Even though we're more than six months down the road, the shear quantity of new food hygiene legislation that came into force at the start of 2006 is enough to leave many people working with food unclear about their new obligations. Unfortunately, it's not only those in the industry who feel that way. Many of those responsible for enforcing the law are in the same situation.
"Regulations like this require substantive guidance and training for people to get to grips with them - not only those in the industry but the people who enforce them too. The enforcement regime in the UK is always very busy and it's debatable whether they have enough resources to cope with peaks in activity caused by all this new legislation," says Neil Griffiths, food hygiene consultant and past chairman of the Society of Food Hygiene Technology (SOFHT). "The situation hasn't been helped by the fact that a lot of the legislation was left till the last minute by the European Commission. It's going to take at least one or two years until it fully beds down and we all know what we're doing."
The new regime centres around three primary hygiene regulations, which came into force on January 1. These are:
- Regulation 852/2004 on the hygiene of foodstuffs
- Regulation 853/2004, which lays down specific hygiene rules for food of animal origin
- Regulation 854/2004, which set out rules for the organisation of official controls on products of animal origin intended for human consumption.
The regulations impact in various ways, including bringing some primary producers under food hygiene law for the first time. However, the most important single concept is that the principles of hazard analysis critical control points (HACCP) should be applied at each point in the food supply chain in a 'farm-to-fork' drive to ensure food safety.
The primary regulations are supplemented by additional regulations designed to ensure consistent and effective implementation. These are:
- Commission Regulation (EC) 2073/2005 on the microbiological criteria for foodstuffs.
- Commission Regulation (EC) 2074/2005, which lays down implementing measures.
- Commission Regulation (EC) 2075/2005 laying down specific rules for trichinella in meat.
- Commission Regulation (EC) 2076/2005, which sets out transitional arrangements to ease the change to the new regime.
Transitional arrangements
The transitional arrangements are designed to allow time for implementation. For example, many premises need fresh licences under the new regime, but it could take years for the enforcement authorities to inspect them all. "The transitional arrangements are for the benefit of the enforcement authorities, not industry," stresses Griffiths. "Some people in industry thought it meant they didn't have to worry about it for four years, but if an environmental health officer turns up tomorrow, you have to be working to the new rules."
The other area that seems to be causing the most confusion is the Microbiological Criteria Regulations (MCR). These contain sampling methods and plans that many in industry feared would lead to massively increased costs for testing. But Kaarin Goodburn, secretary general of the Chilled Food Association, says this is wrong. "The MCR clearly states that food business operators must (with certain exceptions) determine the level of testing on the basis of HACCP for each product. HACCP implementation is key, not testing, since testing is not a control."
The main exception is where companies are selling raw minced meat or meat preparations. In this case the MCR specifies a sampling frequency of one product per plant, per week. Even here, however, Goodburn says that the requirement has no real scientific justification. "According to one company, sampling would give a one in a billion chance of finding something. The added cost of testing is moderate, but it's also pointless. Even if you did find something, what could you do about it apart from cooking it? After that it's not raw meat anyway."
Where enforcers get it wrong
Most major British food manufacturers are comparatively well placed to respond successfully to the new regime. "They're pretty advanced in terms of applying HACCP and other measures, such as the use of segregated areas," says Goodburn. But she says that many enforcers have been struggling to familiarise themselves with the new requirements. "I know of environmental health officers writing to all the companies on their patch with supposed new requirements that are just plain wrong. That obviously causes a lot of running around, panic and unnecessary expense."
Independent hygiene consultant Slim Dinsdale has noted similar problems in keeping up to date among the vets who inspect abattoirs on behalf of the Meat Hygiene Service (MHS). For example, in the wake of BSE, certain material from cattle is deemed Specified Risk Material (SRM) and must be removed, labelled and disposed of separately. Some of the material previously defined as SRM has recently been removed from the list, yet the first time one MHS vet became aware of the change was during an inspection, when the abattoir operator told him. "To be fair to the vets they have to absorb a huge amount of information," says Dinsdale.
One of the best places to look for guidance is the Food Standards Agency (FSA), which has help for manufacturers and enforcement officials. It also includes links to guidance produced by the European Commission.
Guidance from trade associations and other industry bodies is expected to become increasingly important. "It's the industry that really has the experience to deal with the practicalities of applying HACCP in each sector," says Griffiths. "But the industry needs to get the different sectors talking to each other in order to minimise duplication."
Existing industrial standards that are unrelated to the legislation may also have a role to play, according to inspection and certification business Efsis. "The BRC [British Retail Consortium] Global Standard comes from a background of due diligence requirements and there's a section in there on HACCP," says Efsis certification manager Adam Chappell. "But for companies that are really looking to get their HACCP standards checked out, ISO 22000 focuses more tightly on food safety management."
For now, the FSA claims it is doing everything it can to encourage greater understanding of the requirements: "With any change in process or introduction of new legislation there will be a period of change and it will take time to fully permeate across industry," it says. FM
The seven golden rules of HACCP
The need for hazard analysis critical control points (HACCP) is the key principle underpinning the new legislation:
1. Identify any hazards that must be prevented, eliminated or reduced to acceptable levels (hazard analysis).
2. Identify the critical control points at the step or steps at which control is essential to prevent or eliminate a hazard or to reduce it to acceptable levels.
3. Establish critical limits at critical control points, which separate acceptability from unacceptability for the prevention, elimination or reduction of identified hazards.
4. Establish and implement effective monitoring procedures at critical control points.
5. Establish corrective actions when monitoring indicates that a critical control point is not under control.
6. Establish procedures that shall be carried out regularly to verify that the measures already outlined are working effectively.
7. Establish documents and records commensurate with the nature and size of the food business to demonstrate the effective application of the measures already outlined.
Key Contacts
- Chilled Food Association 01536 514365
- EFSIS 01908 844156
- Food Standards Agency (food law policy) 020 7276 8138
- Society of Food Hygiene Technology 01590 671979