Professor Alan Reilly:

I thank the Chairman for inviting the Food Safety Authority of Ireland to update the committee on our study investigating the authenticity of meat products on the Irish market. In making this presentation and addressing the committee's queries I am joined by my colleague, Raymond Ellard, director of the FSAI consumer protection division. The FSAI has brought to light some very poor practice within the burger manufacturing industry which really is not acceptable, although it remains to be seen whether this is as a result of carelessness, collusion or deliberate fraud.

The FSAI was established in 1999 as the national body with responsibility for enforcement of food law in Ireland. We are a statutory, independent, science-based agency dedicated to protecting public health and consumers' interests in the area of food safety. We were set up to be independent of the food industry and we operate under the aegis of the Minister for Health. The FSAI's principal role is to take all reasonable steps to ensure that the food consumed, distributed, marketed and produced in Ireland meets the highest standards of food safety and hygiene. We were also charged with bringing about the general acceptance that the primary responsibility for the safety of food is borne by the food industry across the whole food chain. Over the past 14 years the FSAI has worked in partnership with all interested parties to ensure a consistent standard of enforcement of food legislation and to underpin food law with science-based risk assessment.

The FSAI oversees an extensive programme of food testing in Ireland to safeguard consumer health in respect of food and to assess compliance by the industry with labelling and other relevant legislation. Annual monitoring programmes are agreed with official agencies that work under service contract to the FSAI. Based on a collective risk assessment and the requirements of regulations, these programmes cover a diverse range of micro-organisms and chemical compounds that are tested in a network of official laboratories. The Minister spoke about some components of these programmes.

Each year the FSAI organises additional surveys across a range of foodstuffs. The survey on the authenticity of meat products was one of these. Since 2005 we have used DNA testing for similar surveys which have examined the authenticity of chicken fillets and smoked, wild and farmed salmon and compared the authenticity of some of these products. In 2012 we selected meat products for examination using sophisticated DNA-based analytical techniques to differentiate between animal species present. This was a routine survey examining the authenticity of beef meal products, salamis and beefburger products. We tested for pork, beef and horse DNA. Contrary to some speculation, it was a random survey. Our ongoing work is guided by a combination of scientific risk assessment and common sense. The survey was carried out against a background of increasing prices of raw material used in food and feed manufacture and global sourcing of ingredients. This can lead to a temptation to cut corners and to substitute cheaper raw materials for higher-priced ingredients. The longer the food supply chain, the higher the risk that something may go wrong, such as the sourcing of ingredients containing horse DNA. In conducting the survey we uncovered a problem which might otherwise have gone undetected or have been discovered first in our overseas markets.

Although the findings have provoked a widespread response, fostered lengthy public debate and given rise to questions about the quality of some of our food supply, the eventual impact and outcome will be positive for consumers and the reputation of Ireland as a producer of safe and wholesome food.

I will give some details of the timeline of the initial study. The first samples for the study were purchased between 7 and 9 November 2012 and delivered to the IdentiGEN testing laboratory in Dublin within a few days of purchase. Salami, beef meal and beef burger products from major retail outlets were sampled and tested for animal species using DNA profiling. The first set of results were all qualitative; in other words, we were looking for the presence or absence of DNA. The results were received by the FSAI on 30 November 2012.

Of the 19 salami products analysed, ten tested positive for bovine DNA, all were positive for porcine DNA, while equine DNA was not detected. There were no significant issues with the salami products that warranted further investigation. Of the 31 beef meal products such as cottage pie, bolognese sauces and so forth, all were positive for bovine DNA, 21 were positive for porcine DNA and none was found to contain equine DNA. Only two of these beef meal products had declared on the label that they contained pork, which was found at very low levels; therefore, we considered its presence may have been unintentional and due to cross-over during the processing of different animal species in the same plant.

Of the 27 burger products analysed, all were positive for bovine DNA, 23 were positive for porcine DNA and ten were positive for equine DNA. Most of the burgers positive for porcine DNA had not been labelled as containing pork, which was found at very low levels. Again, we considered its presence to be unintentional and due to cross-over during the processing of different animal species in the same plant. The 27 burgers which were tested in this study had come from nine manufacturers, six in Ireland and three in the United Kingdom. The products that had tested positive for equine DNA had come from three plants, two in Ireland and one in the United Kingdom.

A surprising result was the detection of equine DNA in ten beef burgers which had not been labelled as containing horsemeat. Given this unexpected finding, we decided that the results needed to be confirmed and the laboratory was requested to sequence the DNA detected to ensure it was of equine and porcine origin. This was confirmed by the laboratory on 10 December. As an additional confirmatory check, the FSAI purchased more burger samples on 10 December from the same or similar product batches as the original samples that had tested positive. Results for these extra samples were received by the FSAI on 18 December and, again, they were found to be positive for equine DNA. At this stage I was beginning to wonder what was happening. It was a very surprising finding and we were scratching our heads and thinking: "What the heck is going on here?"

For the sake of certainty, on 21 December 20 sub-samples from the initial 27 samples were taken from the IdentiGEN laboratory and sent as blind samples to the Eurofins laboratory in Germany for additional independent testing. All results up to this date were qualitative, which indicated either the presence or absence of equine DNA but not the actual amount. Both laboratories were, therefore, asked to quantify the amount of DNA in the samples. The FSAI was and is confident about the competence of both laboratories. Both operate to high standards and are accredited to European standards.

On 21 December the FSAI requested the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine to obtain samples of raw ingredients from the two implicated meat processing plants. These were sent to the IdentiGEN laboratory on 4 January and the results were received on 11 January. The results showed very low or trace levels of equine DNA in beef products from the Netherlands, Spain and Ireland. These products, however, were not linked as ingredients in the burgers that had tested positive. We advised our counterparts in Spain and the Netherlands of our findings.

Semi-quantitative results from the Eurofins laboratory in Germany were received on 11 January 2013 and corroborated the initial results of the IdentiGEN laboratory. In addition, quantitative results from the IdentiGEN laboratory were received by the FSAI late on the evening of 11 January. Of the ten burger products that had tested positive for equine DNA, all but one had low levels. The quantification of equine DNA in this one burger gave an estimated amount of 29% equine DNA relative to beef DNA. This product was manufactured by Silvercrest on behalf of Tesco. At this point, there was no explanation for the finding of 29% equine DNA relative to beef DNA in this single sample.

With regard to the food safety risks, the FSAI considered that there was no risk to consumer health associated with these findings. When assessing risk, the FSAI bases all of its decisions on sound science. In this case, we evaluated the potential risks such as the presence of bacteria or residues of animal drugs. First, if bacteria are present, they would be killed by cooking and as these burgers are fully cooked before being eaten, there would be no consumer risk. Second, we also had the burgers that had tested positive for equine DNA tested for the presence of a range of animal remedies by the State Laboratory on 10 December. The animal remedies for which we tested are listed in the footnote at the bottom of the page in the submission. They included phenylbutazone, a commonly used medicine in horses. Once administered to a horse the animal is not allowed into the food chain. It is usually stamped on its passport that the animal is not for the food chain. The FSAI received these results on 19 December and all the results were negative for the presence of phenylbutazone and other drugs.

The finding of even trace amounts of equine DNA in beef products, even if not a public health concern, is relevant and worthy of further consideration in cases where the manufacturing plant does not handle horsemeat products. For plants that do not handle horsemeat product it is relevant to explain how the contamination occurred. On 14 January we discussed the survey findings with the management of both plants which confirmed that they did not use or process equine material in both plants. On 14 January the FSAI informed officials in the Department of Health and the Ministers in that Department of the findings. We understand both Ministers were informed by their officials on 14 January. We also advised the Food Standards Agency in the United Kingdom, including Northern Ireland, on that day. Also on 14 January we requested the HSE to take formal samples of burgers from a range of retail and catering premises. These samples were analysed in the Eurofins laboratory in Germany under the direction of the HSE's public analyst laboratory in Cork. All samples later tested negative, except for one burger from Tesco which confirmed our previous findings.

On 15 January we advised the five retailers concerned of our findings. They took immediate and independent decisions to remove implicated products from the market. The FSAI issued a press statement on 15 January and the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine began an investigation into operations in both plants. The FSAI has been part of that investigation and is working closely with the Minister's team. The Minister has given details of the investigation.

There are some preliminary conclusions we can draw from the investigation to date. Clearly, modern analytical techniques are essential in combating food fraud such as the use of the DNA probes which we used in this study. A key lesson for the food industry is that there is a need for robust supplier control and verification of supply. When purchasing raw ingredients for inclusion in meat products, it is necessary to ensure all ingredients are lawfully declared. Knowledge, control and checks of primary and secondary suppliers are essential. The detection of trace amounts of non-bovine DNA highlights the need for food processors to be more vigilant about the integrity of food ingredients and the potential for cross-contamination in plants where meat from multiple species is handled. Food business operators should validate their cleaning programmes for their ability to eliminate or reduce to a reasonable level cross-contamination of meat products by tissue from undeclared species.

Some research is required to determine if there are thresholds below which cross-contamination of DNA is unavoidable. Should this prove to be the case, authorities, consumers and the food industry across Europe will have to consider how this issue can be addressed. The matter will have to be addressed at European level.

When purchasing processed foods, consumers cannot tell what type of raw material is used. They rely on labelling and put their trust in brands, manufacturers and retailers. Therefore, in any food business the most valuable ingredient - in this case, processed meat products - is trust. I will be happy to answer any questions members may have.