Transparency data

Meeting minutes for FSA Business Committee: 8 June 2026

Published 14 September 2026

Applies to England, Northern Ireland and Wales

Meeting minutes for the Food Standards Agency (FSA) 8 June 2026 Business Committee meeting. This meeting took place at 64 Victoria Street, London.

Present

• Timothy Riley (Chair)
• Susan Jebb
• Alison Austin
• Fiona Gately
• Rhian Hayward
• Louise Hoste

Apologies

Steve Ruddy.

Officials attending

• Katie Pettifer − Chief Executive
• Emily Antcliffe − Director of Strategy, Trade and Food System Policy
• Steve Churchyard − Deputy Director of Finance, Planning and Commercial (for FSA BC 26/03/05)
• 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 26/06/04)
• Junior Johnson − Director of Operations
• Nathan Philippo − Head of Delivery Assurance (for FSA BC 25/06/04)
• Julie Pierce − Director of Information and Science
• Lexi Rees − Head of Regulated Services Delivery (for FSA BC 25/06/04)
• James Robinson − General Counsel
• Rebecca Sudworth − Director of Policy
• Michael Todd − Head of Planning and Performance (for FSA BC 26/06/04)

Apologies

Ian Young − Chief Scientific Adviser.

1. Introduction, declarations of interest, minutes of the previous meeting, and actions arising

1.1 The Chair opened the meeting and welcomed attendees to the meeting. He confirmed that the meeting would be recorded to support the preparation of minutes. Apologies were noted from Steve Ruddy. 

1.2 The Chair invited declarations of interest. No declarations were made and Members confirmed they were content to proceed. No items of any other business were raised.

2. Business Committee meeting minutes – 16 March 2026 (FSA BC 26/06/01)

2.1 The minutes of the 16 March 2026 meeting were reviewed. The Committee confirmed that the minutes were an accurate record and approved them without amendment.

3. Actions arising (FSA BC 26/06/02)

3.1 The Committee reviewed the actions arising. It was noted that three actions had been completed and three remained ongoing, with two expected to return to the September Board. Members did not raise any additional issues and the Committee noted progress.

4. Chief Executive’s Report (FSA BC 26/06/03)

4.1 The Chief Executive (CE) introduced her report and drew attention to key areas. She provided an update on an animal welfare issue in an abattoir in the north west, noting that significant volumes of correspondence had been received on the issue. Steps taken to ensure staff safety and maintain operational resilience were outlined. Business Committee Members queried whether the case suggested any broader risks elsewhere in the system or indicated the potential for similar issues to arise in other settings. Officials explained that, where issues of this nature arose, the FSA assessed whether there was evidence of a wider systemic problem beyond the individual case. In this instance, investigations and monitoring had not identified any broader risk requiring additional intervention, and the matter continued to be managed through established regulatory processes.

4.2 The CE reported that the FSA had secured £4.7 million in additional Treasury funding to support delivery of SPS-related (Sanitary and Phytosanitary agreement) activity. Members welcomed this outcome and recognised it as a significant achievement given the wider fiscal environment.

4.3 Officials advised that while the funding would be allocated to SPS delivery, the fact that adequate funding was now available for SPS work would  enable the FSA to progress previously constrained priorities (where staff had been diverted to SPS priorities), including work on incident operating models and system resilience. Members noted that this strengthened delivery confidence but did not materially change strategic priorities.

4.4 Members examined workforce risks, particularly in relation to pay and issues relating to pension administration delays. Officials advised that mitigation arrangements were in place, including interim financial support for affected individuals, though uptake had been limited. Members noted that resolution remained dependent on central systems outside FSA control.

5. Performance report Q4 2025–26 (FSA BC 26/06/04)

5.1 The Committee Chair invited Ian Gibson to introduce the Performance Report for Q4 2025–26 and welcomed the structured overview of organisational delivery. Members focussed discussion on key areas of sustained challenge and operational complexity, examining both performance against metrics and the underlying drivers informing those outcomes.

5.2 The Chair emphasised the importance of moving beyond high-level metrics to interrogate root causes, particularly in areas of recurring red or amber performance. Members agreed that the Committee’s role was to provide robust challenge and insight to inform Board-level decision-making.

Market authorisations

5.3 Rebecca Sudworth reported that while progress had been made in managing caseload, delivery continued to be constrained by a complex operating environment shaped by SPS negotiations, legal considerations and cross‑government dependencies.

5.4 Committee Members queried expected throughput over the coming year and sought clarity on what constituted successful delivery. Officials advised that the delivery plan focuses on completing applications prioritised using criteria agreed by the Board in autumn 2025. In addition to decisions about authorisation, completion also includes bringing applications to a close through other means such as withdrawals or invalidation.

Action 1: officials to enhance pipeline reporting and improve visibility of delivery trajectories across the caseload.

5.5 The impact of additional funding on delivery was discussed. Officials advised that while additional resource improved organisational resilience, it would not materially accelerate authorisations in the short term due to inherent process complexity and external dependencies, including coordination with Food Standards Scotland. The Committee’s frustration at the inability to progress was acknowledged.

5.6 There was discussion concerning legal and reputational risks associated with prioritisation decisions, and Members emphasised the importance of ensuring that decision‑making remained transparent, evidence‑based and legally robust.

5.7 The Committee also considered the stakeholder response, noting that industry had raised concerns regarding prioritisation and perceived commercial impacts. Officials advised that while stakeholder engagement was ongoing, decisions took appropriate account of all relevant FSA obligations, including in relation to public health.

5.8 The Committee concluded that improved transparency of pipeline management and strengthened articulation of delivery expectations were required to support effective oversight.

Trade

5.9 Emily Antcliffe gave an overview of trade performance. She noted an increase in border notifications, reflecting improved reporting practices, particularly by port health authorities, and increased identification of documentary and administrative non-compliance rather than underlying food safety deterioration.

5.10 The Committee considered trends in higher-risk imports. Officials advised that specific countries had been subject to increased scrutiny following identification of elevated risks, including pesticide residues, and that monitoring arrangements had been strengthened accordingly.

5.11 Committee Members asked about the potential impact of SPS alignment on trade flows. Officials advised that current notification patterns were largely driven by imports from non‑EU countries and therefore unlikely to be significantly affected by SPS developments in the near term.

5.12 On international audit activity, it was noted that recent EU audits had not identified significant concerns. Officials confirmed that audit activity had been managed effectively, notwithstanding temporary peaks in workload.

People and resources

5.13 Ian Gibson gave an overview of workforce performance, with particular focus on diversity metrics. It was noted that applications from ethnic minority candidates continued to increase, but that conversion to appointment remained static. Committee Members queried whether this reflected structural issues within recruitment processes. Officials advised that while no evidence of systemic bias had been identified, conversion rates were broadly consistent with the wider public sector.

5.14 The Committee considered proposed interventions, including enhancements to recruitment materials and interviewer training. Officials advised that these measures were intended to improve candidate experience and ensure that interview processes better captured capability.

5.15 Committee Members emphasised the importance of demonstrable progress, noting that sustained underrepresentation required continued focus and measurable outcomes.

Finance

5.16 Ian Gibson explained the financial outturn for 2025–26 and noted that the organisation had delivered a modest underspend across all budgetary limits. Members welcomed this outcome and recognised that it reflected strong financial control alongside delivery pressures.

5.17 The Committee queried the drivers of underspend, including the need for financial contingency. Officials advised that uncertainty relating to potential VAT liabilities had necessitated retention of headroom, limiting options to redeploy funding.

5.18 On lessons learned and future improvements, officials outlined actions to strengthen forecasting, including closer integration between finance, HR and operational planning, and improved management of financial risk.

5.19 Committee Members emphasised the importance of maximising use of available resources without compromising financial discipline, noting that improved forecasting would support more effective deployment of funding.

Communications

5.20  Claire Forbes gave an overview of Communications performance and noted a marked increase in media coverage and engagement. She noted that this was largely driven by high-profile incidents, particularly the infant formula issue.

5.21 Members queried the extent to which headline metrics reflected meaningful impact. Officials advised that current measures were largely volume-based and acknowledged the need for enhanced analysis of audience reach and behavioural outcomes.

5.22 The Committee explored whether increased engagement represented a sustained trend. Officials advised that while some increase was attributable to specific incidents, improvements in targeting national media and proactive engagement were likely contributing to a broader uplift.

5.23 Members emphasised the importance of demonstrating impact, particularly in achieving public awareness and behavioural change, rather than relying solely on volume metrics.

5.24 The Committee concluded that the communications metrics showed high volumes of activity, but that reporting frameworks required further development in order to generate more insight into impact

Action 2: Communications team to develop improved performance metrics focussed on impact and outcomes.

Incidents

5.25 Junior Johnson briefed on FSA’s incident management performance, noting increased volumes alongside longer case durations. Officials advised that delays were often attributable to dependency on industry for completion of root cause analysis.

5.26 Members queried whether increased volumes represented deteriorating performance or improved detection. Officials advised that both factors were relevant, noting that improved systems had enhanced visibility of incidents and demand.

5.27 The Committee discussed the appropriateness of current thresholds. Officials confirmed that thresholds had been updated to reflect changes in operational capability and provided a more accurate representation of workload.

5.28 Members requested clearer presentation of trends, including differentiation between increased demand and process delays, and improved articulation of baseline changes.

5.29 The Committee concluded that while system improvements were positive, greater clarity of performance drivers was required to support effective oversight.

Action 3: Officials to provide enhanced trend analysis and baseline comparisons in future reporting.

Local authority performance

5.30 Nathan Philippo introduced the discussion on local authority performance. The amber and red ratings across a number of local authority measures remain based on the data provided in October 2025, and reflected  long standing pressures within the local authority regulatory system.

5.31 Nathan gave a verbal update based on the latest data which showed gradual improvement in food hygiene intervention delivery on all performance measures compared with the  previous data. Performance for the highest-risk Category A establishments remained close to 100%, while intervention rates for lower-risk categories continued to improve. More recent data from April also suggested that the overall trajectory remained positive, though slow.

5.32 Workforce capacity was identified as the major challenge. Funding was no longer the primary constraint in many cases, but local authorities continued to face significant difficulties recruiting and retaining suitably qualified food safety officers. While additional resources had been made available, vacancies remained high and there was a substantial gap between funded posts and the number of officers in place. As a result, local authorities were often unable to increase inspection activity at the pace required to eliminate backlogs.

5.33 The Committee asked whether there were further interventions available to accelerate improvement. It was explained that immediate levers were limited, given the national shortage of qualified professionals. Current efforts were focused on longer-term workforce development, including programmes such as FSA Ready and work under the Future Food Regulation programme to strengthen the pipeline of regulatory professionals.

5.34 The Committee recognised local authority resourcing as a significant corporate and delivery risk for the FSA. While Members welcomed the evidence of gradual improvement and were cautiously optimistic that workforce initiatives would improve performance over time, they noted that recovery to pre-pandemic levels of activity would take time. The Committee agreed that local authority performance should remain under close scrutiny and that a more detailed examination of the issue would be valuable at a future meeting, with any lessons or recommendations fed back to the Board.

6. Any other business

6.1 No additional business was raised.  The next meeting would be held on 2 September 2026.