The management board of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) met on Wednesday for the first time after the setting up of - in the words of the chairman Stuart Slorach - the "main cornerstones of the Authority". But a key obstacle to EFSA efficiency exists - the level of staffing.
At the meeting, the chairman stressed that it was important the new EFSA focused "on what can realistically be achieved in the short, medium and long terms". Adopting a realistic approach, he said that the demand for EFSA's services is, at least initially, "likely to greatly exceed what it is able to provide, particularly as its staffing levels remain very low at the present time".
Indeed a tremendous understatement. The EFSA staff currently amounts to a mere 35, in comparison to the planned full complement of 2-300. Apparently the EFSA has already identified heavy workloads in some key areas and, although the Scientific Committee and panels have been set up, the low staffing levels will hit efficiency.
But remaining upbeat, Slorach went on to add that the newly established EFSA has the task of achieving the best possible balance between routine work, such as that in the product assessment area, and more strategic work aimed at identifying emerging risks.
However, he added that the workload is difficult to forecast accurately for a number of reasons. For example, the scaling down of the Commission's risk assessment activities will leave a backlog in some areas, advice is likely to be needed at short notice to meet political priorities, and demands will come from new sources - the Parliament and Member States.
With this in mind, the EFSA's Executive Director, Geoffrey Podger, was quick to point out that "it is critical that we determine the best possible approach to prioritising the workload, at this stage, in collaboration with our customers".
He went on to add that the first major step in the process was taken by the board this week in deciding on the main principles. The basis of the prioritisation approach will be the allocation of priority to questions which raise issues of importance to public health, the meeting of legal deadlines to the maximum extent possible and finally, the Commission, Parliament and Member States' own prioritisation of their requests.