Letter: Safe food
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: As enforcers of food safety legislation, we appreciate the comments in your leading article (23 December) on the need for the Food Safety Agency to enjoy public trust.
That "producer interests" may have played too strong a role in the formulation of food safety policy is a view with which enforcers concur. However, what consumers, food producers and enforcers want most - and quickly - is clear information. Impartial advice and considered actions by government are essential to protect both public health and food businesses.
The recent beef-on-the-bone regulations are a case in point. We made our position clear to the Government that the regulations as they stand are extraordinarily difficult to enforce. What we require is government direction and information to enable local authorities to enforce the regulations more effectively. As health professionals we are fully committed to measures taken to protect the public against BSE. We need guidance to achieve this.
One of the key arguments for the Food Safety Agency is that it would be able to provide this information while responding in a considered way to advice from scientific committees. This would avoid political pressures which can induce either unduly delayed or panicked responses, while the public, enforcers and food producers are supplied with information to minimise risks to public health.
MICHAEL COOKE
Chief Executive
Chartered Institute of Environmental Health
London SE1
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments