The FSA has won confidence, almost against all the odds, and Clive Beddall discovers how
You won't find it in his entry in Who's Who, but Professor Sir John Krebs, chairman of Britain's first independent Food Standards Agency, is a potcher. And while that is easily the most unscientific of the distinguished Oxford scholar's many accolades, it is one of which he is proud.
For the uninitiated, like me, a potcher is someone who enters the kitchen when the food is almost ready, stirs in a few carefully selected herbs and then confidently serves up the dishes to waiting guests as if he has created them himself.
The self-confessed food junkie was awarded the title by his biology teacher wife, Katherine, who swears that the art of "potching" comes from her native South Wales. Ask Sir John about it, and he'll tell you that while the description "probably fits," the 57-year-old son of a domestic science teacher boasts a pretty mean coq au vin when his busy diary allows.
Oxford trained scientist
Three years on from setting up the FSA amid suspicion among consumer groups and cynical media folk, the Oxford trained scientist is heading a proactive team that has gained strong credibility, albeit in occasional controversial circumstances. For a start, the FSA was dismissed by many as an extension of the much vilified former Ministry of Agriculture. It was "in the pockets of ministers", and, in the words of one commentator merely "old wine in new bottles". To one broadsheet, surely this Oxford boffin was just the Blair camp pandering to the consumerist food safety lobby in the wake of BSE?
When you meet Sir John in his London office, he looks back on these remarks with the faintest of smiles, but then confidently dismisses them with a single sentence: "We have a degree of independence, transparency and accountability that safeguards our role in putting the consumer first and ensures that we take balanced judgements."
There are many surprises about Sir John Krebs, starting with his office which is in a converted church in London's Kingsway. Here, gothic is mixed with early 21st century pine, glass and stainless steel all adorned by innumerable hanging plants. The office has vast windows that mirror the city skyline. And, surprise, instead of the crusty old biscuits with the awaiting coffee, we see a fresh plate of five varieties of fruit. But then Sir John is far removed from the clichéd image of the crumpled professor wearing a thick, brown tweed suit covered in tobacco stains. His well cut, steel blue ensemble is more your well groomed City CEO. Add his lean, keen countenance that displays the results of healthy, regular jogs around his beloved Oxford, or London's Victoria Embankment, and you have the man who has successfully beaten off the critics with the most important organisation ever to cast a critical eye across the UK grocery trade.
Sir John has a straightforward honest approach that some cynics including this writer never expect from the scientific community. Hardly, to use a phrase from his initial critics, an "innocent abroad in the Whitehall jungle".
His starting point in protecting consumer interests was that food, like everything else in life, cannot be guaranteed totally risk-free. Yet, Sir John talks about a "hugely enjoyable and exciting three years".
"We've put ourselves on the map. People see us as a watchdog that is independent, evidence-based, that does not succumb to pressure, whether it is from the food industry, lobby groups or government departments."
So how did this confidence building exercise succeed? He cites the FSA's practice of getting away from "private, smoked-filled rooms and holding board meetings in public right from day one".
"After our first board meeting we came out punching the air. But we continued to talk about risk and uncertainty in a very straightforward and honest way, admitting that, sometimes, we didn't know all the answers.
"But at least we had scientific experts looking at issues, even if, in the end, we had to come to judgements in the face of imperfect knowledge. And that was a very different style from the old we can guarantee this food is perfectly safe.'"
Fuelling a feud
However, it has not all been a bed of roses with the food industry. His assertion that organic food is not necessarily what it has been projected to be caused that sector's disciples and a certain campaigning tabloid to choke on their lentil soup.
But never mind the public statements, does he buy organic food? Another rapid, honest answer and all is revealed. "When I am feeling really flush I pay an arm and a leg for super organic fillet steak from a butcher in Oxford's covered market."
Given that some tabloids have attempted to fuel a feud between the FSA and the Soil Association on organic issues, where does he stand? "I have studied the evidence, as have many other independent bodies, and there is simply no basis for saying organic food is healthier or safer. But there are people who believe it is. So the important thing is to hold a sensible discussion about why we disagree. People who make their living out of organic food feel threatened by an objective statement that may undermine some of their starting points."
But despite a clearer understanding of the FSA's motives by the food industry, Sir John admits there are still differences. "Our practice of naming and shaming, as the industry calls it, is one area of disagreement.
"We prefer to call the practice transparency and honesty. They don't like us naming brands when issues crop up, but I think we're right. The old style of covering up names on food safety issues will not work. The brands will be named, otherwise the FSA will be accused of a cover up with the food industry and confidence will be eroded."
Sir John's term as chairman concludes at the end of this year. He clearly enjoys the job and admits that he would "seriously consider" staying on if asked.
And, as the interview ended there was one final surprise. The usually placid FSA chairman punches the air in delight. He had just been told his beloved Sheffield United football club, another of his unexpected passions, had won an important game.
{{ANALYSIS }}
You won't find it in his entry in Who's Who, but Professor Sir John Krebs, chairman of Britain's first independent Food Standards Agency, is a potcher. And while that is easily the most unscientific of the distinguished Oxford scholar's many accolades, it is one of which he is proud.
For the uninitiated, like me, a potcher is someone who enters the kitchen when the food is almost ready, stirs in a few carefully selected herbs and then confidently serves up the dishes to waiting guests as if he has created them himself.
The self-confessed food junkie was awarded the title by his biology teacher wife, Katherine, who swears that the art of "potching" comes from her native South Wales. Ask Sir John about it, and he'll tell you that while the description "probably fits," the 57-year-old son of a domestic science teacher boasts a pretty mean coq au vin when his busy diary allows.
Oxford trained scientist
Three years on from setting up the FSA amid suspicion among consumer groups and cynical media folk, the Oxford trained scientist is heading a proactive team that has gained strong credibility, albeit in occasional controversial circumstances. For a start, the FSA was dismissed by many as an extension of the much vilified former Ministry of Agriculture. It was "in the pockets of ministers", and, in the words of one commentator merely "old wine in new bottles". To one broadsheet, surely this Oxford boffin was just the Blair camp pandering to the consumerist food safety lobby in the wake of BSE?
When you meet Sir John in his London office, he looks back on these remarks with the faintest of smiles, but then confidently dismisses them with a single sentence: "We have a degree of independence, transparency and accountability that safeguards our role in putting the consumer first and ensures that we take balanced judgements."
There are many surprises about Sir John Krebs, starting with his office which is in a converted church in London's Kingsway. Here, gothic is mixed with early 21st century pine, glass and stainless steel all adorned by innumerable hanging plants. The office has vast windows that mirror the city skyline. And, surprise, instead of the crusty old biscuits with the awaiting coffee, we see a fresh plate of five varieties of fruit. But then Sir John is far removed from the clichéd image of the crumpled professor wearing a thick, brown tweed suit covered in tobacco stains. His well cut, steel blue ensemble is more your well groomed City CEO. Add his lean, keen countenance that displays the results of healthy, regular jogs around his beloved Oxford, or London's Victoria Embankment, and you have the man who has successfully beaten off the critics with the most important organisation ever to cast a critical eye across the UK grocery trade.
Sir John has a straightforward honest approach that some cynics including this writer never expect from the scientific community. Hardly, to use a phrase from his initial critics, an "innocent abroad in the Whitehall jungle".
His starting point in protecting consumer interests was that food, like everything else in life, cannot be guaranteed totally risk-free. Yet, Sir John talks about a "hugely enjoyable and exciting three years".
"We've put ourselves on the map. People see us as a watchdog that is independent, evidence-based, that does not succumb to pressure, whether it is from the food industry, lobby groups or government departments."
So how did this confidence building exercise succeed? He cites the FSA's practice of getting away from "private, smoked-filled rooms and holding board meetings in public right from day one".
"After our first board meeting we came out punching the air. But we continued to talk about risk and uncertainty in a very straightforward and honest way, admitting that, sometimes, we didn't know all the answers.
"But at least we had scientific experts looking at issues, even if, in the end, we had to come to judgements in the face of imperfect knowledge. And that was a very different style from the old we can guarantee this food is perfectly safe.'"
Fuelling a feud
However, it has not all been a bed of roses with the food industry. His assertion that organic food is not necessarily what it has been projected to be caused that sector's disciples and a certain campaigning tabloid to choke on their lentil soup.
But never mind the public statements, does he buy organic food? Another rapid, honest answer and all is revealed. "When I am feeling really flush I pay an arm and a leg for super organic fillet steak from a butcher in Oxford's covered market."
Given that some tabloids have attempted to fuel a feud between the FSA and the Soil Association on organic issues, where does he stand? "I have studied the evidence, as have many other independent bodies, and there is simply no basis for saying organic food is healthier or safer. But there are people who believe it is. So the important thing is to hold a sensible discussion about why we disagree. People who make their living out of organic food feel threatened by an objective statement that may undermine some of their starting points."
But despite a clearer understanding of the FSA's motives by the food industry, Sir John admits there are still differences. "Our practice of naming and shaming, as the industry calls it, is one area of disagreement.
"We prefer to call the practice transparency and honesty. They don't like us naming brands when issues crop up, but I think we're right. The old style of covering up names on food safety issues will not work. The brands will be named, otherwise the FSA will be accused of a cover up with the food industry and confidence will be eroded."
Sir John's term as chairman concludes at the end of this year. He clearly enjoys the job and admits that he would "seriously consider" staying on if asked.
And, as the interview ended there was one final surprise. The usually placid FSA chairman punches the air in delight. He had just been told his beloved Sheffield United football club, another of his unexpected passions, had won an important game.
{{ANALYSIS }}
No comments yet