Day 106 - 23 Mar 95 - Page 44


     
     1        meat stripping stage, then a logical and reasonable
     2        deduction, I would suggest, is that it would be higher in
     3        the actual McNuggets themselves.
     4
     5   Q.   I remember we had the interlude, do you remember, when
     6        I suggested that Mr. North came and sat behind you, and one
     7        of you said that he had to leave in five minutes and we
     8        thought we had got it all straightened out what the
     9        understanding was.  It may well be that that was in the
    10        deboned meat that you were seeking to put there, but we,
    11        essentially, left it until Mr. North gave his evidence.  If
    12        need be, we can look up the transcript of what happened
    13        there.  I think it was not either side of the mid-day
    14        adjournment; it was either side of one of our five-minute
    15        breaks that it happened.
    16
    17   MS. STEEL:  I have the note I made when I asked Mr. North about
    18        this.  It just says:  "25 per cent of the meat samples"
    19        which could be either.
    20
    21   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I think I was thrown by the words "finished
    22        processed meat".  It may be other people ----
    23
    24   MR. RAMPTON:  It may not at the end make a huge amount of
    25        difference because the fact is that once the meat has been
    26        deboned from a particular piece of chicken, it is chucked
    27        with a whole lot of other bits of chicken from different
    28        birds into a bin and sent to France for making into
    29        McNuggets.
    30
    31   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Yes, I appreciate that.  It seems to be
    32        common ground, in any event, which may be the most
    33        important matter, that you must work on the basis that any
    34        chicken food in whatever form may well have salmonella
    35        organisms in it.
    36
    37   THE WITNESS:  I think, my Lord, that is -----
    38
    39   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  So on that basis there is not testing for it
    40        at the end of the day because everyone thinks that is the
    41        only safe assumption to work upon.
    42
    43   MS. STEEL (To the witness):  This part of a salmonella reduction
    44        programme, did you ask about the figures for 1989 or 1990
    45        or previous years?
    46        A.  As I understand Pattison, he was talking in terms of
    47        previous flock rates being in the order of 4 per cent
    48        around that time.  He was quite proud of having achieved
    49        that reduction.  He attributed it, in part, to the new
    50        reception facility for the live birds, and the role of 
    51        distribution of infection through the crates was discussed 
    52        at some length.  They had certainly felt -- this would 
    53        actually be obvious -- that if the crates had not been
    54        washed -- the crates, you see, come in with the live birds,
    55        they are then returned, but not necessarily to the same
    56        farms, so if you are taking crates, soiled crates, from one
    57        farm and then distributing them back to another farm
    58        without them being thoroughly cleaned, there is a
    59        possibility of transfer of infection.
    60

Prev Next Index