Roythornes Solicitors. FIR Implementation how the sector fared

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Roythornes Solicitors. FIR Implementation how the sector fared"

Hector Carr
5 years ago
Views:

1 Roythornes Solicitors FIR Implementation how the sector fared A survey by Roythornes Solicitors. Conducted January 2015

FIR implementation Overview The Food Information Regulations (2013) (FIR) came about as a result of the EU Food Information for Consumers Regulations (EU FIC), which came in to force on 13 December

2 FIR implementation Overview The Food Information Regulations (2013) (FIR) came about as a result of the EU Food Information for Consumers Regulations (EU FIC), which came in to force on 13 December The FIR are being introduced in three key stages: 1 January 2014 For the rules on the composition and labelling of minced meat; 13 December 2014 For the general labelling rules, and if provided, a nutrition declaration must use the format set out in the EU FIC from this date; 13 December 2016 For the rules on the mandatory nutrition declaration needed for most pre-packaged foods. This survey looked at the implementation of the second stage, which is the one that affects most food producers. The results present a mixed picture with most businesses up to speed with the changes, but some finding them harder and more expensive to implement than they at first expected. With further changes due at the end of next year, businesses should learn the lessons from stage two to ensure a smooth transition for the final stage. Roythornes Solicitors February 2015

3 Prepared for the changes? Did you feel fully prepared for the changes? Despite the fact that some respondents felt the legislation had been late arriving, most producers considered themselves prepared for the changes. Respondents in the frozen sector indicated some regulatory confusion on date of freezing and indication of glazed weight. Yes (73%) No (27%)

4 Timescales From start to finish how long did implementing the required changes take? The length of time to implement the changes varied perhaps an indication of the different size of companies and number of products manufactured Month (21%) 1-3 months (8%) 3-6 months (17%) 6-12 months (33%) Over 12 months (21%)

5 Source of information What was your main source of guidance when making the changes? Most people used the Government websites, with trade bodies also providing a useful resource. Other respondents highlighted the BRC website, Trading Standards, DEFRA, independent consultants and in house QA teams. Government websites (64%) Trade bodies (23%) Local authority/trading Standards (14%)

6 Most challenging aspect What was the most challenging element of implementation? Not surprisingly, accommodating the requirements on packaging provides the biggest challenge. Some businesses which traded across Europe highlighted that local interpretation had caused some issues. Interpretation of regulations (32%) Packaging redesign (41%) Font sizes (18%) Listing key allergens (9%) Foodservice companies noted that as the original regulations were written for food sold in packages, applying in a restaurants and foodservice environment was a challenge. Those making single-serving packs had particular issues with fitting information on packaging.

7 Using the opportunity Have you used the FIR changes as an opportunity to introduce other information to your packaging e.g. front of pack traffic lights etc? Some firms used the opportunity to include requirements of forthcoming legislation. Others commented that with the new font sizes etc, there was little space for voluntary additional information. Yes (44%) No (56%)

8 Additional resources Did you need to engage additional resources to meet the changes? Most businesses used in-house resources to make the changes. External agencies were sometimes used for nutritional analysis. No - all in-house (72%) Yes - additional staff recruited (8%) Yes - external agencies used (20%)

9 Implementation costs Considering the total costs of implementation, were these: A fairly even split on total costs against expected costs. Some respondents commented that additional cost were incurred in small print runs and write-offs to ensure there were no gaps in supply. Others commented on additional costs shipping labels abroad. More than expected (52%) Origination costs on single serve packs also caused some issues. As expected (48%)

10 Employee training Have those employees involved in the manufacturing process been trained on the FIR and the need to follow recipes correctly? Training seemed to cause particular issues for foodservice businesses. It was commented that there were a number of businesses offering expensive and unnecessary advice. Yes (75%) No (25%)

11 Auditing the supply chain Have you introduced additional auditing procedures with your suppliers in relation to allergens and ingredients? Most respondents felt their suppliers were ahead of the game so no additional auditing was required. Yes (29%) No (71%)

12 Additional comments As is often the case, it is the additional comments which reveal how people are really feeling, and our thanks go to those who supplied the following selected comments: I am still receiving a lot of queries about interpretation, particularly in the supply chain. I think that over the next year there will be a lot of discussions about inconsistent labelling by FBO's and inconsistent interpretation and enforcement by Local Regulators. Some retailers left things very late and there was quite a stress to rush through the necessary changes. It was worth noting that where retailers sub-contracted the work out to 3rd parties, this from my experience was not good. It added further complications and made changes and approvals of artworks very slow and bigger room for errors. Being mainly a PL manufacturer it is/was a challenge to phase the change through the business in terms of new packaging material versus old. A very expensive exercise made more expensive by the tight time line. Significant cost for SMEs to absorb. We are a label company and have found that that the majority of our customers have not implemented label change in time for the FIR regulations. This is despite us informing customers to act early. We still have customers who have not implemented the change and labels will not be ready on time.

13 About Roythornes Roythornes is a top 200 law firm providing services to a wide range of businesses and individuals. In this highly competitive, constantly evolving industry, a legal team that understands your business is a powerful asset. At Roythornes, we have been serving the food community for over 60 years, advising fresh and chilled food businesses and helping them achieve profitable relationships with their supermarket clients. Our field-to-fork understanding has given us an exceptional reputation across the industry. We understand the pressures our clients face, so we go beyond pure legal advice, sharing our expertise and drawing on our contacts to help you go from strength to strength. From crisis management and contract disputes to negotiating corporate transactions, our Food and Drink team focuses on the key issues to help clients achieve their objectives. Our team brings together corporate, litigation, tax and property lawyers with extensive experience, meaning that clients always receive advice from someone who knows the sector and the key issues. Our Food services: Follow us on Contact Telephone Peter Bennett peterbennett@roythornes.co.uk Martin Jinks martinjinks@roythornes.co.uk Tim Russ timruss@roythornes.co.uk Edd Johnson edwardjohnson@roythornes.co.uk Mike Matthews mikematthews@roythornes.co.uk Alex Keenan alexkeenan@roythornes.co.uk John Cameron johncameron@roythornes.co.uk This publication is for guidance only and does not constitute legal advice. You should always seek professional advice before making decisions of a legal nature. Roythornes Limited is a company registered in England and Wales under number We are regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Registered office: Enterprise Way, Pinchbeck, Spalding PE11 3YR. We use the word 'Partner' to refer to a shareholder of the company, or an employee or consultant with equivalent standing and qualifications. Refer to for additional legal information. February

Glazed Seafood Weight Indication Guidance

Glazed Seafood Weight Indication Guidance Glazed Seafood Weight Indication Guidance Disclaimer: This document is not a definitive interpretation of the law, which only the courts can provide. It is the