FSA PROPOSALS WILL COST FARMERS DEAR SAYS NFUS

NFU Scotland is bitterly disappointed that the Food Standards Agency (FSA) is once again considering transferring the full cost of meat hygiene inspections on to industry before full reform of the Meat Hygiene Service (MHS) has been concluded.

The FSA has tabled a paper on full cost recovery for its board meeting, due to take place in London on Tuesday (10 November). The subject of MHS charging was hotly debated in March of this year with industry welcoming the decision in June to freeze MHS charges.

This new discussion raises the potential of adding significant additional costs onto Scotland’s struggling abattoir sector. NFUS has concerns that this would inevitably see costs transferred down the chain through lower prices to farmers rather than passed up the line to consumers, with Scottish livestock and poultrymeat producers taking the hit.

NFU Scotland’s Vice-President, Nigel Miller said:

“It is extremely disappointing to see full cost recovery for meat hygiene inspections back on an FSA agenda. Scotland’s abattoirs remain under pressure, with many plants struggling on tight margins, increased regulation and costs of compliance. Heaping additional cost onto Scotland’s plants could further undermine an abattoir sector in Scotland that is already shrinking and challenge the Scottish Government’s own ambitions to grow our red meat sector.

“ It is equally disappointing that full cost recovery has been put back on the table ahead of necessary further reforms to the MHS. We would have dearly liked to see further costs being driven out of the meat hygiene regime before cost recovery was even considered for further debate.

“Industry is pushing for inspections to move to a more risk-based approach, simplified inspection regimes for low risk animals such as lambs need to be agreed and there are specific areas relating to poultrymeat requirements that have still to be fully addressed. Progress in these areas have the potential to strip out considerable costs to plant operators and must be resolved before the debate on full cost recovery can be considered in earnest.”