Getting IFST's Voice Heard in Government
The Triage Group are looking for new members as John Points steps down this year as chair. You do not need to be a subject matter expert. But you do need to know who the experts are, to understand how government works, how the IFST works, and recognise the significance or contentiousness of topics. Many food legislation or guideline proposals go through a formal consultation process; seeking either open (public) or invited (industry/expert) opinions.
Did you know that IFST has a structured process to respond?
It is important that our independent and expert voice is heard. We advocate that any regulations or guidelines relating to food are based on sound science and evidence, by way of example, see our open letter on a UK-wide Food Strategy.
We can make valuable input when:
-
The topic fits with IFST’s charitable purpose and strategic priorities
-
We have members or groups with the Subject Matter Expertise to address the topic.
-
IFST members, and other stakeholders, would recognise the legitimacy of IFST being involved in the topic.
-
There is a significant benefit to food technical professionals or to the public in our helping to shape the proposal.
Examples where we have responded in recent months include UK consultations on Retained EU Law Bill, Genetic Technologies, guidance on Less than thoroughly cooked beef burgers, and FSA consultations on Precautionary Allergen Labelling. In many cases, FSA or Defra have followed up with informal discussion and have said they value us as a “critical friend”.
We have a governance process around responding to consultations. Our recommendations must be evidence-based and not merely the opinion of the member(s) drafting the response. If there are a range of scientific views, we say so. We are not a food industry lobby group, but neither are we a committee of academic advisors seeking consensus.
The Consultations Triage Group
A key part of this process is the Triage Group. This small team meets fortnightly over a virtual coffee to discuss upcoming consultations and policy issues and decide whether to submit
-
No response
-
A standard response (e.g. “We have no specific comment, but welcome the fact that you are consulting”)
-
A full response
If the latter then they decide who within IFST is best placed to draft, who is best placed to review, and if it is appropriate to seek more influence than merely submitting a public response.
The draft goes through a final review and sign-off with the Chair of the Scientific Committee to ensure that it meets our objectives of being evidence based and appropriate as an IFST response.
Get Involved
Articulating a credible independent opinion relies heavily on the expertise of our members, particularly through the SIGs. We appreciate the time taken and embrace volunteers. We also need members to flag upcoming or current consultations which we may have missed – whether from government, trade bodies, standards bodies, or certification schemes. This is likely to be critical in 2023 if the sunset clause on retained EU legislation is invoked and the UK food regulatory framework is re-written.
The Triage Group are also looking for new members as John Points steps down this year as chair. You do not need to be a subject matter expert. But you do need to know who the experts are, to understand how government works, how the IFST works, and recognise the significance or contentiousness of topics. Please contact Stephen French if interested s.french@ifst.org