Day 094 - 01 Mar 95 - Page 12
1 to produce a bacteria-free meat unless it is properly
2 cooked -- nobody can.
3
4 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I think the question was that there was no
5 government or regulatory testing. I understood that to
6 mean were there any regulations which provided for
7 compulsory testing for bacteria, Salmonella in particular,
8 perhaps?
9 A. No, there are not.
10
11 MS. STEEL: That is because it would be something that would be
12 impossible to test for, is it?
13 A. That is correct. Up to this point, there is no
14 technology that can do that, to test or to avoid its
15 presence.
16
17 Q. So it is basically the case that it is inevitable that
18 there are going to be bacteria on the meat?
19 A. Absolutely, in everywhere, in every plant, every
20 animal, every pet, there is going to be bacteria -- every
21 human being.
22
23 Q. Some of those bacteria are going to be harmful bacteria?
24 A. Absolutely, could be, yes.
25
26 Q. Your defence against that, presumably, is that you hope
27 that the products are going to be cooked properly?
28 A. We cook the products.
29
30 Q. Yes, that is your defence, is it?
31 A. The defence for what?
32
33 Q. Against customers getting food poisoning?
34 A. Protection, yes. It is, that is what we call a
35 critical control point. That is what it is. Cooking is a
36 critical control point.
37
38 Q. Is it right that whilst the number of poultry processing
39 units increased in the USA, the number of US DA inspectors
40 decreased?
41 A. That is correct.
42
43 Q. So inspectors are having to check increasing amounts of
44 chicken each?
45 A. Not necessarily. The intent of that is that the United
46 States has made a proposal or an intent to go and implement
47 HACCP. The intent of HACCP, the major emphasis is
48 prevention. When you do that, you do not need inspectors.
49 When you have the inspectors, you have the responsibility
50 on the United States government. When you do not have the
51 inspector, you have direct responsibility to the plants.
52 That is what -- those things combined, that is what is
53 causing that. The best plant, what they have proven time
54 after time, that even if you increase inspection, what you
55 cause is that the plants relied on the inspectors for their
56 Quality Assurance programme. If you reduce that, you take
57 the responsibility. When the company takes that
58 responsibility, they do a far better job than that.
59
60 Q. So the inspection is actually left to the company rather
