Transparency data

Business Committee Meeting Minutes – 16 March 2026

Published 25 June 2026

Applies to England, Northern Ireland and Wales

64 Victoria Street, London.

Present

Timothy Riley, Chair; Susan Jebb; Alison Austin; Fiona Gately; Rhian Hayward; Louise Hoste; Steve Ruddy

Officials Attending

Katie Pettifer −   Chief Executive
Nathan Barnhouse −   Deputy Director Head of Regulatory Compliance (For FSA BC 26/03/06)
Laura Blair −   Deputy Director International, Trade and Devolution
Beth Chaudhary −   Director of Strategy and Regulatory Compliance
Steve Churchyard −   Deputy Director of Finance, Planning and Commercial (For FSA BC 26/03/05)
Rachel Cooper −   Director of Strategy and Regulatory Compliance
Sam Faulkner −   Deputy Director International, Trade and Devolution
Claire Forbes −   Director of Communications
Ian Gibson −   Director of Corporate Services
David Holmes −   Deputy Director of Strategy (For FSA BC 26/03/07)
Junior Johnson −   Director of Operations
Nathan Philippo −   Head of Delivery Assurance (for FSA BC 25/12/05)
Julie Pierce −   Director of Information and Science
James Robinson −   General Counsel
Rebecca Sudworth −   Director of Policy
Michael Todd −   Head of Planning and Performance (for FSA BC 26/03/04)
Tom Vincent −   Deputy Director of Sandbox and Innovation (For FSA BC 26/03/08)
Ian Young −   Chief Scientific Adviser

1  Introduction, Declarations of Interest, Minutes of the Previous Meeting, and Actions Arising

1.1      The Business Committee Chair opened the meeting and welcomed attendees to the March 2026 Business Committee meeting. He welcomed Fiona, attending her first meeting as a Committee Member, and confirmed that Professor Ian Young, the FSA’s new Chief Scientific Adviser, was attending the meeting on his first day in post.

1.2      No apologies were received from Committee Members.

1.3      The Business Committee Chair invited declarations of interest.  No declarations were made, and Members confirmed they were content to proceed.

2  Minutes of the last meeting (FSA BC 26/03/01)

2.1      The Committee reviewed the minutes of the September 2025 Business Committee meeting.  The Business Committee confirmed that the minutes were an accurate record, and they were approved without amendment.

3  Actions Arising (FSA BC 26/03/02)

3.1      The Business Committee Chair then reviewed the table of actions arising.  Actions 1 to 4 were reported as complete.  Remaining open actions from previous meetings continued to progress.  The Business Committee noted that some matters would be addressed later in the meeting under the relevant agenda items.  No further issues were raised.

4  Chief Executive’s Report to the Business Committee (FSA BC 26/03/03)

4.1      The CE introduced her report and highlighted several issues for the Committee’s attention.  She began with an update on the infant formula contamination incident, which, although now de‑escalated, had been significant in scale.  There had been a series key learning points arising from the incident, particularly regarding supply‑chain resilience.  These insights had been shared with Defra and DHSC as part of wider discussions on resilience planning.

4.2      The Business Committee welcomed the CE’s update and noted the critical importance of communication in managing public confidence.  It recognised the challenges associated with messaging for infant formula incidents, given the sensitivity of the product category. The Committee noted that UKHSA had not identified an unusual increase in infant sickness reports, consistent with the assessed low risk. 

4.3      The CE also updated the Committee on recent operational successes by the National Food Crime Unit (NFCU), including the seizure of over 67,000 bottles of counterfeit and misrepresented wine and prosecco, valued at approximately £500,000.  The Business Committee welcomed the strong operational performance and the strengthened cooperation with Italian authorities following the updated memorandum of understanding.

4.4      The CE concluded with comments on the FSA’s financial position.  The organisation’s projected underspend had increased due to the need to maintain provision for a potential VAT liability relating to legacy digital‑services accounting treatments.  She added that the People and Finance teams continued to collaborate closely on issues linked to the civil service pension administration transition.  The Business Committee Chair thanked the CE for her update.

5  Performance Report Q3 2025–26 (FSA BC 26/03/04)

5.1      Ian Gibson introduced the Q3 Performance Report.  This focussed on priority themes requiring Committee oversight.  These included incident management, market authorisations, and communications and reputation.

Operational Delivery

5.2      Junior Johnson began by reporting on raw drinking milk.  Inspection frequency had improved from 92% to 96% but remained marginally below the tolerance thresholds set by the FSA.  He noted that the increase in required inspections followed changes to the risk‑classification system and confirmed that full recovery was expected by Q4.

5.3      Junior explained that a small number of farms accounted for the recent sample failures, including one with multiple failures across separate periods.  These farms represented a small proportion of overall producers.  The Business Committee Chair queried whether these patterns indicated a systemic weaknesses.  Junior confirmed that enforcement actions were in progress and that no farm is permitted to resume sales until compliance was restored.

5.4      The Business Committee sought additional context on the regulation of raw drinking milk.  Rebecca Sudworth reminded the Committee about  the “risky food framework,” under which raw drinking milk is regulated. The framework seeks to balance consumer choice with enhanced controls for foods associated with higher inherent risks.  The Committee welcomed the suggestion to recirculate the framework for Members’ reference.

Action 1 -       Junior Johnson to provide further detail on the specific issues identified at the repeatedly non‑compliant raw drinking milk farm, including any learning relevant to other producers.

5.5      Junior then addressed incident‑management performance.  He reported a record number of incidents during the quarter, driven largely by targeted surveillance activity that generated positive sampling results, including those from Dubai chocolate‑related sampling programmes.  He emphasised the positive impact of the newly implemented PRISM system, which had improved workflow and ensured the team did not need to activate surge capacity, despite the increased volumes.

5.6      On NFCU performance, Junior explained that benchmark targets had been raised mid-year due to strong performance and outcomes in the first half of the year.  Seasonal factors had contributed to some amber indicators in the most recent data, but hoped results in Q4 would restore performance to the increased benchmark levels.  The Business Committee stressed the importance of demonstrating the real-world impact of enforcement activity, including prosecutions, economic disruption of criminal networks, and the scale of illicit goods seized.  Junior agreed and highlighted that the FSA was developing and monitoring more outcome-focused performance measures at an operational level.

Action 2 -       Operations and NFCU teams to develop and provide the Business Committee with a more systematic set of outcome-focused indicators for NFCU activity, including economic impact, key enforcement outcomes, and progress of cases affected by court delays.

Market Authorisations of Regulated Products

5.7      Rebecca Sudworth introduced the update on regulated‑product authorisations.  Lexi Rees provided operational detail, reporting that several applications, including fermentation‑related products, had progressed to Ministerial advice, meeting KPIs set as part of the DSIT-funded Innovation Research Programme.  In addition, Defra had now received applications for products of precision‑breeding notifications, marking the emergence of a new category of applications likely to require FSA oversight in future.

5.8      The Business Committee asked about early business reactions following the FSA’s letters to stakeholders about the implications of SPS dynamic alignment for the market authorisation service.   Lexi reported that six responses had been received so far, with themes including concerns about innovation categorisation, requests for further information, and frustration from some businesses anticipating commercial impacts.

5.9      Rebecca highlighted that many businesses with applications under assessment in the UK but not in the EU would face unavoidable challenges under SPS alignment.  Transitional arrangements would therefore be essential.  The CE added that the market authorisations prioritisation approach and work plan for 2026/27 had been formally agreed with the Board and should form the primary basis of the Business Committee’s future oversight.

5.10   The Business Committee Chair commended the improved visibility and reporting in this area.

Science and Evidence

5.11   Julie Pierce reported that performance across science indicators remained strong, with all metrics assessed as green.  Work to refine science performance measures continued, with a view to shifting from process metrics toward outcome‑focused indicators that better captured the real‑world value of commissioned science.

5.12   The Business Committee discussed the importance of ensuring that scientific research provided demonstrable value for money and supported the organisation’s strategic needs.  Members also highlighted the need to differentiate internal scientific work from collaborative or ecosystem‑wide projects.  Julie advised that the FSA’s forthcoming Annual Science Report would more explicitly describe these distinctions.

Action 3 -       Science Directorate to continue development of outcome-focused science metrics and reflect these more clearly in future updates and in the Annual Science Report.

Trade and International

5.13   Sam Faulkner introduced the trade and international update.  He noted that border notifications typically increased in the run‑up to Christmas, driven largely by documentary failures, and confirmed that the pattern was expected to normalise in the following quarter.

5.14   Sam explained that the SPS agreement was influencing the scope of ongoing market‑access work.  Defra, as the policy lead for imported food, had begun reviewing market‑access programmes and associated audit plans.  Audits relating to China and India were now being reassessed to determine their value under forthcoming SPS alignment.

5.15   The Business Committee discussed potential implications for Free Trade Agreements and for alignment of UK and EU control rates.  Sam confirmed that aligning with the EU would require the UK to increase certain control rates where the EU applied higher standards and that the UK would also provide evidence to encourage the EU to raise their control rates where UK data indicated a higher risk.  He outlined the need to maintain robust risk‑based prioritisation.

5.16   Sam provided an update on high‑risk food of non‑animal origin (HRFNAO) reviews.  The fifth review had concluded without recommending structural changes, and a sixth review was planned before SPS implementation.  The Business Committee noted that emergency controls and enhanced sampling remained available tools where risk warranted additional action.

Communications and Reputation

5.17   Claire Forbes presented the communications and reputation update.  She explained that December performance reflected both the FSA’s festive‑food safety campaign and the Dubai chocolate recall, which had driven significant media and public engagement.

5.18   The Business Committee asked about media‑sentiment analysis.  Claire confirmed that automated sentiment scoring was available through the press‑cuttings service but noted that the communications team relied on manual interpretation for significant coverage.  Members discussed the value of intelligence from public‑facing channels, such as consumer helplines, to complement this analysis.

5.19   The Committee queried a dip in engagement on social media.  Claire explained that this reflected reduced posting during the Christmas–New Year period rather than a longer‑term downward trend.

Resources and People

5.20   Ian Gibson updated the Committee on the underspend position reported in Q3. The need to maintain headroom for several financial risks, including a  significant potential VAT liability was the largest single driver of this underspend.  He reiterated that the FSA is required not to overspend and thus an underspend, while undesirable, was preferable to breaching budget limits.

5.21   The Business Committee Chair emphasised this point and welcomed efforts underway to improve forecasting accuracy.  Steve Churchyard noted that despite the scale of the underspend, it represented one of the lowest underspends recorded in recent years.

5.22   The Committee also reviewed progress toward diversity and inclusion targets and encouraged sustained communication of the FSA’s values to prospective and existing staff.

6  2026/27 Annual Plan and Budget (FSA BC 26/03/05)

6.1      Ian Gibson presented the proposed annual plan and associated budget for 2026/27.  He confirmed that the SPS business case had been submitted to the Treasury, requesting sums at Main Estimates and indicating that further sums might be sought at Supplementary Estimates.  Treasury decisions on timing and scale of allocation would affect the FSA’s ability to deliver SPS work alongside its statutory functions.

6.2      The Business Committee discussed tracking of progress against the plan.  Members emphasised the importance of visibility of delivery, particularly for change‑programme milestones.

Action 4 -       Executive to adapt Business Committee reporting so that Members receive clearer visibility of delivery against major change programme milestones within the annual plan.

6.3      The CE and Michael Todd outlined governance arrangements, including directorate‑level planning, quarterly performance reviews, and oversight through the Business Delivery Group.  They confirmed that reporting could be adapted to strengthen Member oversight.

6.4      The CE commented on the FSA’s watchdog function, explaining that it remained a small but important area focused on system commentary and statutory scrutiny obligations.  Resource levels for this function were considered appropriate.

6.5      The Business Committee approved the 2026/27 annual plan and budget allocations.

7  Local Authority Performance Update (FSA BC 26/03/06)

7.1      Nathan Barnhouse introduced the update on local authority performance.  He noted that seasonal trends continued to influence quarterly performance, but that long‑term trajectories remained positive.  However, increased numbers of new business registrations and staffing challenges continued to place strain on local authority delivery.

7.2      Nathan reported that 93 of 134 local authorities were operating the new Food Standards Delivery Model (FSDM).  Seven authorities were significantly behind schedule.  Two had experienced cyberattacks that affected progress, while five had not completed the necessary data conversions for the new model.  Nathan confirmed that these cases would now be escalated through the FSA’s established performance‑management process.

7.3      The Business Committee welcomed the update and emphasised the importance of proportionate but firm escalation to ensure the new model was implemented consistently.

7.4      Nathan Philippo provided an update on MIS readiness.  Initial feedback from MIS providers suggested that about 30% of local authorities would be unable to provide full detailed returns in April, requiring aggregate returns instead.  Full detailed data coverage was expected by October.

7.5      The Business Committee expressed concern about the prolonged period of incomplete data and stressed the need for clear explanation of limitations in future reports.  Nathan confirmed that even with partial data, the FSA would still be able to identify under‑performing authorities, though additional engagement would be required.

7.6      Members discussed expanding data‑collection frameworks to include Port Health Authorities.  Nathan confirmed this remained an ambition but would need to follow stabilisation of core systems.

7.7      The Business Committee welcomed the FSA’s new resource‑modelling tool and emphasised the importance of understanding FTE capacity relative to business numbers or population.  Members noted that outcome indicators, including FHRS data, remained relatively stable, indicating resilience despite pressures.

7.8      The Business Committee Chair requested ongoing close monitoring of the seven non‑compliant authorities, with progress clearly reported in future updates.

Action 5 -       Local Authority teams to explore further analysis linking FTE resource levels to business numbers and population, to support strategic understanding of system pressures.

8  Regulation Action Plan Commitments (FSA BC 26/03/07)

8.1      David Holmes introduced the update on the Regulation Action Plan.  He confirmed that all four commitments had been delivered on schedule.  These included improvements to food‑standards and hygiene processes, enhancements to international audit practices, embedding compliance‑cost principles, and the FSA’s new recycled‑plastics role.

8.2      The Business Committee welcomed the achievement and noted strengthened engagement with DBT.  Members commented that successful delivery of these commitments had increased the FSA’s visibility and credibility across government.

8.3      David confirmed that DBT had now established a baseline for the administrative cost of regulation and that departments would need to demonstrate their role in achieving the government’s 25% burden‑reduction target.

8.4      The Business Committee discussed the recycled‑plastics audit programme.  Rebecca Sudworth noted that only a small number of facilities were involved and that early audits were helping define compliance expectations.  Junior Johnson added that early findings were informing the long‑term assurance framework.

8.5      The Business Committee Chair thanked David and his team and teams from across the FSA for successful delivery of the commitments.

9  CCP Sandbox Progress Report (FSA BC 26/03/08)

9.1      Tom Vincent introduced the six‑month update on the CCP Sandbox.  He reminded Members that the Sandbox was structured into four six‑month sprints and confirmed that all planned outcomes for the most recent sprint had been achieved.

9.2      Tom reported that validated CCP applications had now progressed to the risk‑assessment stage following review by the Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes.  Further information had been requested from applicants as needed.

9.3      He noted that several pre‑market taste trials were being planned following publication of new guidance and that regulatory guidance had been issued confirming that several cultivated products were considered products of animal origin.

9.4      Tom stated that evidence showed the Sandbox was increasing investor confidence and influencing international regulatory strategies.  The Business Committee welcomed these trends.

9.5      Members stressed the importance of clearly distinguishing periods when applications were held by applicants versus the FSA.  Tom confirmed that this would be incorporated into future reporting.

Action 6 -       Sandbox team to include in future reports a clear breakdown of time during which applications are with the FSA versus with applicants, to support Committee oversight of delivery pace.

9.6      The CE noted that while the commitment related only to risk assessments, the timeline for SPS implementation could mean that risk‑management proposals might become time‑critical.  She emphasised the need for careful planning.

10  Any Other Business

10.1   No additional business was raised.

10.2   The Business Committee Chair noted that the next meeting would be held on Monday 8 June 2026 at 14:00 as a virtual meeting.  Discussions were ongoing about scheduling the annual in‑person meeting later in the year.

10.3   The meeting was closed.