Vol. 396 No. 5
19 Mr. Byrne asked the Minister for Health if his attention has been drawn to public concern at the practice of the irradiation of food; if it is intended to take any steps to restrict or control this practice; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
24 Mr. Garland asked the Minister for Health his views on the method used in the preparation of the Government's report on irradiated foods; whether any independent studies were carried out in this country to assist in the preparation of this report; if so, who carried them out; the nature of such studies; if he is satisfied that there is no risk to health from both this process and from the possible setting up of food irradiation plants in this country; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
28 Mr. Garland asked the Minister for Health if he will outline the Government's view of the proposals of the European Commission on (a) genetical manipulated organisms being released into the environment and (b) food irradiation and food irradiation plants; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
85 Mr. Garland asked the Minister for Health if, in the preparation of the Government's report on food irradiation, the Government caused any independent studies to be carried out on the effects of food irradiation plants; if his attention has been drawn to the level of radiation from such plants; if he will outline the present levels; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 19, 24, 28 and 85 together. I am aware of wide public interest in the question of food irradiation.
There are no food operators licensed to carry out food irradiation on a commercial basis in this country. However, food irradiation is carried out in 21 countries and it is possible that some imported foods, for example, most likely herbs and spices, may have been subject to irradiation treatment in their country of origin.
The Food Safety Advisory Committee recently reported to me and my colleague, the Minister for Agriculture and Food, on food irradiation. The committee did not carry out independent studies but reviewed international scientific data and studies on the issue. In view of the wide range of scientific information available going back many years this was the most appropriate approach.
The committee concluded that the technology presents no hazard to the health of the consumer when applied in an approved manner to specified categories of food.
Any proposal to set up a food irradiation plant in this country would, in the first instance, be subject to the provisions of the Nuclear Energy (General Control of Fissile Fuels, Radioactive Substances and Irradiating Apparatus) Order, 1977 (S.I. No. 166 of 1977) which prohibits any activities including custody and use of radioactive substances, radioactive devices, irradiating apparatus and radioactive waste products save under licence issued by the Nuclear Energy Board. The Nuclear Energy Board attaches to each licence such conditions as are considered necessary for safety.
The construction and operation of such a facility would, if licensed by the board, be closely monitored by the board, to ensure that the level of external radiation due to the normal operation of the facility is extremely low and indistinguishable from natural background radiation.
There are proposals at present with the Council of the European Communities for the adoption of a Directive on foods and food ingredients treated with ionizing radiation. The Food Safety Advisory Committee in its report recommended that because of the potential to reduce foodborne diseases and to prevent food wastage without any risk to public health these proposals should be accepted in principle. By strictly regulating the irradiation treatment of food, and by requiring labelling informing the consumer, a Directive would afford the consumer safeguards, and the right of choice, which he does not enjoy in the absence of Community Rules.
Responsibility for dealing with the Commission's proposals on the release of genetically modified micro-organisms into the environment is shared between my colleagues the Minister for Industry and Commerce and the Minister for the Environment.
I am not reassured by the Minister's reply. He talks about independent studies done by other groups. It is an old story where we do not seem to be able to monitor.
Questions please, Deputy.
Would the Minister agree that it is not satisfactory to have these matters dealt with by foreign sources which may be influenced by purely commercial considerations?
No, I have the utmost confidence in the Food Safety Advisory Committee who have studied many reports throughout the world on this subject. I am satisfied that they have made a bona fide and a good decision.
To what extent is the Minister assured that the irradiation of food does not, as claimed by some sources, destroy up to 70 per cent of the vitamins in the food, that it denatures the protein in food and that there is a loss of taste — which for some foods may not be a bad thing — but nevertheless there are serious claims with regard to the effects which irradiation has on food? Can he indicate if he is satisfied that irradiation can be up to 300,000 times the strength of a chest X-ray? Would he agree that that dosage is not acceptable? Is he aware that the proposed Directive from the Commission proposes that there will be no labelling of individual food items on sale to the consumer if these are delivered in bulk; in other words the consumer will not know that they are buying irradiated food if these products are delivered in bulk?
I am satisfied on the basis of the advice given to me by the Food Safety Advisory Committee that there is no risk in irradiation. I am satisfied on the evidence presented to me that that was a correct decision. On the question of how the irradiation works in regard to different elements in the food I do not have the detailed information here. In relation to the consumer, what I feel is very important about the Directive — indeed it was in the last part of my reply — is that by strictly regulating the irradiation treatment of food, and by requiring labelling informing the consumer, it would afford the consumer safeguards. It is vitally important that the consumer would be informed, and then the consumer has the right of choice which they do not enjoy in the absence of some rule or regulation.
Deputy De Rossa rose.
It must be a final supplementary. The time for dealing with questions is exhausted. I am proceeding to other business now.
I have a very brief question. The Minister said he is satisfied, although he does not have the information to hand about the effects of irradiation. It is known that irradiation creates new chemicals in food.
This is leading to argument. Let us have brief and relevant questions.
The effects of these new chemicals are unknown. Can the Minister give us an assurance that he will have a further inquiry carried out into what exactly are the side effects of irradiation?
I have taken my advice from an expert committee which was established by the Minister for Agriculture and Food and myself. On the basis of the evidence before me I am satisfied with their decision, but let me say to Deputy De Rossa or indeed to any other Deputy that if they have new evidence that the food advisory committee have not come across we will be glad to see it and pass it on so that they can examine it.
Deputy Ferris rose.
That disposes of questions for today. I am now proceeding to other business.
A Cheann Comhairle——
What is the Deputy raising with me?
With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I wish to raise a matter which is the source of the gravest concern to the beef industry. I will do so very briefly.
I am sorry, Deputy, but are you giving me notice of something?
I am.
The Deputy must be very brief and very precise.
Forty-four cattle were exported.
If the Deputy is seeking——
I want to tell you what it is about.
No, Deputy, I will not allow any interruption of this kind. If the Deputy is seeking to raise a matter on the Adjournment I regret to say he is too late.
