The judgment on the Food Standards Agency (FSA) charges followed claims for a judicial review being brought by Association of Independent Meat Suppliers (AIMS) and the British Meat Processors’ Association (BMPA).
The FSA is responsible for carrying out hygiene and safety checks on food business operators in relation to the exercise of official controls and other activities at slaughterhouses. These operators are required by law to contribute to the costs incurred, and in the High Court judgment, Mrs Justice Dias ruled that the FSA’s charging has been taxing slaughterhouses unlawfully.
Hourly rates for official controls to be quashed
The FSA charges are published in the form of Cost Data Slides and costs are split into a Meat Controls Hourly Rate (known as the ‘main rate’) and an Hourly Enforcement Rate. As a result of the judgment, these rates will have to be quashed.
AIMS, supported by the National Farmers’ Union (NFU), argued that:
- The FSA’s main rate and enforcement rate included charges for activities that it was not lawfully allowed to charge for.
- The FSA should not be able to charge for inspections by novice official veterinarians and temporarily registered novice official veterinarians, as they do not meet minimum qualification requirements.
- The FSA failed to meet the required standard of transparency as the Cost Data Slides did not include sufficient information of what costs were included in the charges.
The ruling concluded that the Cost Data Slides did not contain enough detail and that FSA’s main rate and enforcement rates are unlawful. Mrs Justice Dias stated: “I have been able to determine that at least some costs have been unlawfully included in the assessment of both the Main Rate and the Enforcement Rate. Since it is impossible for me to separate these out, it follows that the calculations of both rates as whole must be quashed, as well as the Cost Data Slides in so far as they relate to the Main Rate and Enforcement Rate.”
The judge will now hear further argument on the precise terms of the court’s order.
In a statement, AIMS and BMPA said this was a “devastating judgment” for the FSA, adding that the ruling has provided clarification on what the FSA can lawfully charge for, both in terms of relevant activities and the personnel whose time can be charged for. BMPA and AIMS added that the latter aspect related to “the FSA seeking to charge for numerous improperly qualified veterinarians employed by its private contractors in relation to the controls that industry has long complained were not being carried out to a high standard”.
AIMS and BMPA welcome judgment
John Powell, CEO of the BPMA, commented: “The BMPA welcomes the judge’s findings, which recognise and have exposed long-standing weaknesses in the FSA’s charging policy. We will now work closely with the FSA to ensure a fairer and more transparent system for the delivery of official controls can be quickly implemented going forward.
“The burden of FSA charges on our industry is significant when we are responsible for ensuring the country is fed, safeguarding food security and upholding the highest standards of food safety and animal welfare.”
“The judgment must now mark the beginning of a complete reset in the relationship between the regulator and the meat industry.”
Jason Aldiss, executive director of AIMS, stated: “The judgment must now mark the beginning of a complete reset in the relationship between the regulator and the meat industry, founded upon legality, proportionality, transparency and scientific risk-based regulation.”
NFU calls ruling a “brilliant result for the meat industry”
The NFU said that it held the view that the FSA’s meat inspection charges risk “seriously impacting” the wider livestock sector and has consistently called on the Government to carry out a review of the charging regime. Since the outbreak of the war in the Middle East the NFU said it has also asked Government to postpone these charges and adopt a different approach to help ease cost pressures on livestock farmers.
NFU president Tom Bradshaw said: “Today’s ruling is a hugely significant outcome for the livestock sector and is a brilliant result for the meat industry, the NFU and our members. This has been a key issue we’ve consistently raised with government over many months due to the pressure these charges put on abattoirs.”
“Abattoirs play a vital role in the nation’s food supply chain, yet in recent years the sector has faced significant consolidation, with many small and medium-sized businesses forced to close. This trend has resulted in serious consequences for livestock farmers as local abattoirs which provide important services such as private slaughter and support the independent hospitality and retail sectors, have been lost. It also raises concerns around increased journey times and travel costs.
“The increased charges introduced by the FSA have, in some cases, added tens of thousands of pounds to businesses’ bills overnight. These increases placed further strain on meat premises already under pressure from escalating costs and regulatory burdens. The High Court Judge has been clear that these charges are unlawful and we now look to the FSA to rectify this swiftly.”
