Food Standards Agency
Saturday 4 July 2009
Safer food better business banner
AZ-Directory
What's NewRSS
What is RSS?Listen
Listen to this siteTuesday 8 May 2007
Held at Monks Cross, York
Attendees
Chair
Chrissie Dunn
MHS Board Members
Valerie Howarth
Celia Bennett
Maureen Edmondson
Deryk Mead
Alick Simmons
MHS Board Adviser
Debby Reynolds, Chief Veterinary Officer, Defra (Item 4 onwards)
Secretariat
David Bramley, MHS
Officials participating
Chris Lawson, MHS
Steve McGrath, FSA
Jane Downes, MHS
Mike Greaves, MHS
Kathryn Davies, MHS
Paul Adams, MHS
Kevin Goddard, MHS
Item 1: Introduction and Apologies
1. The Chair welcomed all attendees to the meeting and Steve McGrath, MHS Chief Executive designate, to the meeting table.
Apologies had been received from MHS Board member John Harwood, David Hart from the FSA and representatives from FSA Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
2. The Chair reminded MHS Board members and adviser of their obligation to declare any relevant interests before agenda items were discussed.
Back to top
Item 2: Draft Minutes of the 27 September 2006 Meeting (Paper (06) 57)
3. Subject to an addition to para 41, bullet 2 [shown below], MHS Board members agreed the minutes as an accurate record of the MHS Board meeting held on 27 September 2006:
Item 3: Actions Arising (Paper (06) 58)
4. Actions arising from the September meeting were recorded as complete except the actions at:
Action: MHS Chief Executive
5. Alick Simmons informed other MHS Board members that at the British Veterinary Association Congress [para 5 of September minutes] there had been considerable discussion about how best to ensure that a sustainable veterinary knowledge and skills base for livestock work was maintained despite a continuing decrease in livestock work.
6. An MHS Board member observed that further BSE positives are to be expected and that the latest Defra statistical analysis suggested the likelihood was that there would be three per annum. Due to the nature of the statistics, it was noted that there could be significant variation to this number.
Back to top
Item 4: MHS Board Chair’s Report
7. The Chair reported that:
Initial comments from the MHS Board were:
The Chair of the MHS Board asked for any further comments to be sent to her or to David Bramley by Friday 24 November 2006.
Comments would then be collated and sent to the FSA Board secretariat.
Action: MHS Board members and Adviser
A draft of the Chair of the MHS Board’s report to the FSA Board had been prepared and copies would be given to MHS Board members at the end of the Board meeting.
Comments on the report were requested by Friday 24 November 2006.
Action: MHS Board members and Adviser
As part of her continuing commitment to visit each region at least once per year, she intended visiting plants in the MHS South and West Region next week.
Item 5: MHS Chief Executive’s Report (Paper (06) 59)
8. The MHS Chief Executive said that he would provide some supplementary verbal briefing to his first written report and would be happy to answer any questions.
He noted that there was an error in paragraph 14 of his report and that the future visit by an FVO mission on BSE controls would actually take place from 20 – 29 November 2006 rather than in October.
Accommodation
9. The MHS Chief Executive said that MHS Headquarters had temporarily relocated to Triune Court, Monks Cross on 20 November 2006.
The relocation had been smooth and he was grateful for the way that it had been approached by staff.
Animal Health and Welfare Delivery Board
10. The MHS Chief Executive said that he and Steve McGrath, the MHS Chief Executive Designate, had represented the MHS at the inaugural meeting of Defra’s Animal Health and Welfare Delivery Board.
The Board brought together representatives from delivery agents from across the Animal Health and Welfare spectrum and was not intended to alter or supplant existing governance relationships.
Initially, the intention was for the Board to meet every two months.
11. The Chief Veterinary Officer said that this was an important Board for Defra to help deliver animal health and welfare outcomes and real organisational change.
12. In response to a question from an MHS Board member, the Chief Veterinary Officer confirmed that organisations operating solely in Northern Ireland are not involved in the Board because Defra do not fund or pay for services through these organisations. The aim of the Board is to help ensure that Defra invest or spend their money wisely. The simplicity of the current arrangements make it more likely small discreet improvements can be achieved which then can be disseminated more widely as best practice. In response, the MHS Board member said they remained concerned that there were not closer links with Northern Ireland and asked that consideration be given to inviting Northern Ireland representatives in, at least, an observer capacity to mitigate the risk that policy in GB and Northern Ireland could drift apart.
Review of Models for Delivering Official Controls in Approved Meat Premises (Para 2)
13. The MHS Chief Executive said that the Review was made up of three projects each with clear deliverables and deadlines.
The project to consider options within the existing delivery architecture was being led by the MHS.
Projects on options for alternative delivery models and options for charging mechanisms were being led by the FSA to which the MHS would contribute.
The MHS Chief Executive invited Steve McGrath to provide an update from the project group meeting held yesterday.
He reported that:
Flexibility Project (Paras 6 and 7)
14. In response to a question from a MHS Board member, the MHS Chief Executive confirmed that, at present, there was no financial incentive for Food Business Operators (FBOs) to reduce Official Veterinarian (OV) attendance under the current charging regime.
Reductions in OV attendance could actually result in the FBO needing to make changes to plant operating practices thereby increasing costs or time pressures.
This meant that the flexibility project might not achieve the targeted amount of savings.
15. MHS Board members expressed concern that the FSA were considering measures that could increase MHS charges before considering measures that could reduce MHS charges.
Patent Blue Dye
16. In response to questions from MHS Board members the MHS Chief Executive said that:
Service Level Agreement (SLA) with Defra
17. The MHS Chief Executive reported that he and Defra’s Chief Veterinary Officer had signed the overarching part of the SLA between the MHS and Defra setting out the general principles and had agreed the content of the annexes detailing the specific work carried out on behalf of Defra.
This was a moving document and would be reviewed every quarter.
The MHS are working with Defra to set KPIs for 2007/08 and further refine the content of the annexes in line with the MHS business planning process.
18. The Chair reminded Board members that an OTM testing Implementation Review Group was set up to oversee implementation of the BSE testing regime for its first 12 months of operation, and that Celia Bennett represents the MHS Board on the Group. The Chair of the MHS Board had written to the Chair of the FSA highlighting the concerns discussed by the MHS Board at their September meeting. A response from the Chair of the IRG providing assurances that these matters were being pursued had been received.
19. The Chair invited Celia Bennett to provide an update on the IRG’s work. Celia reported that:
20. The MHS Chief Executive said that UNISON had made allegations that brain stem substitution had occurred in abattoirs in England. In one case, the plant had been identified and the MHS had conducted an investigation and found no evidence of substitution. In the other case, UNISON had refused to identify the plant concerned. This had resulted in the MHS Director of Operations instigating an investigation at all OTM plants to make sure that procedures were being followed correctly and to establish whether there was any evidence to support the allegation. The IRG had considered 100% supervision, as proposed by UNISON, was not needed as this was neither proportionate or justified. The IRG had also considered further changes to reduce the possibility of sample substitution such as introducing tamper-evident pots.
21. The MHS Chief Executive updated the MHS Board on the GB position regarding the slaughter of OTM animals for human consumption as at the end of October 2006:
22. In discussion:
23. Kevin Goddard, Head of the Business Development Unit, introduced this paper and reported that, whilst the majority of indicators are on track to achieve the end of year target, five indicators are currently at red or amber status. Kevin highlighted these areas and said that further details, including any action to be taken to address performance, was detailed in the exception reports.
24. In discussion:
Indicator 1 – BSE controls (RED)
was determined to be at red due to two breaches of domestic SRM controls, one in April and one in May.
Although failure to remove the spinal cord in two bovine carcases occurred, the quarters did not enter the food chain.
Indicator 1 – Animal Health and Welfare (AMBER) :
Indicator 17 – Cost per Unit Livestock (AMBER) was 77 pence higher than the target of £13.93. This was largely due to a lower than expected throughput of OTM animals. In June 2006, the MHS had 96 contract meat hygiene inspectors and by November this had been reduced to 57. Excluding the costs and income related to processing OTM cattle for human consumption from the calculation results in the cost per unit being 17 pence lower than the target.
Indicator 20 – Review appraisal and PRP schemes (GREEN) – the MHS Management Board have recently agreed a revised target of 31 March 2008 for the implementation of a new performance appraisal system, which was a delay of 12 months. This decision reflects the substantial work required to put in place a new system that focuses on the achievement of agreed objectives and takes account of supporting competencies. An MHS Board member agreed that it was important to implement an effective appraisal system that is linked to Investors in People.
Indicator 23 – (i) Achieve workforce representation of 4.1% ethnic staff (AMBER); (ii) Achieve 2.5% operational disabled staff (AMBER); and (iii) Achieve 3.7% non-operational disabled staff (RED) – there had been very little opportunity for the MHS to improve the diversity statistics due to low staff turnover, and there was some concern over the accuracy of the information with regard to the lack of disclosure by staff, particularly in relation to disability.
The MHS Board welcomed the scoring system for SLA indicators. Care needed to be taken to ensure that the SLA indicators accurately reflect the full range of work carried out by the MHS. Consideration should be given to:
Celia Bennett offered to provide some comments on the presentation of the balanced scorecard outside of the meeting;
Action: Celia Bennett
The MHS Board would be kept informed of how and when they could engage with the MHS Business planning process so that their comments could influence the process at a timely stage.
25. The MHS Board:
26. The Chair welcomed Paul Adams, Acting MHS Human Resources Director, to the table and invited Kathryn Davies, MHS Director of Corporate Services, to introduce the paper. In discussion:
In relation to Poultry Inspection Assistants (PIAs):
Information on age is useful for succession planning and is collected by the MHS.
Future reports on HR Strategy to the MHS Board would include age statistics.
Action: Kathryn Davies
27. The MHS Board welcomed the paper and the assurance it provided that development of an HR strategy was receiving due attention.
Back to top28. Jane Downes, MHS Veterinary and Technical Director, introduced this paper.
In discussion:
29. Jane Downes provided a verbal update on progress against recommendations in the Wall report.
Back to top30. Kevin Goddard introduced this paper.
In discussion:
31. The MHS Board:
MHS Board Effectiveness Review
32. The Chair of the MHS Board said that she was keen to progress an MHS Board Effectiveness Review by early next year to capture the considerable experience and knowledge of Valerie Howarth, before the end of her appointment to the FSA Board, and Chris Lawson, before his retirement from the MHS.
The review would also provide an opportunity to evaluate the role of adviser to the MHS Board.
Consumer Engagement
33. An MHS Board member proposed that the information paper on consumer engagement should be discussed at a future MHS Board meeting
Action: MHS Board Secretariat
Date of next meeting
34. The next MHS Board meeting will be held on 21 February 2007 in York.
Find out what our other sites have to offer