Food Standards Agency
Saturday 20 March 2010
Safer food better business banner
AZ-Directory
What's NewRSS
What is RSS?Listen
Listen to this siteThursday 13 April 2006
Foss House, York
Chair:
Chrissie Dunn
MHS Board Members:
Valerie Howarth (Deputy Chair)
Jon Bell
Celia Bennett
Maureen Edmondson
Deryk Mead
Alick Simmons
MHS Board Adviser:
Debby Reynolds, Chief Veterinary Officer, Defra
Secretariat:
David Bramley, MHS
Officials
Chris Lawson, MHS
Participating:
Mike Greaves, MHS
Kathryn Davies, MHS
Jane Downes, MHS
Kevin Goddard, MHS
Officials Attending:
Kevin Waggott, MHS
David Hart, Food Standards Agency (FSA)
Elspeth MacDonald, FSA Scotland
1. The Chair welcomed Debby Reynolds, Chief Veterinary Officer, to her first MHS Board meeting as an adviser to the MHS Board. The Chair said she looked forward to the MHS Board benefiting from Debby's experience and knowledge. Apologies had been received from Alison Gleadle (Head of TSE Division, FSA) and FSA Wales and Scotland.
2. The Chair reminded MHS Board members and adviser of their obligation to declare any relevant interests before agenda items were discussed. No interests were declared.
Draft Minutes of the 3 November meeting and actions arising
3. Members agreed the minutes as an accurate record of the November 2005 MHS Board meeting subject to insertion of 'suspect' before 'cases of Avian Influenza' in paragraph 17, line 5 to read:
Action: Secretariat
4. All actions arising from the November meeting were complete.
Back to top5. The Chair reported that:
6. Debby Reynolds thanked the Chair for enabling Defra representation at the MHS Board and welcomed her role as adviser. She said she would attend MHS Board meetings whenever possible and suggested that the MHS Board might wish to review her role after one year.
7. In discussion, MHS Board members made the following points:
The MHS Chief Executive thanked members for these suggestions and assured them that they would be followed up.
Back to top
Avian Influenza
8. The MHS Chief Executive explained that there were two aspects of Avian Influenza with which the MHS was concerned: (i) disease control measures, where MHS was supporting Defra on contingency planning; and (ii) worker safety, where the MHS was working with the Health and Safety Executive and Defra to produce a document on staff health and safety.
Charter Mark
9. The MHS Chief Executive reported that the MHS had received a routine surveillance visit as part of its Charter Mark accreditation on 16 December 2005.
The assessor had been very pleased that from the ten areas previously identified for progress, the MHS had made substantial progress on four of these and progress was being made in the other six areas.
In response to a question from a Board member, the Chief Executive said that consideration would be given to celebrating this achievement.
Action: MHS Chief Executive
Ombudsman Cases
10. The MHS Chief Executive updated the Board on progress on complaints being handled by the Ombudsman:
11. The MHS Chief Executive noted there were also two cases being examined by an independent assessor appointed by the FSA. Both involved complaints against decisions made by Official Veterinarians (OVs) over the identification of cattle. One complaint had been upheld and, exceptionally in this case, the MHS had agreed to pay costs. The second case was still under consideration.
Service Level Agreements (SLAs)
12. The MHS Chief Executive updated the Board on the position of SLAs with government departments:
13. In discussion:
Action: Jane Downes
MHS Financial Position
14.
The MHS Chief Executive reported that the financial forecast had recently been reviewed and the MHS was expected to be
0.5m – 0.6m within budget. This was subject to final adjustments and unforeseen circumstances.
Defra Delivery Landscape
15.
The MHS Chief Executive reported that he was due to meet David Eves on 9 February 2006 who was reviewing the Defra Delivery Landscape on Animal Health and Welfare.
Eurofreeze and Northern Ireland Audit
16. The MHS Chief Executive explained that allegations of fraudulent activity at the Eurofreeze coldstore in Northern Ireland had led to the MHS being asked by the FSA to conduct an urgent independent audit of the 35 coldstores operating in Northern Ireland [the MHS do not normally operate in Northern Ireland].
This audit was completed within two weeks of the request being made and the final report was scheduled for issue by the end of January.
The MHS had also been asked to ensure that the protocol for the release of meat from Eurofreeze detained in Northern Ireland was applied properly and an MHS Regional Veterinary Adviser was assisting with this.
Concerns about coldstores in other EU countries had led to the Commission asking for a complete audit of all coldstores across Europe.
Since 1 January 2006, Local Authorities had become responsible for standalone coldstores but the MHS retained responsibility for co-located coldstores.
This additional audit, to be completed by the end of January, would require the diversion of MHS resources and delay routine business.
17. Jon Bell, FSA Chief Executive, expressed the FSA's gratitude for the work carried out in Northern Ireland by the MHS. He felt that, as the MHS did not operate in Northern Ireland but had experience of coldstores, they were in an ideal position to provide an independent audit.
Potential case of illicit export of meat
18. The MHS Chief Executive reported that, at Defra's request, the MHS had assisted in investigating the background of a potential case of illicit export of beef from the UK.
It was possible that further involvement by MHS could be required, which would again divert resources.
Implementation of new EU Hygiene Regulations (H123)
19. The MHS Chief Executive reported that this was the third full week of implementation of the new regulations and, overall, implementation had been smooth.
In November, a working draft of the new Manual for Official Controls and the industry guide to the new regulations was issued to MHS staff.
The new regulations provided a challenge to MHS staff and plant operators to adjust to a less prescriptive regime where the MHS verify and do not supervise activities in plants, and food safety is clearly the responsibility of the plant operator.
20. Introduction of the new regulations had resulted in some slaughterhouses in Scotland insisting that cattle be clipped prior to presentation for slaughter. Whilst producers are required to present clean cattle for slaughter, clipping would only usually be used as a last resort and can be hazardous to the handler. An additional issue emerging in Scotland is how animals are dealt with if they are not accepted by the slaughterhouse, and whether or not they can be moved or have to be slaughtered and not allowed into the human food chain. This involved hygiene law, animal health measures, and human rights requirements. The MHS Chief Executive reported that urgent legal advice has been requested from FSA lawyers to clarify the situation.
21. Separately, difficulties had arisen over the requirements for proper identification of sheep received at abattoirs, particularly with consignments from auction marts where a number of batches from many producers could be involved.
22. In discussion:
23. The MHS Chief Executive reported that since 1 January 2006 the MHS had also taken responsibility for trichinella sampling. There had been some teething problems with the collection from plants and delivery of samples to the laboratories, but these were being addressed.
Accommodation
24. The MHS Chief Executive explained that refurbishment of Defra's Kings Pool site would begin shortly.
The MHS Headquarters and North regional office would be affected.
To allow refurbishment to begin, around 150 staff from Kings Pool need to be relocated for two years to create a buffer space to allow the refurbishment to take place whilst the building is still occupied.
Defra's preferred option is for MHS to relocate temporarily to another building in York.
The MHS have two choices that both involve some disruption: (i) to remain in Foss House during refurbishment, which may involve a series of moves within the building or (ii) to temporarily relocate to a new building at Monks Cross in York.
The MHS Chief Executive reported that MHS HQ staff had concerns about temporarily relocating to a new building.
These concerns had been relayed to Defra and stressed that although the MHS was considering the proposal no decision had as yet been made.
In response to questions raised by MHS Board members, the MHS Chief Executive provided an assurance that any decision would be based on delivery requirements of the business.
Over Thirty Month (OTM) Rule Change
25. The MHS Chief Executive updated the MHS Board on the latest GB position regarding the slaughter of OTM animals for human consumption:
In Northern Ireland six plants had been approved, 5,000 OTM animals slaughtered, no positive tests, twelve 'no' tests and the remaining tests had all been negative.
Back to top26. The Chair invited Celia Bennett, as a member of the IRG, to provide an update on the Group's work. She said that whilst no ineligible animal had got past the checks, the number of pre-August 1996 animals presented for slaughter was a major concern. The consequences of one pre-August 1996 animal entering the food chain would be significant in terms of consumer confidence. Prosecution should therefore be considered for producers who present pre-August 1996 animals.
27. In discussion:
Action MHS and FSA Chief Executive
MHS Board members were asked to provide views on whether the current weekly OTM implementation update should move to a monthly update, which would involve a reduction in administration.
Action: MHS Board members
28. The Chair invited Mike Greaves, MHS Director of Operations, to introduce this paper. Mike confirmed that the paper had been jointly agreed between FSA and MHS officials. He explained that the consultation document was not simply a direct response to the second DNV report , but also addressed points raised in the Wall , Independent Advisory Group and first DNV reports. In discussion:
29. The Chair of the MHS Board summarised the discussion and said that it was clear that much progress had been made on the paper since the November MHS Board meeting but that the MHS Board had concerns regarding the amount of information on costs and legal implications of the options, as well as managing the relationship with contractors.
Indicative costs for, at least, the favoured option and status quo and any legal implications of options would allow fuller consideration by consultees.
The MHS Board would stand ready to consider a revised paper intersessionally by 7 February 2006.
The MHS Chief Executive agreed to consider amending the consultation document and producing an accompanying cover letter to reflect MHS Board concerns.
This would then be re-presented to the MHS Board.
Action: MHS Chief Executive and MHS Board
30. The Chair invited Kevin Goddard, Head of the MHS Business Development Unit, to the table to introduce this paper. Kevin explained that the introduction of the Food Hygiene Regulations (H123) on 1 January 2006 meant that data on a number of indicators would no longer be relevant and therefore would not continue to be collected.
31. In discussion:
Action: Kevin Goddard
32. The Chair of the MHS Board summarised discussions and requested that the MHS Board receive further information on the indicators affected by H123, audit and OTM rule change before they could agree to the proposal that they assess MHS performance on nine months data. This information would be provided intersessionally.
Action: Kevin Goddard
33. Kathryn Davies, Director of Corporate Services, introduced this paper and said that the consultation on the framework was due to close on 27 January. Six replies had been received so far.
34. In discussion:
The MHS Board noted the process to be followed in order to secure publication of the Performance Management Framework by April 2006.
Back to top35. Kathryn Davies, Director of Corporate Services, introduced this paper and explained that it had not been possible to produce a draft vision statement for the MHS Board's consideration as effort had been focused on developing the Performance Management Framework for 2006/07.
36. In discussion:
37. The Chair of the MHS Board introduced the paper. Members agreed the scheme should be applied to the MHS Board whilst recognising that some of the processes may be common for joint MHS and FSA Board members. The MHS Board also agreed that the scheme should apply to all MHS Board members, including officials, and Debby Reynolds as adviser to the MHS Board.
Back to top
IT in Plants
38. MHS Board members welcomed the information paper on IT in plants and the availability of the Manual of Official Controls on the MHS Portal and CD.
However, currently whenever enforcement action is taken, MHS staff must refer back to the paper version of the Manual.
Contracted OVs will have access to an electronic version of the manual when it becomes available on the extranet.
Audit
39. MHS Board members welcomed the information paper summarising the extent of audit of the MHS.
The paper raised questions about whether the large amount of audit, to which the MHS was subject, provided value for money.
It was agreed that a more detailed paper should be prepared for discussion at the MHS Board's next meeting.
Action: MHS Board Secretariat
Date of next meeting
40. The next MHS Board meeting will be held on 28 March 2006 in Foss House, York.
Find out what our other sites have to offer