SCOTTISH consumers have been cautioned over the potential for “major” impacts on food safety and standards if legislation on retained EU law is progressed in its current form.
Food Standards Scotland (FSS) issued the warning after Thursday’s publication of the Retained EU Law (Reform and Revocation) Bill in the House of Commons.
The bill, announced in January, was introduced to assist in the easier amendment, replacement, and repeal of retained EU law.
But it would also result in the removal of consumer protections relating to food which have existed in Scotland and the rest of the UK for “many years”, the FSS said.
Currently, retained EU law requires businesses to provide clear information on their food, as well as labels for allergens.
The use of decontaminants on meat, such as chlorine washes on chicken, is restricted, and there are maximum permitted levels of chemical contaminants in food set.
The law also requires businesses to maintain minimum levels of hygiene, including the recalling of food deemed unsafe.
READ MORE: Gordon Brown's devolution review leaks – here's what independence supporters made of it
The FSS is now calling for action to be taken before December 31, 2023, when the safeguards are to disappear.
Heather Kelman, FSS chair, said: “At the heart of what we do is our responsibility to protect Scottish consumers.
“This bill, as it currently stands, poses a significant risk to Scotland’s ability to uphold the high safety and food standards which the public expects and deserves.
“Much of the legislation which could be repealed as a result of the sun-setting clause has been developed over the course of decades and with significant UK input and influence.
“It exists to ensure consumer safety through the protection of the most vulnerable and ensuring the food and feed which is on the market is safe.
READ MORE: The key points from Kwasi Kwarteng's mini-budget announcement
“This bill could lead to a significant hole where consumer protections sit. The purpose of regulators and regulations, especially in relation to food, is to protect consumers.
“This bill confuses red tape with consumer protection and indicates that the latter is now less of a priority and of less importance than when we were in the EU.
“Whichever way consumers voted on Brexit, they did not vote for a race to the bottom of lower standards and a de-regulated landscape that reduces consumer protection.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here