Anyone with doubts about the kind of reforms of food safety legislation urgently required within the European Union should look no further than the insidious persistence in Europe of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, or BSE. Unquestionably, there is also a pressing need for a new European food safety authority, though its proposed structure, as outlined yesterday by the Irish commissioner Mr David Byrne, may encounter problems.
This week, France is in the throes of yet another BSE crisis and has reported a 20 per cent drop in beef sales over the past fortnight as cases of the disease continue to rise. In Britain, doctors investigating one of a cluster of five variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease (vCJD) deaths in an English village say BSE-infected meat may be the cause. Organic food only is to be served in Italian schools in reaction to the latest consumer panic over BSE (but also concern about genetically-modified foodstuffs). Meanwhile in Ireland BSE cases continue to rise stubbornly - albeit from a relatively small base.
The case for streamlined food safety legislation; a revamped rapid alert system across Europe to warn member states when potential problems arise and a scientifically-rigorous European Food Authority (EFA) is overwhelming.. Mr Byrne's success as commissioner with responsibility for health and consumer affairs will hinge on prompt and full implementation of his latest proposals put before the European Commission. They represent the fine details of what was initially announced earlier this year.
When the economic interests of member states arise, the mettle of EFA will be tested. It remains to be seen if it will achieve the level of authority necessary by virtue of its expertise. This is because, in essence, it will have an advisory role though it has some significant powers. In effect, it will be run by a scientific body of 14 prominent scientists, while a separate advisory group including member state food safety agency representatives will, in effect, have a crucial role in reconciling differences of opinion between the EFA and member states. The authority will have a pivotal role in risk evaluation but risk communication and risk policy matters will remain the remit of the commission and, to a lesser extent, politicians.
Such a division of responsibilities may prove to be problematic and a recipe for confrontation and delay. But the ineptitude and tardiness evident in recent scares mean consumers will not tolerate anything less than swift and appropriate action with transparency at every turn. Notwithstanding the potential problems from the division of responsibilities, Mr Byrne's proposals represent a genuine effort to "overcome weaknesses of the past", and a tangible attempt to put consumer health interests ahead of those of food industry and agriculture.