🌾 Delegated Legislation Committee

General Committees

🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️

The UK government is set to modernize food and feed regulations to boost innovation and economic growth in the £245 billion food industry. The new rules will remove the need for periodic renewals of certain product authorizations, enabling regulators to focus on new and potentially riskier products. Authorizations will now take effect after ministerial decisions and be listed in a public register, speeding up market access for new products. These changes aim to maintain high safety standards while enhancing efficiency and supporting the UK’s growing engineering biology sector.

Summary

  • Purpose of the Regulations: The Draft Food and Feed (Regulated Products) (Amendment, Revocation, Consequential and Transitional Provision) Regulations 2025 aim to simplify the market authorisation process for regulated food and feed products in Great Britain.

  • Key Changes:
    • Removes the need for periodic renewal of authorisations every 10 years for certain products (feed additives, genetically modified organisms, and smoke flavourings).
    • Allows authorisations to come into effect following a ministerial decision, based on advice from safety assessments, instead of through statutory instruments.

  • Economic Impact: These changes are expected to boost the UK’s food industry, valued at £245 billion, by encouraging innovation and reducing regulatory barriers.

  • Safety and Consumer Trust: The reforms maintain high safety standards and consumer trust by ensuring that the Food Standards Agency (FSA) and Food Standards Scotland (FSS) can focus on products that may pose higher risks. These agencies will conduct safety reviews based on new evidence rather than on a fixed schedule.

  • Efficiency and Oversight: The removal of set renewal periods will enable a more targeted approach to regulation. Ministers will continue to receive advice from the FSA and FSS, and all decisions will be publicly available in an official register.

  • Public Consultation and Scrutiny: The FSA has a statutory duty to consult, and the consultation process for regulated products remains unchanged. Public consultations will continue to be open and transparent.

  • Northern Ireland Considerations: For products moving between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the regulations align with the Windsor Framework. Products approved in Great Britain can be sold in Northern Ireland under the Northern Ireland retail movement scheme.

  • Monitoring and Risk Assessment: The FSA and FSS will focus on horizon scanning and risk assessment to quickly address any emerging safety concerns, rather than routine reviews.

  • Support and Concerns: The reforms have received substantial support from industry and consumer groups. Concerns about oversight and safety have been addressed by assurances of continued rigorous risk analysis and the ability to modify or revoke approvals if safety issues arise.

Divisiveness

The level of disagreement displayed in the session was minimal. The session consisted primarily of supportive statements and clarifications rather than significant oppositions or debates. Here’s a detailed breakdown of the session’s dynamics and examples of interactions that reflect the level of disagreement:

  1. Supportive Statements: The session opened with the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, Ashley Dalton, presenting the proposed reforms to the Food and Feed (Regulated Products) Regulations. Dr. Caroline Johnson (Con) welcomed the use of Brexit freedoms to deregulate, indicating support for the changes (09:31:00). Alison Bennett (LD) also expressed support for a simplified process but raised concerns about safety (09:35:00).

  2. Questions and Clarifications: The interactions primarily revolved around seeking clarifications rather than opposing the regulations. For instance, Dr. Johnson asked about the level of oversight following the removal of mandatory renewals and about the regulatory framework for Northern Ireland (09:31:00). These questions were not phrased in opposition but as requests for further information.

  3. Response to Concerns: Ashley Dalton responded to the clarifications and concerns raised by Dr. Johnson and Alison Bennett promptly and with detailed answers. She addressed how the changes would not compromise safety, explained the oversight measures, and outlined the mechanisms for Northern Ireland (09:36:00).

  4. Absence of Strong Opposition: There were no direct objections or amendments proposed to the regulations. Even Dr. Johnson, who asked detailed questions, stated that they did not plan to divide the Committee on the regulations, indicating an acceptance of the proposals despite seeking clarity on certain aspects (09:31:00).

  5. Conclusion: The session concluded with the Minister reiterating the benefits of the reforms and the Committee agreeing to the regulations without any vote to oppose (09:43:00).

Given these points, the disagreements were limited to requests for clarification on specific aspects of the reforms rather than fundamental opposition to the proposals themselves. Thus, the session is rated a 2 out of 5 for disagreement, reflecting a mostly harmonious discussion with minimal contention.