HL Deb 11 October 1999 vol 605 cc35-44WA
Lord Palmer

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Why, if other European Union member states are complying fully with the requirements for official veterinary surgeon attendance in slaughterhouses and poultry processing plants, the Meat Hygiene Service, or its contractors, are able to recruit veterinary surgeons from those member states, especially Spain, which has large red meat and poultry industries of its own. [HL3328]

The Minister of State, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Baroness Hayman)

Other member states produce a surplus of veterinary surgeons willing to undertake work in slaughterhouses and poultry processing plants, while the United Kingdom does not.

Viscount Exmouth

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether a slaughterhouse owner is entitled to refuse entry to a slaughterhall to any Meat Hygiene Service official who is incorrectly dressed or is wearing protective clothing which is contaminated or insufficiently clean. [HL3097]

Baroness Hayman

Meat Hygiene Service (MHS) officials are required to abide by the standards of personal hygiene set out in the MHS operations manual.

Slaughterhouse owners cannot legally refuse MHS officials entry to a slaughterhall because they believe them to be inappropriately dressed. However, any slaughterhouse owner with concerns about the standards of an MHS official's dress should bring them to the attention of either the official veterinary surgeon or principal official veterinary surgeon, who will take the appropriate action.

The Earl of Northesk

asked Her Majesty's Government:

What were the total costs to the Meat Hygiene Service in the last financial year, including bonuses and social security costs, in employing official veterinary surgeons while carrying out inspection duties under EC Directive 91/497/EEC in slaughterhouses and cutting plants. [HL3090]

Baroness Hayman

The total costs to the Meat Hygiene Service in the last financial year, including bonuses and social security costs, in employing official veterinary surgeons while carrying out inspection duties under EC Directive 91/497/EEC in slaughterhouses and cutting plants amounted to approximately £460,000.

Earl Alexander of Tunis

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether a slaughterhouse owner or operator is required to carry out a direction from an official veterinary surgeon if compliance would lead to committing an illegal act. [HL3126]

Baroness Hayman

No.

Lord Stanley of Alderley

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether, owing to the difficulties experienced by the Meat Hygiene Service in recruiting official veterinary officers to service abattoirs in remote areas, it is fair that some small abattoirs should be required to pay a higher hourly rate for their official veterinary surgeons, plus travelling time, than abattoirs in more accessible locations. [HL3102]

Baroness Hayman

The Meat Hygiene Service (MHS) makes extensive use of contract official veterinary surgeons (OVSs) which it obtains by means of national competitive tendering procedures. This is fully in line with government purchasing policy and ensures that the MHS obtains value for money and that the plant operator is provided with the most cost-effective service avoiding cross-subsidisation. Contract arrangements also provide greater staffing flexibility, particularly where plants have a low attendance requirement or are located in remote areas.

The hourly rate includes the full costs of travel and travelling time. This means that abattoirs in remote areas may be charged a higher hourly rate.

The Earl of Liverpool

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether the relevant provisions of the Food Safety Act 1990 (Section 40, codes of practice) apply to Meat Hygiene Service engaged in enforcement duties; and, if not, why not. [HL3115]

Baroness Hayman

Codes of practice under Section 40 of the Food Safety Act 1990 are issued by Ministers for the guidance of food authorities. Food authorities are local authorities as defined in Section 5(1) of the Act.

The Meat Hygiene Service (MHS) is not a food authority. Until the establishment of the Food Standards Agency, it remains an executive agency of the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. For the purposes of the enforcement of meat hygiene regulations having effect under the Food Safety Act, the MHS is an enforcement authority as defined in Section 6(1) of the Act. MHS staff enforce these regulations in accordance with instructions in the MHS operations manual. Where relevant these instructions have regard to the provisions of the Section 40 codes of practice.

The Earl of Liverpool

asked Her Majesty's Government:

How many hours of practical tuition and practical experience in slaughterhouses under supervision official veterinary surgeons are required to have in post-mortem inspection of animals; and how much of that time is spent in carrying out the post-mortem inspection of animals. [HL3117]

Baroness Hayman

No minimum number of hours practical tuition and practical experience in slaughterhouses are set for official veterinary surgeons (OVSs) in the carrying out of post-mortem inspection of animals. However, by virtue of their extensive five-year undergraduate training in areas such as microbiology, pathology, veterinary public health and zoonotic diseases, OVSs are well qualified to be responsible for such work.

Lord Blyth

asked Her Majesty's Government:

What the rates of total condemnation in bovine, ovine and porcine species have been for the financial years 1995–96,1996–97,1997–98 and 1998–99. [HL3189]

Baroness Hayman

Rejection data are collected by the Meat Hygiene Service but not in a form to answer this particular Question.

Lord Blyth

asked Her Majesty's Government:

What arrangements are in force for liaison between the Meat Hygiene Service and local authorities outside the periodic meetings with the Local Authorities Co-ordinating Body on Trading Standards. [HL3190]

Baroness Hayman

No formal arrangements are in force. However, senior management of the Meat Hygiene Service are always available to meet with local authority respresentatives should the need arise.

Lord Blyth

asked Her Majesty's Government:

How many times in the last financial year representatives of the Meat Hygiene Service met with representatives of the local Authorities Co-ordinating Body on Trading Standards. [HL3191]

Baroness Hayman

Representatives of the Meat Hygiene Service have not met officially with representatives of the local Authorities Co-ordinating Body on Trading Standards (LACOTS) during the last financial year. However, there has been informal contact on a number of occasions during this period.

Lord Blyth

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether a slaughterhouse owner who suspects that an animal presented for slaughter at his establishment may produce meat in which veterinary medicines residues may be above the statutory limits may require a sample to be procured by an official veterinary surgeon for transmission to and testing by the Veterinary Medicines Directorate; and whether he is entitled to receive a result in sufficient time to release the carcass should residue levels be within acceptable limits. [HL3256]

Baroness Hayman

It is an offence under Regulation 9 of the Animals and Animal Products (Examination for Residues and Maximum Residue Limits) Regulations 1997 to sell, or supply for slaughter, for human consumption any animal which contains an authorised substance in any of its tissues at a concentration exceeding the relevant maximum limit. Under Regulation 30 the slaughterhouse owner is required to ensure that any animal brought into his establishment does not contain a residue at a concentration which exceeds the maximum permitted limit. It is the responsibility of the owner/presenter of the animal to ensure compliance with the regulations at their own cost.

Any slaughterhouse owner who suspects that an animal presented for slaughter at his establishment may produce meat in which veterinary medicine residues may be above the statutory limit should refuse to take the animal into his slaughterhouse. If he has already slaughtered it he should arrange for it to be tested for residues at his own expense, making arrangements to ensure it does not enter the human food chain. If the test is positive he should inform the OVS so that action can be taken to re-test tile carcass and, if necessary, take the appropriate action against the presenter. The slaughterhouse operator, under Regulation 10, would be prohibited from marketing the meat from the carcass.

Lord Blyth

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether the trimming of carcasses in a slaughterhouse by Meat Hygiene Service personnel to remove contamination increases the risk of penetration of bacteria into deep muscle by way of the exposed, cut surfaces. [HL3257]

Baroness Hayman

Most trimming of carcasses to remove contamination is carried out by slaughterhouse staff. Meat Hygiene Service (MHS) inspectors are permitted to carry out some trimming in defined circumstances. Trimming may theoretically increase the risk of penetration of bacteria into deep muscle by way of exposed cut surfaces: nevertheless the objective of food safety overall is best achieved by trimming to remove contamination rather than by other available methods.

Lord HolmPatrick

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether they will cause the total output of improvement notices served by official veterinary surgeons to be subject to independent scrutiny with a view to determining how many non-statutory works have been required. [HL3084]

Baroness Hayman

As improvement notices are served under the Food Safety Act 1990, and can only be served where there is a statutory act of non-compliance, there is no need for such arrangements for scrutiny.

Lord HolmPatrick

asked Her Majesty's Government:

What was the level of non-productive time booked by the Meat Hygiene Service working in slaughterhouses during 1997–98 and 1998–99 in terms of number of hours and as a proportion of the total hours available. [HL3200]

Baroness Hayman

The level of non-productive time booked by the Meat Hygiene Service working in slaughterhouses during 1997–98 and 1998–99, in terms of number of hours and as a proportion of the total hours available, was as follows.

(i) Hours recorded to non-productive time (time not directly charged) were approximately:

Year Hours %
1997–98 8,000 0.4
1998–99 5,000 0.3

(ii) In addition, there is a further element of nonproductive time which arises as a consequence of plant down-time or unusual working hours and is charged directly to plants.

(iii) In 1998–99 the total non-productive time for slaughterhouses amounted to approximately 54,000 hours or around 4 per cent of the total hours available.

Lord HolmPatrick

asked Her Majesty's Government:

How many official veterinary surgeons employed by the Meat Hygiene Service have been subjected to disciplinary procedures, either formal or informal, for failure to follow the Meat Hygiene Service operations manual (HL3201)

Baroness Hayman

The number of official veterinary surgeons (OVSs) employed by the Meat Hygiene Service (MHS) that have been subject to disciplinary procedures, either formal or informal, for failure to follow the MHS operations manual is as follows:

Disciplinary Action: Total Number
Formal 4
Informal 14

The use of "caution" letters as part of the normal line management process have been included in the figure for informal disciplinary action.

While disciplinary action has been taken against a number of contract OVSs, which in some cases has led to the termination of their contracts, this information is not recorded centrally and could only be produced at disproportionate expense.

Lord HolmPatrick

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Where the responsibility for carrying out statutory duties in meat inspection lies; whether meat hygiene inspectors are authorised specifically in writing to carry out these duties; and, if so, who signs the authorisations. [HL3202]

Baroness Hayman

Responsibility for carrying out statutory duties in meat inspection lies with official veterinary surgeons and meat hygiene inspectors employed by the Meat Hygiene Service (MHS). They are specifically authorised to carry out such duties in writing, their authorisations being signed by officials duly authorised by the appropriate enforcement authority to do so.

Lord HolmPatrick

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether an assessment of the health and safety of Meat Hygiene Service staff working in meat cutting plants and abattoirs has been carried out; and, if so, what recommendations have been made. [HL3203]

Baroness Hayman

The Meat Hygiene Service has undertaken a programme of specific risk assessments in licensed premises. Follow-up action has been taken as appropriate in plants where risks have been identified through liaison with the operators of those plants.

Lord HolmPatrick

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether asking meat hygiene inspectors employed by the Meat Hygiene Service to sign the Official Secrets Act is an appropriate use of this Act. [HL3204]

Baroness Hayman

Meat hygiene inspectors employed by the Meat Hygiene Service are not required to sign the Official Secrets Act. However, as civil servants they are bound by its terms. This is considered to be entirely appropriate.

The Countess of Mar

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Further to the Written Answer by Lord Donoughue on 16 June (WA 28), how many hours they estimate would be reasonable to allocate to the training of candidate official veterinary surgeons in the Hygiene Assessment Scheme (HAS); and how they can be satisfied that the training of official veterinary surgeons in the implementation of the HAS is adequate, since they are unable to state how many hours are devoted to the HAS in the conversion training for official veterinary surgeons. [HL3299]

Baroness Hayman

Training in the Hygiene Assessment Scheme (HAS) forms an integral part of official veterinary surgeon (OVS) training. While it is not possible to provide an exact figure for the total number of hours currently dedicated to HAS training or to provide an estimate of how many hours it is considered reasonable to allocate to it, it is believed that such training is adequate given that:

  1. (i) as part of the OVS course, veterinary surgeons undertake approximately three hours theoretical training specifically on HAS. In addition, a further three hours of practical training and assessment is undertaken prior to a veterinary surgeon's appointment to Meat Hygiene Service (MHS) duties;
  2. (ii) Once employed or contracted to the MHS, OVSs as part of a continuous professional development (CPD) programme, have to attend occasional one-day seminars updating them on HAS-related issues. The exact number of hours that an OVS will have undertaken on such training will depend on their length of service and cannot therefore be clearly specified.
  3. (ii) Finally, the work of an OVS on the implementation of HAS is routinely monitored and assessed by their principal OVS. Further guidance will be given where appropriate. The exact amount of time dedicated to this will be specific to a particular OVS.

The Countess of Mar

asked Her Majesty's Government:

What was the total expenditure on offices and administration for the Meat Hygiene Service for the last financial year. [HL3304]

Baroness Hayman

The total expenditure on offices and administration for the Meat Hygiene Service for the last financial year was approximately £4.4 million.

The Countess of Mar

asked Her Majesty's Government:

How many staff of the Meat Hygiene Service have been charged with, or convicted of, criminal offences which were committed at times when those staff were employed by the Meat Hygiene Service or its contractors. [HL3339]

Baroness Hayman

Since the launch of the Meat Hygiene Service (MHS) on 1 April 1995 one member of stair has been convicted of an offence in relation to their employment, while one other is currently the subject of ongoing criminal proceedings.

The Countess of Mar

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether Meat Hygiene Service staff are required to comply with the instructions set out in the Meat Hygiene Service operation manual at all times; and what action is taken by the Meat Hygiene Service if they do not. [HL3340]

Baroness Hayman

Yes, Meat Hygiene Service (MHS) staff are required to comply with the instructions set out in the MHS operations manual. Appropriate management, and if necessary disciplinary, action is taken if they fail to do so.

Lord Glentoran

asked Her Majesty's Government:

How many Regulation 10 notices under the Fresh Meat (Hygiene and Inspection) Regulations were served by official veterinary surgeons, employed by the Meat Hygiene Service in the financial years 1995–96,1996–97,1997–98 and 1998–99. [HL3119]

Baroness Hayman

The information requested is not readily available for the financial years 1995–96, 1996–97 and 1997–98 and could only be produced at disproportionate cost. However, the total number of Regulation 10 notices served under the Fresh Meat (Hygiene and Inspection) Regulations by official veterinary surgeons employed by or contracted to the Meat Hygiene Service during the 1998–99 financial year was:

  • Financial year: 1998–99
  • Regulation 10 notices served: 279

Lord Rowallan

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether a slaughterhouse owner or operator is entitled to exclude from his premises any member of the Meat Hygiene Service staff who is so disruptive as to interfere unlawfully in the conduct of operations. [HL3109]

Baroness Hayman

Meat Hygiene Service (MHS) staff are appointed to licensed fresh meat premises to carry out responsibilities assigned to them by statute. Indeed the occupier of the slaughterhouse has a statutory duty to ensure that official veterinary surgeons (OVSs) and inspectors are provided with such reasonable assistance as they need to carry out their duties under the appropriate hygiene regulations. Slaughterhouse owners or operators are therefore not entitled to exclude MHS staff from their premises. However, if a slaughterhouse owner or operator has problems with any member of MHS staff, they should make these known to either the official veterinary surgeon appointed to the plant or to more senior MHS management, who will take the appropriate action. MHS staff are trained to a high standard and their performance is monitored rigorously. They are required to be present and to ensure that fresh meat is produced in compliance with the regulations.

Lord Rowallan

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether a slaughterhouse owner who, on being instructed to carry out works by way of an improvement notice served by an official veterinary surgeon, carries out those works and then subsequently discovers that those works were not a statutory requirement is entitled to claim compensation for the costs of those works; and to whom any claim should be addressed. [HL3110]

Baroness Hayman

Stringent safeguards are set out within relevant food safety legislation to ensure that a slaughterhouse owner's interests are protected both before and after the serving of an improvement notice.

Prior to serving an improvement notice, official veterinary surgeons (OVSs) are required to provide a slaughterhouse owner with written notice that they intend to serve an improvement notice, together with the reasons for doing so. The slaughterhouse owner has the right of appeal once the improvement notice has been served. However, by being informed of an OVS's intent to serve an improvement notice, the slaughterhouse owner may make representations at this stage to attempt to stop the notice from being served.

In serving an improvement notice an OVS has to state why the slaughterhouse owner is thought to be failing to comply with the regulations; state what has to be done to rectify that failure; and require the slaughterhouse owner to take those or equivalent measures required of them within a specified time. Should the slaughterhouse owner appeal against the serving of this notice, the need for compliance will be suspended until the result of that appeal is determined. Accordingly, it would be most unusual for a slaughterhouse owner to carry out remedial action while awaiting the results of an appeal.

Country Visited Date/ Duration Employee (Grade) Approximate total Cost to MHS (Excluding Salary) Purpose of Visit
Australia, New Zealand, USA 28 June to 16 August 1998 (50 days) MHS Regional Director (Grade 6) * Study tour to look at HACCP, world trade and the concept of equivalence.
Australia 28 February to 12 March 1999 (13 days) MHS Director of Operations (Member of the Senior Civil Service) £5,341 Attendance at World Congress on Meat and Poultry Inspection, and investigation of Australian progress in implementing the Meat Safety Enhancement Programme (based on HACCP).
*Visit was partly self-funded via a scholarship financed by the National Sanitation Foundation in the USA.

The slaughterhouse owner therefore has every opportunity to make sure that they do not carry out work that is not a statutory requirement, and consequently the need for a damages claim should not arise.

This said, any slaughterhouse owner who believes that they have justifiable grounds for claiming compensation for the costs of works carried out in order to comply with an improvement notice should address their claim to the Meat Hygiene Service.

Viscount Long

asked Her Majesty's Government:

What training official veterinary surgeons receive in the investigation of food poisoning; and how much time is allocated to this subject. [HL3324]

Baroness Hayman

No specific period of time is currently dedicated to the training of official veterinary surgeons (OVSs) in the investigation of food poisoning. However, by virtue of their undergraduate training in microbiology, epidemiology, pathology, and zoonoses they are well placed to carry out this work in the premises to which they are appointed.

Viscount Long

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether for each employee of the Meat Hygiene Service who has visited countries outside the European Union in 1998 or 1999 they will list (a) the countries; (b) the date of the visit and its duration; (c) the grade of the employee; (d) the total cost of each visit; (e) whether these costs were met from the budget of the Meat Hygiene Service or the budget of a named government department; and (f) the purpose of the visit. [HL3452]

Baroness Hayman

The information requested is given in the table below: