NEWSFSAI

Vol. 18, Issue 3 ISSN 1393-6972

May/June 2016

In this issue Page 2 > Sound Science Page 3 > Food Businesses Under Supervision: Five Year Trend; 2015: Official Food Control Sampling Page 4 > Audit of Approved Establishments Page 6 > Legislation Update Page 8 > The Five–Year Term of the Third FSAI Scientific Committee Page 12 > FAQ Page 14 > Event Round-up Page 16 > Recent Publications; Court Ruling Against Keelaghan Wholesale Meats; FSAI Staff at Dublin Staff Relay Event

Features in focus

Food and Fitness: The Recipe for PerformanceA recent open meeting of the FSAI’s Food Safety Consultative Council (FSCC) discussed the effects on young people (aged 13-35 years) of performance nutrition and the proliferation of related food products and supplements. ‘Food and Fitness – the Recipe for Performance?’ provided a platform for debate on issues around sports and fitness nutrition, including the use of performance enhancing products and supplements, misleading nutritional claims and the important role of a balanced diet suitable for young people and their activities.

This event drew on the views of leading experts from the nutrition, medical, sports and public health community to explore how diet contributes to athletic and sporting performance and how best to protect young people from misleading claims in relation to nutrition and sports supplements. Participating to share their experiences first-hand were Shane Jennings, former Irish professional rugby union and Leinster player, and Richie Hogan, Senior Kilkenny Hurler.

Speakers included Prof. Mary Flynn, FSAI; Noreen Roche, Sports Dietician to the Kilkenny hurling team; Dr Conor O’Brien, Consultant Neurophysiologist and Physician, Sports Surgery Clinic, Dublin ; Ms Ruth Wood-Martin, Irish Rugby Football Union Head of Nutrition and Conn McCluskey, CEO, Ireland Active. A lively and interesting panel debate was chaired by food writer and broadcaster Ms Suzanne Campbell.

Page 4: Audit of Approved Establishments

Page 8: The Five–Year Term of the Third FSAI Scientific Committee

Page 16: Court Ruling Against Keelaghan Wholesale Meats

Pictured at the Open Meeting of the FSCC are Mr Shane Jennings, Former Irish professional rugby union and Leinster player, Prof. Mary Flynn, Chief Specialist Public Health Nutrition, FSAI and Ms Noreen Roche, Nutricia and member of the Irish Nutrition and Dietetic Institute

May/June 2016Page 2

FSAI News

Dr Pamela Byrne Chief Executive

Sound Science Scientific advice can be defined as ‘the conclusion of a skilled evaluation taking account of scientific evidence, including uncertainties’ (FAO/WHO 2007). This advice is essential for the effective planning and implementation of food safety and nutrition programmes and in informing policy and decision making processes.

The FSAI’s mission is to protect consumers by leading a collaborative food safety community to continuously raise food standards and create a culture of excellence. In achieving this, we are engaged in a wide range of activities that focus on the entire food chain, from primary production through to consumption, and take food safety and integrity, as well as nutrition, into consideration. The importance of scientific advice as key to achieving our mission is well established and growing. We attach high value to our collaboration with esteemed scientists and to the use of sound science to underpin our work.

In addition to the high level of scientific expertise of its staff, the Authority’s Scientific Committee and Sub-committees play a very valuable role in providing us with sound scientific advice. They bring an abundance of scientific knowledge, critical thinking and analysis to the FSAI, ensuring the scientific excellence of the Authority’s opinions. Working closely with our staff, our Scientific Committee is the linchpin that aids us in defining our scientific advice and this advice is critical in underpinning our risk management decisions. The Committee is made up of scientists, from a variety of disciplines, all of whom work in a voluntary capacity. The evidence base that the Scientific Committee provides forms the basis of our advice to Ministers on the development of food safety policy, public health nutrition policy and associated legislation. It also provides clarity on scientific and technical issues relating to food safety and hygiene.

The Authority has always recognised the importance and value of science in informing consumer protection programmes. However, in addition to our scientific expertise, the FSAI also needs to continue to seek ways to build meaningful dialogue with consumers and other stakeholders in order to understand and address their risk perceptions and information needs and preferences, particularly related to new or complex scientific issues. We are actively working to strengthen our dialogue with all stakeholders and in doing so we will strengthen engagement and consultation between our scientists and stakeholders. Transparency is also of the utmost importance to us and we will continue to consult publicly on scientific opinions, particularly when preparing guidance documents, and by doing so collect and consider views from various stakeholders.

As an organisation, we are confident that we can stand over our opinions and advice, as we know they are based on robust science. We are also confident that our food standards are developed on the basis of the best, most up-to-date scientific advice available. This is due to the scientific experts who participate in our scientific advisory structure.

Much appreciation and thanks are due to each member of the outgoing Scientific Committee and Sub-committees for the time and world-class expertise that they have provided the Authority with, on a voluntary basis over the past five years. They were undoubtedly a significant asset in formulating best thinking and approaches in the food safety arena, based on the most recent scientific developments. Thank you too to the new Scientific Committee members for their commitment to the FSAI and we look forward to working with them, and learning from them, in the future.

We attach high value to our collaboration

with esteemed scientists and to the

use of sound science to underpin our work.

As an organisation, we are confident that we can stand over our opinions and advice, as we know they are based on robust science.

May/June 2016 Page 3

FSAI News

Food Businesses Under Supervision: Five Year Trend Each year, official agencies are required to submit an annual report based on activities carried out under official food control. In 2015, it was reported that 49,089 food businesses were under supervision of the Health Service Executive, Environmental Health Service (HSE, EHS), the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine (DAFM), the Sea-fisheries Protection Authority (SFPA) and the Local Authorities (LAs) (Figure 1). This represents a 2% increase on the number reported in 2014 and a 4% increase on the number reported in 2013.

A consistent trend over the past five years has been the distribution of supervision between the official agencies. 91% of food businesses are under the supervision of the HSE EHS, 6% under the SFPA, 2% under DAFM and the remaining 1% under the LAs (Figure 2).

Across all agencies, service sector businesses accounted for 66% of all food businesses, with retailers at 26%. The percentage distribution

of food businesses by food chain stage has remained similar over the past five years (Figure 3).

In 2015, over 31,000 food samples were tested by official agency staff and reported to the FSAI. All details relating to these samples and their results are now stored in the National Food Safety Surveillance Database (NFSS2). NFSS2 is a reporting database that collates and standardises data from over 20 laboratories.

0

30

60

90

47,0

0048

,000

49,0

0050

,000

51,0

0052

,000

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Coun

t of E

stab

lishm

ents

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

HSE EHSL.A.SFPA DAFM Inspectorate

Agency Name

Coun

t of e

stab

lishm

ents

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Primary Producers

Manufacturers & Package

Distributors & Transporters

Service Sector

Retailers

Manufacturers Selling Primarity on a Retail Basis

Not Assigned

Food Chain Stage

Coun

t of e

stab

lishm

ents

Coun

t of e

stab

lishm

ents

010

000

2000

030

000

4000

050

000

6000

0

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

2015: Official Food Control Sampling

Fig 1: Food Businesses Under Supervision

Fig 2: Establishments Under Supervision by Agency

Fig 3: Establishments Under Supervision by Food Chain Stage

31,000 food samples were tested and reported

76% of food samples were taken routinely

70% of food samples tested were classed as being of Irish origin

11% of samples taken were survey samples

Almost 50% of samples taken were from the business category ‘manufacturers and packers’

50% of samples taken were classed as dairy products and meat and meat products

May/June 2016Page 4

FSAI News

Audit of Approved EstablishmentsThe FSAI recently completed an audit of approved establishments utilising commercial cold stores, to assess compliance with food legislation. The audit had a particular emphasis on following up non-compliances identified during the previous audit of cold stores, which the FSAI carried out at the end of 2014.

The programme consisted of seven on-site audits in approved establishments that were availing of the services of commercial cold stores to undertake additional activities on their products, e.g. to blast freeze product, collate orders, use of cold stores as dispatch depots, tempering of products, etc.

The wide variety of services now offered by commercial cold stores has meant that where traditionally processors sent their products to the cold store simply for storage, there is now a greater range and complexity of activities being undertaken by cold stores on behalf of processors. It is now also more common that the processors use the cold stores to store materials other than just finished products awaiting dispatch. While all of the processors audited were storing finished product in the cold stores, 43% were also storing raw materials, quarantined stock and rejected stock there, rather than at their own processing site.

All of the processors considered the cold stores they were using to be an approved supplier or sub-contractor. Documented agreements regarding the interactions between the processor and the cold store were in place in two of the processors audited. These documented agreements were in addition to the usual terms and conditions applied by the cold store relating to basic storage of product. The fact that only 29% of

the processors had documented agreements regarding the activities undertaken on their behalf in cold stores, confirmed what was identified during the cold stores audit. That is, that systems and communications between processors and commercial cold stores were not adequately formalised or documented regarding these activities.

Three of the seven processors audited were operating as tenants in commercial cold stores. Each processor had dedicated space rented within the cold store and the processors’ own staff worked there. During this audit at the processing establishment, the food safety management systems were assessed to ascertain whether the processor had included the activities being carried out by their staff in the cold stores. Only one of the three processors operating as a tenant in a cold store had documented the activities and controls on those activities as part of their food safety management system. The activities being undertaken in the cold stores by the other two processors’ own staff had not been adequately incorporated into their food safety management systems.

In two of the processing establishments, incorrect information was being applied to products. During the traceability checks carried out, the audit team identified incorrect dates on labels, specifically the date of tempering being recorded on the label as the

kill date and also an incorrect pack/freezing date. These incorrect dates had not been identified during supervisory checks during processing or checks on paperwork by the processor.

Only one of the seven processors audited had adequately described the procedures and controls in place in relation to returned product and in particular, the maintenance of traceability of such products. In the remaining six processors, the operational and documented controls regarding returns, re-work and tempering were not sufficiently detailed. Procedures developed by the processors relating to activities being carried out in the cold store on their behalf, did not include sufficient detail and failed to identify hazards and associated controls for the activities.

In relation to returned product, procedures and operational controls did not adequately address product which has been outside of the processor’s direct control, e.g. product sent to a customer and rejected and returned. The procedures and controls relating to returned product and the re-work and/or re-labelling of such product require strengthening.

Traceability in the processors audited was maintained through the use of production management software systems. Each food business operator was requested to carry

May/June 2016 Page 5

FSAI News

out traceability checks for products which had been observed by the audit team during the previous audit of cold stores. In five of the seven processors, the results of traceability checks on products which had been rejected by customers and returned to the processor were unsatisfactory and incomplete. In two cases, reference to the dispatch to the original customer, the subsequent rejection and return to the processor, were excluded from the traceability information initially presented. When rejected product is scanned back into stock on return from the customer, the original traceability information is expunged from the traceability module of the production management system. The information regarding the initial sale and rejection was only available at the specific request of the audit team and required assistance from the processor’s IT specialist to access the movement history of the product. The full information regarding the traceability of these products, which had been rejected by customers, was not maintained as part of the product traceability within the production management system. A complete movement history should be available as part of the maintenance of the traceability information for these products. Amendments should be made to the electronic production management systems in processors to take account of the additional information which should be maintained in relation to rejected products.

The 15 breaches of legislation identified during the programme of audits (Figure 1) highlight the need for processors to improve compliance with particular requirements of food law relevant to their business. This audit identified deficiencies in the manner in which food business operators control sub-contracted processes, such as those undertaken in cold stores on their behalf. It also identified that 66% of processors did not have adequate controls in place relating to activities being carried out by their own staff off-site.

In contrast, two examples of best practice were observed during the audits; one of the processors had integrated their production management system with their cold store’s warehouse management system. This allowed the production information, such as batch numbers, production date, ‘best-before’ date, etc. to transfer across to the warehouse management system, when the product was scanned in to the cold store. It also allowed the processor to have visibility on their production management system of product while it was in the cold store. One of the processors had conducted a full audit of the commercial cold store as part of its supplier approval procedure; this included a full audit of the cold store’s food safety management system as well as operational controls.

Recommendations to food business operators to strengthen controls

1. Processors availing of services offered by commercial cold stores as part of their business activities, should document agreements to include operational and documentary controls around the activities being undertaken on their behalf.

2. Processors leasing part of a cold store must be registered as a food business operator at that establishment.

3. Processors must ensure that they maintain a complete and accurate record of the traceability of all products.

4. Processors must put procedures in place to ensure full compliance with all the relevant requirements of food law.

5. Processors should ensure that food safety management systems cover the full range of activities relating to their business, and that such systems adequately address all relevant hazards or processes, including those relating to rejected, returned, re-worked or re-labelled products.

6. Corrective action is required where non-compliances were noted with regards to structural deficiencies and poor hygiene practices.

Figure 1: Breaches of Legislation

Food information for Consumers

Food Business A

Food Business B

Food Business C

Food Business D

Food Business E

Food Business F

Food Business G

Num

ber o

f Bre

ache

s

Registration and Approval General hygiene HACCP Traceability

Coun

t of e

stab

lishm

ents

0

1

2

3

4

May/June 2016Page 6

FSAI News

Legislation Update

Food Additives and Caseinates

Commission Regulation (EU) 2016/691 amending Annex II to Regulation (EC) No. 1333/2008 as regards the use of food additives in edible caseinates has been published in the EU Official Journal. It lays down an EU list of food additives approved for use in foods and their conditions of use. Directive (EU) 2015/2203 provides a list of food additives that may be used in edible caseinates. That Directive is a recast of previous legislation relating to certain lactoproteins (caseins and caseinates) intended for human consumption.

Directive (EU) 2015/2203 provides clarity as regards the classification of certain substances in edible caseinates which are considered food additives. This new amendment ensures that the provisions on food additives in Directive (EU) 2015/2203 are reflected in Annex II to Regulation (EC) 1333/2008.

Edible caseinates belong to dairy products. However, that group is not specified in Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008. Therefore, this amending Regulation establishes a food category titled ‘edible caseinates’ and the additives authorised in edible caseinates are included with the respective conditions of use. This new category is included in Part D of Annex II and follows after the entry for food category ‘01.8 dairy analogues, including beverage whiteners’.

Spirit Drinks: Methods of Analysis

The EU Commission has recently published Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/635 which amends the Annex to Regulation (EC) No. 2870/2000 as regards certain reference methods for the analysis of spirit drinks.

Commission Regulation (EC) No. 2870/2000 lists and describes the reference methods for the analysis of spirit drinks. However, some of the methods listed in the Annex to that Regulation are not described and included among those are the methods for

the determination of volatile acidity and total sugars in spirit drinks.

The methods for the determination of volatile acidity and total sugars in certain spirit drinks have been subjected to two international validation studies that were conducted in accordance with internationally agreed procedures and their method performance parameters have been found to be acceptable. The description of those methods is therefore included in the Annex to Regulation (EC) No. 2870/2000.

Regulation (EC) No. 110/2008 lays down requirements for some categories of spirit drinks to be aged in wood and provides that others may undergo such ageing. Analysis of the principal compounds coming from wood can be helpful when considering if a sample is consistent with the definition corresponding to the relevant category of spirit drink. The International Organisation of Vine and Wine (OIV) has recognised a method of analysis for the determination of those compounds in its Resolution OIV/OENO 382A/2009. The recognition of the method was based on data obtained from an international method-performance study on different spirit drinks carried out following internationally-agreed procedures. This method and its description is therefore added to the EU reference methods for the analysis of spirit drinks set out in the Annex to Regulation (EC) No. 2870/2000.

Dried Beans from Nigeria

On 2 June the EU Commission published Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/874 which amends Regulation (EU) 2015/943 on emergency measures suspending imports of dried beans from Nigeria.

Regulation (EC) No. 178/2002 lays down the general principles governing food in general and food safety in particular. It provides for emergency measures to be taken by the EU Commission, where there is evidence that food imported from a third country is likely to constitute a serious risk to human health.

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/943 prohibits imports of dried beans from Nigeria declared under customs code CN code 0713 39 00 due to the high number of cases of contamination with an unauthorised active substance dichlorvos at levels largely exceeding the acute reference dose tentatively established by the European Food Safety Authority. Pending the implementation by Nigeria of the appropriate risk-management measures, the prohibition set out in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/943 was to apply until 30 June 2016.

Following the introduction of the import prohibition, notifications have been issued

to the Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed in relation to dried beans originating from Nigeria declared under CN codes 0713 35 00 and 0713 90 00 due to a contamination with dichlorvos. Therefore, the scope of the existing prohibition is extended by Regulation (EU) 2016/874 to include these additional two codes.

The continued presence of dichlorvos in dried beans imported from Nigeria, and the stage of implementation by Nigeria of an action plan as regards integrated pest management and maximum residue levels of pesticides, do not allow the conclusion that compliance with food law requirements as regards pesticide residues can be achieved in the short term.

Therefore, this amending Regulation extends the duration of the importation prohibition for an additional period of three years, until 30 June 2019, in order to allow Nigeria to implement the appropriate risk-management measures and provide the required guarantees.

Eco-label Scheme for Fishery and Aquaculture Products

Article 36 of Regulation (EU) No. 1379/2013 on the common organisation of the markets in fishery and aquaculture products placed an obligation on the EU Commission to submit to the European Parliament and to the Council a feasibility report on options for an eco-label scheme for fishery and aquaculture products. On the 18 May the EU Commission published that report.

According to the United Nations’ Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), eco-labels entitle a product to bear a logo or statement certifying compliance of its production with conservation and sustainability standards.

In preparation of the report, a study was commissioned by the EU Commission which

May/June 2016 Page 7

FSAI News

analysed existing eco-labels and other forms of communicating environmental information for fishery and aquaculture products in the EU; benchmarked it with other sectors, assessed potential economic, social and environmental impacts and looked at information on the feasibility, cost-effectiveness, advantages and disadvantages of options for an EU eco-label scheme for fishery and aquaculture products.

The EU is currently the largest market for eco-labelled fishery and aquaculture products. However, the study found that market penetration of eco-labelled products varies significantly across Member States and concentrates on frozen or processed products. The main consumers of seafood products (per capita consumption) are not the main buyers of products bearing eco-labels. In countries, such as France, Italy, Portugal and Spain where consumers mainly purchase fresh products, the study found that eco-labels and certifications play a marginal role. The study stated that on the other hand, eco-labelled products have become well established in some Member States, such as Germany and the United Kingdom.

This EU report describes the context in which eco-labels have developed in the fishery and aquaculture sector. According to the report, eco-labelling in the fishery sector started in the 1990’s. While organic aquaculture is regulated in the EU since 2010, sustainable aquaculture certifications emerged in the early 2000’s and continue to grow rapidly. Eco-labelling in these two sectors is different, and tackles different sustainability aspects. While in fisheries the focus is mainly on stock conservation, in aquaculture the emphasis is mostly on potential negative externalities generated by production such as disruption of natural ecosystems or water pollution

The report highlights a number of issues linked to eco-labels. Firstly, the credibility of the claims is linked to the existence of a robust certification process.

Secondly, confusion is related to the perceived proliferation of eco-labels and to the parallel use of other communication tools, as well as to the difference in content and scope of eco-labels. Finally, costs linked to certification may be substantial for producers although sale of eco-labelled products may open up new markets.

For the purpose of the feasibility analysis, three options for action by the EU were identified in the report.

The first option – The EU report considered effective use of available tools but not introducing new legislation and found that this would prove effective in addressing the credibility of claims, but would not improve the state of confusion resulting from multiple messages, since consumer information that falls outside existing EU regulations would not be subject to control. As regards costs, use of public funds could help reduce the costs of certification for producers.

This option satisfies the criteria of added value, subsidiarity and proportionality, as it is based on already adopted legislation. On the other hand, additional funding may be necessary to strengthen control of voluntary information on food labels.

The second option – looked at setting of minimum requirements on sustainability and certification process and the report states that this would address issues such as potential confusion and credibility. It would imply extensive preparation and adoption of new legislation or a recommendation at EU level. Similar objectives could, alternatively, be reached by supporting international standards that are being developed.

The third option examined was the establishment of a self-standing EU-wide eco-label scheme for fishery and aquaculture products and the report considered that this may bring positive effects in terms of credibility of eco-labels by creating incentives and an effective public control. In terms of costs for the certification, only limited savings could be

achieved. New legislation would need to be adopted to establish such an EU-wide scheme.

However, the report states that given the differences in market penetration of eco-labelled products across Member States, and the premature stage of implementation of national schemes, action at EU level could make it difficult to detect explicit market failures and could raise questions as regards the added-value of EU action. The costs of this option are significant compared to the other two options.

The report also highlights that the Common Fisheries Policy is expected to deliver on sustainability by 2020 at the latest, and this may partially reduce the need for a public label as a driver of sustainability. Furthermore, the dual role of the EU in improving environmental sustainability through the Common Fisheries Policy and setting criteria for assessing sustainability may raise consistency issues.

The report has been forwarded to the European Parliament and the Council where its content will be discussed.

New Regulations

The following Regulations have been introduced over the last few months in Ireland: S.I. No. 160 of 2016 European Union (Radioactive Substances in Drinking Water) Regulations, 2016

S.I. No. 164 of 2016 Communities (Official Controls on the Import of Food of Non-Animal Origin) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations, 2016

S.I. No. 275 of 2016 European Communities (Official Controls on the Import of Food of Non-Animal Origin for Pesticide Residues) (Amendment) (No.2) Regulations, 2016

S.I. No. 282 of 2016 European Union (Natural Mineral Waters, Spring Waters and Other Waters in Bottles or Containers) Regulations, 2016

May/June 2016Page 8

FSAI News

The Five–Year Term of the Third FSAI Scientific Committee

Third Scientific CommitteeProf. Albert Flynn: Prof. in Nutrition, UCC Chair,

Prof. Dan Collins: Prof. Emeritus of Farm Animal Clinical Studies, UCD (RIP)

Mr Ray Parle: Principal Environmental Health Officer, HSE

Dr Colette Bonner: Deputy Chief Medical Officer (DoHC)

Ms Paula Barry-Walsh: Senior Superintending Veterinary Inspector, DAFF

Prof. Martin Cormican: Prof. in Bacteriology, NUIG and Consultant Microbiologist, HSE

Dr Paul McKeown: Consultant, Public Health Medicine, HSE

Prof. Brian McKenna: Prof. Emeritus of Food Science, UCD

Dr Michael O’Keeffe: Senior Principal Research Officer, Teagasc

Dr Iona Pratt: Retired Chief Specialist Toxicology, FSAI (RIP)

Dr Dan O’Sullivan: Head of Residues Division, DAFF

Ms Ita Saul: Paediatric Dietician, Crumlin Children’s Hospital

Dr Margaret O’Sullivan: Consultant in Public Health Medicine, HSE-South

Prof. Peter Jones: Prof. in Plant Science, UCC

Dr Geraldine Duffy: Head of Food Safety, Teagasc Ashtown

FSAI Scientific Committee Secretariat

Dr Wayne Anderson

Ms Eileen Lippert

Advice of the Third Scientific CommitteeReports:Microbiological criteria for ready-to-eat foods

Risk Management of Norovirus in Oysters

Risk Based Approach to Developing National Residue Sampling Plan

A Review of the Delivery of Official Food Controls in Ireland

Update Report on Folic Acid and the Prevention of Birth Defects in Ireland

Potential for Transmission of Antimicrobial Resistance in the Food Chain

Information for Caterers on Microbial Toxins and Marine Biotoxins

Metals of Toxicological Importance in the Irish Diet

Fact sheets:Chemical Residues and Contaminants in Foods of Animal Origin Aspartame Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) in Food Bisphenol A

Updates of previous opinions:Scientific Recommendations for a National Infant Feeding Policy, 2nd Edition

Salt and Health: Review of the Scientific Evidence and Recommendations for Public Policy in Ireland (Revision 1)

The Scientific Committee performs a vital role for the FSAI by ensuring that risk management decisions taken by the Authority are underpinned by sound scientific advice and risk assessment.

The FSAI Act charges the Scientific Committee with the responsibility of providing scientific advice to the Board in three areas:

• Scientific and technical questions relating to food safety and hygiene

• The implementation and administration of the food inspection services

• The nutritional value or content of food

The advice to the Board is communicated by the Chairperson of the Scientific Committee who must be a Board member. The Scientific Committee may also undertake other or further investigations, assessments, research or examinations into matters referred to it whilst taking into account budgetary and resource constraints. It may also initiate, on its own merit, any investigation, assessment or examination of a food safety and hygiene issue providing it first informs the Board. The Scientific Committee or the Board can also set up Sub-committees to advise them.

In 2011, the Minister for Health and Children appointed the third Scientific Committee under the FSAI Act. On 31 December 2015 that Committee came to the end of its term.

The FSAI would like to take this opportunity to recognise the contribution of all the scientists who have advised us over the past five years and we wish to thank them wholeheartedly for their dedication and professionalism.

The third Scientific Committee consisted of 15 members (listed below)

from a range of disciplines relevant to the work of the FSAI. Sadly, two valuable members passed away during the term. We remember Dr Iona Pratt and Prof. Dan Collins with great affection and their strong contribution to the work of the Scientific Committee and Sub-committees is greatly missed. We also sadly lost Prof. John Scott, a member of our Public Health Nutrition Sub-committee who passed away in 2012.

Three standing Sub-committees were created in 2011, and in 2012 an ad-hoc Sub-Committee was set up. Each Sub-committee is chaired by a member of the Scientific Committee. The Sub-committees were subject-specific, and comprised between 9 and 18 experts each. In total, the third Scientific Committee structure provided the FSAI with the advice of 63 experts, all working in a voluntary capacity. In the five years of service, there were 13 meetings of the Scientific Committee and 34 meetings of the Sub-committees. In addition there were 33 meetings of working groups attended by 26 additional invited scientists dedicated to developing a particular opinion. These figures do not account for all the work that was carried out outside of the meeting scenario. This represents an invaluable resource for the Authority and an important service to the Irish public.

Over its five-year term, the third Scientific Committee published seven reports, two updates of previous reports and four detailed fact sheets. The scientists in the Scientific Committee structure also peer reviewed work developed by scientists in the FSAI as well as providing advice on a range of diverse food safety issues.

May/June 2016 Page 9

FSAI News

The Five–Year Term of the Third FSAI Scientific Committee

Sub-committees of the Scientific CommitteeThe Sub-committees generate draft advice before the Scientific Committee amends it, where necessary, and adopts it.

Public Health Nutrition Sub-committee

Members

• Ms Ita Saul, Our Lady’s Children’s Hospital (Chair)*• Dr Anne Nugent, University College Dublin• Prof. Barbara Livingstone, University of Ulster• Dr Claire O’Brien, Nutrition Science Research Consultant• Dr Clare Corish, Dublin Institute of Technology• Dr Eileen Gibney, University College Dublin• Prof. Fionnuala McAuliffe, National Maternity Hospital• Prof. Helene McNulty, University of Ulster• Dr Hilda Griffin, St Mary’s Hospital• Prof. John Scott, Trinity College Dublin (RIP)• Dr Kate Younger, Dublin Institute of Technology• Dr Mairead Kiely, University College Cork• Prof. Malachi McKenna, St Michael’s Hospital & St Vincent’s

University Hospital• Dr Margaret O’Neill, Health Promotion Service• Dr Sinead McCarthy, Teagasc• Dr Teresa Bennett, Health Service Executive• Dr Tom Hill, Newcastle University* Denotes Scientific Committee members

Chemical Safety Sub-committee

Members

• Dr Michael O’Keeffe, Residue Specialist (Chair)*• Dr Dan O’Sullivan, Dept of Agriculture, Food and the Marine

(Deputy Chair)*• Ms Catherine Cosgrove, Health Service Executive• Dr Claire Chambers, Chambers Toxicological Consulting• Dr Colman Concannon, Environmental Protection Agency• Dr David McGrath, Retired, Teagasc• Dr Evin McGovern, Marine Institute• Mr Gerry Lohan, Dept of Agriculture, Food and the Marine• Dr Joe Silke, Marine Institute• Dr John Keegan, Health Service Executive• Dr John Moriarty, Dept of Agriculture, Food and the Marine• Dr Martin Danaher, Teagasc• Dr Padraig Burke, Health Service Executive• Dr Peadar Lawlor, Teagasc• Dr Thomasina Barron, Dept of Agriculture, Food and the Marine • Dr Iona Pratt, Retired Chief Specialist Toxicology, FSAI (RIP)** Denotes Scientific Committee members

Biological Safety Sub-committee

Members

• Prof. Martin Cormican, National University of Ireland, Galway (Chair)*

• Dr Bill Doré, Marine Institute• Ms Catherine Foye, Health Service Executive• Dr Geraldine Duffy, Teagasc*• Dr Helen O’Shea, Cork Institute of Technology• Mr John Griffin, Dept of Agriculture, Food and the Marine• Dr Kieran Jordan, Teagasc• Dr Margaret O’Sullivan, Health Service Executive*• Dr Micheal O’Mahony, Sea-Fisheries Protection Authority• Dr Montserrat Gutierrez, Dept of Agriculture, Food and the Marine• Dr Paul McKeown, Health Protection Surveillance Centre*• Dr Paul Whyte, University College Dublin• Ms Paula Barry Walsh, Dept of Agriculture, Food and the Marine*• Mr Ray Parle, Health Service Executive*• Prof. Simon Moore, University College Dublin• Dr Theo De Waal, University College Dublin• Mr Vincent Young, Health Service Executive• Prof. Dan Collins, Prof. Emeritus, University College Dublin (RIP)** Denotes Scientific Committee members

Ad-Hoc Sub-committee on Official Controls Review

Members

• Prof. Brian McKenna, former Head of Food Science, UCD (Chair)*• Dr Dara Lynott (Environmental Protection Agency)• Dr Deirdre Mullholland (Dept of Health)• Mr Micheal Jackson (Food Standards Agency, N. Ireland)• Mr Peter Ryan (RA Consulting)• Prof Patrick Gibbons (Smurfit Business School, UCD)• Mr Pat Keogh (formerly BIM)• Mr Eugene Donoghue (formerly Bord Altranais) * Denotes Scientific Committee members

May/June 2016Page 10

FSAI News

The FSAI Act charges the Scientific Committee with the responsibility of providing scientific advice to the Board on the nutritional value or content of food. Mandates of this nature were given to the Public Health Nutrition Sub-committee (PHNSC) which consisted of 17 experts in the fields of nutrition and dietetics. The advice drafted by the PHNSC can also be of interest to other State bodies with a nutrition mandate e.g safefood, the Health Service Executive as well as the Department of Health who’s role it is to develop national policy in this area. Consequently, the FSAI works in collaboration with partners to also address public health nutrition issues that are of interest to them.

A major task of the PHNSC during their term was in developing a risk assessment approach for the establishment of safe levels of vitamins and minerals in food supplements. The FSAI is responsible for oversight of the safety of food supplements placed on the Irish market. The purpose of food supplements is to supplement the normal diet. A normal balanced diet provides a certain level of vitamins and minerals and this must be taken into account in establishing safe levels of these vitamins and minerals in food supplements. A substantial document outlining draft advice was created and adopted by the PHNSC and sent to the Scientific Committee. Unfortunately, adoption was circumvented by time and hence this will be a priority item on the work plan of the fourth Scientific Committee.

The PHNSC, via a specialist working group, succeeded in providing a comprehensive report to the Scientific Committee on folic acid and the prevention of birth defects in Ireland. The mandate for this work was developed in conjunction with the Department of Health who is establishing an updated policy in this area. The report provided a detailed review of folic acid and its effect on the reduction of pregnancies affected by neural tube defects. It then went on to lay-out the strength of evidence behind differing policy options for supplementation of the diet

of women of child-bearing age. The report was adopted by the Scientific Committee in December 2015 and was presented to the Department of Health’s Expert Group on Folic Acid for further consideration in order to fully advise the Minister for Health.

FSAI Scientific and Administrative Secretariat: Prof. Mary Flynn, Dr Oonagh Lyons and Ms Eileen Lippert

Additional Working Group Scientists: Prof. David Bender, Dr Anne Molloy, Dr Bob McDonnell, Dr Cliodhna Foley Nolan, Dr Daniel McCartney, Prof. Michael Turner.

The Scientific Committee is also charged with advising the FSAI on scientific and technical questions relating to food safety. The Chemical Safety Sub-Committee (CSSC) dealt with food safety mandates in the area of chemical contaminants in food, biotoxins, food improvement agents, residues in food and food contact materials.

A major output of the CSSC was the completion of a risk-based approach to developing the national residue sampling plan. EU law requires competent national authorities to monitor residues in foods on an annual basis and report to the European Commission. This task is undertaken by the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine (DAFM) under service contract to the FSAI. Official controls require a risk basis to such activities and therefore the CSSC were able to provide a model for

The Five–Year Term of the Third FSAI Scientific Committee

Members of the Scientific Committee absent from the photo above are Mr Ray Parle (left) and Prof. Albert Flynn

Members of the third Scientific Committee. Back row (l-r): Prof. Dan Collins (RIP), Prof. Peter Jones, Dr Iona Pratt (RIP), Dr Geraldine Duffy, Ms Paula Barry-Walsh, Dr Dan O’Sullivan, Ms Ita Saul and Dr Paul McKeown. Front row (l-r): Prof. Brian McKenna, Prof. Martin Cormican, Dr Colette Bonner, Dr Margaret O’Sullivan and Dr Michael O’Keeffe

May/June 2016 Page 11

FSAI News

The Five–Year Term of the Third FSAI Scientific Committee

establishing a risk basis for the national residue monitoring programme. The FSAI is working with DAFM, through the service contract process, to implement this approach in practice.

The CSSC also completed a major report on biotoxins which is due for publication later this year. It was a review of current and novel biotoxins of relevance to Irish seafood. It examined the human health implications of these biotoxins given the current regulatory controls and made recommendations for further work and regulatory review. This should ensure that the FSAI and the Sea-Fisheries Protection Authority (SFPA) have the most up-to-date information on threats posed to public health by these marine toxins.

Another major report was a review of metals of toxicological importance in the Irish diet. This sought to evaluate the dietary exposure of the Irish population to metals such as lead and cadmium. It accounted for anthropogenic and non-anthropogenic sources of contamination in an Irish context. This report was published earlier this year and is an important resource for official agencies and the food industry when addressing the risk of heavy metals in the Irish diet.

Finally, the CSSC also completed a series of chemical safety fact sheets on various chemical hazards to enable food businesses to identify and address these hazards as part of their legal obligation to implement a food safety management system based on the principles of HACCP.

FSAI Scientific and Administrative Secretariat: Dr Rhodri Evans (to July 2014), Dr Christina Tlustos (from July 2014) and Ms Eileen Lippert

Additional Working Group Scientists: Dr Margaret O’Leary, Dr Denise Glynn

The Biological Safety Sub-committee (BSSC) dealt with Scientific Committee mandates on the topics of food hygiene, bacteria, viruses and parasites. In this regard they made a considerable contribution to the risk basis of official controls.

Following a question to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) in 2010 regarding threshold limits for gene-copies of norovirus in oysters determined by PCR, Member States were advised that a scientific threshold could not be set. However, EFSA noted that gene-copy numbers was not equivalent to the number of infectious virus particles in oysters and a pragmatic risk management approach was required. The BSSC developed such an approach to provide a basis for the reopening of shellfish beds after they had been closed due to a suspected norovirus outbreak. To date, Ireland is the only EU Member State that has adopted such an approach, although a harmonised view is being discussed at EU level.

The BSSC also reviewed and updated its guideline microbiological criteria for ready-to-eat foods. This was incorporated into the revision of Guidance Note No. 3 on interpretation of microbiological criteria which is used by food businesses and official laboratories for determining the microbiological status of foods.

Antimicrobial resistant bacteria are a major threat to public health and are recognised as such in the 2015 national overview of strategic risks. A joint Department of Health and Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine’s National Interdepartmental Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) Consultative Committee was created in 2015 to coordinate efforts to tackle this threat with a ‘One-Health’ approach. The BSSC undertook a complete review of AMR in the Irish context for the Scientific Committee; its routes of transmission and international approaches to addressing the issue. They made recommendations for control of AMR in Ireland that were submitted to the Interdepartmental Committee in the context of the national coordinated response. This report was a major contribution to national efforts to avert this potential public health crisis.

FSAI Scientific and Administrative Secretariat: Dr Lisa O’Connor and Ms Eileen Lippert

The FSAI Act charges the Scientific Committee with providing advice to the FSAI Board on the implementation and administration of the food inspection services. This type of mandate is not within the terms of reference of the three standing Sub-committees, therefore, from time-to-time the Scientific Committee creates an ad-hoc Sub-committee of relevant experts to draft opinions of this nature. During the term of the third Scientific Committee, only one such group was created, and this was to draft a review of the official controls system in Ireland. This was a major undertaking and included an evidence-gathering phase conducted under contract by a consultant firm. The final report made recommendations for measurable, performance-based oversight of official controls by the FSAI. This will be published later in 2016 on completion of discussions with Official Agencies around the recommendations.

FSAI Scientific and Administrative Secretariat: Mr Peter Whelan, Ms Eibhlin O’Leary and Ms Eileen Lippert

Additional Working Group Scientists: Mr Andrew Guthrie, Mr Andrew O’Connor, Ms Ann Louise Grant, Ms Bernadette Hickey, Dr Blaithin Maunsell, Mr Dan Crowley, Ms Geraldine Feehan, Dr Gerard Barry, Mr Kilian Unger, Mr Paddy Lynch, Ms Rita Gately, Mr Stephen Murphy, Dr Susanne Boyd, Mr Vincent Young, Mr Gabriel Beechinor, Ms Caroline Garvan, Ms Hazel Sheridan, Dr Nola Leonard

Dr Pamela Byrne, CEO of the FSAI, with Prof. Martin Cormican, National University of Ireland, Galway (Chair of the Biological Sub-committee of the Scientific Committee) and Dr Lisa O’Connor, Chief Specialist Food Science, FSAI at the launch of the report on Antimicrobial Resistance.

May/June 2016Page 12

FSAI News

? FAQ Many people contact our advice-line each month to ask questions on a variety of food safety issues. Some questions get asked time and time again – so in each issue of FSAINEWS, we feature a Frequently Asked Question. This issue’s question is:

What are the Rules for Nutrition Labelling? Nutrition labelling will become mandatory for almost all prepacked foods from 13 December 2016 under Regulation (EU) No. 1169/2011 on the provision of food information to consumers. There are some exemptions from this requirement which are listed in Annex V and Article 16 of the legislation.

What must appear in the nutrition declaration?

Information on the following must be declared per 100g/ml of the final product: Energy (kJ/kcal), Fat (g), Saturates (g), Carbohydrates (g), Sugars (g), Protein (g) and Salt (g).

How must the information be presented?

Nutrition information must be presented in a tabular format with the numbers aligned. Where the space on the packaging does not allow for this, the declaration may appear in linear format. If you are considering using a linear format bear in mind that any voluntary information, for example marketing information, must not be displayed to the detriment of space available for mandatory food information. So, you cannot use a linear format in order to fit more marketing information on the label.

All elements of the nutrition declaration must be presented together in a clear format and, where appropriate, in the order shown in Table 1.

Table 1: Mandatory Nutrients

Typical Values Per 100g/ml

Energy kJ/kcal

Fat g

of which saturates g

Carbohydrates g

of which sugars g

Protein g

Salt g

Does the nutrition information have to be given per 100g/ml only?

No, in addition to the amounts given per 100g/ml, other information can be provided voluntarily:

• information can be given per portion or consumption unit provided the size and number of portions/consumption units are given. The portion or unit used must be indicated in close proximity to the nutrition declaration (see Table 2)

• the percentage Reference Intake (RI) value provided by the nutrients per 100g/ml of the product, and/or per portion/consumption unit, can also be given. RI values are listed in Annex XIII of the legislation (see Table 3)

If %RIs are given then the following statement must also be displayed in close proximity - ‘reference intake of an average adult (8400kJ/2000kcal)’

Table 2: Portion information given in addition to information per 100g

Typical Values Per100g Per portion* (2 biscuits)

Energy 2065kJ/ 495kcal

604kJ/ 160kcal

Fat of which saturates

22.3g 10.0g

20.0g 5.8g

Carbohydrates of which sugars

64.6g 18.8g

20.0g 5.8g

Protein 6.7g 2.0g

Salt 1.0g 0.4g *This pack contains 10 portions

Table 3: %RI values per 100g given along with the mandatory statement

Typical Values Per100g %RI per 100g

Energy 823kJ/ 195kcal

10%

Fat of which saturates

2.6g 0.3g

4% 2%

Carbohydrates of which sugars

37.5g 1.6g

14% 2%

Protein 4.5g 9%

Salt 0.54g 9% Reference intake of an average adult (8400kJ/2000kcal)

Can any other nutrients be added to the nutrition declaration?

Yes, you may also include one or more of the following: monounsaturates, polyunsaturates, polyols, starch and fibre. Just remember, if you’ve made a claim about one of these nutrients then you must include it in the declaration.

Information can also be given on vitamins or minerals, as listed in Annex XIII of the legislation, provided they are present in significant amounts as set out in this Annex. The %RI for vitamins and minerals must be given in addition to the amount. These are also set out in Annex XIII.

Nutrients other than those listed above cannot appear in the nutrition declaration as it is considered a closed list. If a claim is made about a nutrient other than these e.g. Omega-3, then the amount of that nutrient must be displayed near to, but not within, the nutrition declaration.

May/June 2016 Page 13

FSAI News

Table 4 is an example of how the nutrition declaration might appear where supplementary information is given. The supplementary nutrients are indicated in red. Remember, you can add one or more of these; you don’t have to include all of them.

Table 4: Mandatory nutrients with supplementary nutrient information

Typical Values Amount per 100g/100ml

Energy kJ/kcal

Fat g

of which

- saturates g

- monounsaturates g

- polyunsaturates g

Carbohydrates g

of which

- sugars g

- polyols g

- starch g

Fibre g

Protein g

Salt g

Vitamins/Minerals units + %RI

How are nutrient values calculated?

The legislation allows for various methods of calculating the nutrient values. It states that the declared values in the nutrition table are average values and must be based on:

• the manufacturer’s analysis of the food• a calculation from the known or actual

average values of the ingredients used; or

• a calculation from generally established and accepted data

So, determining the nutrient values does not necessarily require laboratory analysis and it may be possible for a food business operator to calculate the values themselves depending on the type of product. This could be done, for example, using nutrition information from suppliers, nutrition information on the label of the ingredients or using food composition tables, such as McCance and Widdowson (these tables are available at http://bit.ly/1BsrzBc).

As mentioned, the nutrient values are average values to take into account the natural variation in foodstuffs due to, for example, seasonality or supplier differences. However, there is EU guidance on the permitted tolerances for nutrient values which should be consulted. You can find a link to this on our website at http://bit.ly/1P5vSL0.

The nutrient values must be for the food as sold. However, where appropriate, for example with a dried soup mix, the information may relate to the food after preparation, provided that sufficiently detailed preparation instructions are given and the information relates to the food as prepared for consumption.

Can information on nutrient content be given on the front of the pack?

Yes, information can voluntarily be repeated on the front of the pack. This is not a mandatory requirement. However, if a food business chooses to put information on the front of pack only the following can be provided:

1. Energy per 100g/ml, or

2. Energy + Fat, Saturates, Sugars and Salt

This repeated information may be provided:

• Per 100g/ml only• Per 100g/ml and per portion or• On a per portion basis only

When providing this ‘Front of Pack’ information, Energy must always be indicated per 100g/ml as a minimum.

Further Information

You can access more detailed information, guidance documents and the legislation on our website http://bit.ly/1OIrO8E.

May/June 2016Page 14

FSAI News

Small Food Business Start-Up Seminar All food businesses, big or small, whether operating from a business premises, in the home or from a mobile unit or food stall, must be aware of the legislation regarding food hygiene and food safety. Ultimately, food businesses are responsible for ensuring the food they produce is safe.

In order to share information and advice with small food business operators and those considering setting up a small food business, the FSAI held a Small Food Business Start-up Seminar in Galway in May. This provided a one-stop shop for anyone thinking about starting a small food business and/or who has recently gone into business in the food sector.

At the event experts from the FSAI outlined the various information resources available from the

FSAI - food safety training requirements, how to set up a food safety management system, labelling regulations and what to do in the case of a product recall. Peter Gaffey from the Environmental Health Service detailed how to register a food business and what to expect from an inspection. Eddie O’Neill, a new product development expert from Teagasc, outlined what is involved in developing a new food product and small food business owners outlined their recent experience in setting up a food business.

There were a number of Q&A sessions with the experts and the Health Service Executive, Teagasc and Supporting SME’s had information stands to provide information and advice on start-up supports, food safety inspection and product development.

FSAI & HSE PEHOs Annual SeminarThe FSAI hosted the annual FSAI and HSE Principal Environmental Health Officers (PEHOs) seminar in Dublin on 24 May last. The seminar was attended by over 40 people and discussed issues relevant to the FSAI-HSE service contract. Presenters at the seminar included FSAI CEO, Dr Pamela Byrne on the new FSAI strategy; Ted Massey, Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine and Elaine Connolly, FSAI on the EU coordinated control plan and honey authenticity issues; Dr Declan Bolton, Teagasc on HACCP; Prof. Colin Scott, UCD on regulatory compliance and enforcement; Dr. Lisa O’Connor, FSAI on the FSAI Industry Fora; Dorothy Guina-Dornan, FSAI, on foods for special groups; Anne-Marie Boland, FSAI on food information to consumers and Ruth Conefrey, FSAI on audits on cold stores.

The annual seminar is an important opportunity to bring together the managers within the HSE Environmental Health Service and the FSAI to discuss issues of importance for food law enforcement and as an opportunity for networking and relationship building.

Event Round-up

Meeting with Chinese Restaurants Association The FSAI recently met with the Chinese Restaurants Association. The Association was established in Feb 2016 and is open to owners of most Asian restaurants e.g. Chinese,

Japanese, Korean, Thai, Malaysian (it does not represent Indian restaurants). The objectives of the Association include providing training for members and promotion of the Chinese food

culture. The FSAI has many resources available to food businesses to aid compliance and the Association will inform its members of the availability of these resources.

Cliona O’Reilly, Training and Compliance Manager, FSAI; Carol Heavey, Training Executive, FSAI; Dorothy Guina-Dornan, Chief Specialist, Environmental Health, FSAI; Edel Smyth, Information Manager, FSAI; Gail Carroll, Contracts Manager, FSAI and Dr Lisa O’Connor, Chief Specialist, Biological Safety, FSAI, are pictured here with members of the Chinese Restaurants Association.

Anne-Marie Boland, Senior Technical Executive, FSAI offered advice to an attendee at the FSAI’s Small Food Business Start-Up Seminar.

Shane Keane, Principal EHO, HSE Western Region, is pictured here with Rita Gately, County Veterinary Officer, Galway County Council.

Caption

Speakers from the FSAI-HSE PEHO Seminar are (l-r): Anne-Marie Boland, Senior Technical Executive, FSAI; Dr Pamela Byrne, CEO, FSAI; Gail Carroll, Contracts Manager, FSAI; Ted Massey, Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine; Dr Declan Bolton, Teagasc Food Research Centre; Elaine Connolly, Contracts Executive, FSAI and Dr Lisa O’Connor, Chief Specialist, Biological Safety, FSAI.

May/June 2016 Page 15

FSAI News

SFPA Breakfast Event The Sea-Fisheries Protection Authority (SFPA) hosted a Breakfast Information Event in Dublin on 18 May. The event was organised as an information opportunity for the seafood industry. Experts from the SFPA and stakeholders, such as the FSAI and the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, provided advice to fishermen, shellfish producers and seafood processors on the day.

World Congress of Food Science and TechnologyThe Institute of Food Science and Technology of Ireland will host the 18th IUFoST-World Congress of Food Science and Technology 2016, from 21-25 August in Dublin. The congress theme is “Greening the Global Food Supply Chain through Innovation in Food Science and Technology”.

The World Congress of Food Science and Technology is expected to attract over 1,800 delegates (including food scientists, engineers, food industry professionals, thought leaders, decision makers, regulatory authorities and students) from around the world, with a significant presence from Europe, the Americas and Asia. It presents an important opportunity to engage with international companies and world class scientists (and their institutions), to discuss, showcase and initiate collaborations in food science, food technology, food innovation and indeed food business.

More details are available at: www.iufost2016.com.

Upcoming Events

Subscribe to our Events For further information on upcoming events, see our website at: www.fsai.ie/events. You can subscribe to our email alerts to receive further details when they are available.

Breakfast Bites Our most recent Breakfast Bite events were as follows:

Labelling for Small Food Producers - What You Need to Know.

Small food producers selling prepacked foods are required to provide certain labelling information on products. This session advised small food producers of their labelling requirements and covered all of the information that by law, must be declared on the label, regardless of the size of the food business.

Gluten Free Labelling - What to Consider When Marketing Gluten Free Foods

In this Breakfast Bite session, Clodagh Crehan, Information Executive, provided essential information to food producers on the legal requirements associated with foods that are permitted to carry a gluten free or very low gluten label. Providing consumers with accurate information about gluten content carries with it significant safety implications and so it is essential that food businesses get it right.

Maria Meghan, Technical Executive, FSAI with Aileen O’Sullivan, Sea Fisheries Protection Officer at the SFPA and Clodagh Crehan, Information Executive, FSAI at the SFPA breakfast event.

Liz Maurice, ALT and Colm O’Bric, Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine attended the FSAI’s ‘Breakfast Bites’ on labelling for small food producers.

Attending the FSAI’s labelling for small food producers ‘Breakfast Bites’ event were Rodolpho Leonardo, Lough Eske Castle and Jamie Peaker, The Sauce Company.

Food Safety Training Skills Workshop The FSAI’s Food Safety Training Skills Workshop took place in Dublin on the 19 & 20 April. The two-day workshop was designed to provide participants with the skills to deliver induction training in their workplace using the FSAI’s three-hour induction training programme ‘Food Safety and You’.

Check out our website for more information on FSAI’s Food Safety Training Skills Workshop - www.fsai.ie

May/June 2016Page 16

FSAI News

Recent PublicationsThe following publications have recently been produced by the FSAI and are available on our website:

• Update Report on Folic Acid and the Prevention of Birth Defects in Ireland

• Targeted Audit of Approved Establishments

• Metals of Toxicological Importance in the Irish Diet

• Salt and Health: Review of the Scientific Evidence and Recommendations for Public Policy in Ireland (Revision 1)

Editor: Edel Smyth

Contributors:

Wayne Anderson

Anne Marie Boland

Ruth Conefrey

Helen Crowley

Carol Heavey

Emma Reinhardt

Olive Ryan

Martina Stack

Abbey Court Lower Abbey Street Dublin 1 DO1 W2H4

Tel: (01) 8171300

E-mail: newsletter@fsai.ieWebsite: www.fsai.ie

facebook.com/FSAI

twitter.com/FSAIinfo

Please subscribe to our mailing list, or update your details, by contacting us at newsletter@fsai.ie.

You can also subscribe to the electronic version of our newsletter online at www.fsai.ie.

‘Permission is granted to reproduce information contained herein with appropriate credit’. © 2016

All our publications, most of which are available free of charge, can be downloaded from our website and may also be ordered in hard copy See www.fsai.ie/publications.

Order Online

Products) Regulations, 2000 and; Regulation (EU) No. 1169/2011 on the provision of food information to consumers. The breaches included falsely declaring Irish origin for beef imported from Poland, Lithuania or Germany; the application of false Irish slaughter and cutting plant codes used on packaging labels and; having an inadequate beef traceability plan.

The company was fined a total of €16,000, with €10,000 as an agreed contribution to costs.

The court ruling reinforces that breaches of food law which are in place to protect consumers’ health and interests will not be tolerated. Food businesses are obliged by law to ensure that the information they provide to their customers is accurate. Customers must have confidence in

their food suppliers and should seek to assure themselves that the food they are purchasing is authentic and that the integrity of the supply chain has not been compromised. Food businesses should ensure that they have robust traceability systems and that they carry out their own audits of their suppliers to check that they have the appropriate food safety systems in place and are complying with the law.

Court Ruling Against Keelaghan Wholesale Meats A court case was recently brought by the FSAI against Keelaghan Wholesale Meats Ltd. following an investigation undertaken by the FSAI in conjunction with Meath County Council.

Keelaghan Wholesale Meats Ltd. was found guilty of six charges relating to breaches of food safety legislation. The breaches of legislation were under Regulation (EC) No. 178/2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law; Regulation (EU) No. 931/2011 on traceability requirements; European Communities (Labelling of Beef and Beef

Well done to all our staff members who participated in the Dublin Staff Relay event on 19 May in the Pheonix Park. It was great fun and an excellent team building experience.

FSAI at Dublin Staff Relay Event