SCOTLAND’s food safety watchdog has warned the UK Government’s post-Brexit “power grab” plans risk lowering standards and the repeat of past scandals such as BSE.
Food Standards Scotland (FSS) said proposals for a UK internal market would also have the effect of removing the devolved decision making process and returning it to Westminster control “by design or not”.
It criticised the idea of a new monitoring body to assess the impact of policies across the UK, saying its purpose “appears to be to consider simply the monetary cost to business”, rather than taking consumer interests into account.
“Lessons from the past, such as the BSE scandal and previous major food borne disease outbreaks, clearly demonstrate the danger in that approach, not only to consumers, but ultimately to the food industry through lowering standards and loss of reputation and market,” FSS said.
“It is important that as time passes those lessons are not forgotten or conveniently ignored to the detriment of consumers and industry.
“Leaving decisions to a body that doesn’t have appropriate expertise and where cost is the predominant focus risks replicating expensive historical mistakes.”
READ MORE: UK Government blows off MSPs 36 minutes before power grab meeting starts
The concerns have been highlighted in a response by FSS to a consultation on the UK Government’s White Paper on the UK internal market, which closed last week.
It said under the new proposals, recommendations or advice on food issues would become subject to approval by UK ministers and not the Scottish Parliament.
This would put Scottish consumers’ interests in a “significantly worse position” than before FSS was established in 2015 and undermine the devolved nature of food regulation in Scotland.
“The effect of these proposals would mean that Scottish consumer interests in relation to food would not be a primary focus as they are for FSS,” it said.
“Hence the way the arguments are presented in the White Paper leads to the conclusion that the purpose of this proposal is not really about collectively supporting the internal market but whether – by design or not – it has the effect of removing the devolved decision making process and returning it to centralised UKG control.”
In a letter to UK Business Secretary Alok Sharma, FSS chair Ross Finnie said the proposals in the White Paper are too focused on cost benefits and consumer interests “appear time and again to be subservient to the business cost implications”.
He added: “Despite the arguments in this paper, fundamentally these proposals do change the scope and accountabilities of FSS and the devolution framework we work within.”
NFU Scotland also raised concerns about the White Paper last week, saying while it agrees with the intention for the UK internal market to operate as it does now, there is a “significant threat” to devolution.
Scottish Environment Link, a coalition of 40 environmental charities, has also warned the plans could drag down standards for wildlife, landscape and food.
SNP MSP Emma Harper said the FSS response was “another damning verdict” on how the UK Government’s plans will impact on food standards.
She said: “The quality of the food that feeds the nation is at risk.
“Yesterday Scotland’s farmers also called out the Tory proposals for threatening a regulatory race to the bottom which would jeopardise food standards and jobs across the sector.
READ MORE: Boris Johnson accused of running 'deliberate anti-devolution policy'
“Despite claims to the contrary, this Tory Government has proven time and again that it can’t be trusted with Scotland’s agriculture industry.
“Any attempt to impose lower food and environmental standards, and block Scotland from taking action in devolved areas would be completely unacceptable and must not happen.”
Last week Scotland’s Constitution Secretary Michael Russell told MSPs the Scottish Government will continue to challenge the internal market plans, and did not rule out legal action.
Giving evidence to Holyrood’s Finance and Constitution Committee, he said “every devolved power could be undermined”.
“This is an outrageous power grab and it is a major weakening of devolution, and it should not be permitted to take place,” he said.
On Friday, MSPs on Holyrood’s Finance and Constitution Committee warned the internal market plans must not be imposed without agreement between the devolved nations and the UK Government.
UK Business Secretary Sharma rejected an invitation to give evidence to the committee.
Previously, the UK Government has insisted that the UK’s status as a “world leader” in environmental protection, animal welfare and food safety standards will not change.
Scottish Secretary Alister Jack has said the changes will ensure “seamless trade continues across all parts of the UK” and the proposals would “respect and strengthen devolution”.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel