CITRUS FRUITS (MINERAL OIL) (Hansard, 24 November 1954)

§ Mr. Frederick Willey (Sunderland, North)
I beg to move, That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, praying that the Mineral Oil in Food (Amendment) Order, 1954 (S.I., 1954, No. 1044), dated 29th July 1954, a copy of which was laid before this House on 5th August, be annulled. Perhaps I ought to say at once, for the convenience of hon. Members on both sides of the House, that we do not intend to divide on this Prayer, unless we get an unusually unsatisfactory answer from the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food. As we have reached the end of a Session, may I say that I and my hon. Friends have been pleased by the energy and enthusiasm with which the Parliamentary Secretary has spoken so late at night on so many of our Prayers. We only regret that he has not devoted that energy and enthusiasm to arguments which were more acceptable to us.
I am sure the Parliamentary Secretary will appreciate that this matter is a proper one for us on which to seek an explanation. I know that one of my hon. Friends has devoted a good deal of attention to the subject. In view of the rule which now operates we shall endeavour to conclude the discussion before 11.30 p.m. I shall, therefore, leave my hon. Friend to make out the case.

§ Dr. Barnett Stross (Stoke-on-Trent, Central)
I beg to second the Motion.
This matter will not take long, because it is not as contentious as the one which we have just been discussing. This order amends the order of 1952 by providing that the general prohibition which was noted in the principal order, relating to mineral oil food, shall not now apply to citrus fruits, as well as to certain dry fruits. I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary whether the information I have received is correct, that these citrus fruits are to be treated with a thin coating of wax to preserve them and allow them to travel better? Also, whether the purpose of that is so that they shall keep and be protected from attack by moulds which cause rotting of citrus fruits, or of the skin?
1387 If that be the case, and that only, and as one knows that the coating is to be one-thousandth part of the weight of the fruit itself, we cannot, and would not, press this matter to a Division; for if my surmise is right, this will be better than some of the dangerous substances used in the past on citrus fruits, such as thiourea. This latter has even led to the prohibition of the importation of fruit treated with it because it was dangerous to children.
We know, now, something we did not know before the original order was made, namely, that excessive use of mineral oils is not desirable for human beings. The Parliamentary Secretary knows as well as I do that it is common knowledge now that when they are ingested in any real quantity, not in the tiny amounts mentioned here, and in the form of liquid paraffin and as emulsion, there is absorption of the fat soluble vitamins, A. D. and K., so that the human being is robbed of these. Therefore, it is not desirable to add further mineral oils to anyone's diet. It is not really desirable that any at all should be used for any purpose.
The other thing which we have noted in recent years is that, in a few and rare cases—I have never seen a case, myself—after many years of ingestion of mineral oil in large quantities—and, again, I want to make it quite clear that there is here no suggestion of a large quantity—the absorption through the gut into the system produces paraffin tumours inside the body and those cannot be resolved. Although these cases are very rare we have, obviously, to look at such matters and be very careful what we do.
I note that this amending order allows the use of mineral oils not only, in the first part, for citrus fruits, but for lubricating when confectionery or bread is made. Surfaces can be lubricated with mineral oil. I presume that that means conveyor belts or surfaces of pans and tins in bakinghouses. The definition of "mineral oil" is that it can be one of four things—liquid paraffin, or white oils, or petroleum jellies, or hard paraffin. I presume that it is hard paraffin, which we are now discussing in the first part of the amending order, which will apply to oranges, grapefruit and lemons. It is 1388 to be used in very small quantities—one part in 1,000 in weight—and when used for lubrication it must not enter into food to an extent greater than one-fifth of 1 per cent. of the weight of the food itself.
Have the advisers to the Parliamentary Secretary's Department considered whether this lubrication could not be as well effected by using vegetable oils extracted from sunflower seed, cotton seed or nuts—or any oil which is most easily available and reasonably cheap? I cannot think that it would add much to the cost of confectionery or bread. We have just passed, and sent to another place, a Bill connected with food and drugs, of which we are very proud, and in which the Parliamentary Secretary played, if I may say so, a very notable part; although there were one or two matters on which we did not agree with him. At this early stage we should not do any harm to the principle which was invoked in, I think, Clause 1 of that Bill, that no substance should be added to any food which would render it injurious to health.
I do not claim for a moment that one part per 1,000 of the weight in the form of hard wax on the outside of an orange, which I do not think can be easily absorbed through the gut, is a very great matter. I do not think the substance of the Bill with which we have just dealt is affected, but I do suggest that the principle should be brought back to memory, and that we should be careful. I therefore hope that the Parliamentary Secretary will say that he will at least take up this question of whether vegetable oils, which are in good supply and of reasonable price, may not be used in future, instead of these mineral oils for lubrication purposes.

§ The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food (Dr. Charles Hill)
Had the hon. Member for Sunderland, North (Mr. Willey) still been here—he was good enough to intimate that he had to leave—I should have told him that his speech in moving the Prayer was one of the most convincing and moving speeches which we have ever had from him. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, Central (Dr. Stross) for the way he has spoken. He was using an important freedom by using this Prayer 1389 to obtain from me the reasons which led to the making of the order.
He was quite right in dealing as he did with the background to this matter. This began in 1949 when, because of the shortage of edible oils, it was becoming a widespread practice to use mineral oils for many of the purposes for which edible animal and vegetable oils had been used. Because of the growing suspicion of mineral oils in this connection, an order forbade their use except for the very limited purpose of the lubrication of surfaces in the way the hon. Member described.
The hon. Member was quite right, too, to refer as he did to the general health reasons for that prohibition, the fact that the continued consumption of liquid paraffin, for example, interferes with the absorption of certain vitamins, the fact that such oil is actually deposited in the human frame, and the fact that mineral oils are under suspicion in relation to the causation of cancer.
That general prohibition, with that small exception, was done speedily and deliberately as a door-closing exercise. It was realised then that it might be necessary in certain circumstances and for good reasons to modify that general prohibition on a case being proved and on safety being satisfied in certain respects. In 1950 and 1952 orders were introduced relating to the exemption permitting the use of a modest and declining amount of mineral oil in connection with dried fruit. This is a further modification for a specific purpose. The hon. Member put to me the question, why not vegetable oils?——

§ Dr. Stross
Only for lubrication.

§ Dr. Hill
For the purpose of the exemption, why not? I want to deal with that point first.
I am advised that, in general, vegetable oil does not serve the purpose of mineral oil in connection with this surface lubrication for a number of reasons. There is greater tendency to rancidity with vegetable oil; there is a greater danger of objectionable taste; it is a less satisfactory lubricant; and mineral oil withstands temperature better without sticking than does vegetable oil.
In general, it is still necessary to use the mineral oil, although in some parts 1390 of the baking operation there is a tendency, which we welcome, to use vegetable oil. We see some signs of success in its use, and we shall watch that position with very great care.
Now to the specific point of the exemption from the general prohibition now made by this order. It relates to citrus fruits. In practice, it relates to oranges. For a good many years there has been in operation in the United States a process of waxing the surfaces of oranges. It is called the Brogdex process. This process is now being adopted by Israel. Simply put, it means this. It is necessary and desirable to wash the surfaces of oranges to clear them of dirt and mould, but that process of washing removes the natural, waxy, protective surface of an orange.
Therefore, cleanliness demands as a second phase, the replacement of that protective surface and it is known that this thin, waxy layer prevents the softening of the fruit, improves its appearance and prevents the hardening and drying of the peel. We are satisfied that it is a general safety and improving measure. Bearing in mind the knowledge possessed by the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, Central on the standards of the United States—which have been indicated to us—I am satisfied that the food and drugs administration of the United States, where there is a more extensive knowledge of this process, are convinced of its safety.
Now that this process is being used in Israel, and now that we are satisfied that this modest coating of a mixture of two waxes, one particularly hard, is reasonable and safe, we could not allow this prohibition to interfere with the importation of citrus fruit from Israel. That being so, having satisfied ourselves as to safety, and, indeed, seeing a considerable gain from the point of view of cleanliness and preservation of the fruit, we made this order.
The new Food and Drugs Bill—or the Act as undoubtedly it will be within 24 hours—will enable us to tackle this kind of problem more thoroughly and successfully in the future. I am particularly grateful to the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, Central for his kindly words to me personally about the 1391 Bill, because coming first from him they are the most satisfactory intimation from the other side of the House that there was any worth or value in the effort which we put into the piloting of that Bill through the House. The new powers will make it easier to gain knowledge in advance of such processes as are here involved. We are satisfied that it is a reasonable, proper and safe procedure 1392 and I hope that I have convinced the hon. Member on that point.