cartoon 5 | oops, sales forget to tell technical about the ... web viewcreated in the cloud with...

Created in the cloud with Aspose.Words for Cloud. http://www.aspose.com/cloud/word-api.aspx

Cartoon 5 | Oops, sales forget to tell technical about the launch and still no mention of the supply chain risk Published Date : 2015-09-04 10:15:14

Oops, sales forget to tell technical about the launch and still no mention of the supply chain risk

The business development manager is so busy with holidays and a team bonding session at the golf resort that he forgets to tell technical about the launch for two weeks, there are now 10 weeks to launch and not a chance of getting everything done including the finished product specification.

As expected, NPD or sales have not mentioned the potential supply chain risks from the new ingredient.

About These Cartoons

QADEX understand the continual pressure that food safety teams are under.

Sometimes what happens is surreal and would be funny, except you are up to your neck and it is hard to see the funny side.

This cartoon is Number 5 in a series of 19 cartoons charting some of the crazy things that happen in the process of launching a fictional hot potato range into a supermarket. Please make sure to reference the cartoon number which is highlighted in bold above.

We hope you find some of these cartoons amusing, if you do please share the smiles by clicking the share button on LinkedIn.

Previous cartoons in this series are available on the QADEX LinkedIn pageYou can see the full series on the QADEX website at http://qadex.com/cartoons-npd

Will COOL Labelling Restore Consumer Confidence in Meat? Published Date : 2015-08-28 15:37:28

While the horse meat scandal of 2013 may be in the past, consumers haven’t forgotten the breach of trust. The shockwaves are still well and truly present, with many Brits and Europeans still reluctant to purchase meat or products containing meat from the supermarket. The industry knows that confidence has to be restored and a new venture from the European Commission (EC) could be the answer.

This year, mandatory country of origin labelling (COOL) could become compulsory if the European Commission gets its way. Members of the European Parliament advocate that the introduction of COOL laws is the key to restoring consumer confidence in meat products and avoiding future food fraud incidents.

Consumers back the new bill

Consumer group Which? has revealed that consumers are largely behind COOL, with a recent survey indicating that 87% of respondents backed the movement. “Our survey shows that one of the main reasons people want to know about the origin of produce, including meat, is because they want to buy British,” says Which? Chief Policy Advisor Sue Davies. As well as supporting the British economy, home-grown produce also gives consumers the peace of mind that they’re purchasing premium quality food that’s 100% safe for consumption.

Opposition from manufacturers

While the concept does have enormous benefits for consumers, manufacturers aren’t as enthusiastic. There is a large contingent that argues the cost of introducing COOL legislations would be prohibitive. According to the EC impact study it would cost manufacturers an extra 20 – 30% to comply while governments would incur costs of 10 – 25% in regulation.

Could voluntary compliance be the answer?

Provision Trade Federation takes a more lenient line, maintaining that COOL should be voluntary. This way, consumers can choose whether or not they value the inclusion of origin

labelling, and purchase accordingly. PTF Director General Terry Jones understands the concern, explaining that “Although PTF supports the requirements of the Food Information for Consumers Regulation, which ensures that misleading statements of origin are not made, we consider any extension of the legislation to require origin labelling of meat as an ingredient would be burdensome to achieve, increase costs and further complicate the label.”

While no final decisions have yet been made, food manufacturers are being urged to engage as much as possible in order to make their voices heard in the lead up to the ultimate verdict. Stay on top of labelling laws and procedures with the Allergen Management and Labelling module from QADEX.

Cartoon 4 | Business Development & NPD - "Technical and Production are always failing to deliver" Published Date : 2015-08-26 10:20:50

Smug Business Development & NPD bemoan fact that in their opinion technical and production are always failing to deliver.

Racing back from their meeting with the supermarket our smug business development and NPD friends chat about how the business would be stuffed without them and project that the new hot potato range is going to be massive.

Have they considered the food safety risk from this new ingredient?




This cartoon is Number 4 in a series of 19 cartoons charting some of the crazy things that happen in the process of launching a fictional hot potato range into a supermarket.


Previous cartoons in this series are available on the QADEX LinkedIn pageYou can see the full series on the QADEX website at http://qadex.com/cartoons-npd

Fines for Food Fraud Set to Rise Published Date : 2015-08-21 13:58:12

Food fraud has become a serious issue over the past few years, thrown into the spotlight by high profile cases such as the horse meat scandal and dangerous counterfeit spirits. Today, it’s become such a lucrative business that many hard-line criminals are choosing the sky-high profits and laxer penalties over more conventional crimes such as drug smuggling and stolen goods. So what’s the solution? Across the EU, courts are starting to hand out heftier fines and harsher penalties in a bid to stop food fraud from escalating into a continental crisis. With multi-million

pound fines and even imprisonment on the cards, the EU hopes that criminals will think twice before trying to fool consumers.

Crippling fines and lengthy jail terms

In January pub chain Mitchells & Butler was slapped with a £1.5 million fine for a food poisoning incident that occurred in 2012. The non-compliance led to the death of one woman, as well as the serious illness of several other diners. As well as being handed the fine, both the chef and the manager were both sent to jail for irresponsible service of food.

Dominic Watkins, a partner at DWF law firm maintains that “the game has changed as far as the food industry is concerned.” Unlike other similar incidents that have occurred in the past, he says that “the fine is way, way higher than anything we have ever seen before” and asserts that “this is the direction of travel” that industry penalties are heading in.

Another high profile case saw fish retailer Michael Redhead fined £50,000 and issued with a six month imprisonment notice for passing off one fish as another when selling produce to Iceland supermarket chain. The days of leniency are definitely over, with Food Standard Agency representative John Barnes backing the “swingeing fines” that are being introduced across Europe. “This has to put people off,” he explains, referring to the fines and jail penalties that can quite literally ruin a person’s life and career.

Safety and standing of key importance

At the end of the day, food fraud is not simply about making money by fooling manufacturers, duping the supply chain and deceiving consumers. The health risks are severe and can cause serious illness, and even death. For those with allergies food fraud and mislabelling can be lethal. For the food industry as a whole, food crimes also shake consumer confidence and put profits at risk. The EU is well aware of this and has made it crystal clear that from now on, a hard line will be taken against anyone risking the health of consumers and the reputation of the industry as a whole.

Protect your business against food fraud by tightening supplier controls with QADEX.

Cartoon 3 | Unusual and unapproved ingredient sneaks into samples Published Date : 2015-08-19 10:11:44

Our NPD person has returned from their exotic travels and are now busy in the kitchen making up product samples.

Have they:

Got a raw material specification for this new ingredient Ensured that your supplier approval procedure has been followed Checked impact on allergen labelling Checked that the product specifications will comply with the retailer brand standards

Fat chance, but that’s not likely to stop them heading off with the business development manager and presenting the samples to the retailer.

The retailer asks if the product can be launched in 12 weeks, the business development manager hasn’t a clue but says “No problemo”






Previous cartoons in this series are available on the QADEX LinkedIn page

You can see the full series on the QADEX website at http://qadex.com/cartoons-npd

Revoking EU Membership Identified As Major Threat For British Manufacturing Industry Published Date : 2015-08-14 13:00:03

According to the EEF, quitting the EU is the single biggest threat faced by British manufacturers. With Britain’s membership to the European Union hardly watertight, the manufacturing organisation has warned that continental alliance is the key to enduring economic success. “The biggest threat to our long-term economic wellbeing remains the prospect of leaving the EU,” explains EEF boss Terry Scuoler.

EU membership up in the air

The focus on retaining EU membership comes in the wake of a Conservative party pledge that promised to hold an in-out referendum on whether or not the UK should remain a member state. Cameron has confirmed that the vote will be held by 2017, which gives manufacturers a tight deadline to convince the public that membership is fundamental to the nation’s economic prosperity. While some people believe EU membership is holding Britain back, Scuoler stresses that “any drift or dithering on this issue will mean uncertainty for British businesses, which would be very unhelpful for the long-term prospects of the economy.”

As well as jeopardising the profitability of existing manufacturers, analysts also warn that leaving the EU will deter foreign investment and hinder wealth creation. In turn this will terminate jobs, limit expansion opportunities and seriously slow the UK’s progress at emerging from the economic recession.

The EEF backs EU membership so strongly that last year it even released an official manifesto that pleaded its case. The organisation maintained that membership to the EU “best served” the nation’s interests.

The EU has not always been well received however the EEF is highlighting the fact that a newly reformed politico-economic union would represent huge benefits for the UK. With trade, expansion of the free market and a commitment to improving economic growth and employment opportunities across all member states, the EEF upholds that membership is exactly what Britain needs.

The food industry will be facing a lot of uncertainty in the years leading up to the referendum, which experts warn is bad for investment and ultimately bad for business and trade. Duncan Swift, of food advisory group Moore Stephens says, “This will not be helpful – there will be uncertainty over inward investments and exports.”

Sceptics argue otherwise

Of course, not everyone agrees. UK organisation Better Off Out is one of the nation’s strongest sceptics, arguing that leaving the EU would be largely beneficial. The group maintains that without EU obligations Britain would be able to negotiate stronger trade deals with foreign nations, as well as enhance the state of the national economy and create more jobs. Better Off Out also argues that should Britain leave the EU the government would enjoy greater control over the country’s resources, national borders, NHS structure, immigration policies and legal systems.

While the official verdict is yet to be decided, no one can argue that EU membership gives the UK access to the world’s largest market. EU member states are made up of over 500 million consumers and in a reformed Europe, alliance could mean lucrative economic opportunities for Britain.

Cartoon 2 | NPD go on glamorous trips abroad, technical get stuck on the motorway travelling to audit a supplier Published Date : 2015-08-12 10:05:21

The NPD person has flown off to an exotic and sunny location to search for ideas, the person responsible for supplier quality assurance is stuck in traffic on the M25 auditing the laundry supplier..






Previous cartoons in this series are available on the QADEX LinkedIn page


Interpol and Europol Close in on Food Fraudsters Published Date : 2015-08-07 13:43:53

Food and drink investigators from across the world have warned about the dangers of fake and substandard products, after thousands of tonnes of fraudulent items were seized in numerous countries, including the UK.

On home soil, the focus was on fake brand name vodka, as equipment used to make counterfeit vodka was raided in Derbyshire. Officers seized 20,000 empty bottles ready for filling, antifreeze containers used to make the counterfeit alcohol and used labels. Fake vodka can pose a serious health and safety threat to the public as it usually contains dangerous industrial chemicals.

Tracey Cranney, Operations Manager at food safety software company QADEX said, “Food fraud is inconvenient for the industry, but serious cases of criminal activity can be extremely dangerous for consumers. Counterfeit alcohol is a prime example – chemicals often found in fake spirits can cause serious illness and in some cases, death. Food and drink manufacturers need to tighten supplier controls and retailers need to work solely with trusted suppliers.”

Food fraudsters aren’t just targeted alcohol – An Interpol and Europol coordinated two month operation seized thousands of tonnes of illicit food including strawberries, eggs, mozzarella and dried fruit. Checks were carried out at airports, seaports, markets and industrial estates to uncover criminal activity in the industry. Worryingly, food fraud is affecting all types of food and drink products in all parts of the world.

Head of Interpol’s Trafficking in Illicit Goods and Counterfeiting Unit, Michael Ellis, said, “Fake and sub-standard food and drink pose a real threat to health and safety. People are at

serious risk and in some cases dying because of the greed of criminals whose sole concern is to make money.”

QADEX has long been raising awareness of the food fraud problem and urging all food businesses to be vigilant against threats. With software designed by the company, manufacturers, suppliers, wholesalers and retailers can ensure tight controls are upheld at every stage of the food chain to squeeze out the poison of fraud. By using the software dashboard, businesses can effectively manage food safety risks, manage supplier approval and audit extended supply chains.

Food Fraudsters to Target Fairtrade Products Published Date : 2015-08-07 13:40:08

As a growing consumer base is willing to pay a fair price for food and drink, Europol has warned that criminals could target this area of the food industry next. With interest in ethical goods rising – £1.5bn was spent in the UK in 2013 – officials predict that fake Fairtrade and organic products could be the next in line for a fraud scandal.

In a recently published report on counterfeiting by Europol, Fairtrade and organic products, also known as ethical goods, were highlighted as risk areas. Certification labels such as Fairtrade could see a range of copycats in the future, which could con consumers into believing they are buying fairly for high quality products.

Tracey Cranney, Operations Manager at food safety software company QADEX said, “As Fairtrade products are often priced higher than regular goods, it is no surprise that we’re expected to see food fraudsters closing in on this area. It may be increasingly targeted as experienced criminals can easily replicate the certification label.

“We advise food business to remain highly vigilant of all Fairtrade products they are retailing. It is the ultimate deception for consumers who want to make a moral and ethical purchase if they end up putting money in fraudster’s pockets.”

The Europol report also highlighted the growing trend for counterfeiters focussing on everyday items such as food and drink. In the past, fake luxury goods and pharmaceuticals were often the products of choice for fraudsters. Now there is a growing interest in food fraud as it seems it is more difficult to get caught and can be a lucrative business.

With food fraud cases on the rise, QADEX is urging all retailers, suppliers and manufacturers to step up internal and external checks and audits. It seems as if no product or certified goods are

above food fraud, so to avoid a scandal supply chains needs to be tightened. While a Food Crime Unit is now in place, with so much criminal activity breeding around the world, it is becoming almost impossible to weed out the possibility of fraud.

The cloud software designed by QADEX is a fool proof way to protect businesses against fraud. The bespoke software allows each company to choose the relevant modules, and rigorously ensures each part of the food chain for each product is legitimate. From risk assessments to certification management, the software brings together food safety, quality management and brand protection.

Cartoon 1 | Testing budgets out to tender yet again.. Published Date : 2015-08-05 13:42:44

Where would the business be without marketing and sales get to spend mind boggling amounts of money on glamourous projects with unquantifiable business benefit.

When you try to talk to them about the need to invest in your food safety management system their eyes glaze over.

To make matters worse the accountants get involved and insist you put the lab testing contract out to tender, yet again, to balance budgets.

You have been here before, salami slicing of lab testing budgets over many years have hammered your quality control and quality assurance capabilities.

It cannot go on.







4 ways to increase your Productivity as a Food Safety Professional Published Date : 2015-07-31 13:46:26

Life as a food safety professional in today’s food industry is as tough as it has ever been. Caught between a rock and a hard place, the demands on your team are constantly increasing, yet resources are constantly declining. Here are four easy tips that just might help…

Having spent most of my early career in food manufacturing, I now spend all of my time helping food safety teams use technology to reduce the hassles of doing a demanding job whilst driving step change improvement in food safety and brand protection. But my own job seems to keep increasing in complexity as our business grows quickly so finding better ways to be productive with my time is a constant challenge.

In this post I will share with you some of the techniques I have picked up that I find particularly useful, hopefully some of them may benefit you. We all want to get more done, but the same solution doesn’t work for everyone. Figuring out how to schedule your day to help you maximise your output is the first step toward being more productive.

Here are my best 4 tips that may help you sail through your small and big projects this week:

1: Have a NO-MEETINGS Day

Block off an entire day (or a half day) every week for no meetings. This works particularly well if you can get your entire company or even just your team on board.

Having a full day free from meetings allows both managers and non-managers to get into their flow and tackle the big projects that often get interrupted other days of the week. Once you implement a no-meetings day, you’ll find that it will become your most productive day of the week, and will reduce your stress level on other days when you can’t find a block of time to focus on your work.

Extra Tip: From personal experience Saturday and Sunday don’t count. I often leave it to the weekend to catch up on outstanding emails and tasks in an uninterrupted way. This is unfair on family and work colleagues on the receiving end of emails at the weekend.

2: Block out the right time for big projects

Spend a few days taking stock of your current schedule, or lack thereof.When do you have the most energy? When are you least productive? Then, plan to work on smaller tasks and those that require less brainpower and concentration at times when you tend to be less inspired.

Block off larger chunks of time on your calendar when you’re most ‘on’ for your bigger tasks such as completing vulnerability assessments. I usually find mornings between nine and eleven are my most switched on times for churning through stuff.

A lot of procrastination is a result of poor scheduling: trying to tackle energy-consuming big projects at times when you’re most in need of a break, or not quite ready to concentrate. Being aware of which times are best for you to get work done, and planning around it, can make a big difference.

3: Try the ‘Pomodero’ Technique

No, you don’t need to be flexible… ThePomodoro Technique advocates breaking big projectsor tasks into smaller, more achievable tasks distributed throughout the course of your day and separated by frequent breaks.

Each task should take no longer than 25 minutes and breaks should be approximately 5 to 30 minutes (depending on how long you need to recharge before the next task). The technique’s name comes from a tomato kitchen timer, used to time 25 minute increments.

If you want a more modern solution, there are many timers available online.The Pomodoro Technique is a time management philosophy that optimizes for creative recharging, so you’ll have less mental fatigue and can move faster through projects.

It’s actually a business version of ‘Fartlek Training’ for sportsmen, where they do 20 minutes at top speed, followed by 20 minutes at a slow recharging jog, then another 20 minutes at full speed. Its a German efficiency model that builds endurance, and concentration.

As a food safety person in a food factory you might use this technique to switch off email and your mobile, stick your head down for 25 minutes and clear some stuff on your ‘to-do’ list. Then get up, walk away from your desk or head down the factory to check up on QA Checks, customer complaints corrective actions, do something else.Then come back and get another 25 minutes head down. A strong barricade at your office door or electric fence around your desk might help….

4: Block out time to plan your day

Schedule 30 minutes to an hour on your calendar at the beginning or end of each day and use this time to organise your day and respond to teammates in your Inbox.

Reactive days during which you’re constantly responding to messages, getting distracted by the latest new task, or spending time figuring out what to do next, wastes a lot of time and drains your energy.

Getting through housecleaning before you even start your day will save time and conserve your energy for more mindful work later. If you are out and about doing supplier audits, bring some low level admin tasks that can be done while you are waiting for the train or flight.

Even implementing just one of the above techniques should give you some productivity improvements, implementing all of them will turn you into a productivity superstar!

Let me know if you have any other great ways that we can increase our productivity.

7 economic indicators of fraud available within your business Published Date : 2015-07-24 08:54:07

Within the vulnerability assessment requirements of BRCv7, is a requirement to review economic indicators of fraud and to include these within your risk assessment. This is more difficult than it sounds, especially without any recognised or formal guidance procedures on what exactly to review.

This will not be an easy task, but the first one will probably be the hardest, with following years’ having the luxury of adding up to date comment on each issue raised in the first risk assessment. So here is a summary of what we consider could be the seven most vital places to start looking for your information.

It is difficult to know exactly where to start, but taking these areas as separate indicators, they do all appear to have significant risks associated with economic vulnerability and the amelioration of fraud. The BRCv7 guidance notes, and every other guidance that has appeared so far; sheds little light on any best practice on how to do this and it is not a simple matter of just talking to your purchasing colleagues and reading the latest edition of The Grocer.

If reading this gives you an idea about any other indicators that are not included here, then please do add a comment or contact me by reply for a chance of receiving a £50 Amazon Voucher for your trouble.

# 1 – Use available commodity pricing data

Your purchasing colleagues will be paying for commodity pricing data from one of the business data providers, or will be subscribers to industry specific journals that provide pricing data and trends. Talk to them, and find out which commodities, that are relevant to your business, have gone up in price significantly. Find out if this was unexpected and find out what their concerns are about it.

This is an economic indicator that has a pretty good possibility of being used fraudulently.

# 2 – Pull out that stack of Grocer Magazines gathering dust in the sales office

There is no point in looking in the jobs section, technical jobs are in Food Manufacture. Every week there is a very useful page provided by Mintel, which highlights issues related to food commodity prices or shortages. These can be very insightful and if any of these resonate with your field of products, then add these to your risk assessment.

Similarly if they are definitely NOT risks for your area, then note that too, as an insignificant risk.

#3 – Talk to purchasing, find out which ingredients have availability problems

There are many reasons for availability problems and difficulties of sourcing, which you will already be familiar with. But these are certain economic vulnerabilities, with a propensity to be fraudulent, and may carry quite a high risk.

Here are some of the biggest culprits:

A Poor harvest of X in country Y now means that suppliers are struggling to supply the volumes your business requires.

China starts importing vast amounts. What does this do to price? A country restricts exports. For what reason? Will others follow? Is it Political? Economic sanctions against Iran, Russia, or some other country impacts availability.

What is the likelihood of this changing – or getting a whole lot worse, as world supplies are harder to source.

# 4 and 5 – Suppliers look for price rises

Whenever suppliers come looking for price rises, the justification for this may be an indicator. If you have a number of suppliers in a category and most of them are talking price rises, but one is not; find out why this supplier is not looking to pass on a price increase.

If no one is talking price rises right now, it is still a risk, albeit a lower one, but unexpected price rises in 3 months could be devastating. State this too.

# 6 – Supplier review meetings

Ask suppliers during review meetings to give an update on what’s happening in their sector, what adulteration & substitution risks exist, and what shortcuts are the cowboys in the sector taking. Reputable suppliers will be happy to help, those who are less reputable will be uncomfortable.

This is a potential time-bomb in the vulnerability risks, and could have significant opportunities for fraud.

#7 – Prices too good to be true

Every food business is under pressure to increase margins, if a supplier comes along with a price that substantially undercuts existing suppliers, it could be too good to be true. Tread carefully and do extensive due diligence, including supplier audits.

Don’t let the cost of auditing the supplier deter you. If the savings are worthwhile you may even be able to get purchasing to pay for the audit from their budget. The risk of it being fraudulent may be noted as possibly high, and the impact of this would certainly represent an economic vulnerability risk.

There you have it

All of these indicators can be built into your risk assessment and will go a long way towards giving you a robust risk assessment of economic indicators. Dont forget an insignificant risk is still a risk, and ought to be noted. Other parties who have risks, can also become your risks, if they have an impact on your economic vulnerability.

But there is a silver lining to this veritable cloud….. It may improve the working relationship with your purchasing colleagues.

Don’t forget to let me know of any other indicators you think of for a chance of a £50 of Amazon voucher.

Is an unsustainable supply chain more vulnerable to fraud and adulteration? Published Date : 2015-07-17 13:05:47

As a panelist at Nutrition Integrates 2015, I was asked an excellent question from the floor about the reduced focus on sustainability across much of the food industry over recent years. I thought colleagues may be interested in my response…

The big issue is how to achieve the introduction of sustainability into our every day working practices across the food supply chain. I firmly believe that the Vulnerability Assessments which form part of BRC issue 7, provide us with a unique opportunity.

Horizon Scanning is the art of trying to predict where the next food industry crisis might happen; yet many of us have not yet considered the sustainability of our supply chains; and the risks inherent to an unsustainable supply chain. It is an unmistakable fact, that developing sustainability in the supply chain whilst building resilience to fraud and adulteration are inextricably linked.

But first let’s clarify sustainability.

What is sustainability in the food supply chain?

For simplicity, let us consider water usage. Many other variables can be added but the principles are the same:

A Google Search of “what is water sustainability” presents an array of NGO and other sites explaining the challenges of water sustainability – but I cannot find a universal definition.

Lack of any universal definition throws up a challenge for any business hoping to introduce sustainability measures into its supply chain management.

If we cannot clearly standardise our definitions of sustainability, perhaps we should start by exploring the implications of an unsustainable supply chain.

What are the implications of an unsustainable supply chain?

There are numerous implications but I will focus on three:

Price volatility

When a supply chain is unsustainable, you are more likely to experience price volatility. Drought in areas of your supply chain will result in reduced crop yields. Supply and demand are often evenly balanced across commodities, so small reductions in yield can have a disproportionate impact on prices, which will therefore result in an unknown amount of price volatility.

Raw material shortages

Drought may result in raw material shortages making it difficult to source enough of the raw material, or difficulties in sourcing from the preferred source. The quality of material available may decline, resulting in non-conformances for not meeting raw material specifications, making it difficult to achieve finished product specifications.

An everyday example of this is Hovis having to end a commitment to using British wheat in 2013 due to a poor harvest.

Contamination risks from over-pumping of irrigation water

Growing crops in water-stressed areas where irrigation is used, may become increasingly unsustainable if we have already reached what some have referred to, as peak water

Today, around 18 countries, containing half the world’s total population, are overpumping their aquifers. Among these are the big three grain producers: China, India and the US.

During recent decades, several of these countries have over- pumped to the point where aquifers are being depleted and wells are becoming dry. They have exceeded not only peak water, but also peak grain production. Among the countries whose use of water has peaked and begun to decline are: Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iraq and Yemen. In these countries peak grain has followed peak water.

Now that we have established some of the risks presented by an unsustainable supply chain, how can we begin to resolve them using the Vulnerability Assessments?

How can food companies incorporate sustainability into Horizon Scanning and Supply Chain Risk Management Plans?

The implementation of BRC issue 7, requires “food businesses to have processes in place to access information on historical and developing threats to the supply chain which may present a risk of adulteration or substitution of raw materials” (clause 5.4.1).

“A documented vulnerability assessment shall be carried out on all food raw materials or groups of raw materials to assess the potential risk of adulteration or substitution, taking into account economic factors which may make adulteration or substitution more attractive” (clause 5.4.2).

So what can food businesses do?

Include supply chain sustainability as a variable in BRC issue 7 Vulnerability Assessments.

The quid pro quo is, that an unsustainable supply chain introduces a substantial risk of price swings, raw material shortages and reduced raw material quality and these are the factors which will increase the risk of economic motivated adulteration (EMA) within the food supply chain.

Therefore, it will be beneficial to include sustainability within your vulnerability assessments.

Move sustainability out of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and into business risk management.

Sustainability has been seen as the responsibility of CSR over recent years. Some have questioned the commitment of retailers and food businesses to achieving CSR, particularly when economic circumstances deteriorate.Looking at sustainability from the perspective of ‘supply chain vulnerability’ makes an irrefutable case for it being an important pillar within both business risk management, and supply chain management.

Sophisticated Test Techniques are a Media Time bomb… Published Date : 2015-07-10 13:31:15

In an embarrassing press release last week, Food Standards Scotland alongside the FSA (Food Standards Agency) were forced to rescind a UK wide recall of ground cumin provided by the Bart Ingredients Company, after more detailed test results evidenced an entirely different result…

Additional testing by the Laboratory of the Government Chemist (LGC) proved that almond protein was not found in the ingredient, it was in fact, traces of a spice called mahaleb resulting in adventitious cross-contamination. Mahaleb and almond originate from the same ‘Prunus’ family of trees and shrubs, but mahaleb is not one of the 14 allergens identified in food allergen legislation.

This situation highlights the enormous brand protection risks to food businesses even if it turns out that the incident was a false alarm.

The news cycle tyrant

Horror stories from the food industry and food supply chain, makes for great media copy. But in reality, it is only the telling of bad news that makes great copy, good news seldom gets noticed.

Compounding this issue is the speed of the news cycle to react to these headline grabbing stories, which results in untold damage being done to the unsuspecting company, before the media moves on to their next story. So if the story turns out to be incorrect, only a small correction gets posted in a hard to read place with a fraction of the space dedicated to the original story.

In the case of Bart Ingredients Company, now the story has been proven to be unfounded, the coverage stating this has been minimal, and posted in ‘insider industry’ sources where the public at large do not have access, unless they search for it specifically.

QADEX advocate media caution

In suspected cases of the presence of adventitious cross contamination, we encourage the media to exercise more caution before they do irreparable and unnecessary damage to any company in the food industry.

Perhaps a guidance protocol or media code of practice could be established to assist in their journalistic investigations. Clearly, the media need to be able to investigate and publish their findings, and we encourage the sensible use of such investigations.

There are advantages to society in investigative journalists uncovering and publishing stories that might otherwise go unreported, but just like libel and other laws, they should seek to ensure a scientific and evidence based view. Where levels of product cross contamination which could be adventitious, or false positives, these should be corroborated in more detail before stories are printed which could be damaging to food businesses.

The devil is in the detail

Test sensitivity has increased to such a level over recent years that it is possible to detect DNA traces. The food supply chain has many opportunities for this to occur: from seed admixtures, shared storage and distribution, and manual product handling; for small levels of cross contamination to be introduced which could be detected in the final product using sensitive tests.

Yet we do not have accepted thresholds for what could be defined as adventitious cross contamination, or engagement with the media to explain that a positive test result may not always be what is seems to a journalist excited about the latest story.

The second batch of tests, were performed using a more complex, more expensive, and more specific methodology than the original process, which has thus far, only served to create headline media coverage and foster further distrust in our already over-cautious retail markets.

LGC used a type of analysis called “liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry” which, in combination with DNA testing, found that mahaleb could produce a false positive result for almond protein in cumin. This is the first time researchers have identified this type of reaction.

The preliminary – and much more basic tests, had been done using the ELISA method, invented by Dr Eva Engvall in 1971, while researching her Ph.D.in the University of Stockholm. It stands for Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay and uses a process of antibodies and colour change to identify the presence of a substance.

Evidence of the different results

This was eventually provided by Michael Walker, Consultant Referee Analyst in the Laboratory of the Government Chemist, who said:

“This has been a pioneering and resource intensive scientific investigation involving a large multidisciplinary team of scientists. Almond and other Prunus species in spices had received little attention.

We now know that ELISA detection is useful but only as a screening test. There are unusually high similarities in the DNA and protein of these related species that make it very difficult to tell them apart in spices. But thanks to the expertise of the molecular biologists and protein chemists in LGC we have developed what is, to the best of our knowledge, the world’s first DNA test for mahaleb and discovered subtle mass spectrometry differences to distinguish almond and mahaleb proteins.”

Can UK businesses protect themselves?

It is easy, and relatively cheap, for a reporter hunting for a story to purchase some food in a retail store and send to a lab for testing. But the reliability of some test results can often be called into question, whether as a result of how the samples are collected or the analytical methodologies used.

False positives are a reality of testing that industry experts have extensive experience dealing with, this experience is often not available to journalistics or overlooked in the excitement of a positive result likely to create a great headline.

The VITAL system from the Allergen Bureau in Australia gives a very useful methodology for setting thresholds for allergen cross contamination and introducing common sense into this whole debate. The same principles could be applied to all types of adventitious cross contamination.

QADEX Software can help…

All the usual best practices, ensure a robust supplier approval management system is in place, with detailed product risk assessments, comprehensive product specifications and extensive QA

checks on intake to monitor compliance with raw material specification for at risk ingredients.If you would like to know how a software system can assist with these requirements, contact us here at QADEX.

Allergen Food Alerts up by 27% Reports FSA Published Date : 2015-07-03 13:54:31

Every year the Food Standard Agency publishes an annual report with information about the overall food industry, that includes a useful overview of the total number of Food Alerts and Information Notices sent to local authorities who enforce food law.

Interestingly, only a small proportion of the total number of food incidents lead to a formal food alert, which are issued for incidents where the product in question has a wide distribution involving more than one local authority. This doesn’t tell us how many incidents did not result in this process, but our individual experience will lead us towards conclusions on this – dependant on the products we use in our own companies, and the minor alerts we may have been involved with in our own local authority area.

The current picture

2013 numbers of such food alerts was 47 and this has increased dramatically to a reported 60 in their 2014 report, showing a worrying 27% increase inside the last twelve months. In case you don’t have both reports to hand, here is how the total number of food alerts and information notices compares:

Allergens reported in 2013 was 47, while in 2014 it has risen to 60

Microbiological reported in 2013 was 19, and in 2014 had fallen to 15

Foreign Bodies reported in 2013 was 9, and in 2014 fell to just 6

Chemical reports in 2013 were 4, and in 2014 fell to just 1

Other reasons in 2013 was 16, and in 2014 fell to 6

In all other categories, the number of alerts has fallen, including the total number of alerts over all categories, which in 2013 was 95, and reported in 2014 had dropped to 88. This reduction is of course something that we all aim for, and it evidences that current work in these areas is clearly having an effect. If you wish to remind yourself of the reports, here are direct links to them: 2014 report 2013 report

68% are Allergen Alerts

The percentage of Allergen related alerts of the total in 2013 was 49% (47 of 95) and the worrying picture from the 2014 report indicates a significant rise to 68% of the total number of alerts, or 60 of the total 88. So is there a reason for this increase in Allergen alerts, and is there any easy way of reducing it across the industry?

Well, there are three possible ways to combat this growing risk and these are: Allergen Risk Assessments, Allergen Declarations and Allergen Management Labelling Systems. Here is a brief outline of how these procedures could lead to a reduction in the overall numbers of allergen alerts reported next year:

Allergen Risk Assessment

Creating and maintaining up to date allergen risk assessments can seem like an endless task. It can involve large and complex Excel spreadsheets that list every allergen and every ingredient purchased, creating a matrix that needs to be updated whenever any new ingredient is brought in, either on trial, or as a permanent run.

This takes a huge amount of man hours, training and experience to get right. But there is an easy alternative for those who are using QADEX software. The module that will fulfil this role for you is actually free to any of our customers who use the Raw Material Specifications Module and the Self Audit Questionnaires Module.

Allergen Declarations

An incorrect allergy declaration on any packaging is always an issue, but there are various policies that can prevent this and one of these is to carefully check every raw material

specification against a list of allergens that are known to be present on supplier manufacturing sites.

This vast amount of data exists in all your specifications and supplier audit documents, which needs to be cross-checked, line by line, whenever you receive a new document from any supplier.

Thankfully, the QADEX, allergen declarations from suppliers can now be easily auto-validated, which will massively help to reduce any incorrect allergen declarations on your packaging. Even better, this module is provided completely free to all users of the QADEX Raw Material Specifications Module and the Self Audit Questionnaires Module.

Solution Sign

Allergen Management Labelling

On a day to day basis, the amount of data contained in all your specifications and supplier audit documents means that there is just too much of it to accurately cross check everything line by line, whenever you receive a new document from a supplier. It highlights the lack of synergy between current supplier audit functions, and the existing product specification functions that are inherent in many food businesses.

You may be relieved to discover that the QADEX Allergen Management module can automatically solve all of these issues for you, with a unique software programme that uses powerful inbuilt validation tools to detect differences or inconsistencies in allergen labelling.

It also removes the need to rely on paper based systems which are not up to date, and resolves the constant need for adequate technical resources to review and cross check every datum provided by every supplier; for every specification; against a plethora of data gathered from supplier audit processes.

Many Allergy recalls are preventable.

Allergen recalls are expensive and damage brands – sometimes beyond short-term repair.

Using QADEX software can help to substantially reduce the risks faced by your business being involved in an allergen related recall, and that is good news for everyone.We think it‘s worth shouting about….

7 reasons vulnerability assessment is biggest challenge for food safety teams in a long time. Published Date : 2015-06-26 13:04:01

Just when you thought life as a technical manager could not get any more difficult, along comes BRCv7 and Vulnerability Assessments…

In my opinion, this will prove to be a huge challenge to a vast number of people in our industry, in fact, if you are aware of anything that presents an equal or greater challenge across the industry, I would be delighted to hear from you. So why do I feel so pessimistic?

1 – No definitive guidance or best practice

Any site audited from July must comply, and my view is that much of the guidance disseminated so far, has been purely theoretical, giving us no more than a steer on the steps to take and how to complete a vulnerability assessment. But the devil will be found in the detail.

Vulnerability to food fraud will be determined on a ranging scale from low to high. Low will include vertically integrated supply chains owned by the food business, and high will be global supply chains for ingredients such as; ground beef and olive oil, where there is a substantial history of fraud.

The big question to be answered, is what will happen to everything in the middle? Most food businesses will have a majority of ingredients that fall into this middle range, and it may take quite a few years before any recognised ‘best practice’ starts to emerge.

2 – Auditors will be finding their way

It won’t be any easier for auditors; who are already under intense scrutiny; as the GFSI and Standards owners endeavour to improve audit consistency. I envisage that audits will be conducted across multiple sites, without the availability of any definitive best practice.

It is very likely that they will begin to favour specific approaches, bringing their preferences to other auditee sites, who may have taken an alternative approach. Auditors may have extensive experience of an individual sector, which will put them at a distinct advantage over the generalist technical managers; who are required to risk assess a wide array of ingredients; at the same time as managing their sites.

3 – Ambiguity prevails

Until a recognised best practice becomes established, this will cause ambiguity within the industry, leaving a situation that will be open to differences of interpretation. Auditors and technical managers are specialists in their fields and will therefore identify what they believe is the best approach, based on their individual experience. Hence I anticipate lots of debate.

Consider how many food businesses still get non-conformances on HACCP. I would argue that HACCP is a far less complicated concept to understand than vulnerability assessment.

4 – Fraud risks exist in every sector of society, yet food businesses are expected to prevent fraud in their supply chains.

Identity fraud, credit card fraud, phishing……the list is endless. So taking credit card fraud as an example; the banking sector is comprised of a small number of very big, highly profitable businesses; and yet they have not succeeded in stamping out credit card fraud. It still happens every day.

Is it reasonable then, to expect the food industry; many of which are small and medium sized businesses; to prevent fraud in their supply chains?

5 – Too many variables

Despite many years of having to complete supplier risk assessments, where the list of variables is shorter and more absolute, many food businesses have struggled to conduct robust and consistent supplier risk assessments. With vulnerability assessments however, there are too many grey areas, ambiguities and unknowns. There are just too many variables.

6 – The sands are shifting

Vulnerability assessments require constant review and an annual update. Most food businesses will not have the resources or the IT capabilities to track all the variables that could have an impact on the vulnerability assessment. Too many of the variables are constantly moving, for us to keep up.

7 – Even the best vulnerability assessment is likely to fail

In spite of all of the best efforts by thousands of experienced professionals across the food industry, the pessimist in me feels that we will still succumb to the fraudsters, whilst we continue to be lambasted by the media; except the charge sheet will now include, that we are failing to comply with our own industry standards.

Please let me know if you feel I am being too pessimistic, I would appreciate the opportunity to discover a more optimistic perspective…

Congratulations to Booths - Independent retail chain of the Year Published Date : 2015-06-19 13:03:01

Last week Booths were awarded independent retail chain of the year at the prestigious Grocer Gold Awards.

As a family owned and operated retailer, Booths has recorded 160 years of unbroken profits.

Think about that, 160 years!

How many retailers can trace their roots back 160 years. J Sainsbury, founded in 1869 are trading 145 years, Sainsbury’s have long ceased being a private company.

Key to Booths success has been its local focus – at least 25% of its ranges are sourced from its northern heartland. Ticking all the following fashionable boxes:

Local sourcing Short and transparent supply chains.

Corporate social responsibility Investing in their local community

Booths have been doing this long before it became fashionable, and will continue to do so whether it remains fashionable or not, I suspect.

As a dairy farmer’s son, and brother, I was delighted during 2014 when Booths showed its commitment to dairy farmers by introducing a Fair Milk scheme, a pledge that farmers supplying Booths own-label range are permanently paid the highest farmgate price in the market. The initiative was praised by customers, and the media across the industry.

And it was just one of the innovations that have allowed Booths to “differentiate itself…in a very difficult UK grocery market,” said one one judge. “Booths understands their market, their customer and their brand,” said another, praising the independent retail chains “world class standards”

My first experience of shopping at Booths was in Bowness on Windermere over 15 years ago while on holiday in the Lake District, it was a great & differentiated experience then and remains so today.

Congratulations Booths and long may you continue to prosper.

Are you destined to be a technical Fire Fighter? Published Date : 2015-06-12 17:02:41

Working as a technical manager in the food industry can seem like a thankless task; caught between a rock and a hard place; and constantly running around putting out fires. Grappling with BRCv7 compliance and the new Vulnerability Assessment requirements can definitely make you feel that way.

Insufficient Resources

Before horsemeat and the requirements of BRCv7, most food safety teams found themselves seriously under-resourced after many years of budget cuts. Decisions to spend your budget on replacing staff who have moved on, coupled with the difficulties of recruiting suitably skilled staff and incurring the costs of recruiting processes are ever more challenging.

Insufficient Expertise

The industry as a whole is currently losing many experienced people who are retiring, leaving the industry, or moving into consulting for higher rewards and lower stress levels. Without the influx of excellent technical resources from abroad, I believe the industry would be in grave danger of falling over completely. We cannot rely on immigration to plug the gaps in our skills base for the longer term.

Horizon scanning isn’t working

Horizon scanning has entered our toolbox as a timely and useful tool to assist with the identification of fraud and adulteration risks. However, we are trying to achieve this by using historic data from sources such as RASFF; which is an incomplete data source.

This means that we are not achieving true horizon scanning, we are merely studying history to provide us with an indicator of the future. At the moment it’s all we have. It is certainly a useful model, but calling it horizon scanning is rather stretching the definition.

We need more appropriate intelligence

Most food businesses operate on their own, they will have some information from trade bodies and associations but it cannot cover all risks.

We are being encouraged to pass our own intelligence to the FSA; but we are not receiving any intelligence from the FSA in return, that we can use to help defend ourselves. I do understand that the FSA has no wish to alert criminals to the fact that they are being monitored, but the FSA is itself suffering from limited resources. A public-private partnership where intelligence is more easily shared, would increase the levels of monitoring in areas of risk; and could potentially help to deter criminals.

Are Vulnerability Assessment requirements of BRC7 an over-reaction?

In response to the horse-meat scandal and the Elliott Report, the industry was forced to react, but there is a high risk that Vulnerability Assessments on their own, may not work. Where will that leave us as an industry? Is it reasonable for the food industry to shoulder this burden on its own?

Fraudsters are better resourced and more agile

Europol has recently issued a warning about the level of sophistication and resources that are available to the fraudsters. A sophisticated fraudster with extensive resources is in a good position to probe weaknesses in the defences of our industry to discover which can be exploited, and then to move quickly and decisively to take full advantage.

Consider the quantities of illegal drugs, tobacco and alcohol that are brought into the UK, despite a vast Police and enforcement effort. What chance do we have in the food industry?

Fraudsters can collaborate for mutual gain

Combined sophistication and extensive resources alongside cross-border collaboration, gives the fraudsters a distinct advantage. Rules, Regulations and Standards do not apply. Yet as an industry it can be very difficult for food companies to sit down together and share intelligence, so yet again we are battling against further disadvantage.

The unknown unknown’s

Fraud and adulteration across global food supply chains have too many unknowns. Even with the best vulnerability assessments, there will be unknowns which may result in failures.

Every cloud has a silver lining

While I may sound pessimistic, I believe that the food businesses who implement robust vulnerability assessments are increasing their defences substantially, and these increased defences will reduce risk.

As we all know risk cannot be eliminated, but can we hope for the possibility that the fraudsters will seek out easier targets…?

Venomous Spider Found in Tesco Bananas causes Four Hour Erection!! Published Date : 2015-06-05 13:19:13

Another supermarket complaint has hit the media recently as a mother of two found a nest of deadly Brazilian Wandering Spiders in her Tesco bananas. A venomous bite from one of these arachnids notoriously causes an uncomfortable four hour erection, not to mention the possibility of death.

Purchased by 43 year old Maria Layton, the bag of bananas looked harmless enough until she spotted a giant spider cocoon. Thankfully Layton acted fast and threw the bananas in the freezer before they had a chance to hatch. A smart move given the fact that the venom can kill a human in as little as two hours.

“[Her daughter] Siri asked for a banana,” she recalls.” The first banana had a funny bit on it, so I got another one for her and that was when I found the massive spider cocoon.”

Crowned by the Guinness World Records as the most venomous arachnids on the planet, the Brazilian creatures are not what you’d want to find in your home. Their preference for bananas is also widely known, which has led to them earning the nickname of “banana spiders” due to their penchant for hiding in banana plants.

When Ms Layton contacted Tesco to report the incident she was asked to bring the bananas, and the packaging into the store. Obviously, she wasn’t too keen on taking the spiders out of the freezer and transporting them back to the supermarket. Despite the fact that she spoke to three separate customer service representatives within an hour of discovering the spiders, they were only able to offer her their sympathies and “a Moneycard as an apology.” Ms Layton was understandably extremely dissatisfied with the response from Tesco, maintaining that they were alarmingly unhelpful when it came to dealing with the complaint.

“I opened the bag and chucked it in the bin before I spotted this thing. Should I take the bin to the store too and my fruit bowl? Would Tesco like to come round to check whether any baby spiders are in our house?” she angrily posted on the Tesco Facebook page.

Tesco has so far declined to comment, however for other retailers, the story highlights the importance of having rigorous food quality procedures in place. Not to mention a clear-cut response plan andrigorous complaints system should anything happen to slip through the cracks. In a similar incident handled by Waitrose the chain was able to send out a pest control expert to deal with dangerous organisms found in its products.

Call for agents and brokers to improve or leave the food industry. Published Date : 2015-05-29 13:18:28

Agents and Brokers within the food supply chain may find themselves under the spotlight with the release of the new BRC7 standard.

There is a greater need to improve the flow of supply chain information for their customers implementing vulnerability assessments.

With many food and drink manufacturers preparing to be audited for the first time against the BRC Food Standard Issue 7, challenges faced getting enough information from suppliers is a shared concern within the industry.

To complete vulnerability assessments extensive information is required on the length and complexity of the raw material supply chain as well as ease of access to raw materials. Much of which food businesses are having to collect for the first time.

The 4th QADEX Supplier approval management conference, focused on vulnerability assessments, and was attended by a capacity audience of over 70 food and drink businesses from around the UK.

An excellent line up of speakers included Professor Lisa Jack of Portsmouth Business School, John Figgins of BRC Global Standards and Stephen Whyte of QADEX, the event was hosted by Professor Tony Hines of Leatherhead Food Research.

Professor Hines provided a fascinating introduction, with insightful perspectives, connecting historic fraud, horsegate and politics culminating in where we are today.

Professor Lisa Jack gave pause for thought with an extensive overview of how fraudulent food creeps into the supply chain, as well as indicators of fraud and also provided some great ideas on the types of things food businesses need to be asking of their supply chains in order to identify resilience to fraud in their own supply chains.

John Figgins provided an excellent background to vulnerability assessments within issue 7 of the BRC Food standard with an easy to follow guide showing how to complete a vulnerability assessment.

When asked about the role of agents and brokers in the food chain, Stephen Whyte responded

“ they have a role to play in the food supply chain, there are many good agents and brokers but a minority do not take their responsibilities seriously enough. ” Whyte proceeded to outline two calls to action for businesses undertaking vulnerability assessments.”

“ Consider all suppliers who are not supplying high quality information, high risk.”

“Move promptly to delist suppliers who do not cooperate.”

“With the introduction of the BRC Global Standard for Agents and Brokers there is no excuse for every agent and broker not to be certified”, claims Whyte.

Planning for the 5th Supplier Approval Conference 2016 is already underway, and the theme looks to be continued as although food safety and security is better today than ever before, it seems every step forward is offset by a new set of vulnerabilities.

cartoon 5 | oops, sales forget to tell technical about the ... web viewcreated in the cloud with...

Documents