Delays to SPS controls were recently announced in conjunction with the publication of the Border Target Operating Model. This update has given rise to concerns within the industry, with BPC chief executive Richard Griffiths criticizing the decision to attribute the delays to inflation rather than addressing the consequences and realities of Brexit. He argues that the lack of clarity surrounding unreciprocated controls and regulatory timelines is a major factor contributing to cost of production pressures.
Griffiths further emphasizes that the repeated delays are hindering investment and impeding growth for domestic poultry producers, ultimately adding to the cost of production and putting additional pressure on the food inflation challenge. Such concerns are echoed by other meat production industry members, including the International Meat Trade Association, who express disappointment at the impact on businesses that have invested time in their preparations. They suggest that the government’s communication with the food industry regarding the course of action from October 31st could easily rectify this situation.
Regarding the invocation of inflation as a justification for the delays, Griffiths comments that it serves as a convenient excuse, neglecting the need to level the playing field across industries, sectors, and nations. He stresses that prioritizing accessible and affordable food requires addressing this disparity. Additionally, he highlights the potential biosecurity and food safety risks accompanying the absence of appropriate controls, which not only inflate British poultry prices but also contribute to the overall cost-of-living crisis. To uphold his commitment, Griffiths urges the Prime Minister to recognize that establishing balanced and reciprocal checks to equalize trade between importers and exporters, particularly in the absence of an SPS Agreement, is essential to mitigate the adverse consequences of repeated delays and ensure the long-term sustainability of domestic food production.
The BPC insists that the government should work towards maximizing the efficiency of its relations with the EU by implementing fair and reciprocal checks that promote equitable trade. They argue that a mutually beneficial agreement on standards and practices with the EU is necessary to enable smooth and competitive trade, maintain the flow of food, and address the concerns faced by BPC members on a daily basis. The current system, where one side of the Channel trades freely while the other faces penalties, is simply unsustainable.