Greeny News

Victory for food manufacturers as health groups accuse Andrew Lansley of caving in to big business

The Food Standards Agency is to be abolished by Andrew Lansley, the health secretary, it emerged last night, after the watchdog fought a running battle with industry over the introduction of colour-coded "traffic light" warnings for groceries, TV dinners and snacks.

The move sparked accusations that the government 'gave a big business. "

Under the changes Lansley reassign FSA 's regulatory aspects - including safety and health - to the Department for Environment, Food and Agriculture (Defra).

Its responsibilities for nutrition, diet and public health will be incorporated into the Department of Health.

"The functions of the FSA will be subsumed into the Department of Health and Defra," a source told Reuters.

Andrew Burnham, Labour's health spokesman, said: "Getting rid of the FSA is the latest in a number of worrying steps that show Andrew Lansley caving in to the food industry. It does raise the question whether the health secretary wants to protect the public health or promote food companies."

Tam Fry of the National Obesity Forum, said it was "crazy" to dismember the FSA. "It had a hugely important role in improving the quality of foodstuffs in Britain and it was vital to have at the centre of government a body that championed healthy food. This appears just the old Conservative party being the political wing of business," Fry said.

Patrick Holden, director of the Soil Association, the organic food standard-bearer, which had several run-ins with the first FSA chair Lord Krebs on the issue, said: "Many NGOs campaigning on food thought for a long time the food industry has an unhealthy degree of influence over the Department of Health so the great risk is the corporate vested interests of the food industry will have too strong an influence on future policy."

In its green paper on health care last year, the Conservatives said they would turn the role and competence of the FSA and venue of the independent supervisory body in accordance with ministerial control.

Last night the Department of Health would only confirm the FSA was "under review".

Over the past four years, FSA, which was established to protect consumers after the BSE crisis was the focus of legal battle that pitted the major food companies from consumer groups and public health professionals, and both sides accuse each other of a campaign of misinformation and excessive lobbying.

The FSA has led calls for the Europe-wide introduction of a traffic light system that required food companies to label the front of their products with red, amber or green symbols to denote the amounts of fat, saturated fat, salt and sugar contained per serving.

The agency, which employs 2,000 staff and spends £ 135m a year, said that the best way to see Europe 's more obese shoppers can make informed decisions about which products they bought.

The British Medical Association, British Dietetic Association and British Heart Foundation are among health groups that supported the scheme.

The FSA had also found some support among supermarkets. Although Tesco has resisted the scheme, it has been adopted by some high street rivals including J Sainsbury and Marks & Spencer.

But traffic light labelling was buried by the European parliament last month, when MEPs backed a rival system favoured by multinationals such as Nestlé, Kraft and Danone.

The industry advocated "guideline daily amounts", a system that listed percentages of recommended daily allowances included in each serving. The food industry spent an estimated £830m on lobbying to stop the traffic lights scheme, which enjoyed a level of popularity with consumers because it was relatively easy to understand. A spokesman for cereal manufacturer Kellogg's said: "The FSA has done a very good job in terms of food safety and science but there was a feeling that perhaps its role was becoming far too broad. We welcome the prospect of a more consensual partnership which will have many positive benefits." Lansley said on the BBC that he was not in favour of "lecturing, nannying people or constantly legislating or taxing people". Responding to calls for a crackdown on junk food from Terence Stephenson, president of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, Lansley said a cross-government cabinet sub-committee was focused on public health.

Critics noted that the end of the FSA was floated days after the health secretary offered a pact with the food industry.

In a deal outlined last week, Lansley publicly asked big business to fund the government's advertising campaign to persuade people to switch to a healthier lifestyle â€" and in return it would not face legislation outlawing excessively fatty, sugary and salty food.

Lansley said that he would be cutting out £1bn of savings in "bureaucracy" and that in the last seven years the costs of red tape in the NHS had doubled. He said he was seeking nearly £190m a year in savings from independent agencies to spend elsewhere in the NHS on top of an £850m crackdown on management costs.

Today in a white paper he will set out a radical agenda for the NHS in the biggest shake-up since its creation in 1948. The minister will set out plans to give foundation hospitals freedoms to borrow, free from Treasury restrictions and have more private sector involvement in health.

Controversially, he will allow GPs to spend billions of pounds of taxpayers' money on behalf of patients who will be able to rank and choose local hospitals and private providers on their "mortality rates".

But a thinktank said evidence suggesting GPs will be more effective than health trusts at commissioning NHS services was "weak". A report by Civitas said the government's plans would lead to a "one-year dip" in performance in the NHS.

FSA

Non-ministerial government department was created in 2000 after several high-profile outbreaks and deaths from foodborne illness.

After the collapse in public trust triggered by the BSE crisis, civil servants within the then Ministry of Agriculture Food and Fisheries were perceived as having put the interests of producers ahead of those of consumers.

It was felt that it was inappropriate â€" and dangerous â€" to have one government department responsible for both the health of the farming and food processing industries and also food safety.

The consumer group Which? had lobbied for an independent food watchdog and scrutinised its performance over the last 10 years, noting its low points as well as its achievements. The bloated body ran into controversy about the health claims of organic food and even the role of GM foods while criticised for expensive and questionable research and public consultation exercises. It tried to be open to scrutiny with "open board meetings" available for public viewing on the web and even award-winning health advertising campaigns had a short lifespan, with budgets axed.

Ultimately, it was the FSA's difficult relationship with the powerful food industry which undermined its effectiveness and claims to be independent, after manufacturers successfully lobbied in Europe to put an end to its attempt to secure a universal system of "traffic light labelling" for food and drink products.

Rebecca Smithers