The government is facing fresh calls to step up its engagement with the food and drink sector over the EU reset, amid mounting speculation a Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) deal could now be agreed before the summer.
Businesses needed to be kept “well informed on the scope of the SPS agreement”, the FDF urged yesterday, as it set out its top 10 priorities from the prospective deal.
With food and drink exports to the bloc having fallen by almost a quarter (23.4%) over the past five years, a new SPS agreement had the potential to be “a positive step towards easing the complexity food and drink manufacturers currently face when trading with our nearest and most important trade partner”, the FDF said.
It would also remove the “burdensome certificates and checks at borders” that had plagued the sector since Brexit, the industry body added.
However, it echoed recent concerns by the Commons Efra Committee in warning of the “potential unintended consequences for the nation’s food and drink manufacturers” facing alignment with the EU across more than 100 areas of food safety regulation.
This was a “significant shift in UK policy”, with businesses needing “to know what to do by when, and how long will they have to comply”, said FDF CEO Karen Betts.
“Early clarity on regulatory changes – allowing sufficient transition periods, and ensuring our voice is heard for decisions that will impact UK businesses in the future – are non-negotiable to protect the competitiveness and long-term resilience of our sector,” she insisted.
Read more: Commons Efra Committee slams government’s lack of engagement on EU SPS deal
Alongside calling for “sufficient transition periods for companies to adjust”, the FDF’s list of priorities included the need for government to give early and “clear guidance” on where UK and EU regulations had diverged “and what will fall into scope of the new agreement, so they can prepare properly and don’t face a cliff-edge”, the FDF said.
Ministers also needed to communicate any changes with ingredient suppliers from overseas “so they also have time to adapt to prevent disruptions to the UK’s food supply chains”, it added.
And where the EU had more advanced frameworks and authorisations “the UK should align now so our businesses are not disadvantaged”, the FDF stressed, for example in aligning the authorisation of new, innovative food ingredients.
The government also needed to ensure “carve outs” from the deal “to protect UK-specific industries”, while retailers, logistics partners and manufacturers all needed to be engaged with early on the removal of ‘Not for EU’ labelling.
Ministers were additionally urged to ensure the UK had “a seat at the table for future EU decision making, to ensure that policy decisions don’t have negative impacts on UK businesses”.
The FDF’s concerns was shared by the Provision Trade Federation. Its director general Rod Addy told The Grocer there were questions about the depth of engagement with industry by government, particularly for specialist sectors and smaller and medium-sized businesses.
Farmers facing £810m hit to profits from EU SPS deal crop chemical rule ‘alignment’
“The government often tends to see engagement with the old F4 group (FDF, BRC, UKHospitality and NFU), plus a few large businesses and wider online forums after decisions have been made as enough,” he said.
“And actually, I would even question how in-depth the engagement with the F4 group has been,” Addy suggested.
“There’s just a lack of visibility on what’s going on,” added British Poultry Council CEO Richard Griffiths. “We keep hearing about pathways regarding communications with industry, but we’ve not been part of any of those.”
And given how poultry trade volumes with the EU had fallen by 30% since 2022, Griffiths warned the so-far vague talk about transition periods also concerned the body’s members.
“To me, a transition period equals delay, what we’d like to do instead is get the problems out of the way beforehand,” he said.
“We don’t even know what part of our supply chain will be affected and how. Even something as mundane as a list of legislation covered by a potential SPS agreement would be incredibly helpful.”
Defra was approached for comment. It has previously said it would “not provide a running commentary on negotiations”.
No comments yet