Day 295 - 06 Nov 96 - Page 15


     
     1        if they do not want to, they basically synthesise, if that
     2        is the right word, all the meat that has arrived in order
     3        to guarantee that the contamination in one piece of meat
     4        will be spread throughout their products.  Do not forget,
     5        E.Coli is potentially deadly in even very, very low amounts
     6        -- I cannot think of the word.  And that is all something
     7        that is very particular to this whole process, because
     8        normally, if there was going to be contamination of a beef
     9        product, that is not ground meat, it would be cooked on the
    10        surface and therefore people's penchant for raw beef would
    11        not be endangering their lives because the surface would be
    12        cooked to a very high temperature.
    13
    14        So, really, what is left in this very fragile and flawed
    15        system is just the cooking, which in itself is fragile and
    16        flawed.
    17
    18        Just to say that the figures for the number of cattle on
    19        that page that I referred to, about 6,900, it is not
    20        immediately clear on that page whether it is 6,900 head of
    21        cattle or 69,000 head of cattle.  But it could be worked
    22        out easily from the volumes that we gave on that day.
    23
    24   MR. JUSTICE BELL:   Well, I will have a look, because you have
    25        given me the reference.
    26
    27   MR. MORRIS:   Yes, I mean, there are other references.
    28
    29   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I mean, it is -- yes.
    30
    31   MR. MORRIS:   We know that they take beef from -- it says on
    32        that page, "eight percent of all the cattle slaughtered in
    33        this country", which is a staggering figure, eight percent;
    34        that is on that page.  In fact, for the record, on the same
    35        day -- day 80, page 31 -- there are details about pigs.
    36        I think that was referred to by Mr. -- (Pause).
    37
    38   MR. JUSTICE BELL:   By whom?
    39
    40   MS. STEEL:   I actually read them out the other day when I was
    41        doing the animal section.
    42
    43   MR. MORRIS:   That is Mr. Walker, page 31, day 80, anyway.
    44
    45        Moving on to page 45, here we have the reference.  The top
    46        reference is about tying off the oesophagus and bung before
    47        the animal is cut up.  That was a new specification
    48        produced.  Mr. Walker, then on the second reference --
    49        I think that is Mr. Walker stated that two to three guts
    50        per day are split open in error even despite this
    51        specification, and he said the carcass then has to be
    52        washed, which is discouraged by expert witnesses.
    53        Timothy Chambers felt that this process was likely to lead
    54        to bacterial contamination.  We have the date there.
    55
    56        On the third reference, the specification on the tying up
    57        of the -- no, to sample E.Coli was in October 1991.  It
    58        says here, in his actual evidence -- not in his statement
    59        -- he gave evidence that the specification was not changed
    60        until the end of 1993 in reality.  Yes, I recall that now.

Prev Next Index