Day 039 - 20 Oct 94 - Page 66


     
     1        are right, of course, they are all corrupt.  Which do you
     2        propose as being the likely explanation?
     3        A.  It is not for me to advance an explanation in respect
     4        of the particular individuals.  What I do say, however,
     5        Mr. Rampton, is this:  My understanding of the position is
     6        as follows:  It is entirely acceptable and accepted
     7        practice for members of all of these committees to act as
     8        paid consultants to the companies manufacturing and
     9        utilizing these ingredients, and they are not compelled to
    10        declare those interests with the exception of members of
    11        the Committee on Toxicity since 1991.
    12
    13        I have endeavoured to investigate these matters as
    14        carefully as I can.  I am satisfied that it frequently
    15        occurs that members of these committees enter meetings and
    16        act as paid consultants for the companies involved and do
    17        not declare those interests either to the scientific
    18        secretariat, to the chair of the committee or to the other
    19        members of the committee or to the public generally.
    20
    21        Therefore, I feel that I cannot rule out the hypothesis
    22        that there may, from time to time, have been some
    23        corruption on some of these committees.  I do not have
    24        direct evidence in respect of a documentary kind in respect
    25        of particular members and particular compounds.
    26
    27        I have, as I indicated, been investigating these matters
    28        for 20 years now, and I am satisfied that, from time to
    29        time, members of these committees are both participating in
    30        the decision making of these committees and simultaneously
    31        acting as paid consultants to relevant commercial
    32        interests.
    33
    34   Q.   A fourth possibility, Dr. Millstone, perhaps you would
    35        agree, as an explanation for the fact that these
    36        distinguished bodies do not appear to pay heed to what you
    37        say vociferously theorise or promulgate is this, is it not,
    38        that they do not regard you as a reliable source of
    39        scientific opinion.  That is a possibility, is it not?
    40        A.  Of course it is a possibility, but insofar as it is a
    41        possibility, I think I might reasonably have expected from
    42        time to time to have my scientific judgments criticised in
    43        the scientific literature.  But that has hardly ever
    44        occurred.  I have from time to time been the recipient of
    45        vitriol and abuse, but very rarely scientific critique.
    46
    47        I find myself in the position where I cannot advance a
    48        precise detailed explanation for their conduct.  All I am
    49        able to do is gather as much scientific information as I am
    50        able to gain access to, not having privileged access to 
    51        unpublished documents most of the time, and compare the 
    52        evaluations which emerge from these committees with what 
    53        purports to be the scientific base from which they are
    54        nominally derived.  I find that there is a clear gap
    55        between what the scientific evidence suggests to me and the
    56        evaluations which these committees reach.
    57
    58   Q.   I am not a scientist and I do not write scientific papers,
    59        Dr. Millstone, but I am going to try, if I may, to see
    60        whether we in this court may rely upon the scientific

Prev Next Index