Border controls system called ‘inadequate’ as banned products enter UK unchecked

According to a new report by Parliament’s EFRA Committee, DEFRA has no effective system of oversight for biosecurity border controls.

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.

Among 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 the UK for a further six days because of the use of a default digital mechanism known as ‘TODCOF auto-clearing’.

Concerns raised

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 have 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 has also expressed doubt over the explanations given for DEFRA’s reluctance to publish inspection rates.

“We are 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,” its members said.

The committee is now calling on DEFRA to clarify the inspection rates, explain the variations between ports and demonstrate how risk-based inspection rates are being met.

READ MORE: Defra’s £3.1m boost is not enough to tackle illegal meat imports

‘Better transparency and consistent enforcement needed’

On 19 May 2025, the UK and EU agreed on 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, the committee said.

MPs found that the UK-EU negotiations offer the opportunity for the 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”.

It added 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 states that better transparency, consistent enforcement and clear communications are necessary to rebuild trust with importers and businesses.

‘Operations are failing’

Alistair Carmichael MP, chairman of the EFRA Committee, 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.”

READ MORE: Supply chain reform needed as supermarkets are ‘failing farmers’

READ MORE: Surge in illegal meat imports fuels food safety fears

Read more political news.