Putting food safety on the political menu

IF VOTERS were to devour policy documents from various parties produced in 1992 and compare them to those being touted now, one issue would jump from the pages, having forced itself on to more recent political agendas. That is food safety.

Policy documents last time out made fleeting reference to food. They talked of maintaining Irish food quality and the pursuit of better marketing based on our green image; hollow terms so often employed to dress up manifestos.

Nearly five years later, a combination of BSE, E coli 0157 and, nearer home, adulteration of meat by growth hormones (including angel dust) and antibiotics albeit by a minority of farmers - means the days of simple food marketing are over. The age of consumer rather than producer domination also nears, if it has not yet arrived.

Add in pesticide contamination of food, additives routinely used in food manufacturing and inadequate labelling, particularly of genetically modified food, and it is easy to see why consumer confidence has been badly shaken.

The most outspoken critic of Irish food production has been Mr Peter Dargan, vet, farmer and chairman of the Consumer Association of Ireland. As a newly crowned consumer defender, there's a question frequently asked of him: "Is Irish food safe?"

His reply: "I don't see any problem at the moment, despite the misapplication of the rules in the past that threatened to destroy animal production."

That should not be taken to mean that he is happy. He is irked by the "double think and double speak" of politicians still engaged in a culture of tokenism. Setting up of the Food Safety Authority was a step towards ending that culture. Proof of its demise will come with a separate Department of Food, he says, containing the Department of Agriculture's veterinary inspectorate, the people who certify meat day in, day out.

He remains sceptical of a producer driven Department. Political parties' newly forged commitment to consumer interests would be tested by how they deal with it. A message of food independence needs to be sent to Europe. He suspects, however, that even with promises of meaningful restructuring, past lessons will translate into a sceptical consumer protest vote gravitating towards the Greens.

The FSA chairman, Dr Daniel O'Hare, president of DCU, has a more positive perspective. "Food safety is very close to the top of political agendas. That is important, given the high degree of sensitivity of consumers when it comes to their food."

There is consensus on setting up an independent body to look in a dispassionate, objective way at food safety, he feels. It represents a fundamental appreciation of the need to reassure the public, "not just in a PR way", that in reality their food is safe.

Rainbow parties can take comfort from a study on how a food safety authority could be established in Britain which suggested it be modelled in several respects on the FSA.

A trawl through food safety policies confirms that the Department of Agriculture is likely to face radical restructuring, not unlike a process that has gone on at EU level. Proof has yet to come with the eating of both puddings.

Fianna Fail and PD documents recommend the cleanest break of the Department's food section. The Minister for Agriculture, Mr Yates, envisages restructuring from within, with consumer/food safety and veterinary services under a new directorship employing 1,900 staff.

The Fianna Fail spokesman on food, Mr Joe Walsh, has proposed the most extensive surgery, bringing together all food/water inspection functions carried out by the Departments of Agriculture, Environment, local authorities, and health boards. Yet this would still come under the Agriculture umbrella, which may be interpreted as reluctance to face up to powerful farmer lobbies. It remains to be seen if this would satisfy PD demands for an "independent food quality service".

The IFA president, Mr John Donnelly, has declared that the single most important way to restore confidence in Irish food is meat traceability through a quality assurance scheme. It means eating an Irish steak in Munich and knowing it comes from a farm in Meath. Not surprisingly, all the parties agree.

For food safety has come to dominate consumer minds. People have been made justifiably suspicious by EU member states which put producer interests first despite the risks from BSE and its human form, CJD.

Water quality has the hallmarks of an issue that will come to dominate environmental agendas in similar fashion. For not only is water quantity of concern, even in wet Ireland, but the quality of that diminishing resource is deteriorating. The separate problem of raw or poorly treated sewage discharging into the sea is likely to be eased by EU supported sewerage investment.

It is as if freshwater problems are occurring by stealth because big pollution kills coinciding with summer and silage are now rare. But the quality of freshwater is on a slow, steady path of decline. Official responses have been tardy and dictated largely by an EU stick.

This is in a State that has avoided heavy industrialisation. Yet, the latest Environmental Protection Agency report shows that almost 30 per cent of Irish rivers are either polluted or moderately polluted.

The Minister for the Environment, Mr Howlin, acknowledges that eutrophication is the most serious threat to freshwater, where the essential chemical balance of water is upset by polluting influences. The chief culprits are sewage and agricultural wastes - nitrates and phosphates.

There are obvious consequences for agriculture. The larger parties seem set to introduce restrictive and "polluter pays" measures, advocated for so long by the Greens, in the pursuit of the buzz concept of "sustainable development". To what extent they will be applied remains to be seen.