Volume 6: Human Health, 1989-96
Annex 1 to Chapter 4: Unfit meat and human food
Protections against unfit meat entering the human food chain prior to 1982
Licensing of slaughterhouses and knacker's yards
Admission of animals and carcasses to a slaughterhouse
Determination in a slaughterhouse of fitness of meat for human consumption
Sterilisation of unfit meat at the slaughterhouse
Concerns of Environmental Health Officers in 1977
'Operation Meathook'

4.760 The following section describes the regulatory measures preventing meat which was unfit for human consumption from entering the human food chain. For this purpose it is desirable to look at the position before and after the introduction of the Meat (Sterilisation and Staining) Regulations 1982 (1982 MSSR). ¹

Licensing of slaughterhouses and knacker's yards

4.761 A first protection was the requirement that any premises used as slaughterhouses or knacker's yards be licensed under the Slaughterhouses Act 1974. The use of any place for slaughtering animals, whose flesh was intended for human consumption, was an offence unless that place was licensed as a slaughterhouse. The use of any premises in connection with the business of slaughtering, flaying, or cutting up animals, whose flesh was not intended for human consumption, was an offence unless those premises were licensed as a knacker's yard. By section 12(1) of the Food and Drugs Act 1955 it was an offence to sell for human consumption any part of, or product derived wholly or partly from any animal slaughtered in a knacker's yard or whose carcass was brought into such a yard. ²

Admission of animals and carcasses to a slaughterhouse

4.762 The Slaughterhouses (Hygiene) Regulations 1977 ³ imposed two restrictions upon the admission of live animals to a slaughterhouse. First, there was a prohibition whereby a person who knew or suspected any animal to be either diseased or injured was not to bring that animal or permit that animal to be brought into the slaughterhouse. ⁴ This prohibition did not apply in the event that the animal in question was accompanied by a veterinary certificate ⁵ and was either slaughtered without delay or taken to a part of the slaughterhouse lairage provided for the isolation of such animals. ⁶

4.763 The veterinary certificate was required to identify the owner of the animal, to describe the animal and any identification marks, to identify the date and time of the clinical examination and to contain a statement as follows:

It is my opinion, after making due enquiries and taking and testing any necessary samples, that this animal is not affected with any disease or condition liable to render the whole carcass unfit for human consumption and to the best of my knowledge and belief has not received any medicament, antibiotic or chemotherapeutic which might do likewise. ⁷

4.764 Second, there was a prohibition on the bringing in to a slaughterhouse of an animal which was not intended for human consumption. ⁸ This prohibition did not apply to working dogs (in certain circumstances) and horses.

4.765 Further, there were restrictions on the admission of carcasses. First, there was a prohibition whereby no person was to bring, or permit to be brought, into the slaughterhouse the carcass of an animal which had died or had been killed and not bled. ⁹ This prohibition was subject to an exception where an animal died in transit to the slaughterhouse, but in that event the carcass was to be removed from the slaughterhouse immediately following the carrying out of any necessary examination. The result was that only the carcass of an animal that had been killed and bled could be brought into, and remain at, a slaughterhouse. Even this was subject to certain requirements affecting undressed and dressed carcasses respectively. ¹⁰

4.766 In the case of an undressed carcass, such a carcass was required to be accompanied by a veterinary certificate upon being brought into the slaughterhouse. ¹¹ This certificate was required to identify the owner of the carcass, to describe the carcass and any identification marks, to identify the reason for the slaughter of the animal and to contain a statement as follows:

It is my opinion, after making due enquiries and taking and testing any necessary samples, that the animal from which this carcass was produced was not affected with any disease or condition liable to render the whole carcass unfit for human consumption and to the best of my knowledge and belief had not received any medicament, antibiotic or chemotherapeutic which might do likewise. ¹²

4.767 In the case of a carcass being admitted already dressed, that carcass was required to be accompanied by either:

1. a certificate certifying that the carcass and its offal had been inspected and passed fit for human consumption; or
2. its offal, including the stomach and intestines, and a veterinary certificate in the same terms as that required for an undressed carcass (see above). ¹³

4.768 Further information concerning the Slaughterhouse (Hygiene) Regulations 1977 is to be found in Chapter 10 of this volume.

Determination in a slaughterhouse of fitness of meat for human consumption

4.769 In an export slaughterhouse an animal could not be slaughtered for human consumption unless it had passed an ante-mortem health inspection. ¹⁴ However, no such requirement applied to animals slaughtered in a domestic slaughterhouse.

4.770 In both domestic and export slaughterhouses there were requirements for the dressing of carcasses, for post-mortem inspection to determine fitness for human consumption, and for the marking of meat which had been passed as fit for human consumption. These requirements are described in Chapter 2 of vol. 13: Industry, Processes and Controls.

4.771 In summary, if inspection revealed that the animal was suffering from any of certain specified diseases, the whole carcass and all the offal and blood removed from it, was to be declared unfit. Certain specific diseases or conditions (such as some forms of tuberculosis), did not, if identified, require the whole carcass and all the offal and blood to be declared unfit, but only those parts specified in the Regulations. In addition, where the inspector or authorised officer was satisfied that the whole or any part of a carcass or any offal was affected by any other disease or condition, he was to regard as unfit for human consumption the whole carcass and the offal or such lesser part thereof as he thought appropriate in the circumstances. ¹⁵

Sterilisation of unfit meat at the slaughterhouse

4.772 Under the Meat (Sterilisation) Regulations 1969 ¹⁶ a number of restrictions were imposed upon the way in which knacker meat and meat unfit for human consumption could be dealt with. In each case 'meat' was defined to include offal and fat and any product of which a principal ingredient was meat. ¹⁷ Subject to certain exceptions, these restrictions applied so long as the 'meat' in question had not been sterilised. 'Sterilised' was defined as meaning treated by boiling or by steam under pressure until every piece of meat was cooked throughout, or dry-rendered, digested or solvent-processed into technical tallow, greases, glues, feeding meals or fertilisers. ¹⁸

4.773 Enforcement powers were given to authorised officers of local authorities. 'Local authority' was defined under the Food and Drugs Act 1955 as meaning, as respects any borough and any urban district or rural district, the council of the borough or district. ¹⁹

4.774 'Authorised officer' was defined (also under the Food and Drugs Act) as meaning an officer of the council authorised by them in writing, either generally or specially, to act in matters of any specified kind or in any specified matter, and, for the purpose of taking samples, included a police constable so authorised with the approval of the police authority concerned. ²⁰ In order to be authorised to act in relation to the examination and seizure of meat an officer was required to be either:

1. the medical officer of health;
2. a sanitary inspector;
3. a member of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS) employed for the purpose of inspection of food, or
4. a person having such qualifications as may be prescribed by Regulations made by the Ministers. ²¹

4.775 The medical officer of health and the sanitary inspector of a council were to be deemed authorised officers by virtue of their appointments. ²² A member of the RCVS employed for the purpose of inspection of food was to be deemed authorised for the purpose of examination and seizure of meat under the provisions of Part I of the Act relating to food unfit for human consumption. ²³

4.776 As regards the restrictions imposed by the 1969 Regulations, first, the occupier of a slaughterhouse was prohibited from causing or permitting to be removed from the slaughterhouse, and any person was prohibited from removing from a slaughterhouse, any meat which was unfit for human consumption, unless that meat had first been sterilised. ²⁴

4.777 Second, the occupier of a knacker's yard was prohibited from causing or permitting to be removed from the knacker's yard, and any person was prohibited from removing from a knacker's yard, any meat, unless that meat had first been sterilised. ²⁵

4.778 Each of these prohibitions was subject to exceptions for removal:

1. to any hospital, medical or veterinary school or similar institution for instructional or diagnostic purposes or to any manufacturing chemist for the manufacture by him of pharmaceutical products;
2. to any processor for sterilisation by him, or to any zoological garden, menagerie, mink farm, or trout farm, or to any person by arrangement in writing with an authorised officer for preparation before further removal to any processor or manufacturing chemist or for storage if such meat is in each case removed in a vehicle or impervious container which is kept closed and locked at all times except when necessary for the loading or unloading of the contents or their examination by an authorised officer and which bears a notice of adequate size which was conspicuously visible containing a distinct, legible and unambiguous statement to the effect that the meat was not for human consumption. ²⁶

A further exemption is described in paragraph 4.781 below.

4.779 Thirdly, it was an offence for any person to possess for the purpose of sale or preparation for sale butcher's meat which was unfit for human consumption or knacker meat unless that meat had first been sterilised. ²⁷ 'Butcher's meat' was defined as meaning meat from any animal slaughtered in the UK for sale for human consumption. ²⁸ 'Knacker meat' was defined as meaning meat from any animal slaughtered in, or carcass brought into, a knacker's yard in the UK. ²⁹ The Regulations provided for two defences to proceedings for contravention of this prohibition. It was a defence for an individual to prove either:

1. that he did not know and could not with reasonable diligence have ascertained, that the meat was unfit for human consumption or, as the case may be, was knacker meat; or
2. that he had made arrangements for it to be sterilised without any unnecessary delay. ³⁰

4.780 There was exempted from this prohibition any meat: ³¹

1. in any slaughterhouse or knacker's yard;
2. subject to certain requirements, ³² in the possession of any person while in transit from a slaughterhouse or knacker's yard to:
   1. any processor;
   2. any zoological garden, menagerie, mink farm or trout farm;
   3. any person by arrangement in writing with an authorised officer for preparation before removal to any processor or manufacturing chemist;
3. in the possession of any person while in transit from a slaughterhouse or knacker's yard to any hospital, medical or veterinary school or similar institution for instructional or diagnostic purposes or to any manufacturing chemist for the manufacture by him of pharmaceutical products;
4. on the premises:
   1. of any processor for sterilisation by him;
   2. of any manufacturing chemist for the manufacture by him on those premises of pharmaceutical products;
   3. of any zoological garden, menagerie, mink farm or trout farm;
   4. subject to certain requirements, ³³ of any person by arrangement in writing with an authorised officer for preparation before removal to any processor or manufacturing chemist or for storage on those premises;
   5. in transit to the premises of any processor or manufacturing chemist in a vehicle or container in accordance with (iv)(d) above.

4.781 This prohibition, along with the first two prohibitions described above, was subject to an exemption where there were no facilities for sterilisation in a slaughterhouse or knacker's yard. In that event those prohibitions did not apply as respects any meat removed from that slaughterhouse or knacker's yard by arrangement in writing with an authorised officer to a place where it would be sterilised or destroyed. ³⁴

4.782 Fourthly, no person was permitted to sell, or offer or expose for sale, by retail, any butcher's meat which was unfit for human consumption or knacker meat unless that meat had first been sterilised. ³⁵ It was a defence to proceedings for contravention of this prohibition for an individual to prove that he did not know and could not with reasonable diligence have ascertained, that the meat was unfit for human consumption or was knacker meat. ³⁶

4.783 All of the above restrictions were subject to the application of provisions from the Food and Drugs Act 1955 as follows: ³⁷

1. section 113 provided that a person against whom proceedings were brought was entitled to bring before the court in proceedings any person to whose act or default he alleged that the contravention of the provisions in question was due and prove that the contravention was due to the act or default of that person;
2. section 115(2) imposed restrictions upon the circumstances in which it was possible for it to be a defence in a set of proceedings that a warranty had been given that any article or substance could be lawfully sold or dealt with under the name or description or for the purpose under or for which it was sold or dealt with;
3. section 116 set out offences of applying to an article or substance a warranty or certificate of analysis given in relation to another article or substance and of giving of a false warranty in writing, and provisions relating to those offences; and
4. section 108(1)(b) provided that proceedings under section 116 had to be commenced within 12 months. ³⁸

4.784 The 1969 Regulations required that any person responsible for the consignment or delivery of any butcher's meat which was unfit for human consumption or knacker meat, in any of the circumstances covered by the Regulations, was to give or send with the meat to the person by whom or on whose behalf the meat was to be received a notice. That notice was to bear information relating to the meat including particulars of the date of its consignment or delivery, the quantity and description of it and the respective names and addresses of the person responsible for its consignment or delivery and of the person by whom or on whose behalf it was to be received. ³⁹ The person responsible for the consignment was required to retain a copy of the notice and the person by whom or on whose behalf the consignment was received was required to retain the original. In each case, the notice was to be retained for three months after the date of the consignment and be produced for inspection to an authorising officer upon his request. ⁴⁰

4.785 An authorised officer had, at all reasonable times, a power to examine any meat not intended for human consumption which had been sold, was offered or exposed for sale or was in the possession of, or had been deposited with or consigned to any person for the purpose of sale or preparation for sale. The authorised officer had a further power to seize the meat and remove it in order for it to be dealt with by a Justice of the Peace (JP), if it appeared to the authorised officer that the meat either:

a. is required to be sterilised, but it has not been sterilised; or

b. is required to bear but does not bear a notice. ⁴¹

4.786 Having seized any meat under this power, the officer was required to inform the person in whose possession the meat was found of his intention to have it dealt with by a JP. ⁴² Anyone liable for prosecution under the terms of the Regulations was entitled, if he attended before the JP, to be heard and to call witnesses. ⁴³ If it appeared to the JP that the meat brought before him, whether seized under the provisions of this Regulation or not, was meat to which the Regulations applied and was required to be but had not been dealt with in accordance with those Regulations, he was required to condemn it and order it to be destroyed or to be so dealt with. ⁴⁴ In the event that a JP refused to condemn any such meat, the council was required to compensate the owner of the meat for any depreciation in its value resulting from its seizure and removal. ⁴⁵

4.787 The Regulations also provided that if an authorised officer had reason to suspect that any vehicle or container contained any meat to which the Regulations applied and which was intended for sale or was in the course of delivery after sale, then he had a power to examine the contents, and, if necessary, detain the vehicle or container ⁴⁶ (subject to exceptions in the case of certain vehicles). ⁴⁷ In the event that he found any meat which was required to be but was not dealt with in accordance with the Regulations, the authorised officer was able to seize the meat and remove it as set out at paragraph 4.785 above.

Concerns of Environmental Health Officers in 1977

4.788 In 1977 the Environmental Health Officers Association published a report by their Working Party on Slaughterhouse Hygiene chaired by Mr F G Sugden. ⁴⁸ Among the recommendations made in the report were the following:

1. the particular needs for dealing with casualty animals be given further examination (paragraph 3.9);
2. legislation requiring the ante-mortem inspection of animals be introduced for the domestic trade (paragraph 11.5);
3. further investigations to be made to develop an acceptable uniform system of meat inspection recording (paragraph 11.10); and
4. an investigation be made into meat inspection requirements as specified by Regulations currently in force with a view to assessing the most effective system for controlling meat hygiene and safety (paragraph 11.13).

4.789 The report noted that an increasing health hazard arose from the fact that certain items (eg head meat) may have either an industrial or human food outlet. It stated:

Whilst there is no objection to material handled throughout in hygienic fashion being ultimately relegated to industrial processing the converse is not the case. Where such a commodity has ostensibly left the slaughterhouse for industrial processing and a decision during transit or on arrival is taken to restore it to the edible market, danger arises from the intermediate substandard handling. This is further discussed in the section on by-products and attention is drawn to the Working Party's recommendation that a material once classified as inedible should be handled throughout, to final processing, in accordance with the Meat Sterilisation Regulations, 1969. ⁴⁹

4.790 Concern as to what might happen after completion of the meat inspection process was repeated in paragraphs 16.23-16.28:

16.23 The system described by the Working Party in which sound stock is safely processed under hygienic conditions and full-time expert supervision would be brought to nought if some of the products of such a system were allowed to return unchecked to farm, kennel or stable. The law subscribes surprisingly little to this view, beyond limiting the removal of raw material, unfit or not intended for human food, from slaughterhouses and knackers' yards and prescribing, in the case of statutory seizure and submission to a magistrate, a procedure for destruction or prohibition of sale for food. This latter situation rarely arises as the vast majority of unfit meat is dealt with informally on the basis of its voluntary surrender to the local authority. To avoid doubts as to ownership and the destruction or disposal of unfit meat the local authority may agree to purchase such material from the owner.

16.24 It is in the context of voluntary action or advice tendered by the local and central authorities that the vast majority of industrial utilisation of unfit and inedible (including surplus) materials from the slaughtering industry takes place. Current public opinion, however, is not satisfied to hear that even marginal amounts of hazardous or toxic material escape effective treatment. In this context the hazardous materials are the agents responsible for the spread of zoonoses; the pollutants are the odorous volatile substances emanating from heat treatment necessary for safe re-cycling of the organic chemical constituents of slaughterhouse wastes.

. . .

16.26 The real hazards arise not only from materials which may get out of course, but from materials which may legitimately be handled raw, eg, direct to feed certain animals and from lack of appreciation in the processing industry of the risks of cross-infection between the raw and finished product sides of their plant.

16.27 Comments on hazards arising from the dual nature of certain slaughterhouse surpluses have already been made but an unsatisfactory situation can arise when on the same site edible and inedible processing takes place. Even though plant personnel may be separated there is no firm sanction to require segregated provision of sanitary and ablution facilities - a vulnerable point of cross-infection - and 'decontamination' of personnel on movement from 'dirty' to 'clean' sections.

16.28 A complete prohibition of such mixed processing on the same site would appear a simple solution until one examines the effect both on the factory abattoir complex and the economics of by-product utilisation. ⁵⁰

4.791 These concerns were reflected in two further recommendations:

1. The disposal of unfit, inedible and surplus materials from slaughterhouses be further regulated so as to ensure:
   1. that the application of the Meat Sterilisation Regulations to all such materials be beyond doubt;
   2. that where edible and inedible processing is conducted on the same site adequate segregation of plant, personnel and welfare facilities be required, including facilities for decontamination before moving to edible from inedible areas;
   3. that arrangements for disposal of such materials be subject to prior approval by the local authorities in despatch and reception areas and that copies of the consigment notes required by the above Regulations to accompany the materials be supplied also to the respective authorities (paragraph 16.29).
2. That an appropriate Code of Practice be produced in consultation with the industries concerned to provide for acceptable methods of collection, storage, distribution and processing of industrial and pharmaceutical products of animal origin (paragraph 16.30). ⁵¹

'Operation Meathook'

4.792 Concerns were increased following the uncovering of an illegal market in unfit meat and knacker meat in 1980 as a result of 'Operation Meathook'. ⁵² Enquiries which initially commenced in the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham led to the discovery of a nationwide fraud in which knacker meat was being substituted for beef in the catering and food manufacturing industries.

4.793 A number of factors were believed to have lead to and assisted this fraud. The Chartered Institute of Environmental Health provided to the Inquiry a synopsis of 'Operation Meathook' which included the following summary:

At this time there were more knacker's yards operating than there are now and farmers were paid a reasonable price for sick, injured and fallen stock. When the fraud was discovered, price for fallen stock had reached an all-time high.

Control was exercised by local authority employees, environmental health officers and authorised meat inspectors. The meat from knacker's yards was processed primarily for the animal food industries. The staining of this meat was rigorously opposed by the Pet Food Industry, in particular as marketing a stained product was difficult. Local authority officers spent little time supervising these operations as the food produced was not intended for human consumption. All operators of knacker's yards were obliged to keep records of the stock they picked up, its origin and description. Due to the calibre of operative and the nature of this operation, these records were difficult to police. Equally, details of the amounts paid for stock were difficult to access by local authority officers, due to the way farmers 'prefer to do business'. Veterinary certification was infrequent as the cost of consulting a vet was often more than the value of the stock item. ⁵³

4.794 The findings of 'Operation Meathook' led the Environmental Health Officers and others to lobby for changes to legislation to make the sale of unfit meat more difficult if not impossible. ⁵⁴