Egg industry is refused access to salmonella files
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.THE EGG industry, which is regularly blamed for outbreaks of salmonella food-poisoning, has been refused access to the evidence, and even the names of local authorities which report cases to the Public Health Laboratory Service.
At the end of a year-long correspondence with ministers and officials, in which the technical adviser to the United Kingdom Egg Producers' Association sought the evidence for allegations that eggs were at fault, Whitehall has ruled that the information has to remain confidential.
Richard North, the industry's adviser, wrote in January last year to William Waldegrave, the minister responsible for open government, to say that of 177 cases blamed on eggs between 1988-91, he had been able to track down details of only 44. He asked the minister to ensure the investigation reports were published.
He complained to the Department of Health in February that it was a matter of constant irritation for the industry that while figures of suspected egg-associated outbreaks were published, the supporting evidence was not being made available.
The Department of Health replied in March stating that it only published accounts of 'unusual' outbreaks, adding: 'The reporting systems are voluntary and rest upon the confidence of those supplying the information. Were they to feel this information was used for purposes other than routine surveillance, the integrity of the systems would be compromised and the continued supply of information jeopardised.'
Mr North replied that all outbreaks were unusual, and added: 'It is nothing short of obscene, in the context of the continued trauma caused to egg producers, that public authorities which continue to report outbreaks of food- poisoning in which the suspected vehicles of infection are claimed to be eggs, or foods made with eggs, are not required to support their suspicions with evidence.'
In May and June, Mr North tried another tack, asking both Mr Waldegrave and Virginia Bottomley, the Secretary of State for Health, for a list of the local authorities that had reported outbreaks between 1988 and 1991.
But he was told by Baroness Cumberlege, Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Health, in July: 'Local authorities report food poisoning outbreaks on a voluntary basis and in confidence. For this reason I cannot provide the names of those authorities which have submitted such reports.'
The backbench Right to Know Bill on open government will debated in the Commons tomorrow.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments