Volume 6: Human Health, 1989-96
3. Introduction of the ban on Specified Bovine Offal
External pressures
The House of Commons debates BSE
Articles in the press
Mr Foxcroft's letter to Meldrum
DH meets Geoffrey Cannon
The Women's Farming Union and the Conservative Women's Conference
The Meat and Livestock Commission (MLC)

3.215 During mid-to late May 1989 the issue of banning types of offal from human food was discussed in the House of Commons and in the press, and various groups lobbied the Government to introduce such a ban. An account of these external pressures is given in this section.

The House of Commons debates BSE

3.216 On 18 May 1989 the House of Commons debated the issue of BSE for the first time. ¹ The debate was led by the then junior Opposition spokesman, Mr Ron Davies, who presented his concerns about the Government's handling of the disease. In his opening remarks he said, 'The fact that this is the first debate on the subject to be held in the House shows the complacency with which the Government are viewing the problem.' ² Later on in the debate, Mr Davies said:

By consistently refusing (my) demands for the banning of the sale of all those organs that are known to carry the disease, the Minister is ensuring that our citizens go on eating products which are infected with a potentially fatal contagion. ³

Articles in the press

3.217 On 19 May 1989 two articles appeared in The Times newspaper.

3.218 The first, entitled 'Meat from diseased cattle may be on sale to public', described senior pathologists and veterinary surgeons accusing the Government of not doing enough to prevent BSE-infected cattle being processed. It claimed that these critics, who included Dr Helen Grant and Dr Hugh Fraser, both neuropathologists, had changed their own eating habits because of the possible health risk.

3.219 Dr Francis Anthony (Chairman, British Veterinary Association's Farm Animal Committee) was quoted as saying:

I think it would go a long way to alleviating the present concern if the Government were to impose a general ban on the use of these organs in food manufacturing. ⁴

3.220 The second article was entitled, 'Are we mad to eat sausages?', and included the following:

Sausages and meat pies are now so great a health risk that no one would eat them if they knew what they contained, according to some health campaigners. Their arguments have force for brain and spinal tissue from cows dying of a horrifying and always fatal brain disease are included in many meat products. And it is possible that the disease can be transmitted from animals to humans through food. ⁵

3.221 It quoted the Southwood Working Party's Report, and its conclusion that it was 'most unlikely that BSE will have any implications for human health. Nevertheless if our assessments of these likelihoods are incorrect, the implications would be extremely serious.' The article commented that 'Whitehall watchers see these carefully crafted words as an attempt to conceal real fear that BSE will transmit to humans.' ⁶

3.222 On 20 May 1989 a leading article in The Times noted under the headline 'Sausage Sinister':

Leading experts in animal disease have admitted to changing their habits at mealtimes. They have stopped eating sausages and pies that may contain the brains, spleens, lymph nodes and spinal cords of cows.

Certain products in baby food have also been banned. The use of some animal feeds has been prohibited in Britain as dangerous, though they may still be exported.

The Ministry of Agriculture says there is no further cause for the public to worry about the hundreds of cattle dying from bovine spongiform encephalopathy - a mysterious disease about which almost nothing is known.

No one knows whether it could cause disease in humans. Two human diseases, however, seem to follow a similar pattern. The risk is not inconceivable and, for the price of keeping a small part of the cow off the plate, does not seem worth taking. If BSE does affect humans it is likely to be as maddening and fatal to them as it invariably is to cows and sheep.

The Government's defence is that it commissioned a report from Sir Richard Southwood, Professor of Zoology at Oxford University, and has scrupulously followed his recommendations. He quantified the risk to humans as 'remote', an estimate with which other authorities do not disagree.

But the Ministry of Agriculture appears to have reacted as if that absolved it from further anxiety. If the Government does not wish to ban the use in food of potentially infected organs, butchers and other food retailers ought to see the benefits in doing so of their own accord. ⁷

Mr Foxcroft's letter to Meldrum

3.223 On 22 May 1989 Mr Paul Foxcroft (Sales Director of Prosper De Mulder Ltd, a major rendering company) wrote to Mr Meldrum on the implications for renderers of BSE-contaminated material. In the course of his letter he commented:

. . . it is obvious to anyone that undiagnosed/sub-clinical BSE animals are slaughtered normally, not to mention Scrapie infected sheep! . . .

It appears to (me) that inevitably there will have to be a restriction on the use of ruminant brain and spinal cord materials in human food products and I repeat our suggestions of last year that these materials should be diverted at the point of slaughter from the by-product cycle. ⁸

DH meets Geoffrey Cannon

3.224 On 22 May 1989 a meeting took place between Mr Freeman, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health, and Mr Geoffrey Cannon, a journalist who was Secretary to the Guild of Food Writers at that time, to discuss the position of DH on baby food. ⁹ At this meeting Mr Cannon suggested that some neurologists and, he thought privately, some members of the Southwood Working Party held the view that the Government should go further than the Southwood recommendations by banning, for example, the sale of all food containing ruminant offal and thymus. He argued that the Government was reluctant to consider genuine differences of scientific opinion on issues such as BSE. ¹⁰

3.225 Mr Cannon was told that MAFF and DH were of one mind that there was no case for extending the action on baby food. ¹¹

The Women's Farming Union and the Conservative Women's Conference

3.226 On 24 May 1989 the Women's Farming Union (WFU) issued a press release urging the Government to take steps to ensure that BSE could not be spread through the food chain:

Whilst the WFU recognises that the chance of contamination spreading to the human population is remote it feels that it is the Government's responsibility to ensure that all aspects of risk are controlled.

The WFU suggests that all brain and spinal cord material from bovines and sheep be banned forthwith from inclusion in any products for human consumption. It further suggests that care is taken to ensure that scrapie infected sheep carcasses are not used in the making of animal and bonemeal fertilisers.

Final responsibility lies with Government to ensure that all foodstuffs are safe for human consumption. ¹²

3.227 On 25 May 1989 an article was published in the Guardian citing Government sources as indicating that a general ban on the use of beef brains in food would be introduced by MAFF as an extra food safety precaution. The article stated that:

Announcement of the ban is likely to be hastened by the rebuke the Conservative Women's Conference gave Mr MacGregor yesterday when he attempted to defend the Government's record on food safety. Tory ladies refused to accept blame for poisoning their families when they spoke against a motion which implied that poor domestic hygiene is the primary cause of the problem . . . A succession of speakers demanded new measures to control BSE . . . ¹³

3.228 Sir Donald Acheson had attended an internal meeting the previous day with MAFF officials, where it was decided there were no grounds to extend the baby food ban. Sir Donald Acheson wrote to Mr Freeman on 25 May 1989, attaching a copy of the article. He said:

I do not know whether there is any substance in this article. If Ministers wish to take any further action in relation to BSE I strongly advise that it should be very carefully considered and agreed by both Departments. ¹⁴

3.229 DH contacted MAFF who assured them that the article was incorrect and that there were no plans to introduce such a ban. ¹⁵

3.230 Mr MacGregor was questioned in oral evidence about the pressure on the Government at this time, and about the Conservative Women's Conference:

MR WALKER: The other matters I was going to mention to you was that there was pressure from the MLC [Meat and Livestock Commission], the Women's Farmers Union, the National Farmers' Union. That all accords with your recollection?

MR MACGREGOR: I am not actually sure that this is documented, but around that time, there was a Conservative conference as well, where I hinted very clearly that further steps may well be coming; that was because I had already decided well before then, but we had to draw the threads together.

MR WALKER: Are you thinking of the Conservative Women's Conference?

MR MACGREGOR: I think it probably was, yes. We had to draw the threads together, and in particular, of course, to have the meeting with Sir Richard Southwood. ¹⁶

The Meat and Livestock Commission (MLC)

3.231 Since publication of the Southwood Report, the MLC had had discussions with Dr Kimberlin, who in the words of Mr Maclean 'brought to our attention the value of a further ban on specified materials, not because at that moment he believed it was absolutely essential but because he believed it was a safety factor, in case any of the assumptions were wrong'. ¹⁷

3.232 On 25 May 1989 Mr Geoffrey John, Chairman of the MLC, wrote to Mr MacGregor as follows:

At its meeting today, the Commission expressed very considerable and urgent concern about the effect of the current BSE issue on the public perception of the meat industry, and potentially on beef sales. You, of course, will be fully aware of recent media interest in the subject. I was asked to express the Commission's hope that the Ministry would take the necessary measures as soon as possible to bring about a general ban on the use of beef brains, spinal cord and spleen in meat products for human consumption. ¹⁸