I apologise for the fact that Opposition spokespersons did not receive the interim report a little earlier. When I briefed them yesterday, I stated they would receive copies by 11 a.m. today. However, it took a little longer to distribute them. This was because we were obliged to make some changes.
Interim Report on Equine DNA-Mislabelling of Processed Meat: Statements
Where are our copies?
They have literally just come off the presses. I will have copies distributed to Members immediately.
Two months ago to the day - 14 January - my Department was first informed by the Food Safety Authority of Ireland, FSAI, of its finding of 29% equine DNA in a single beef burger sold in Tesco and manufactured at the Silvercrest plant in County Monaghan. This finding in the FSAI meat authenticity survey resulted in the immediate launching of an official investigation by my Department. This investigation, initially involving the FSAI and my Department's veterinary inspectorate and audit team, was broadened to include the Department's special investigation unit and the Garda National Bureau of Criminal Investigation. On 5 February I appeared before the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine. I gave a detailed statement to the committee and both Professor Alan Reilly of the FSAI and I answered many questions on a series of matters. The controversy has moved on considerably since that date and meat products have been withdrawn in many countries. The disclosure In Ireland of the adulteration of beef products with equine DNA has prompted other authorities to examine the issue. It transpired that what had been uncovered was a pan-European problem of fraudulent mislabelling of certain beef products. Some 26 of the 27 member states of the European Union have now been affected by the problem which has also been uncovered outside the European Union. It became a global problem, affecting some large global companies and international food brands.
Today, I am publishing a report on the official investigation and related matters. It will demonstrate both the complexity of the problem uncovered and the thoroughness with which it was approached. I propose to refer to three main areas, but before I do so I wish to clearly state consumer confidence and trust are the most vital components of our policy on the wider food industry. Without consumer confidence and trust, there is no future for any of the participants in the food supply chain, regardless of whether they are retailers, processors, traders or primary producers. There is a clear onus on all participants to ensure safe and quality food products are placed on the market. Ireland's reputation as a food producing country rests on all participants fulfilling this responsibility. Any potential risk to that reputation, albeit in a relatively small segment of the food sector, was the basis for the immediate launching of the official investigation and the actions I have taken in the course thereof.
I wish to highlight a number of points. The equine DNA found in consignments of frozen beef products was labelled to be of Polish origin. The investigation has not found any evidence of adulteration with horsemeat of these consignments in Ireland, but, following our enquiries, there are clear concerns about the activities of traders and intermediaries operating outside the State. Information uncovered in the investigation has been passed to the appropriate authorities and Europol. We are also working with other member states in this regard. That is not to suggest intermediaries in the supply chain were the sole cause of the problem. The investigation has also shown direct trade with Poland. One Polish company the product of which was found positive for equine DNA arranged to collect the consignment and reimburse the Irish operator, QK Meats.
Details of the investigation outcome in respect of the main companies involved are provided in the report.
The investigation concludes that in the case of Silvercrest and Rangeland Meats, there was no evidence that they deliberately purchased or used horsemeat in their production processes or that these companies were re-labelling or tampering with inward consignments but, given the reputational issues for the Irish food industry as a whole, the practices by two companies of not respecting customer specifications, in the case of Silvercrest, and of knowingly withholding information about problems in the supply chain, in case of QK Cold Stores, are totally unacceptable. Likewise, I am extremely concerned at the failure of ABP as a group to maintain proper oversight of Silvercrest, particularly given its position in the Irish food industry. We have a right to expect better from the Irish food industry. The companies have let themselves down as well as risking reputational damage to the Irish food sector as a whole.
B&F Meats was found to be involved in mislabelling of a limited quantity of horsemeat for export to the Czech Republic. While the company claims that no fraudulent intent was involved, the placing of a false label on a product and the question of instituting legal proceedings in this respect remains under active consideration by my Department.
When the problem widened to include other member states, I convened a meeting of other Ministers and the Commission in Brussels, which led to the establishment of an EU-wide testing programme both for equine DNA in beef products and phenylbutazone in horse carcases. The results of these tests will be published in mid-April and will form the basis for consideration of any future EU actions. It was also agreed that Europol should be involved in terms of co-ordinating the investigations being carried out by individual member states.
Acting in my role as Chairman of the Council, I also arranged a special debate on this matter under the Irish Presidency at the Council of Agriculture and Fisheries Ministers meeting. The Council agreed that it would keep the matter under review, and we are doing this.
Apart from the EU response, a range of additional actions have been put in place in Ireland at my instigation. In addition to the EU programme, the Food Safety Authority of Ireland, FSAI, and my Department met representatives of the meat processing, retailing and catering sectors and agreed a protocol for DNA testing of beef products to check for adulteration with horsemeat. The following categories of food are being tested - prepackaged beef products on sale to the final consumer or to mass caterers, beef products offered for sale without prepackaging to consumers or to mass caterers, and meat ingredients used in processed beef products. It was agreed that the results would be made public. The first set of results was published in early March. Most of the 957 tests were negative except for products already identified as positive. In other words, there was nothing new found.
In addition to the EU-wide control programme for residues of phenylbutazone, my Department introduced a positive release programme for horses destined for the food chain, in other words, we are now testing everything. This programme will run for an initial period of one month and the results, once published, will be assessed to inform future policy.
Although the Department will continue its involvement with investigations being carried out in other member states and pursue any issues arising, the report draws a series of conclusions and identifies possible further actions. First, it is clear that the focus of controls which heretofore was on food safety will henceforth have to encompass checks on food authenticity. The Food Safety Authority of Ireland's DNA testing protocol already in place in Ireland addresses this requirement. It is right that the Irish industry should lead the way in this respect, but I will pursue this issue in Brussels to ensure a level playing field in respect of controls applying to EU food production. I will also pursue the issue of requiring irregularities regarding food authenticity to be reported. If we had that legal protection, we might have got the information from QK Cold Stores much earlier.
This episode has revealed the extent and complexity of the involvement of traders and agents in the food supply chain. With the legal power already in place I have decided that all such intermediaries operating in Ireland will be registered as food service operators from now on.
A number of changes are warranted regarding EU labelling regulations such as provisions covering intermediate labels and the reporting of mislabelling incidences, as well as practical steps on the use of security features and more detail on commercial documentation. These will be pursued at EU level as appropriate.
I want to refer to the related but separate issue of the horse identification and traceability problems. I should first express my concern at the incident which occurred only last Friday in Ossory Meats, a horse abattoir. That incident is detailed in the report. I had previously decided that, in the context of the measures we are taking to improve horse controls, my Department should take responsibility for the supervision of this and another horse abattoir previously under the control of local authorities. What gave rise to the incident at Ossory Meats and the subsequent suspension of the plant is totally unacceptable and will be pursued with full vigour. When Members read the report they will know exactly what I am talking about.
In general, while the investigation did not uncover any illegal introduction of horsemeat into the food chain in Ireland, we have accelerated our review of procedures in regard to horse identification and controls. We believe there is need for significant changes here to move horse traceability to the same level as cattle identification, where systems were developed in response to BSE in the mid 1990s. These changes are dealt with in the report and I will pursue them within my Department with my officials.
Regarding this entire problem, the fact the official control system in Ireland uncovered what is a global problem in terms of the serious mislabelling of beef and the manner in which we have addressed the issue shows Ireland to be at the forefront of control systems in this area. In time, when the issue is fully addressed at EU level, it will stand to us in continuing to build the reputation of Irish food products.
I thank everybody in my Department, in the Food Safety Authority of Ireland, and in the Garda fraud squad who have worked night and day on this problem for two months and who have provided us, at no extra cost to the taxpayer, with a report that is detailed, accurate and that can be the basis for policy change that is needed in the future. I am indebted to them for the time, detail and seriousness with which they have taken on this challenge, whether that be within processing facilities, interviewing meat traders, travelling to Poland, going through, in a painstaking way, audits of different food service operators, or detailed briefings for me, day after day, for the past two months.
I hope this report will be welcomed by Members of the House. I will be bringing it before the Oireachtas committee when we will have a detailed discussion on it, and its consequences, to allow us assess the measures I am proposing to introduce, on which I want to get input from Opposition spokespeople also. Ultimately, this is about learning lessons from something that should never have happened that led from sloppy management and fraudulent behaviour. We will learn lessons from this and have a stronger and more credible food-----
There was sloppy leadership also.
Absolutely not.
The Minister has been in the job two years.
This was the first country in the European Union to uncover this because this was the first country in the European Union to use DNA testing in the food system.
The Minister has no statistics.
I suggest the Deputy read the report before making ill-informed comments.
The Minister answers questions but does not give any information.
I thank the Minister for coming into the House and producing the report. Remarks I make here on the report are preliminary because we did not get the report before we came into the House and we have not had even a cursory opportunity to examine it.
The Minister explained the position.
I know he did, but it is important. I accept that the Minister gave us a briefing yesterday, but to give a detailed response from the Opposition, we need an opportunity to read the full report before making our contribution.
It is easy to make the big speech to solve the problems of the world, but the Minister knows that in government, solving problems requires many hours of painstaking, patient work. Issues must be considered and teased out systematically and then resolved. The Houses of the Oireachtas have a role to play in this work. I ask the Minister to agree that there should be ongoing detailed debate at the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine on the issue. Is the Minister willing to provide to members in tabular form a list of the issues as they arise from his investigations? Will he give us a list of the actions on each issue he has identified and identify whether a domestic administrative decision, regulation or legislation is required or if a European directive or regulation is necessary? This painstaking, slow and systematic approach is required if we are serious about sorting out this and equivalent problems.
There are two ends to the problem, to which I will allude. We must know now what measures have been identified and we must examine them. We must know what defects have been found in the systems. The Minister has mentioned regular DNA testing. We must know what the Minister proposes to do about the defects and we must debate his proposals to see whether they are sufficient. We must also know how the Minister is going to act and by means of what instrument, be it administrative, legislative or regulatory. If we have that information, the next step is to estimate the time by which actions can be taken. I suspect that to solve this problem various issues will have to be addressed by legislation or European regulation. There is no way we can solve these problems overnight.
The difficulty with these issues is that they have a high profile and attract a great deal of media interest for a short while, but when the immediacy of the problem disappears, pressure dissipates. When the media no longer examine the matter on a daily basis, there is a temptation to slip and regress and to fail to take firm action. We all know that human beings respond to pressure or questioning. Given the number of the things on people's desks, there is a tendency to put aside those matters that are not being pressed systematically. We must use the Oireachtas committee to establish a process to check the Department's homework at least at six-monthly intervals, ensuring all of the actions outlined in the Minister's action plan have been taken. We must be provided with the plan in an accessible form so that we know exactly what will happen.
The initial issue that arose was the adulteration of meat products with horsemeat. I compliment the FSAI on its identification of this problem. I recognise that, for whatever reason, Ireland was the first country to query whether such adulteration was taking place. I am still curious about why the FSAI started to carry out checks, because it has never been explained. Were complaints made to the Department or the FSAI that this might be happening? Did it have intelligence? It seems strange that someone would start conducting DNA tests out of nowhere.
For the record, it did not have intelligence.
That is very interesting. If no one had intelligence and we were the first to discover it, it is extraordinary that it was happening on a pan-European basis. There were a whole lot of malfunctions within the system, yet no one had heard about it even as a possibility. I am sure the Minister would love to have that level of confidentiality at the Cabinet. It is extraordinary that this practice was so widespread, yet nobody knew it was happening.
We must let the enforcement authorities take action to determine whether anyone has broken the law. I accept that it is hugely difficult, but enforcement authorities should go after everyone who can be prosecuted. I accept that this will require the painstaking collection of evidence and the compiling of complex case files. I also accept that there will be a great deal of blame-shifting. One can see it all the time. Various players are trying to shift the blame and say they did not know what was or was not happening. I do not want to prejudice any investigation that the Garda Síochána may be undertaking by casting doubt on what anyone has said, lest that be used to undermine a prosecution. However, it appears that in our society, people involved in illegal activities will provide any excuse and always place the onus of proving they are wrong on the authorities. One of the difficulties the Minister and investigating authorities face is the inability of people to acknowledge that they knew what was happening and that they did wrong. The Minister, the Garda and any other investigating agency will have my full support in any investigation and prosecution they undertake. I hope the matter will be pursued and that no soft attitude will be adopted.
I am not happy about another aspect of the situation, which is the control of the slaughter of horses in the State. I have asked on a good few occasions what complaints have been made in the last year about the control and issuing of passports and microchips and, in general, the slaughter of horses. It has become a major issue since the number of horses going for slaughter grew by a factor of six to a very significant number. I understand the number of horses slaughtered has grown from approximately 4,000 to approximately 24,000.
One of the reasons I have called for an independent investigation is a particular worry. The story broke on 14 January 2013. I tabled two parliamentary questions immediately after the story broke. Allowing four days for a parliamentary question to be dealt with, my questions were answered on 23 January 2013. The reference numbers were 3210/13 and 3211/13. The first question was to ask the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the steps he had taken to address the illegal horse meat trade, and the second was to ask the Minister the measures he had taken to address concerns over the use of fake passports in the horse meat trade. If one did not understand the system, one would have thought from the Minister's replies that we had fantastic controls on the slaughter of horses. The replies referred to EU legislation introduced in 2009 and relevant legislation on microchips. One would have thought our system was foolproof. It is amazing that, not two months later, after the issue has been pursued and it has become untenable to defend the castle, we admit that the system is riddled with holes.
It was totally open to abuse and was not fit for purpose. The Minister said he was introducing immediate reforms to centralise the issuing of passports for horses and to make it similar to the cattle movement monitoring system. The Minister still got it wrong because the issuing of passports for thoroughbred breeds - for example, dams and sires of particular breeds such as Connemara ponies - can be dealt with by the breed societies. The issuing of identification for horses should be done not through online registration but directly, in a manner similar to what happens with cattle. If societies want to keep a record of progeny, that is a different issue. It has nothing to do with the unique identifier or-----
That is what we are planning to do.
Will it be done directly or indirectly?
Directly.
Will horses be registered directly, with breeding societies having nothing to do with it?
If we choose, they may act as agents. The Deputy has not read the report and should do so if he has the chance.
The Minister has repeated my worry that societies will act as agents. There should be no agent involved. The Minister should take the leap and have a central registration system. If, with the agreement of the applicant, the Minister wants to pass on the information to the breeding societies for breeding purposes, that is a much better way of doing it.
It is easy to get defensive when one is a Minister. At the beginning, when we started querying the issue, the shutters came down. Like all those involved with administrative systems, the people concerned did not want to recognise that the system was full of holes. I tabled a question within five days and the first reaction of the Department was to put up barriers and say that everything was all right, when it was all wrong. Instead of recognising the major flaws following complaints and promising to do something about it, the Department's replies tried to give the impression the system was fit for purpose. The Department must have known, given that it was in the factories, according to the report, that it was totally unfit for purpose. For that reason, getting the system to examine the system is a very slow way around the problem. The first thing to do is to recognise that the system has a problem. We are all sensitive to criticism and when one criticises the system the first reaction of those involved is always, by the nature of things, to defend it. It is in all of our natures and I am not criticising any particular person.
Part of the problem on the food and horsemeat side is that we do not know whether some of the horsemeat took a circuitous route around Europe and arrived back to food suppliers here. The Minister is saying it did not go directly to food suppliers, but he is not saying it did not travel across half of Europe and come back to our food supply. We know the horse side of this was flawed. When there is a question of whether checks and balances in the system are fit for purpose, it is much better and quicker and creates public confidence if one has the courage to get an outsider to investigate it, rather than asking the organisation with a problem to investigate itself. That is the fundamental lesson the Minister has not learned.
Outsiders could not investigate it.
I propose to share time with Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin.
We appreciate that the ongoing crisis regarding the contamination of meat for human consumption has potentially lasting harmful consequences for the Irish food industry as a whole. That is why it is essential that we all act responsibly, given the number of jobs and farm livelihoods involved. I appreciate the Minister’s position and the fact that he and his officials have kept Opposition spokespersons updated on the progress of the ongoing investigations. We do not seek to score cheap political points or attempt to make out that the Minister is responsible for creating the problem.
It is also worth noting, perhaps, that while initially the crisis appeared to focus on this country, and attempts were made to put across that impression in other jurisdictions, we are dealing with a European-wide problem, with many countries involved. The Minister's presentation today shows the problem is wider than the European union. That is not to seek to overlook any possible practices in this country that have contributed to the crisis. We cannot make definite judgments while the investigation is ongoing, but if it is proved that anyone here was knowingly involved in the passing off or production of food products containing horsemeat as beef, they need to be dealt with severely.
One of the issues that has come to our attention, and to which the Minister referred, is the fact that an Irish company, QK Meats, found traces of equine DNA in imported Polish product on 27 June last year. A further six positive tests occurred at the same plant up to September. Having glanced through the report, what I found striking about the investigation was that the company was purchasing raw material from Poland at €400 a tonne less than the corresponding price of beef trimmings available here. Not only was the company purchasing it, but when it detected horsemeat in its initial tests on 27 June last year, it returned the batch involved but kept purchasing from the same company. This continued despite the fact that DNA evidence suggested the ingredients contained horsemeat.
In February this year the company finally made the Minister, the Department and the Food Safety Authority of Ireland aware of what had happened, which I find very disturbing. During that period, it was continuously testing. What was the motivation behind the initiation of tests? When it was carrying out tests and finding contamination of food products, it failed to make the FSAI and the Department aware of what was happening. After the event became public and other companies were involved, the company finally came clean.
I hope the Minister can satisfy us about whether he had any concern about connections between FSAI personnel and the players in the industry. This went on from June to February without notification to the Department or the FSAI. Why did the FSAI begin testing at the end of last year? What prompted it? Was there a reason for it and did information come to light that directed it to carry out tests?
The Minister said the company had failed to inform the Department of earlier findings. The carry-on of QK Meats leaves an awful lot to be desired. There is a connection between Dawn Meats and QK Meats. The damaging effect of what the two companies failed to do has consequences for the wider sector.
There is clearly an issue to be addressed, especially given that the initial discoveries of horse DNA by QK Meats were not disclosed. That is not acceptable given that had such a disclosure been made at the time it would have acted as a red light and comprehensive testing and awareness programmes could have been conducted to ensure that the crisis did not develop as it has done since Christmas. If the Minister, his Department and the Food Safety Authority of Ireland had been aware of the origin of this product and QK Meats had made them aware of it at that point in time, it might have saved us an awful lot of difficulties down the road.
It would have.
As a legislator, elected representative and a representative of rural communities who are very dependent on farm produce and on having a good image of the food processing industry, that company has done this and I hope if there was any fraudulent behaviour involved the full rigours of the law will be applied to deal with what has happened.
I want to raise the question of what initiated the initial Department tests. How much did the Department know of the possible contamination that was going on and what warned it of the need to be extra vigilant? Did it or the Food Safety Authority of Ireland know that QK Meats had conducted its own tests? The Minister has already answered that question: he said they were not aware of it until February this year. Was any explanation given to the Minister or the Food Safety Authority of Ireland as to why QK Meats did not come forward and make the Department and the Food Safety Authority of Ireland aware of this? I pose those questions not to question the efficiency of any of the official bodies but to try to find out what level of knowledge existed among people responsible for monitoring the food industry here.
In regard to the origin of the contaminated product, and without prejudicing the ongoing investigation, can the Minister inform the House whether we are dealing with one or multiple sources of horsemeat from Poland? Can he also state whether the Polish company from which the contaminated product was bought by QK Meats was informed of the reasons the product was returned to it? Were the Polish authorities made aware of the reason either by the Polish company of by Department when it became aware of it?
This crisis has also highlighted the practices of the food companies themselves. Surely there must be an obligation on any company which discovers contamination of their food product to inform the relevant authorities. If not, then there is the onus for that to be addressed as a matter of urgency as part of ensuring that a similar situation does not occur in future.
We also need to be assured that no processors here knowingly include contaminated ingredients in their products. That brings me back to QK Meats. It had received a consignment that was contaminated and it had also received other consignments that were contaminated, yet it continued to deal with the same company. Apparently, the motivation was that it was able to purchase the product for €400 a tonne cheaper. It all came down to greed and profit: it was not about food safety, the interests of the consumer or a concern for the good name of the Irish food processing industry.
While it is difficult to track down such people always, they need to be dealt with vigorously when caught. More than that, legislation needs to be introduced to ensure that regulations on content, testing and reporting make it more difficult for cowboy operators to break the rules. During my conservation with the Minister yesterday when he was giving us a briefing on this, he said he was contemplating doing that. We need legislation to be brought forward to ensure there is an obligation on any companies carrying out testing to notify the Department and the Food Safety Authority of Ireland immediately if they discover any irregularities in the ingredients, and failure to do so must have a consequence. I would like the Minister to deal with that point.
Earlier this morning I moved a Bill to amend the Food Safety Authority of Ireland Act in order to tighten up in this whole area. It is a short Bill which initially seeks to address traceability and labelling according to country of origin as well as ingredients. A Bill of that nature was never so important and we will move it forward at the first opportunity.
There are a number of questions to be answered. We will have to study the report in detail. I only had the opportunity to have one glance at it. I understand the Minister will come before the committee at a later date when we will have a far more thorough examination of it. Since this issue became public, Sinn Féin, as a party, Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoimhghín and I must be complimentary to the Minister and his staff for facilitating a number of meetings in regard to the ongoing crisis. That is the way business should be done in this House. I compliment the Minister on this.
I welcome the Minister's confirmation that there is no suggestion or suspicion that anything illegal or untoward was taking place at Silvercrest, at Liffey Meats, at Rangeland Meats or at McAdam Food Products, all located in my constituency of Cavan and Monaghan. That is very important for each of those concerns, for their futures and for the futures of those who depend on them for their jobs, their livelihoods and their dependants' needs. I commend the "on the factory floor" workforces at each of those plants for their adherence to the highest standards of food safety and production. That said, the need for strict adherence to contractual arrangements, and for fully responsible oversight by parent companies of subsidiaries across the sector, are lessons that must be learned. Those are lessons for management.
Despite the obvious uncertainties of the weeks since 15 January, the commendable openness and transparency of the testing process set in train, and I have no hesitation in commending the Minister and his Department officials in that regard, has brought us to the cusp of a new and more certain future where domestic public confidence in the Irish beef-based product sector can and will be matched by an international willingness again to laud and applaud Ireland's world leadership role in setting standards in the quality of raw materials used, the production lines in place and the end user produce.
Ireland has - it can again - occupied the premier position on the world stage for food quality and safety. That is a precious position for our country, our economy and all those engaged in agriculture and food production and processing. It is unacceptable, therefore, that anyone or any commercial entity would carelessly or wilfully jeopardise that reputation. I have no hesitation in making it clear to the Minister that every measure should be seriously considered in his and his Department's address of those fault lines in the systems and practices now identified. They should include prosecution where false labelling or the withholding of crucial information is concerned. The suppression of key information by any player in the sector that would alert not only the Minister and the Department but all others, including their competitors, is wholly unacceptable. I have already - I do so again - urged the Minister to introduce legislation to make the reporting to the Minister and his Department of all irregular test results compulsory, with severe consequences for non-compliance.
I have many questions. However, I will confine them to a small number that are of particular concern for me, not having had an opportunity to examine properly the Minister's report. I ask the Minister to confirm, if he can, the future of the Silvercrest operation and the jobs that depend on it. When will the current "bute" testing survey conclude? Will the Minister clearly state that there has not been a risk to human health by virtue of the horsemeat content discovered through the testing process? What sanctions or further actions is the Minister considering where serious failures or wrongdoing have been uncovered? Will the Minister introduce legislation to compel all players in the sector to report any and all irregularities that show in the course of in-house testing?
I thank the Minister again. Deputy Martin Ferris has already recorded my appreciation to the Minister for his accessibility and the accessibility of his office and Department officials.
Deputy Luke 'Ming' Flanagan is sharing time with Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett. Is that agreed? Agreed.
I appreciate the opportunity to discuss this matter. I have not read the report, for obvious reasons. I will read it later. I have read quite a bit on this issue and a few people have contacted me about it. One impressive character, an expert in this area, contacted me. He is connected with horse breeding. In line with the saying, if you have a dog why bark yourself, I will read this person's suggestions which are excellent. I understand that the Minister has seen these too.
He says that at the present time there is no accounting for horses that leave the population through means other than factories that slaughter horses for the human food chain. Specifically, if an animal disposal agent is hired to euthanise and remove a horse, or simply remove a horse that has died or been euthanised by a veterinarian, the agent does not record vital identification variables such as the UELN and microchip number.
The failure to record the UELN and microchip number of each disposed horse is important but it has no direct implication for the human food chain. But the failure of disposal agents to require a passport to accompany the disposed horse is a critical failing in the system. In recent years there has been a trade in passports among dealers who buy horses for slaughter for human consumption. When a dead horse is disposed of the passport is left with the horse owner-keeper. The horse owner-keeper is supposed to return the passport to the issuing agency but most do not. While most horse owners or keepers are honest a minority do sell those passports to dealers for use with other horses. Horses that should not be in the human food chain can enter through this back door.
Changes in zootechnic law that require horse disposal agents to take a horse's passport, record the death of the horse in the proposed on-line information system, and return the passport to the issuing agency would enhance security of the human food chain. An unintended consequence of this policy proposal may be an increase in the incidence of unauthorised and inappropriate disposal of equine remains among individuals owning horses without passports. This issue should be explored during the policy development process.
He also makes several recommendations. He says we do not need a database but an on-line information system. The Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine is in the process of launching an equine database. This man believes that the Department is rushing this task to respond to the horsemeat crisis and in doing so is missing an historic opportunity to institute an on-line information system that could provide enhanced security and in doing so protect public health. This man believes that the Department should create an equine database that can be accessed by studbook officials, veterinarians, Department veterinarians in the field, and horse owners or keepers with each constituency limited as to the type of data access they have and the kinds of data that may be entered or changed. Other individuals, not only in Ireland but also in the EU and throughout the world, should be able to access certain basic data on a read-only basis. The database should contain the fields or variables required by the Department to fulfil its obligations under EU and Irish law and to protect public health. The database should permit each approved studbook to create additional fields or variables to suit the individual studbook and its breeding and administrative requirements. When a foal is registered in the studbook all the data required by the Department must be entered and JPG files containing the marking chart and written descriptions of the horse marks must be uploaded into the database.
This element of the database is very important because it will allow the Department's veterinarians at slaughter facilities throughout the EU and at ports etc. to compare the UELN microchip number and the JPG scan of the horse's marking chart and written description of the marks to the actual horse in front of them to confirm the identity of the animal.
When a horse is prescribed a substance by a veterinarian that requires the animal to be removed from the food chain legislation must require the veterinarian not only to note the removal of the food from the foodchain in the horse's passport but also to enter within some specified period, for example, two hours, that fact in the on-line information system. Smartphone apps should be developed to facilitate quick and easy entry of the data into the database by veterinarians while they are in the field and away from their offices.
His second suggestion is that there be a centralised passport issuing agency. The requirement under legislation for an indivisible and secure equine passport would be better achieved if there were one passport issuing agency that is integrated into the proposed on-line information system. Tenders should be sought from independent organisations, without conflict of interest, that is, studbooks should not be allowed to compete for the contract to provide real time production of passports ordered by studbooks through the proposed on-line information system. When a studbook registers a foal or is asked to issue a passport to an older horse the studbook would enter the required data including the JPG files for making a marking chart and written description into the database and execute the function to issue a passport. The command would be sent to the new passport issuing agency which in real time would create a bound passport with the latest security features, the blank passports would be identical except the passport cover would be individualised for each studbook.
The benefits of this integrated and centralised approach to passport issuance include, (a) the new security features, for example, holograms, special paper etc. can be implemented rapidly as there would be no inventory of old and outdated passports that must be issued before the new passports are used; (b) the per unit cost of issuing passports would be lower than the cost incurred by any current studbook because of economies of scale; (c) the possibility of passports for older horses being issued without the passports being stamped "removed from food chain" would be eliminated because the information system could be hard-wired to require such an entry in the passport if the "31 December-6 months of age" requirement is not met, or if the passport is a replacement or a duplicate; (d) the real-time nature of the system means there is no reporting lag-time, especially important in the case of older horses being issued original, duplicate, or replacement passports; and (d) the Department's regulatory costs would be reduced.
His final recommendation is for enhanced identification and control of animals removed from the food chain. Legislation should be passed containing the following elements: (a) the Department must secure and sell to veterinarians a new type of microchip that contains a standard readable code such as "not for human consumption" that veterinarians will be required to insert in horses prescribed drugs that require them to be removed from the food chain; (b) the Department must secure and sell to veterinarians a freeze mark system with a symbol, for example NHC, that veterinarians will be required to apply to horses prescribed drugs that require them to be removed from the food chain; (c) before prescribing and-or administering and-or giving the substance to the horse owner-keeper to administer the veterinarian must search for the new chip and, if not present, insert the chip in a specified location and mark the location of the passport marking chart along with noting the required "removed from food chain" notice in the passport; (d) the Department must audit every veterinarian every year to confirm that the amount of substances, such as Bute, that they acquire reasonably corresponds to the number of horses they have removed from the food chain through passport stamps, the on-line information system, and new microchip implants and freeze marks less the amount verified by Department inspectors as still being in the veterinarian's inventory; (e) a first offence penalty of €1,000 to be levied on a veterinary surgeon who dispenses a substance that must result in a horse being removed from the food chain; (e) for repeat offenders a penalty of €10,000 and suspension of licence for three months per violation.
I understand the Minister has received this information and I will be interested to hear what he thinks of it.
As the Minister and everyone else is aware, the discovery of horse and pig DNA in what are supposed to be beef products raises the most serious questions. It raises questions for the food industry across Europe and for the political authorities. The fact that it is a pan-European problem and scandal should not be a source of comfort for the Government. I note that at the outset the Minister's response to this crisis was to jump quickly to the conclusion that the origin of the problem lay outside the country and to reassure everybody that everything was okay here and to point the finger at Poland.
What we do not need is false comfort in this regard. Instead, we need to be sure that assurances given by the Minister are based on real fact and evidence. Notwithstanding the fact this is a pan-European problem, it is a larger problem for this country for several reasons. First, as Ireland is the largest exporter of beef in the northern hemisphere, sorting out this problem is of significant economic importance to us. Second, the reputation of our food industry is indelibly linked with the welfare of our economy as a whole. The fact horse DNA was found in one third of products tested by the Food Safety Authority of Ireland and pig DNA in 85% of burgers tested in another study is pretty serious.
Just to clarify that, of the 957 tests recently taken by the Food Safety Authority of Ireland, only seven tested positive for traces of horsemeat. These were all known products already.
Okay, but it is a pretty serious problem which raises questions about the role of big business in the food industry and its attitude to food quality and integrity. It also raises important social questions. Academics in Britain have been making the point that in time of recession, people in financial distress or who have lost their jobs economise on food purchases and, as a result, are much more dependent on cheap processed food from supermarkets. Accordingly, it is the less well-off who stand to be most impacted upon by this crisis.
I agree.
If I understand the report correctly, one food producer in this country, B&F Meats, was involved in mislabelling meat which was then sold on to the Czech Republic. From the looks of it, this was deliberate and there should be prosecutions. The fact that Silvercrest, owned by someone who is notorious in the beef industry as a result of the activities of his firms in the 1980s and 1990s, was misleading its major customers as to whether its products were sourced properly is also serious. It must be remembered that this factory belongs to a firm which a tribunal of inquiry was established to investigate, which the State had to step in to bail out for hundreds of millions of euro and which was involved in widespread tax evasion as well as selling substandard meat to the Iraqis. Quite incredibly, its chief executive was never done for any of this and remains in charge of one of the largest food producers in the country.
QK Cold Stores denied it had found horse DNA in its food products even though the scandal had broken.
Just to be accurate. It did not deny it but it did not tell us either. That was the problem.
What is concerning is the report states there is no evidence that Silvercrest and Rangeland Meats knowingly purchased or used horsemeat in the production of beef products. Neither is there any evidence that they did not, however. One could argue it is quite incredible that they would not know these facts.
I met a well-known celebrity chef on the street in Dún Laoghaire recently who told me that at the base of this scandal was a product call rind emulsion. This consists of animal carcasses, mainly horses and pigs, which are boiled down to produce an emulsion which, in turn, is used by food processors to bulk up meat products to make more money and to fool the pubic as to the quality and standard of the meat. According to the chef this is widespread.
Are these bulking agents produced in Ireland and put on beef products labelled as Irish? If that is not the case and they were sourced from outside, what were Irish beef producers doing, in a country that produces more beef than any other country in the northern hemisphere, buying in dodgy beef products from abroad? Punitive action needs to be taken against the firms in question. We need a regulatory regime that ensures we know precisely the origins of all ingredients in food products and what they are. The issue of horse passports also needs to be addressed.
I thank all the Deputies who contributed to this debate. Several Members asked if we could have a detailed discussion on this report, its consequences and its policy implications at the agriculture committee. I want to do that and give as much time as is necessary. I have shown myself to be more than willing to go to committee for long question-and-answer sessions on this matter. We will do that again for this report because I want everyone's input. We will outline a timescale for actions in this regard.
When we replied to parliamentary questions on the passport issuing system for horses, we gave the factual position. In recent years, we have introduced a system of microchips and passports. The law states horsemeat cannot enter the human food chain unless its identity is known through its passport as well as its medical history. Clearly, there are flaws in the system of which fraudsters are taking advantage. However, when people make complaints, we need evidence to follow up on that. We have acted on the evidence that we have gathered ourselves and it is detailed in the report.
I thank Deputies Martin Ferris and Ó Caoláin's supportive comments as I know there is always a temptation in opposition to sling political shots. I have tried to keep all Members up to date on the matter as much as possible through private briefings. There are, however, some ongoing investigations referred to by this report that I cannot discuss. There is one meat trader who operates on both sides of the Border and, in my view, there will be a Garda investigation involving that individual. It is not Martin McAdam by the way. I hope I can continue to ensure the decision-making process in this regard is open and transparent.
I am pleased that others see the frustrations I have expressed especially with regard to QK Meats and its lack of forthcoming information.
Deputy Ó Caoláin asked some specific questions about legislation on compulsory reporting. We have made a commitment that we would do this and examine it and we will do so. I am somewhat restricted in what I can say about the future of Silvercrest Foods. I had hoped that by today I could give more clarity for the workers in Silvercrest in terms of what their future holds. I have been rather critical of Silvercrest and ABP Food Group in this report but they have continued to pay all of the staff in the plant in full during the past two months while the plant has been essentially closed and that is to their credit.
I have been working with the industry, including ABP Food Group, to try to ensure that we have a future for a large, modern burger-making facility at Silvercrest. It is probably the best plant of its type in Europe. I have visited it and seen it for myself. Given the changes that are needed there is no reason this plant cannot continue to employ all of the people that are there at the moment or continue to produce more than 200 million burgers per year, which is what it was producing. That gives a sense of the scale of the operation. I am afraid the detail of that will be for another day.
The issue of bute or testing for phenylbutazone was raised. We decided to release no meat into the market until all horses being slaughtered had been screened for phenylbutazone or bute. That process will have some false positives and when we get them we will test them in detail for bute to determine whether they are real positives and we will release all of that information. The testing will take place until the end of this month and we will publish information on the extent of the problem or otherwise, as the case may be, when we have that information. The issue of sanctions was raised. I have made it clear in the report that, when and where appropriate, we want to take prosecutions and make an example of people if they are guilty of wrongdoing, but obviously I must have the law on my side to do that and I cannot do it simply because I want to.
Deputy ‘Ming’ Flanagan read into the record a detailed set of proposals. I believe we will do much of what Deputy Flanagan is proposing. Deputy Ó Cuív raised this issue as well. We are considering a centralised database in order that we can have central control of information. The reason for this is similar to the regulation of the beef sector in that when horses are being slaughtered companies should be able to tap into a central computer system to ensure each given horse is as it should be in terms of markings, the microchip matching the passport and the age being consistent with the passport. Unfortunately, a lot of disturbing facts have come to light as a result of our investigations in terms of horses being slaughtered without accurate information.
I will finish presently but I am keen to ensure Deputies get answers. I put it to Deputy Boyd Barrett that it is not true to say we jumped to conclusions at the start of this. Initially this investigation was about Silvercrest Foods. When we established where the ingredient that contributed to equine DNA being in the burgers was coming from we released the information because I said I would do so. The truth is that all the ingredient which tested positive was Polish-labelled. We tested a good deal of other ingredient that came from other parts of Ireland and none of it tested positive. I had to release that information and we drew obvious conclusions from that. Subsequently, the investigation has expanded to involve many more companies, meat traders and others countries and it is true to say that we have real concerns about some Polish-labelled product which on its way to Ireland was transited through other EU countries and which, we believe, may well have been tampered with. Therefore, there are two problems here. Undoubtedly, there are problems with product that came directly from Poland and Polish companies. For example, QK Meats was sourcing from 19 different Polish companies and it returned some product directly to some of those Polish companies. However, there is other product managed by meat traders through intermediaries, especially through our closest neighbour. We have some concerns and there are ongoing investigations in this regard.
Our conclusions have been on the basis of the facts that we can establish through gathering information, interviews, audits of invoicing and order forms, interviewing transport companies and testing in cold stores, but all of this takes time. I believe our team did a great job within a two month period in putting together a rather hard-hitting report. Anyone who accuses me of trying to protect the industry inappropriately will change that view having read this report. We have left no stone unturned. Where criticism is merited we have given that criticism in a blunt manner. However, where companies deserve the all-clear in terms of a lack of wrong-doing we are trying to do that as well. This is about telling the truth, learning lessons from what has happened and ensuring that it does not happen again.