---

Mr. Forsyth: The whole House has considerable sympathy for the hon. Gentleman and his constituents and I thank him for the courteous and typically concerned way in which he has gone about carrying out his duties. I agree with him about the importance of ensuring that the health board makes the information widely available. As he said, it has decided to take advertisements, and I believe that that is the right thing to do. The hon. Gentleman is right about the need to ensure that any food that may have got into freezers is traced. Proper and full cooking will destroy the E. coli bacteria in raw meat. Those who believe that they may have processed meat from one of the sources that have been identified should contact the environmental health officer in their local authority immediately.

The hon. Gentleman asked me for a specific response to the specific suggestion that there should be an immediate quality check from outside, without in any way casting doubt on the quality of the work that has been done by the responsible people in Lanarkshire. That is a sensible suggestion. Whether it should be done by Professor Pennington or through our chief medical officer is a matter on which I would want further advice, but I am happy to respond to the hon. Gentleman's request, if he feels that that would be helpful in restoring or reinforcing confidence within his constituency.

Mr. Bill Walker (North Tayside): My right hon. Friend will be aware that all the people of Scotland will now be

28 Nov 1996 : Column 470

deeply concerned about the possible impact of this problem, not only in Lanarkshire but elsewhere. I received two telephone calls today--I am sure that other hon. Members have had similar calls--about serious food-related problems, such as sickness, in my constituency. I am no medical expert and I have no idea what those problems are, but I am sure that we have to avoid causing panic. We must also ensure that people are made aware of what the problem really is, and I welcome the setting up of the group under Professor Pennington. I hope that it will produce information that will be helpful in some way, both now and in the future.

Mr. Forsyth: I am grateful to my hon. Friend. He is right to say that wider concern will be felt. As I said in my statement, all the evidence so far is that the E. coli can be traced to the one butcher's shop--the difficulty has been following the line through all the tributaries. My hon. Friend can reassure his constituents. I am sure that Professor Pennington will want to consider wider measures that we can take to deal with the problem, and I assure my hon. Friend that we shall act speedily and swiftly in response.

Mrs. Helen Liddell (Monklands, East): I associate myself with the expressions of condolence. I pay tribute to the medical and nursing staff of Monklands district general hospital in my constituency and of Law hospital in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Motherwell, North (Dr. Reid).

Given that the medical staff of Monklands hospital were told on Saturday that a crisis of some significant proportions was likely to be visited upon them, why was action not taken at the time when people are most likely to consume cold meats and other meats--that is, immediately after purchase--to ensure that they did not do so? As any housewife would say, it is rather late to start warning people on Thursday not to eat foods that they might have bought on the previous Friday or Saturday.

Does the Secretary of State accept that the lackadaisical attitude displayed by the Scottish Office in alerting people to the dangers of those meats has led to further illness and perhaps to people consuming those meats even at this late stage? Does he further accept that my constituents are grievously concerned about the lack of action and about the fact that local hospital facilities are now sorely stretched, which problem could have been reduced had action been taken earlier?

Mr. Forsyth: I know that the hon. Lady is new to the House and may not be aware of the procedures, but the responsibility for a local outbreak is a matter for the environmental health officers of North Lanarkshire local authority and the local health board, and nothing about their actions could be described as lackadaisical. They seem to have carried out their duties properly and efficiently, in a way that no one in the Scottish Office would criticise.

The Scottish Office became involved--as it was required to be--only when it became apparent that the outbreak might not be confined locally, which was well after the weekend. The hon. Lady would do well to wait

28 Nov 1996 : Column 471

until she has the facts before she starts to criticise people who have been working extremely hard to protect the welfare and health of her constituents.

Mr. Phil Gallie (Ayr): Sympathy and concern, especially for those who are directly involved, must be in the mind of all who think about this problem. However, other thoughts strike us, too. One of the thoughts that strikes me is the fact that awareness of food hygiene and the proper handling of meats is essential for all those involved in the meat production process. It also strikes me that that is perhaps even more important in the light of the concerns that we have expressed in recent times about bovine spongiform encephalopathy.

Mr. Forsyth: My hon. Friend is absolutely right. People sometimes complain about regulations, but they are necessary. The clear lesson from this outbreak is that the proper handling of meat products and the proper use of utensils and storage of food is very--[Interruption.]

Madam Speaker, it is extremely difficult to speak over the voices of Opposition Members.

Madam Speaker: Order. Hon. Members should not be discussing this issue with the shadow spokesman on Scotland, but paying attention to the Secretary of State, who is attempting to answer questions.

Mr. Forsyth: I am grateful to you for your protection, Madam Speaker.

The proper handling of utensils and the proper storage of food, cooked and uncooked, is very important, and we have taken steps to try to reinforce that practice through the meat trade and through actions by the Scottish Office. It is one matter on which we shall look to the expert group to give further advice.

Mr. Robert Hughes (Aberdeen, North): Although I fully accept that the closure of the Torry research laboratory will have had no effect whatever on the current outbreak, does it not serve as a warning that we should not skimp on research on bacteria such as E. coli? Quite apart from looking at food hygiene and distribution, will Professor Pennington examine the original source of E. coli, because where it comes from is just as important as where it went?

Mr. Forsyth: I agree with the hon. Gentleman. I hope that it will not embarrass him when I say that, to a degree, he and I, with the Under-Secretary of State, my hon. Friend the Member for Aberdeen, South (Mr. Robertson), made common cause in ensuring that vital research jobs and activities remained in Scotland. I think that the stand that we took is vindicated, and the quality of research carried out in Scotland benefits the whole of the United Kingdom.

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. We need to get to the source and also look at the procedures. The hon. Member for Hamilton (Mr. Robertson) pointed out that there was uncertainty as to when the list of names should be published. We may need to give clearer guidance about that, but I am certain that the overriding priority, even though it might mean rough justice for some firms, must

28 Nov 1996 : Column 472

be public health, particularly when dealing with a bacterium that can have such devastating and fatal consequences.

Mr. Alex Salmond (Banff and Buchan): I join in the expressions of sympathy for the bereaved and the admiration for the medical staff and others who have had to deal with the implications of this devastating bacterium.

The Secretary of State, in response to local Members of Parliament who said that commercial factors impinged on the release of information, says that the outbreak should not have happened. Can he reassure the House that commercial factors did not impinge on the release of public information?

I welcome Professor Pennington's appointment--he is a world authority on E. coli 0157, and many hon. Members have a great deal of confidence in his judgment. The Secretary of State said that the inquiry will be wide ranging. Will Professor Pennington's team be able to look at the provision of food science research in Scotland, and if the team identifies gaps in that provision, will the Secretary of State give an undertaking to act on them? Will Professor Pennington look at research provision in the animal herd, which is a natural reservoir of E. coli 0157, as many authorities think that that is the key to getting the bacterium under control? Will the Secretary of State revisit the Government's refusal only this summer of research into that? Will the recommendations of the wide-ranging review that the Secretary of State promised be taken on board by the Government, as Scotland has four times the average number of cases of E. coli in the UK and the highest incidence in Europe?

Mr. Forsyth: I am very happy to give the hon. Gentleman an undertaking that we shall act on the recommendations, and if there are particular recommendations for research in this area, I can think of no one better qualified than Professor Pennington to give advice in that respect, and we shall certainly act on it.

As for the hon. Gentleman's point about commercial considerations, it clearly would not be responsible to publish a list of names until one was certain that the list corresponded to the businesses that had received the material concerned. I do not know at what stage the list was considered reliable or the basis on which advice was given to hold back publication of the list, but it would be perfectly reasonable for people to be reluctant to provide a list that might blight particular businesses, if they were not entirely satisfied that those businesses had received the product.

It is a difficult balance, and a judgment was made by the health board to publish the list. Rather than adding to its difficulty, we should anticipate that difficulty. I believe that it acted properly and fairly, but it may well be that, with hindsight and the opportunity to look over the incident, additional guidance should be given. The health board decided, exceptionally, to publish the material, and I believe that it was right to do so. The circumstances were exceptional: there was a serious, unprecedented outbreak of a serious form of food poisoning in Scotland.

---