Policy & Compliance
Food imports: report highlights BIFA concerns A report by the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (EFRA) committee on the commercial import of meat and plants has underlined many of the problems that have been troubling BIFA Members
O ne of the most from the European Union (EU) related to the movement of SPS goods (goods requiring sanitary/phyto-sanitary certi fi cation). On the day of the UK’s exit from the EU, there was fi lm of delayed lorries carrying rotting Scottish farmed salmon. Later, after the UK implemented controls, the attention shifted to problems with such goods being imported into the UK from the EU. Over a long period of time, BIFA Members expressed concerns regarding the processes implemented by the Border Target controversial aspects of United Kingdom’s (UK) exit
Operating Model (BTOM), especially the multi-agency Sevington Inland Border Facility. This location, including the Border Control Post (BCP) for the inspection of SPS goods, is located 22 miles inland from the port of Dover, the point of entry of laden vehicles. Members have always been concerned about the possibility of checks being evaded, a point made by BIFA on many occasions to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) and Port Health. Unfortunately, these concerns were largely overruled – possibly because the traffic volumes and location meant there
were not many viable alternatives. The Association and wider membership have endeavoured to comply with the new processes. EFRA report The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee (EFRA) has released two reports, one covering the commercial import of meat and plants, and the other looking at meat smuggling. Both are broadly similar in tone and conclusions; BIFA will focus on the former in this article. “DEFRA has no effective system for (biosecurity) border controls,”
16 | December 2025
www.bifa.org
Made with FlippingBook Annual report maker