Home | Contact us | Help

The Future of the Veterinary Profession

What role might the veterinarian play in ensuring food safety in 2020?

Alick Simmons
Veterinary Director
Food Standards Agency

For years veterinarians have played an important role in the production of food. Primarily, whether in private practice, academia or in Government service, this role has been the prevention or control of livestock disease whether it be at the herd level or at the national and international level. These inputs continue to contribute to maintaining and improving the supply and quality of meat, poultry, eggs and milk. However, with a few exceptions, the role played by the veterinarian in the active promotion and regulation of food safety has been limited to meat hygiene and largely in a regulatory role. In the UK this has been driven largely by a need to satisfy the requirements of European Union legislation.

In this paper I hope to set out how this rather narrow role might be enhanced and expanded so that the role of veterinarian, whether privately- or state-employed, is clear, competence-based and one that adds value to food production and standards. I will set out a vision for 2020 and some challenges for the profession to meet.

As the primary regulator of food safety and safety in the UK is the Food Standards Agency (FSA), I should start with explaining its role. The FSA is an independent Government department set up by an Act of Parliament in 2000 to protect the public's health and consumer interests in relation to food. The Agency’s core values are to put the consumer first, to be open and accessible and to be an independent voice.

Our strategic plan 2005 -10 has as its key aims:

  • to continue to reduce foodborne illness
  • to reduce further the risks to consumers from chemical contamination including radiological contamination of food
  • to make it easier for all consumers to choose a healthy diet, and thereby improve quality of life by reducing diet-related disease
  • to enable consumers to make informed choices

The first of these aims ie to continue to reduce food borne illness, will only be realised if there is comprehensive risk management of the hazards associated with the production, processing and distribution of food of all types. The FSA is an evidence-based organisation and that principle applies to the ways in which we meet all of our objectives including how we regulate.

The Agency inherited, at its inception, a suite of highly prescriptive, complex and out-moded EU food safety law. In many cases, this required the competent authority, particularly in slaughterhouses, to impose a command and control culture. In turn this stimulated an environment where, in some cases, the Food Business Operator (FBO) was able to avoid taking full responsibility for the food he or she was producing. Further, the controls were not risk-based, often applied disproportionately and frequently in the wrong place. One might have been forgiven for believing that the only place where hazards associated with meat production could be identified and the associated risks controlled was in the slaughterhall. The emphasis was on the detection and removal of macroscopic lesions most of which of are little or no public health concern. This effort, while well meaning, meant that a great deal of official resource was being expended with little benefit. However, of greater concern is the requirement to inspect via incision and palpation of carcases derived from young animals for which little or no pathology is disclosed. Not only is this a waste of enforcement effort, it contributes to the risk of cross-contamination with food-borne zoonotic micro-organisms such as Camplyobacter and Salmonella which rarely are the cause of macroscopic lesions.

Partly as a result of determined efforts by the FSA during years 2002 – 2005, we now have fully-revised EU food hygiene law. This came into force in 2006. While not perfect it is a considerable step forward. It is considerably less prescriptive and introduces a partially risk-based enforcement environment through official verification and audit with less rather less emphasis on inspection. The responsibilities of FBOs are more explicit and far-reaching. The new Regulations take account of the need to control hazards at all points in the food chain and thus encompass primary production and include for the first time livestock farmers as food business operators. However, there are still prescriptive rules on inspection and official attendance which take little account of risk. There is the scope for a more risk-based approach and for greater FBO responsibility which we will be seeking to adopt as the evidence base improves.

What does this mean for the veterinarian? The FSA seeks high standards in food production which are consistently applied and independently verified. We believe this is best achieved by expecting the FBO to take full responsibility for his or her part in the food chain. However this does not mean that enforcement and regulation can be done away with. Appropriate intervention determined by integrated risk assessment should lead to sophisticated regulatory intervention at the right the point in the food chain without shifting responsibility from the FBO. I believe the veterinarian is well placed to play a full part in meeting this challenge.

With the right approach and competencies, I predict that in 2020 veterinarians will play a key role in food safety and hygiene although this is likely to be a primarily verification and audit of the FBO’s systems and controls rather than traditional inspection tasks. And in this context the FBO includes the farmer.

How can this be achieved? First, let us deal with the processing side of the industry. The meat industry is moving steadily towards full acceptance and delivery of FBO responsibility. It is now up to the regulator (the FSA) working the delivery agents (such as the Meat Hygiene Service and the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development in Northern Ireland) and the industry and consumers to ensure that the regulatory environment is appropriate for the task taking into account the legal framework. Much has been done but it is clear the role of the veterinarian in this area will continue to evolve to suit the needs of the day. Second, the primary producer ie the livestock farmer needs to believe that he or she is producing food rather than a commodity. Food safety is not just the responsibility of Government; it is the responsibility of all food producers and applies equally to farmers as it does to slaughterhouse operators and restaurateurs. Although the EU legislation makes this clear this will not be achieved by legislation alone. It requires a substantial change in attitude and while there are encouraging signs particularly in the pig and poultry sectors, there is much still to be done.

For this to be successful, the veterinarian (working alongside other food safety enforcement officers) will need to be fully integrated into management of risk throughout the food chain – ie from farm to fork. In addition to a regulatory role, I like to think that competent veterinarians will be consulted by FBOs particularly by farmers as source of advice on food safety. However, there are challenges for the profession before this vision is realised. Competence in Veterinary Public Health will have to be gained and maintained preferably to a standard recognised by third parties. This will have to be supplemented by competence in verification and audit to an international standard. It will require state and private veterinarians to work in partnership whatever the prevailing political climate and with the aim of driving and maintaining the appropriate standards in food businesses.

With these objectives achieved, in 2020, I believe the appropriately-qualified veterinarian will play a substantial and rewarding role in food safety to the benefit of the consumer and to his or her clients whether they happen to be in the private or public sector.

 

Page last modified 2 November, 2006