Food Safety in the Hospitality Industry

Tim Knowles

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2012
• Print ISBN:
  9780750653497
  9781138153127
• Edition: 1
• eBook ISBN:
  9781136402623
• Topic: Technology & Engineering
• Subtopic: Hospitality, Travel & Tourism Industry
• Index: Technology & Engineering

Food Safety in the Hospitality Industry is a user-friendly guide to current food safety and hygiene legislation and is vital reading for all those involved in food handling and preparation. Using frequent practical examples, the text outlines and explains what you need to know about the following areas: · The key legislation and legal background in easy-to-follow terms - includes a comparison of the UK and European Union. · Safe food handling in practice - an easy reference source for all areas of a catering operation, including food service and labelling, storage and temperature controls and health and safety. · The application of food safety policies in business - practical guidance on food hazard analysis, including planning, implementation, control and measurement. Ideal reading for the core food safety component of hospitality management and catering degrees, the text is also a useful reference for industry practitioners who need to be up to speed on the legal requirements and best practice for maintaining safety and hygiene in the workplace.

PART 1…Food Legislation, Consumers and the Hospitality Sector

CHAPTER 1…European foodstuffs law and the consumer

DOI: 10.4324/9780080494951-2

Background

On 1 January 1993, the Single European Internal Market was established within the European Union (EU). The focus of this and the following chapter is on how the literature views common foodstuffs law within the EU's internal market, the enforcement practices within individual member states and the implications the internal market has had, or will have, for both the consumer and the hospitality firm (Fallows 1988, 1991; Friedhof, 1991).

In the ensuing discussion the five following key areas are considered:

1. Current legal environment and enforcement in the EU and individual countries.
2. Food safety in the foodstuffs industry.
3. Supply/distribution.
4. Effects on the hospitality industry.
5. Opinions of the consumer.

It is the last point on this list that is the initial focus of attention in this chapter. In identifying the general adopted framework, the specific objectives of this and the following chapter are:

• to investigate the role of the EU foodstuffs law;
• to consider the different food law and enforcement practices in the EU;
• to analyse the law's influence on the foodstuffs industry and supply within the internal market;
• to focus particularly on the law's influence within the hospitality industry;
• to identify relevant aspects that affect the consumer; and
• to identify the extent to which the law fulfils its function towards the consumer.

Harmonization

While both the EU and the Single European Act (SEA) have already been mentioned, the practical basis of the SEA was that move to harmonize EU standards and practices, because during the 1960s and 1970s the community had come up against the obstacle of national protectionism, and there was a need for mutual recognition of each other's standards. This situation culminated in the famous Cassis de Dijon ruling after a celebrated case in the European Court of Justice in 1979.

The case arose when a German firm found that it was prevented from importing Cassis de Dijon because it allegedly did not conform to German standards for liqueurs. The court ruled that the Germans could only prevent importation if they could prove that the liquid was harmful to health or contravened tax or consumer protection laws – which it did not. In Cassis de Dijon, the Court of Justice took a very pragmatic approach to EU food law and the free movement of goods in general. In essence, the court held that member states should recognize that other member states had already regulated health and safety for food products sold in their markets. Importing member states should not therefore have used differing health and safety standards to prohibit the free movement of those goods into their territories.

The Community legislature reacted to the Cassis doctrine by adopting a horizontal, rather than a vertical, approach to food law. The legislature reasoned that, with mutual recognition, there was no need for common recipe standards for each product. Rather, it was necessary to set common health and safety standards so that member states and consumers would be confident in mutual recognition. Since then, many exceptions to the Cassis principle have been litigated, and the EU Commission has provided its interpretation of some of these cases, including the issue of goods produced and marketed in the same country (Lister, 1992; O'Connor, 1993). Within this Cassis principle, it was recognized, therefore, that some supranational way was required in which to achieve harmonization of standards. Hence the need for the SEA (O'Connor, 1993).

Another matter worthy of comment here is qualified majority voting. Each member state is given a number of votes, approximately consonant with its size and importance in the EU. The question of this voting system regarding internal market issues is sensitive as it strikes at the heart of a member state's national veto. However, it only takes two or three of the larger countries in the EU to muster enough votes in order to block a decision.

Another factor within the SEA is what is known as the democratic deficit vis à vis the European Parliament's influence on the EU Commission. This situation existed to a great extent prior to the SEA, but was reduced in 1987, a process which has continued to some extent with the ratified Maastricht Treaty.

The entry into force of the Maastricht Treaty on 1 November 1993 increased the powers of the European Parliament in a way that will have important implications for key pieces of food legislation (Agra Europe, 1993; Jackson, 1990), all of which are part of the progress towards a Single European Market (Saunders, 1991).

An extension of EU food law can be seen within the European Economic Area (EEA), which brings together the member states of the EU and three from the European Free Trade Association (EFTA). The EEA is an improved free trade area, rather than a customs union. Whereas the EU member states have transferred sovereign powers to the EU, they and the EFTA countries have not yielded those rights to the EEA. Thus, the mechanisms by which the EFTA countries adopt EEA laws differ from those of the EU institutions, and only certain areas of existing EU laws and principles have been adopted (Inglis and Amaducci, 1994). The bulk of existing EU legislation on food is extended by the EEA agreement to cover the EFTA states. This legislation includes not only specific food legislation, but also certain measures concerning consumer protection. The EU keeps its decision-making processes intact and includes the EFTA states only in measures that have an EEA relevance. The EFTA states play a role which is far weaker than their EU counterparts, in that they may only express their own views. Indeed, they cannot actually influence the decisions of EU members regarding the adoption of legislation applicable in the EU, but may only prevent their application by means of suspension of that legislation in the EFTA states. Where they suspend a measure from application in the EEA, the dispute must be subject to arbitration.

With the proposed accession of EFTA member states to the EU (with the exception of Iceland), the disparities in the representation of the EFTA states in the legislative process should be resolved. Nevertheless, the practicalities of juggling national opt-outs, likely to be attached at their entry, as there have been in the Maastricht Treaty, provide the EEA states with a considerable challenge if an enlarged EU is to be workable (Roberts, 1991, 1992).

The need for foodstuffs law

The comments so far serve as a background for discussing the need for foodstuffs law. Such a requirement is best understood by viewing its historical development, closely linked to the evolution of consumer habits and practices.

When looking at the consumer habits of primitive (hunter– gatherer) societies, a direct link between the foodstuffs supplier and the consumers can be observed. Within these specializations (supplier and consumer), a further development within the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries was that one group concentrated on arable or pastoral farming in order to exchange the food products with the intermediate supplier/distributor, and finally to the consumer (Freidhof, 1991). It is in this respect that the separation widened between the producer and the consumer, a trend that continues today.

Over time, a market developed that was characterized by the different interests of consumers and suppliers, one that can be set within the context of a price–value relationship. The interest of the suppliers, i.e. high price per provided unit of value, stands in contrast to the consumer's interest, i.e. low price per unit of value. This conflict of interest, it is suggested, could disadvantage consumers, since the price–value relationship may be influenced by suppliers to their benefit. The price for a food product can easily be seen by the consumer; the value unit cannot. Thus, the producer can vary the value per unit without the consumer's knowledge. It is precisely this conflict that resulted in a demand for foodstuffs legislation.

The historical development of food legislation is discussed in greater depth in the following chapters but, by way of illustration, it is useful at this point to consider such issues within a UK context.

Before the latter part of the nineteenth century, there was little national legislation to control the adulteration of food. It was not until 1860 that the Adulteration of Food and Drink Act was passed by the UK Parliament, legislation that was concerned with weight and quantity measures. The Act made it illegal to sell food that was not of the nature, substance or quality demanded by the consumer (Roberts, 1993a, 1993b), as for instance, the problem of dilution could arise, e.g. the addition of water to wine (Jukes, 1991). In the latter case, the transparency of the price–value relationship would be revealed, by determining the quality and quantity of the value unit, with the objective of such an approach being to guarantee the consumer standardization and consistency. Statutory control originally focused on bread and other basic products, i.e., consumer protection (Act, 1860; Act, 1872; Act, 1938). During the twentieth century, further refinements have seen food law initiatives considered under the subheadings of either Food Safety or Consumer Protection. This distinction focuses on two elements, namely: the protection of the health of the consumer and the prevention of fraud. It was only with the Food and Drugs Act 1938 that these twin themes were consolidated, and then further developed after the Second World War (Act, 1955; Act, 1956; Act, 1984). Such an approach has continued today in the UK with the Food Safety Act 1990 (Act, 1990a; see also MAFF, 1976).

The argument so far has been that, in the Middle Ages, a foodstuff was relatively easy to identify, and hence its quality easy to estimate, since it was usually in its original form (Jukes, 1991). In the twentieth century, food processing of agricultural raw products has created new problems. Given that the products undergo a variety of technical changes before they finally reach the consumer, the real composition of the value unit cannot be clearly identified. It is within this resulting uncertainty that the buyer can be misled by the producer. Consequently, such a source of uncertainty has to be eliminated by the legislative authorities.

These changes of processing methods in agriculture represent a further risk for consumers. Since they must not be neglected, legislation becomes necessary.

Taking into account all these reasons, foodstuffs law has been built up over a time, on a country by country basis, and is of interest to producer, retailer and consumer. Such legislation imposes duties that can be summarized under the four following aspects, namely:

1. Protection of consumer health.
2. Protection from deception and fraud.
3. Producer protection.
4. Integrity of trade.

The central focus of foodstuffs law is to guarantee the health of the consumer. Additionally, however, a very important function has been the standardization and definition of foodstuffs, their production, distribution and sale – particularly at the European level. Only products that comply with these requirements should enter the market and, in so doing, a level playing field is established. This situation ensures a transparency of the price– value relationship for all the products on the market (particularly important with the Single Market), and protects the consumer from deception and fraud. At the same time, foodstuffs law provid...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Half Title Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• Preface
• Part One Food Legislation, Consumers and the Hospitality Sector
• Part Two The Practical Application of Food Safety
• Part Three Food Hazard Analysis and Due Diligence
• References
• Appendix 1 Useful Internet addresses
• Index