Take the chance to have your say
Wing Commander James Bigglesworth DSO, DFC, MC (never Rtd) is given to dine at a small restaurant in Camberley. Today he intends to enjoy a spot of sustenance with a couple of old chums, Algernon "Algy" Lacey and Ginger. "Think I'll have the duck with pimento and onion compote, roasted squab and wild mushrooms," says Biggles as they set off. "Same here," says Ginger. "Rath-er!" says Algy.
The food at this particular establishment, run by a man-and-wife team, is superb. Lately, however, Biggles has become irritated by the menu which includes more and more ingredients and explanations. The chef, too, has been looking weary and worried, saying: "Everyone wants to know my secrets, and I have to tell them. It's the law."
In fact, the law has defeated him. When they arrive, the three friends are dismayed to find the restaurant in darkness. The door is barred and a notice reads: "Closed due to the burden of bureaucracy and unnecessary regulation, which has had an adverse impact on consumer choice and put us out of business."
"That's a trifle disappointing," says Biggles.
A trifle disappointing and also rather fanciful. Or is it? Over recent years the public has become concerned about the quality and source of the food that it consumes. So much so that successive governments have responded by imposing a series of measures designed to protect the customer. This has obviously affected the way many restaurants operate.
Take menu descriptions (see page 37). It's a brave establishment these days that would describe its quarter-pounder simply as "a 100% British beefburger in a bun" without first checking diligently that the burger really is 100% beef; that the beef really is British; that the accompanying fried onions are not genetically modified; and that the bun isn't covered in sesame seeds.
Of course, the public deserves protection against false menu descriptions, and restaurants should provide accurate information about their food. But the tightening of the legislative screw in this area has gone so far that it is becoming unbearable for many smaller businesses.
The Food Standards Agency (FSA) has said that it is looking at the regulations that require restaurants to label genetically modified ingredients (see page 5). Well done, FSA - because, by reviewing the rules, the debate will swing round from being about what the public wants, and what administrators think it needs, to what effect the law is having on restaurants.
It's all very well having laws to protect the likes of Biggles and his friends who enjoy a good meal out, but there is no point creating regulations that get in the way of that enjoyment and eventually destroy the places where they like to eat.
Everyone agrees that food safety is important, and the FSA obviously has a role to play. In making decisions that affect food in this country, it needs to look at all sides and angles, and it needs the catering industry on its side. This latest move, which gives operators a chance to have their say, will go some way towards achieving this. n
Forbes Mutch
Editor
Caterer & Hotelkeeper
