UK biosecurity ’at risk’ over flawed border approach, Efra warns

Defra has ”no effective system of oversight for border controls” when it comes to biosecurity, according to a damning new report by the cross-party Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (Efra) Committee .

MPs argued 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 hard-hitting report highlights numerous problems with the effective operations of commercial border controls, with the problem noted as being particularly serious at the Short Straits. Among other issues, the committee said it 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 among the causes of weak enforcement. 

BTOM criticised

It 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 among 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 non-compliance with its own targets.”

The committee has therefore called on Defra to clarify the inspection rates, explain the variations between ports and demonstrate how risk-based inspection rates are being met.

SPS under scrutiny

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, with the committee stating 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 report says 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. It argues 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.

’Numerous problems and inadequacies’

Chair of the Efra committee Alistair Carmichael 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.”