§ 2.52 p.m.
§ BARONESS SUMMERSKILLMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government in what circumstances a considerable quantity of carcinogenic material (Rhodamine B, prohibited in 1957) was permitted to be sold to the public 9 in the form of "rock" after it has been established that grave risks were involved; and whether they will issue a directive that foodstuffs containing noxious material should be immediately withdrawn from the market without allowing a period of grace to the traders.]
THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FOOD (EARL WALDEGRAVE)My Lords, the Colouring Matter in Food Regulations, 1957, prohibited numerous colours which had been in use in the food trade for many years and were permitted by the previous regulations. Although the addition of the prohibited colours to food is undesirable, and, in the case of some of them, there is evidence which tends to suggest that they have caused cancer in experimental animals when fed to them in very large quantities, it is improbable that, in the quantities in which they are used in food, they represent a serious hazard to health or such a risk as would have justified an immediate ban on colours to which no previous restrictions had applied. Such a ban would have meant the destruction of considerable quantities of food of many kinds. Regulations made banning the use of an additive in food allow a period of grace to give manufacturers time to alter their production methods and to dispose of stocks when the risks to health are small or doubtful. But if any additive was proved to cause a risk to health suffcient to justify the destruction of food, the regulations banning it would certainly be brought into force forthwith.
§ BARONESS SUMMERSKILLMy Lords, I must thank the noble Earl for his Answer, but I find it quite illogical. Am I not right in saying that in 1957 it was decided that this carcinogenic element, Rhodamine B, was found in such a quantity that it would be dangerous and inimical to health for people to consume it? I do not think that is disputed. The traders were then told that, despite this grave discovery, they could sell their stocks for two years. I will accept the noble Earl's point that perhaps on some things—let us say, infected pies—it might not cause a lot of trouble, but to allow traders to sell for two years material which it is agreed contains carcinogenic properties is diffi- 10 cult to understand. Is the noble Earl aware—and I regard this as a very serious matter—that not only has this been consumed for two years, the period of grace given by the Government, but a sample was found in November which caused the present case? Therefore this has been consumed for four years. My other short question is this. In 1957, when it was discovered that this material contained carcinogenic properties, were the workers in this industry, or their representatives, informed? Because otherwise they have been manufacturing this material for some four years in complete ignorance of what it contained?
EARL WALDEGRAVEMy Lords, may I answer the noble Baroness's short question as to whether the workers were informed? The Colouring Matter in Food Regulations, 1957, were published as Statutory Instrument 1066 of 1957. The public was informed when these regulations were published.
§ BARONESS SUMMERSKILLMay I put a further supplementary to that? When an Order of that kind is published, does the noble Lord think that these unskilled men and women, thousands of them, working in these factories where these preparations are made, know anything about them?
EARL WALDEGRAVENo, my Lords. But the noble Lady's supplementary questions are surely somewhat academic. Five years ago, when these regulations were going through Parliament, would have been the time to question whether a period of two years was to be allowed for stocks to be used up. Parliament, in its wisdom, passed these regulations and the Third Schedule stated the period during which stocks could be used up of the substances which were not thought to cause a serious danger to health. If anybody uses these substances to-day he is in clear breach of the regulations, for the period of grace elapsed in 1959, three years ago.
§ BARONESS SUMMERSKILLMy Lords in the Schedule it does not say it is carcinogenic.
EARL WALDEGRAVEIn this Schedule it does not say that this colouring matter is carcinogenic. But, as the 11 noble Lady is surely aware, when these regulations were introduced we changed our system. Previously it was a question of banning certain materials. In 1957 we changed the system and had a permitted list instead. The permitted list by inference bans all the others. There were some 400 colouring matters which were no longer allowed. In the First Schedule to the Regulations are the only coal tar colours that were permitted from the dates given in the Third Schedule.
§ LORD LATHAMMy Lords, could the noble Earl say whether in cases where there is a danger to workers the factory inspector is informed of the making of the Order?
EARL WALDEGRAVEHe must certainly be aware of it, but these are regulations under the Food and Drugs Act designed to protect the consumer of food. I should need notice of the noble Lord's question as to what steps are taken under the Factory Acts in regard to the preparation of substances which may be dangerous.
§ LORD LATHAMMy Lords, the workers who handle the material are surely just as much concerned as those who consume it.
EARL WALDEGRAVEThat would be for a different Ministry and different regulations would apply. I think we should try to keep this matter in proportion. The noble Baroness probably knows the experimental work that was done on these substances, about which there was sometimes considerable doubt as to whether they should be prohibited or not. It was possible, by massive doses, to induce a certain amount of skin cancer in rats, but not in mice or in any other animals, so far as I know.
§ LORD LATHAMMy Lords, will the noble Earl be good enough to see that these workers are given sufficient notice of the dangers in which they are working?
EARL WALDEGRAVEThis question of the workers in factories who are manufacturing the substance is quite a different question from that on the Order Paper. Perhaps the noble Lord will be 12 kind enough to give me notice of this point and I can answer it on another occasion.
§ LORD DOUGLAS OF BARLOCHMy Lords, may I ask the noble Earl how it happens that sweetmeats containing this substance have been illegally sold in various places in this country for years past and then only a week or two ago is any official action taken? Does not this indicate that the existing procedures for the sampling and testing of foodstuffs are incompetent to protect the public from dangers of this kind?
EARL WALDEGRAVENo, my Lords, I could not accept that at all. Noble Lords may be aware that this very morning a prosecution was successful. I do not have the details of the case. It was clearly in breach of these regulations that this substance should be sold. People will always break the law. Here we have a case in which the law is broken and retribution follows this very morning.
§ LORD DOUGLAS OF BARLOCHMy Lords, does not the noble Earl understand that this sweet has been sold not only in Brighton but in many other places, and has been continuously manufactured and sold?
§ BARONESS SUMMERSKILLMy Lords, on that point, may I say that there was a man outside the shop, with a great cargo of this rock. He said to the inspector: "What a pity to waste this. Can I take it to an orphanage?"
§ BARONESS SUMMERSKILLCertainly not "Yes".