International Worker No 239, Saturday, September 13, 1997 "Labour's role over the last decade clearly establishes their culpability in the BSE disaster"Submission by Chris Talbot on behalf of the Socialist Equality Party Barbara and other speakers have concentrated on the role of the Tory government in the systematic suppression of the truth about BSE/CJD. The documented record of their deregulation of the beef industry and their subsequent attempts to first conceal and then minimise its deadly consequences are by now well-known to those in attendance at this inquiry. Given the scale of their systematic suppression of the truth, their manipulation of scientific advisors, their refusal to act in the interests of public health, the question arises: how did they get away with it? A serious examination of what took place over the last 10 years can only point to the crucial role played by the Labour Party. This is an important question. Not only are the Labour Party and the trade unions the organisations which working people traditionally looked to as defenders of their interests, but on May 1 Tony Blair led New Labour to a landslide election victory against the broadly discredited Major government. Naturally many people will hope that Blair's government will signal a change in the appalling record of the outgoing administration over BSE. Labour has after all made vocal criticisms of the Tory government on this and other issues. It is moreover pledged to establish a Food Agency to make recommendations on how to deal with the crisis. Amongst those who have welcomed a Labour government for this reason is Dr. Stephen Dealler, a leading campaigner in the fight to expose the facts surrounding BSE/nvCJD. Dr. Dealler's web-site ran an editorial recently which said that he would not be posting much more information for a while in order to give Tony Blair and his government "a chance to show that they are honest and open". He also pledged "to offer Tony Blair the greatest support of the scientists in the TSE field". An examination of both Labour's own record in the unfolding of the BSE crisis and the reality of their own proposals to deal with it in government will prove such confidence to be misplaced. Aim to "restore confidence"Labour's role over the last decade clearly establishes their culpability in the BSE disaster. Their approach has revolved around one abiding concern: To restore confidence in the British beef industry. What does this mean? The source of the loss of confidence in British beef is the proven connection between BSE infected beef and nvCJD. If "restoring confidence in beef" meant seriously addressing the BSE crisis then this would be entirely positive. They intend nothing of the sort. Their aim to restore confidence by downplaying the BSE crisis in order to safeguard profits at the expense of public health. The remit of the Food Agency which the Labour government are proposing makes this clear. Its five point agenda puts forward measures that many here would agree are necessary. But the committee is a purely cosmetic exercise. They have already announced that it will take fully two years to set up. It will be staffed by civil servants from the Ministry of Agriculture and the Ministry of Health and will only make non-binding recommendations to the government. How many more will die of nvCJD in the meantime? Given that Labour was supported by businessmen from big food corporations like Sainsbury's and Northern Foods, the suppliers of Marks and Spencers, their subservience to the food industry will match that of the Tory government. The Food Agency will be modelled on the Environment Agency. This body will not be independent of business interests either and nobody should have any confidence in it. Another indication of Labour's real attitude to BSE is that one of their first actions on the international arena was to seek discussions on when the world ban on British beef can be lifted. This went down like a lead balloon, but it shows that "restoring confidence" is motivated solely by commercial considerations and not the welfare of the consumer and how to tackle BSE's disastrous effects. During the election campaign Labour's Deputy Leader John Prescott even issued a press release on BSE, with the cynical heading, "Where's the Beef?" Its main indictment of John Major was that he "talks tough, acts weak and fails to deliver in Europe". He put forward Labour as best able to get British beef back on the international menu: "We have said from the outset that the issue is leadership and trust. People will ask themselves who out of Tony Blair and John Major is the stronger leader, and who is best able to represent Britain in Europe." Labour has consistently supported the lifting of the ban on British beef exports to Europe. They blamed Douglas Hogg because he "flew off the handle" with European countries rather than "putting the case for the safety of our beef". As Prescott put it in his election statement, "In the past week, we have successfully drawn the public's attention to the government's incompetent handling of the BSE crisis... which has undermined our farmers and the beef industry". This is only the culmination of the role they have played throughout the BSE crisis. Before the announcement by Health Minister Stephen Dorrell on March 20 last year and the EU ban, Labour's concern over BSE was very muted. They never challenged the cover up organised by MAFF and the Southwood and Tyrell committees. They ignored the warnings from Professor Lacey, Dr. Dealler and others that the truth concerning the spread of BSE and the danger to human health was being suppressed. This was not through ignorance. Anyone with experience in government knows how committees of scientific advisors can be manipulated. David Ennals, a former health minister, has said "I now realise that half the experts on my advisory committees were paid by one side of the food industry or another." Labour was also aware of the potential dangers involved in the use of animal-based feed for ruminants. The last Labour Shadow Minister for Agriculture, Gavin Strang, was involved in drafting legislation in 1978, under the Callaghan Labour government, for the testing of such feedstuffs. As the figures for BSE deaths escalated in the late 1980s and into the 1990s, Labour did not call for an inquiry and did not once challenge the official version of the truth. Without their tacit support the Tories could not have continued to lie about the seriousness of BSE. They accepted every government recommendation, only ever criticising the Tories for "incompetence" in applying them. Even these criticisms were very muted and scarcely reported in the media. Why was this? The answer is given in passing in a parliamentary debate in February this year. Elliot Morley, Labour MP for Glanford and Scunthorpe, admitted: "We on the Labour benches have been very measured in our criticism of the government because of our concern about the beef industry." Labour confirms its agenda This standpoint was confirmed in a parliamentary debate on February 17 this year in which Gavin Strang said that Dorrell had "bungled" his announcement. He noted that "since 1986, when BSE was identified, there has always been the possibility of a link between BSE in cattle and Creutzfeldt-Jakobs Disease in humans", so why, he asked, didn't Dorrell delay his admission till after the SEAC statement the next Monday, which claimed that there was now no particular risk from BSE to children. With utter cynicism Strang complained, "What an impact that had on our industry." The point was stressed by Barry Sheerman, a Labour MP, in the parliamentary debate. He indicted the Tories for a failure to use "crisis management". The Tories had said "There is a crisis -- there is a problem -- but we are not going to do all that much about it. Indeed, we will tell you about the most sensitive issue, our children's health, next Monday." Sheerman said, "No sensible person involved in crisis management would allow a weekend to pass, featuring comment from the Sunday press. The Sunday press is the worst in terms of speculation, tabloid circulation and the building up of stories -- and we all knew that that story would go through the roof. Then it was out of control." Labour proved it was still concerned to cover-up the dangers of BSE infection when they suppressed letters from Trading Standards Officers in Northumberland sent in April last year, warning that they did not have enough resources to police anti-BSE controls and that 10% of food they sampled was wrongly labelled as meeting anti-BSE requirements. Labour only released the letters in the run-up to the election as part of their "incompetence" campaign against the Tories. Over the last year and in the election campaign Labour have attacked the Tories for overspending on BSE. "Mrs Thatcher gave us the Poll Tax. This government has given us the beef tax -- costing [[sterling]]160 for every household in the country", said John Prescott. The Labour Party did not point out that it was ordinary taxpayers who are bearing the cost of the BSE crisis and not the big business interests who are responsible. Gavin Strang claimed that abattoirs were ripping off the government by charging excessively for the culling of beef. But now they are in government, what do Labour propose? They do not intend to touch the profits of the food companies, the abattoirs, the renderers or any section of business. They will observe the Tory spending limits. In other words if any money is to be spent on vitally needed research, finding safe ways of disposing of cattle, or dealing with any other aspects of this tragedy it will be taken from other parts of the welfare state -- closures in hospitals, old peoples homes, employment of school teachers, etc., etc. This inquiry must hold the Labour Party responsible for their role in supporting the massive cover-up which took place over the BSE crisis. When the connection of BSE with new variant CJD could be suppressed no longer, when the EU banned exports, New Labour attacked the Tories -- not for the cover-up, not for putting the health of millions of people at risk -- but for incompetence in defending the profits of the British beef industry and the food industry in general. Trade unions refuse to defend workers The trade unions, although they represent thousands of workers in farming, abattoirs, and the food industry generally, have been largely silent on the BSE issue. They refuse to take responsibility for the health and safety of workers in the industry handling BSE infected material, or the millions of workers who have been exposed to it in their diet. The main unions involved in the meat industry, the TGWU and GMB initially made a muted appeal for a government inquiry. They were not prepared to use their huge resources to carry out an inquiry themselves. Bill Morris, TGWU National Secretary, explained what he wanted from such a government inquiry, writing in The Landworker (the TGWU's journal for agricultural workers) he said, "no industry can thrive without consumer confidence in its product... getting all the facts and debate out into the open through a public inquiry could help boost confidence." In short the purpose of the TGWU's proposed "inquiry" would be to get people to buy beef again, not to ensure that it was safe or find out who was responsible in the first place. An inquiry held on this basis could only be a public relations exercise for the food industry and a complete whitewash. Since this initial very low key response the unions have even dropped this call for an inquiry. This is a huge indictment of the trade unions. They have not even attempted to defend the thousands of jobs lost in the beef industry. In conclusion, no reliance can be placed whatsoever on the Labour Party and the unions to deal with BSE/CJD. The Liberal Democrats position has been virtually the same as the Labour Party -- they are also supporting the demand for a Food Agency. No answer from radicals and Greens <text>What then, of those who would claim to be more radical than Labour? The Socialist Workers Party, the Socialist Party and the Socialist Labour Party have all written articles indicting the Tory government for the BSE crisis, and made many correct points on the disastrous impact on public health. But they have failed to initiate any campaign against the government and its agencies over this vital issue. They have not protested at the conditions in abattoirs and rendering plants; they have not taken up the danger in the burying of cattle carcasses or opposed the building of incinerators near to housing areas. The reason for this passivity lies in their political outlook, which entrusts the fate of working people to the trade unions or the Labour Party. We insist that the only political way forward will have to be in opposition to the union bureaucrats and the Labour Party. The environmentalist organisations such as Friends of the Earth and the Greens have had very little to say over BSE and certainly have organised no action against it. This is because they attribute the causes of BSE not to the demands for profit of the farming and food industry and the government support of these industries, but to modern technology and science in and of themselves. They see the way forward in persuading big business and national governments not to use the latest developments in science, but to return to more ecologically friendly techniques. Whilst they can point to many abuses of science by big business their calls for a return to the small scale production of an earlier age are utterly bankrupt. Their glorification of regionally based production and consumption is no answer to the realities of the global economy and could only result in a giant step backwards with massive unemployment and starvation. Invariable their lack of any real analysis and individualist approach means they end up blaming "the consumer", i.e. working people, for not following their prescriptions. The SEP have called for an emergency programme to eradicate the dangers to public health shown by BSE-CJD and E-coli. Such an emergency programme would include:
The Socialist Equality Party places the future of humanity in the hands of working people themselves. We stand for a political movement for social equality, that puts the health of the mass of the population above profits and which is organised internationally, so that it can combat the transnational corporations that dominate food production and agriculture. This is the only way to deal with this catastrophe and enable the vast technological developments to be harnessed for the benefit of humanity. |
Top of page Front Page |
Rotherham, England, S60 1SU Tel: 44 (0) 114 2438 117 Fax: 44 (0) 114 2618 424 Email: sep@dial.pipex.com |
| Welcome | What we stand for | What's on? | International Worker | Books | ICFI | Feed Back |
