Martin Ferris (Kerry North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 30: To ask the Minister for Agriculture and Food if there have been breaches of regulations regarding the sale or use of specified risk materials from animals; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [12361/06]

Mary Wallace (Meath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The safe disposal of specified risk material, SRM, and other offal plays an important part in the protection of human and animal health and is an integral part of the EU legally enforced BSE controls in the meat sector. Conscious of the need to protect consumer health from vCJD, the human form of BSE, Ireland has consistently supported control measures to exclude from the food chain products of animal origin which may pose a risk to human health.

Under EU and national legislation it is a requirement that SRM, consisting of certain offal, including the skull, spinal cord, eyes and other specified material of cattle and sheep over 12 months of age, be separately collected, transported, processed and disposed of outside of the feed chain. In practice this material is separated from other animal offal at slaughter plants and butchers' premises, dyed and sent to dedicated rendering plants which are under the veterinary supervision of my Department for rendering into meat and bonemeal and tallow. The meat and bonemeal derived from the SRM is disposed of by incineration in other member states. The tallow is generally burned as an alternative fuel at the rendering plants. More recently, some meat processing plants have begun to use tallow as a fuel in thermal boilers to produce heated water and steam. To do so, the operator must be approved by the Department.

The controls at high capacity meat establishments are overseen by the Department's veterinary inspectorate and those at low capacity meat establishments by the local authority veterinary services. The Department and the local authorities operate under service contracts with the Food Safety Authority of Ireland, which also has a statutory role in auditing the procedures and the food safety controls in place throughout the meat industry. The EU Food and Veterinary Office also audits and reports on the controls in place at meat plants, including those relating to the removal and disposal of SRM. The various audits on the SRM controls operated by my Department have indicated that they are satisfactory.

In 2005 there were nine breaches of the SRM controls recorded. All the product in respect of eight of these breaches was destroyed to ensure it did not enter the food chain. In respect of the other breach, bovine carcase product containing SRM was delivered to a plant not authorised to process such product. This product was subsequently transported under official control to an authorised plant where controlled SRM removal took place.

Our Department will continue to monitor the implementation of the BSE and SRM controls to ensure compliance with all EU and national legislation. In conjunction with the EPA and the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, my Department continues to consider all possible options for the safe disposal of such material.

Martin Ferris (Kerry North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is the Minister of State aware that claims have been made by at least one individual involved in the meat industry that specific risk materials, as defined in the relevant EU scientific options, are being sold for use in the manufacture of cosmetics and that this has taken place despite the appointment of official inspectors to prevent such a transfer of those materials? Has the Minister of State been made aware of any such practices and have the Department inspectors ever voiced concerns that such practices might take place? Will she indicate whether she is satisfied that the current level of inspections and monitoring systems are sufficient? Will she further indicate the penalties for any company or individual found to be involved in such practices?

On a lighter note, given that a great deal of money is spent annually on cosmetics for the Taoiseach, whether it be for foundation, conditioner, moisturiser, liquid blusher, lipstick which I do not assume would apply to him — or eye shadow, and given that considerable specific risk materials could find their way into the cosmetic chain, what measures can we take to at least protect our Taoiseach?

Denis Naughten (Longford-Roscommon, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That answers a good deal.

Mary Wallace (Meath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We are not aware of the incident to which the Deputy referred. If he has such information, we would be pleased if he would notify us immediately of same. Our advice and knowledge is that there is sale element involved in this process because it is a cost to the industry. The industry has to pay for the proper disposal of the materials, chiefly through incineration in Germany and other member states. It is a cost to the industry. There is no profit from the disposal of the materials and there is no sale element of which we are aware. If the Deputy has any other evidence, he might notify us of it.

Our information is that there were the nine incidents of which I advised him. We believe the monitoring system is effective due to the fact that nine incidents were detected in this manner. We are clear about what specifically occurred in each case. In two of nine incidents the items were simply put in the wrong bin and that was immediately identified by the inspector. In some cases the plant was closed temporarily or the slaughtering ceased while the whole line was checked to make sure that everything was perfected. We are all the time perfecting a dedicated and detailed system and it is our information that the process is crystal clear. If the Deputy wishes he may bring to our attention the example he identified of which we are not aware.