Written answers

Tuesday, 14 November 2006

Department of Agriculture and Food

Pesticide Control

9:00 am

Tony Gregory (Dublin Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 461: To ask the Minister for Agriculture and Food further to Parliamentary Question No. 426 of 7 November 2006 with reference to the extensive monitoring programme referred to the number of inspections carried out at the company in question in each of the past five years. [37900/06]

Photo of Mary CoughlanMary Coughlan (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Pesticide Residue Monitoring Programme of my Department is aimed at detecting the presence of residues on foods which are for sale on the market. Strategically, food samples are taken for analysis at wholesale/distribution level and effective action can be taken if a problem is detected.

The monitoring programme is agreed following detailed consultation between the Food Safety Authority. It is a risk based programme which takes account of, inter alia, the dietary importance of mushrooms for Irish consumers and the results of earlier monitoring programmes. In the period 1994 to date in 2006 no illegal pesticide residues were found in Irish mushroom. There is no record of samples being analysed from the company in question during the past five years.

The 2006 Irish monitoring programme has scheduled the analysis of ten mushroom samples for pesticide residues. Each of these samples will be analysed for residues of 150 different pesticide compounds. This programme compares favourably with testing carried out in other EU countries where in 2005 the numbers of samples analysed were as follows: Sweden, 10; UK, 48; Netherlands, 12; Norway, 12; and Belgium 19.

In the event that illegal pesticide residues or levels exceeding Maximum Residue Levels of approved pesticides were detected then in agreement with the FSAI appropriate follow up action would take place. This would include traceback to the producer and if it was determined that there was an unacceptable risk to the consumer the seizure and destruction of the product would take place.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.