The model of confusion

Baffled. There's no other word to describe how my senior colleagues and I feel at the way the Food Standards Agency (FSA) has handled its review of the nutrient profiling (NP) model it developed for use in Ofcom's TV advertising restrictions.

The model was facing intense criticism in early 2007, and it was against this backdrop that the Agency announced its independent panel of respected scientific experts to review its profiling tool.

My colleagues and I didn't agree with every aspect of the panel's conclusions - but we did trust the process and had our say. After an exhaustive scientific review, the panel recommended one change: the removal of the so-called protein cap to encourage industry to continue its work on reformulation.

In reality, few products would have passed immediately - but we felt this was an important step forward.

That's because one of our chief concerns is that the model demonises nutritious foods. We have always warned that it would be used for purposes other than Ofcom's TV restrictions - such as the Welsh Government's decision to use this NP tool for its new vending machine restrictions in Welsh hospitals.

So we felt that anything that made the model more workable - even such a small change - was good news.

Then, days before the FSA Board meeting, Agency officials proposed that the panel's independent advice be ignored. There was no consultation with stakeholders. No justification based on the evidence from the previous two years. No regard for process.

After a lengthy debate, the Board agreed to keep the protein cap in place.

We remain baffled. But our concerns go much deeper than nutrient profiling. We believe the Agency's behaviour raises serious questions about its commitment to the principles of better regulation and leaves our industry wondering whether it can have confidence that good practice - and proper process - will be followed in future.

Julian Hunt is director of communications at the food and drink federation www.fdf.org.uk​​