Asked by: Baroness Jones of Whitchurch (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government in the light of the 2013 horsemeat scandal, what steps are being taken to tighten controls on imported meat and to increase random sampling of meat in the retail and hospitality sectors.
Answered by Lord Prior of Brampton
Robust import controls already exist for meat and meat products entering the European Union (EU) from non-EU countries. These consignments are considered to be of potential high risk to animal and public health therefore each consignment of meat must:
- come from a country approved to export meat or meat products to the EU;
- come from EU-approved premises;
- be accompanied by animal health and public health certification;and
- enter the EU through a Border Inspection Post (BIP) where veterinary checks are carried out (all consignments must also be pre-notified prior to arrival).
Whilst the United Kingdom imports little in the way of processed meat[1] from non-EU (third) countries the Food Standards Agency (FSA) did undertake a two month sampling programme starting on the 4 March 2013 on bovine meat and meat products presented for import from third countries at UK borders to test for traces of horse or pig meat DNA; no horse or pig meat positives were found. The FSA concluded that the existing import controls allowed little room for fraud and did not require further tightening.
Enforcement responsibility for food retail and hospitality sectors lies with local authorities. The FSA funds local authorities to take additional food samples against priorities set by FSA. The meat related priorities in 2013/14, 2014/15 and 2015/16 are as set out in the following table.
The FSA’s priorities are also used by local authorities to target sampling that they fund themselves.
Year | Sampling priorities |
2013/14 | - Composition criteria and labelling requirements for minced meat - Testing for the presence of undeclared meat species in meat and meat products - Labelling in terms of: meat content, added water, and hydrolysed proteins in chicken products/preparations (e.g. chicken breast fillets) – food service |
| |
2014/15 | - Composition and labelling of raw minced meat species: beef, lamb, pork, chicken and turkey mince samples - Raw meat species testing for the presence of undeclared meat species in meat and meat products covering retail, catering, wholesalers - Raw chicken portions/products, checking labelling in terms of: meat content, added water, and hydrolysed proteins |
2015/16 | - Minced meat composition (retail and wholesale), including speciation - Meat species substitution in food service and retail - Raw chicken products and preparations with added water, including checking whether there were proteins present from different meat species |
[1] The 2013 horsemeat scandal centred on the intra EU trade in processed meat.
Asked by: Baroness Jones of Whitchurch (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to tackle the increase in human campylobacter cases, caught from infected poultry, which are proving to be resistant to the key antibiotic ciprofloxacin.
Answered by Lord Prior of Brampton
Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a major public health concern and a global challenge. The United Kingdom Government has established a 5 year AMR strategy (2013-2018) which sets out our actions to slow the development and spread of AMR. A copy of the UK Five Year Antimicrobial Resistance Strategy 2013 to 2018 is attached.
The Government supports industry initiatives on the responsible use of antibiotics, such as those implemented by the British Poultry Council, who introduced a voluntary ban on the use of cephalosporins and fluoroquinolones in poultry in January 2012. This action will in the long-term help reduce the development of resistance in bacteria including campylobacter in poultry.
Campylobacter is the leading cause of infectious intestinal disease in people in the UK and poultry meat is considered to be the main source of these infections. To address this, the Food Standards Agency has worked closely with industry in reducing campylobacter levels in chicken and is tackling this issue throughout the food chain; this has included improved biosecurity measures on farm, interventions such as blast surface chilling or additional heat steps during processing, the introduction of leak-proof packaging at retail and advice for consumers on safe handling of raw chickens within the home. These approaches are expected to reduce the number of campylobacter infections in humans.
Asked by: Baroness Jones of Whitchurch (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they intend to take further steps to raise public awareness of the incidence of campylobacter in chickens.
Answered by Lord Prior of Brampton
The Food Standards Agency will continue to use social and news media opportunities to raise awareness of campylobacter and let people know how they can reduce the risk from campylobacter in their home. The Agency leads the Acting on Campylobacter Together campaign under which the poultry industry seeks to reduce the levels of the bacteria on the chickens they sell.
Asked by: Baroness Jones of Whitchurch (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the Food Standards Agency achieved its target of halving the incidence of campylobacter food poisoning in 2015.
Answered by Lord Prior of Brampton
Although progress continues to be made, the Food Standards Agency’s (FSA) agreed target with industry to reduce the numbers of the most contaminated birds at the end of slaughter to less than 10% by 2015 was not met. However, given the interventions expected to come on stream within industry, the FSA Board agreed to roll the target to 2016, when it is expected that the target will be met. If the target is met, then a decrease of around 50% in the number of human cases of campylobacteriosis would be expected.
Asked by: Baroness Jones of Whitchurch (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what proportion of the National Food Crime Unit's annual budget is allocated to investigating serious crimes.
Answered by Lord Prior of Brampton
The National Food Crime Unit (NFCU) is initially focusing on establishing the scale and nature of food crime in the United Kingdom at a strategic level through developing intelligence sharing relationships across the law enforcement community and with the food industry. This will also enable the Unit to instigate investigative interventions by law enforcement partners and local authorities to identify and disrupt specific instances of food crime. The NFCU’s budget is directed towards fulfilling this primary intelligence function.
Intelligence analysts within the Unit have just completed the first ever Food Crime Annual Strategic Assessment (FCASA), which will be published soon. The FCASA sets out the Unit’s developing understanding of food crime in the UK and will drive its work to ensure resources are focused where the threat to consumers and other interests is the greatest.
At the end of this year, the Food Standards Agency will review progress on food crime, in line with Professor Elliott’s recommendations following the horsemeat incident. This review will inform decision-making about the Unit’s future form and function.
Asked by: Baroness Jones of Whitchurch (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many prosecutions of criminal gangs in the food sector have been initiated by the National Food Crime Unit since it was established.
Answered by Lord Prior of Brampton
The National Food Crime Unit (NFCU) is initially focusing on establishing the scale and nature of food crime in the United Kingdom at a strategic level through developing intelligence sharing relationships across the law enforcement community and with the food industry. This will also enable the Unit to instigate investigative interventions by law enforcement partners and local authorities to identify and disrupt specific instances of food crime. The NFCU’s budget is directed towards fulfilling this primary intelligence function.
Intelligence analysts within the Unit have just completed the first ever Food Crime Annual Strategic Assessment (FCASA), which will be published soon. The FCASA sets out the Unit’s developing understanding of food crime in the UK and will drive its work to ensure resources are focused where the threat to consumers and other interests is the greatest.
At the end of this year, the Food Standards Agency will review progress on food crime, in line with Professor Elliott’s recommendations following the horsemeat incident. This review will inform decision-making about the Unit’s future form and function.
Asked by: Baroness Jones of Whitchurch (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what advice they are giving to consumers about the health risks of eating processed meat.
Answered by Lord Prior of Brampton
Public Health England’s advice is that, on average, people should be eating no more than 70 grammes of red and processed meat a day. People who eat a lot of these meats are at higher risk of bowel cancer than those who eat small amounts. Therefore, people who eat more than 90 grammes of red or processed meat a day are advised to cut down.
Asked by: Baroness Jones of Whitchurch (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the World Health Organization research showing that eating processed meat increases the risk of cancer.
Answered by Lord Prior of Brampton
The World Health Organization published its conclusions on the carcinogenicity of eating red and processed meat on 26 October. The detailed evaluations will be published in the future; until these are available, we cannot assess them in detail.
Asked by: Baroness Jones of Whitchurch (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the case for a sugar tax on sweetened drinks in order to tackle the rise in obesity.
Answered by Lord Prior of Brampton
There are no plans to introduce a tax on sugar-sweetened drinks. However, we keep all taxes under review, with decisions being a matter for the Chancellor as part of the Budget process.
Calorie reduction, including sugar reduction, is being considered as part of the development of the Government’s childhood obesity strategy which is due in the coming months.
Asked by: Baroness Jones of Whitchurch (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what funding has been provided for child and adolescent mental health services each year since 2010.
Answered by Earl Howe - Deputy Leader of the House of Lords
The aggregated primary care trust (PCT) spend on child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS) in England since 2010 is set out in the following table. The figures outline what PCTs have spent but do not indicate the amount of funding provided by the Department. The figures in the table have been rounded to the nearest £ million:
2010-11 | 2011-12 | 2012-13 | 2013-14 |
713 | 713 | 704 | Not yet available |
However, this does not include:
- spend by local authorities, including children’s services and schools’ expenditure on early intervention or emotional resilience programmes;
- £54 million invested by the Department over the four years from 2011-12 to 2014-15 in the Children and Young People’s Improving Access to Psychological Therapies programme; and
- The £150 million investment over five years for NHS England in CAMHS for the treatment of eating disorders.