*EPF310 04/18/01
Text: Veneman Says U.S. Should Continue Food Safety Coordination
(Urges science-based agriculture policy, more public education) (1930)

The United States should continue to coordinate with other countries on harmonizing port inspections and food safety regulations to prevent the spread of food-borne diseases, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Ann Veneman says.

Veneman added that food safety policy should be driven by sound science and consulations with producers and consumers. Government and industry should cooperate to teach the public about all aspects of food safety, she said.

"Some today argue that ... the wisest course would be to isolate U.S. agriculture from the rest of the world. But food safety is a global issue that demands a global response. Diseases and pathogens respect no national borders," Veneman noted in a keynote speech at the Food Safety Summit in Washington, D.C. April 18.

She said global approaches to food safety issues through the Codex Alimentarius -- an international system of food safety standards -- and the Office of International Epizootics (OIE), an international animal health organization, are models for future cooperation.

Regarding public perceptions of food safety, Veneman she said a "well educated public will hold more realistic views of the safety of the food supply, and therefore be more confident in the food they buy and eat."

Following are terms and abbreviations used in the text:
USDA: United States Department of Agriculture
FSIS: Food Safety Inspection Service
EPA: Environmental Protection Agency

Following is the text of Secretary Veneman's prepared remarks:

(begin text)

Secretary of Agriculture Ann M. Veneman at the Food Safety Summit
Washington, D. C.
April 18, 2001
[as prepared]

"It is a pleasure to be with you today to discuss food safety. I commend the organizers of this conference for recognizing the importance of this issue.

"Through the Food Safety Inspection Service, USDA is responsible for ensuring the safety of the nation's meat, poultry and egg supplies. It's an important responsibility, and one that we take very seriously.

"It's vitally important to the millions of people around the world who every day consume American agricultural products. And it's also important to industry, which relies on consumer confidence in the food supply to maintain demand, both here and abroad. "USDA's commitment to food safety remains strong.

"In fact, the President's proposed budget provides funding for no fewer than 7,600 meat and poultry inspectors -- without imposing user fees of any kind. And the total funding proposed for the Food Safety Inspection Service in FY 2002 is $716 million, an increase of $21 million over the 2001 level.

"Our priorities at USDA regarding food safety fall into six categories.

"First, we must begin with an understanding that the food chain has fundamentally changed over the past few decades.

"Today, the various sectors of the food economy -- from producers to processors to retailers -- are more interconnected than they've ever been, and they grow more interconnected every day. U.S. agriculture operates in a global, high-tech, consumer-driven environment. Capital and information flow instantly between buyer and seller. And changing consumer demands are challenging existing marketing institutions and traditional ways of doing business.

"When we look at the state of the food economy, we can clearly see that for any new policy to be successful and effective, it will have to be made with input and cooperation from every link in the food chain. This is especially true of food safety. Only a cooperative approach that integrates research, public health regulation, and education can lead to the formulation of effective policy that meets everyone's needs.

"Second, we must work to ensure that all food safety policies are based on sound scientific principles.

"Speculative or incomplete scientific research may be good for grabbing headlines, but it's a terrible basis for policy and regulation. That's why it is so important for those who conduct scientific research on behalf of the public to ensure that research is sound and reliable.

"And it's just as important -- if not more so -- for those of us who oversee research and make policy based on its findings to accept only scientific studies that live up to the highest standards of methodological integrity.

"This will be especially crucial as we continue to deal with emerging pathogens such as E coli 0157:H7, Cyclopsora, Cryptosporidia, and new strains of Salmonella. These present significant challenges to government and industry alike -- and we must be careful to base any new regulations on science that is both thorough and sound.

"Third, we must continue to educate the public about all aspects of food safety, from the testing we do at USDA, to safe handling practices for consumers.

"People are naturally quite concerned about the safety of the food they eat. And while the general public cannot be expected to become food safety experts, it is certainly possible for them to understand the basic issues. A well educated public is better prepared to assess the validity of claims they may hear in the media, and to reject false or misleading information. And a well educated public will hold more realistic views of the safety of the food supply, and therefore be more confident in the food they buy and eat.

"This kind of public education is not always easy. The confusion over Foot-and-Mouth disease and BSE is a good example. Because both have dominated headlines in recent weeks, the two diseases have become confused in the public mind. As a result, many people worry needlessly that FMD poses a health risks to humans -- which, of course, it does not. USDA is working very hard to get that message out. But we need your help, as well as the help of every link in the food chain.

"I want to mention one example of a successful public education effort before I move on. As you may have noticed, the "Fight BAC!" and "Thermy" characters are here representing consumer education activities. The "Fight Bac!" campaign promotes the four basic food safety rules -- Clean, Separate, Cook, and Chill -- while the "Thermy" campaign promotes thermometer use to indicate when products are cooked to a high enough temperature to kill harmful bacteria. And it's no accident that these campaigns were created in partnership with the private sector. These are just two examples of what such cooperation can accomplish.

"Fourth, we must ensure that USDA's food safety policy-making process continues to be transparent and that the public has the opportunity to provide input and be fully involved.

"You will continue to see public meetings scheduled as a means of soliciting input from the public. For instance, on February 20, USDA re-submitted proposed regulations regarding contamination by Listeria and other harmful pathogens in ready-to-eat meat and poultry products. In order to ensure that sound science plays a key role in this proposal and comment process, FSIS is conducting a technical conference and public meetings during the comment period. And we've extended the comment period by an additional 30 days to help ensure that everyone will be heard, and also to allow us the maximum amount of time possible to get the word out to the public. It's crucial that the public understands the basic facts with regard to any new food safety issues.

"Fifth, we need to encourage public-private partnerships to address food safety problems.

"California provides an excellent model for the kind of public-private partnerships that can help ensure the safety of the food supply. In 1996 and 1997, in the wake of two strawberry scares in California, we at the California Department of Food and Agriculture brought together government, industry, and university leaders to address the problem.

"The result was the creation of the first of many Quality Assurance Plans, voluntary agreements that developed guidelines for safe food production and sound environmental practices. Diverse interests were able to work together, and their efforts were so successful that over the next several months, new Quality Assurance Plans were developed for commodities such as eggs, produce, and dairy. By bringing the links of the food chain together, solutions were crafted that benefit everyone -- without additional government regulation. That's a model we should all seek to follow in the coming years.

"Finally, USDA will strengthen cooperative working relationships with other agencies of government involved in food safety.

"For instance, we at USDA were very pleased when Administrator [Christine] Whitman announced that the EPA will reestablish a liaison to USDA. That position helps ensure that our respective agencies are working together toward our common goals, and not at cross purposes.

"We know that it is possible to make good policy that incorporates all of these elements -- and the Pathogen and Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point system (HACCP) is an excellent example.

"HACCP, as you know, has been fully implemented into the 6,700 federally inspected and 2,500 state-inspected meat and poultry plants nationwide, and the meat and poultry we import from other countries must be produced under a HACCP-based, equivalent system.

"We know that HACCP is working. A new report from FSIS shows that the prevalence of Salmonella on raw meat and poultry products continues to decline -- by as much as half on raw chicken, for example. We are seeing sustained reductions in foodborne illness as well, according to the newest data released from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. We are seeing more and stronger partnerships among industry, government, academia and consumers.

"And consumer confidence in the U.S. food supply is high. Those who have traveled overseas recently and have seen firsthand what can happen when the public loses confidence in government's ability to protect the food they buy.

"But perhaps the most extraordinary thing about HACCP is its ability to evolve to address today's issues and prevent tomorrow's problems. No system of regulations or inspections can remain effective forever. Emerging pathogens alone ensure that. This means that HACCP -- and all of USDA's efforts to protect the food supply -- must be constantly reassessed, and updated where necessary. Already, our partners in industry -- who put forth a phenomenal effort to make HACCP a success -- are looking at ways to improve the system even further.

"Some today argue that to ensure the safety of the American food supply, the wisest course would be to isolate U.S. agriculture from the rest of the world. But food safety is a global issue that demands a global response. Diseases and pathogens respect no national borders. That's why the wiser course is to work cooperatively with other countries on food safety and animal monitoring. We need to harmonize inspections and regulations at ports before diseases break out. We need to be as global as the pathogens. The work that has been ongoing for many years through the Codex Alimentarius Commission and the International Office of Epizootics is a good model for the future.

"If one theme stands out in all this, it is cooperation.

"Every sector of the food economy -- every link in the food chain -- needs to work together toward common solutions. Examples as varied as HACCP and California's Quality Assurance Plans show that when government, industry, scientists and consumers come together to solve problems, the results are policies that satisfy the interests of the various groups while promoting the public good.

"I look forward to working with all of you to develop new approaches that further protect consumers and ensure that America's food supply remains the safest in the world.

"Thank you."

(end text)

(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
NNNN