Day 079 - 27 Jan 95 - Page 24
1
2 MR. JUSTICE BELL: October 1991 revision date.
3 A. Yes,.
4
5 MR. MORRIS: This is the one that is law, if you like, for your
6 suppliers since that time, is it?
7 A. Yes.
8
9 Q. With the addition of the E.coli addendum?
10 A. Yes.
11
12 Q. When was the E.coli addendum issued?
13 A. I think it was 1992 -- at the time of the subject we
14 have been talking about.
15
16 Q. So, in the Microbiological Guidelines on the fourth page of
17 that, it does not actually specify -- it is 6.1 -- are the
18 suppliers expected -- it does not specify what particular
19 organisms are meant to be looking for?
20 A. No, that is total counts.
21
22 Q. So how does that relate to, say, for example, E.coli or
23 salmonella? What is the guideline for -----
24 A. If you are judging food on its cleanliness, there are
25 set parameters on the total number of colony counts. If
26 you want to investigate a particular bacterium, then you
27 have to look for it on different agars or in different
28 sugars. There is a technique of isolation.
29
30 Q. So there is no routine testing for specific bacteria?
31 A. No.
32
33 Q. Just a general?
34 A. Not, in total counts, no.
35
36 Q. So what they are looking for there is the concentration ---
37 A. Yes.
38
39 Q. -- of bacteria?
40 A. What that gives you is a picture of the cleanliness of
41 the meat.
42
43 Q. So as long as the count, the concentration, is below your
44 set figure, the meat is assumed to be acceptable at that
45 stage?
46 A. Yes.
47
48 Q. But different bacteria maybe harmful at different
49 concentrations?
50 A. Yes, at different concentrations.
51
52 Q. For example, E.coli 0157 would be more dangerous than
53 another strain of E.coli ---
54 A. Yes.
55
56 Q. -- at the same concentration?
57 A. Yes.
58
59 Q. So what penalties are there for suppliers who infringe your
60 specifications?
