HL Deb 10 July 1998 vol 591 cc156-7WA
Baroness Anelay of St. Johns

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Further to their commitment to subject every piece of available evidence on organophosphates to rigorous and transparent scrutiny, what is their estimate of the number of documents which will be scrutinised; how they have calculated that number; how they propose to make the scrutiny "transparent"; and what estimate they have made of the staff, time and budget required to fulfil their commitment. [HL2513]

The Parliamentary Secretary, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Lord Donoughue)

As recommended by the Official Group on OPs, the Committee on the Toxicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment (COT), the Advisory Committee on Pesticides (ACP), the Veterinary Products Committee (VPC) and the Committee on Safety of Medicines (CSM) are being asked to consider: a review by the Institute for Environment and HealthOrganophosphorus esters: An evaluation of chronic neurotoxic effects; and a report, which is soon to be published, by a working party of the Royal College of Physicians of London and the Royal Colleges of Psychiatrists on how clinical studies might be undertaken and how patients who attribute their ill-health to OP compounds might be managed.

A sub-group of the Committee on the Toxicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment (COT) has been set up for this task. It is not possible to estimate how many papers will be considered by the COT sub-group because they will consider other papers as they see fit and will invite evidence from other interested parties. Since the recommendation from the Official Group on OPs was made, another review has been published. This review, Neurological syndromes of organophosphorus compounds by Dr. Jamal, will also be considered by the COT sub group.

The advisory committees have been asked to deliver their advice before the end of 1998.

The COT advice will be published, thus making their scrutiny transparent.

The ACP, VPC and CSM have ongoing commitments to review scientific evidence relating to their product areas, so this does not represent an extra burden on them.