“Defra has no effective system of oversight for [biosecurity]
border controls”, according to a new report by Parliament's EFRA
Committee. MPs say that the previous government's vision for the
UK's Biosecurity, Borders and Trade Programme has not been
realised, which is “not simply an operational concern but
continues to present real threats to the health of UK animals and
plants and therefore the viability of our agricultural and
horticultural sectors”.
The report highlights numerous problems with the effective
operations of commercial border controls. This problem is noted
as being particularly serious at the Short Straits. Amongst other
problems, the Committee received “specific and repeated concerns
that the unique location of Sevington inland BCP [Border Control
Post], 22 miles away from the Port of Dover, provides
opportunities for exploitation by criminals.”
The report also lists flawed IT systems and data gaps as being
amongst the causes of weak enforcement. The Committee heard, for
example, that after the government introduced a ban on meat
imports from Germany in early 2025 in response to an outbreak of
foot and mouth disease, prohibited products were able to continue
entering UK for a further six days because of the use of a
default digital mechanism known as ‘TODCOF
auto-clearing'.
The Committee's report describes the current operating
arrangements, known as BTOM, as ‘flawed', saying that ‘it is
essential that present arrangements are reviewed and bolstered.”
MPs heard that the system is failing to provide a robust,
risk-based regime of inspections, is imposing excessive burdens
both on responsible, law-abiding businesses and on local
authorities, and may be creating incentives and opportunities for
criminals.
It found that varying inspection rates at different ports of
entry has created a system that can be gamed by people seeking to
dodge costs or import illegal goods, thus jeopardising
biosecurity and damaging trust in the system amongst law-abiding
compliant businesses.
The Committee expresses doubt over the explanations given for
Defra's reluctance to publish inspection rates, saying that it is
“not convinced that a lack of published data on the inspection
rates is due to a desire to protect the integrity of the
intelligence system. We have concerns that they are not being
published to avoid highlighting Defra's historic noncompliance
with its own targets.” The Committee is calling on Defra to
clarify the inspection rates, explain the variations between
ports and demonstrate how risk-based inspection rates are being
met.
On 19 May 2025 the UK and EU agreed a Common Understanding to
work towards establishing a common sanitary and phytosanitary
(SPS) area, but the UK will continue to rely on the present
system of biosecurity controls until an agreement is reached and
in circumstances in which an agreement is not reached or is
withdrawn from. MPs found that the UK-EU negotiations offer the
opportunity for government to reset its relations with UK
stakeholders as well as with the EU. The Committee states that
“delivering a border system that is truly effective, efficient,
and equitable will require sustained investment, meaningful
engagement, and a commitment to learning from the lessons of the
past.”
The Committee reports that there is a high level of compliance
amongst industry but that companies are dissatisfied with the
current enforcement regime because of their concerns over value
for money, inspection standards and biosecurity. The report says
that better transparency, consistent enforcement and clear
communications are necessary to rebuild trust with importers and
businesses.
Referring to debate about the design of BTOM by previous
administrations, the Committee's report notes that “the question
of adequacy of the system is largely academic; without effective
delivery, even a well-designed model cannot achieve its intended
outcomes.”
In this context, MPs heard that a further problem exists at the
stage of inland local authorities, which have responsibility for
control of imports that have passed border posts. The Committee
heard that local authorities have not received the necessary
funding, staffing or system access to enable them to carry out
these responsibilities.
The Chair of the EFRA Committee, MP,
said:
“In our scrutiny of the control and inspection of
commercially imported animal and plant products through UK
borders, we found high compliance by law-abiding companies,
despite the high costs the system imposes on them and even though
they have been subject to uncertainty, short-notice changes and
unexpected additional costs. While these companies show high
compliance, they do not have confidence that the system is
operating fairly.
“The other side of the coin is enforcement by the relevant
authorities and here we found that, despite the best efforts of
the operating teams and management, the operations are failing,
leaving the UK's biosecurity at serious risk and allowing
opportunities for criminal enterprise.
“Our report describes the numerous problems and inadequacies
which are making it impossible for the designated authorities to
do their job. These problems arise from a failure by successive
governments to appreciate the gravity of the threat, listen to
stakeholders, address problems in real time and to understand
that, even in a time of scarcity these operations must be
adequately funded.”
