It aims to do this by becoming an authoritative and trusted source of information and by ensuring that this information is used to drive improvement.
One or more NHS Trusts
To learn from others' practice and experiences in delivering public accountability, including through open Board meetings.
One or more comparators from the private and community sectors
To identify and understand examples of best practice in these sectors.
One or more comparators for the Meat Hygiene Service
To learn from others' relevant experiences in a service delivery organisation with a culture of openness.
Back to top
Related links
Review of openness in the Food Standards Agency: February 2007
An independent review carried out by Dr. J A Bailey
Download pdf
(pdf 808KB)
See also
Comparing FSA to other organisations
Annexe paper
Download pdf
(pdf 21KB)
Dean Review
FSA 06/09/05 - Review of Openness (Board paper 21 September 2006)
Board paper
Download pdf
(pdf 36KB)
(External)
Get Adobe Acrobat reader
You may need the free Acrobat Reader to view a pdf
Find out what our other sites have to offer
Change Text Only Settings
Graphic version of this page