Natasha’s Law will be the newest legislation on allergens, announced on June 25th 2019 by Environmental Secretary, Michael Gove. The law comes following the death of Natasha Ednan-Laperouse in 2016, after she ate a pre-prepared baguette from Pret a Manger. Tragically, the teenager had an allergic reaction to sesame contained in the sandwich, an ingredient which was not listed on the packaging.
The fact that the baguette was pre-prepared in house and not pre-packaged seems to be where the confusion arose. Allergen regulations currently state that products freshly made on site do not have to be individually labelled. Restaurants, takeaways and cafes are only obliged to let customers know if any of the 14 allergens are present and there is a certain degree of flexibility in how this information is provided to the customer. Consumers may indeed be familiar with signs advising to talk to a member of staff if there are any reservations regarding allergy queries – the bare minimum required by food outlets in terms of disclosing allergens.
Here, Dr Richard Anderson, Food Hygiene Specialist at High Speed Training, discusses the previous attitude to allergens, stating: “The onus, then, appeared to be on the consumer. If they had an allergy it was their responsibility to seek out this information, assume the reply to be correct and act accordingly.
“The problem with this is that it encouraged a constant transfer of accountability and no real ownership of allergen presence. Baristas, cafe servers and waiting staff are often school/university leavers or working part time in addition to studying. Of course, this isn’t the case for all staff, but the principle is the same regardless of your position: What training and understanding have staff received in order to be able to answer allergen related questions with confidence?
“The inquiry into accountability extends to the senior restaurant or cafe staff, who would be the food server’s next port of call if they couldn’t satisfy a consumer’s allergen query. Can they, too, confidently say that the food was prepared, either in house, or externally, without any presence of the 14 allergens? How much visibility does the shift manager on that particular day have over the supply chain? What if the supplier of salad cream has been changed recently; can those in the establishment confidently say there is still no presence of mustard?”
Principal Environmental Health Officer for Hull City Council, Paul Turner, highlights a worrying trend of staff refusing to serve customers “just in case” there is a presence of an allergen. “Once a customer has disclosed an allergy, more often than not, some businesses just won’t risk it. This is their version of allergen control – to flatly refuse service. Of course, this doesn’t solve the problem or answer anyone’s questions. Instead, it isolates people with allergies and emphasises the lack of accountability even further.
“Surely we can do more for consumers with allergies, rather than simply limiting their menu, because “it can’t be guaranteed?” Shouldn’t we be trying to guarantee it?”
The new legislation means that from Summer 2021, all prepacked foods, including those made on site, will have to display a full list of ingredients. For many, including Natasha’s parents, the legislation is a huge victory. However, there are concerns as to whether the new legislation is enough to give food premises the accountability they were previously lacking. Statements from trade body UKHospitality suggest it brings a new set of risks for small businesses who may struggle to fulfil the demands.
UKHospitality’s original backing of voluntary labelling was intended to encourage a dialogue between consumers and staff, giving those with allergies the confidence to seek help and “promote(s) mindfulness on both sides,” according to chief executive Kate Nicholls. Nicholls continues to say that the new legislation could damage these efforts as, once again, the onus is placed on the consumer to identify and steer clear of allergens. It also appears that simply listing the ingredients on the packaging does not solve the problem of inclusivity for those suffering with allergies.
On the whole, food businesses are accommodating a wide variety of dietary requirements. It is not uncommon to see a completely separate menu for a vegan or gluten-free customer. There are also instances where restaurants will offer the gluten-free option as standard. It is clear food premises are recognising the consumer demand, not wanting to lose business as a result of not being able to cater for special requirements or food trends. It doesn’t seem far-fetched, then, for restaurants, takeaways and the like, to consider allergens just as seriously. Changes, such as the use of vegetable oil without soya and mustard-free salad cream, would be a way of ensuring allergy-sufferers were not limited.
Paul Turner explains “The new legislation is, however, only relevant when food is prepared in house and does not consider problems further up in the supply chain. Looking at the FSA alerts in June alone, consumers can see there were seven instances of recalled products due to an undeclared ingredient. Whilst the new law appears to be a triumph, it is only a small victory in one area of a large industry. it is incredibly important that the new law does not simply pass the buck of accountability or discourage people with allergens from having a dialogue with staff.”
Dr. Richard Anderson concludes, “The new law will hopefully prevent tragedies such as the one endured by the Ednan-Laperouses, however, we need to see action rolled out into other areas of hospitality. Namely, we need to address the structural/operational problems further up in the supply chain and not wait for another tragedy before we do so.”