My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper. In doing so, I apologise to the House for a misprint which has appeared and which I did not pick up. The Question should read “carbamates” instead of the relatively benign “carbonates”.
The Question was as follows:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether low-level exposures to organophosphates and carbonates are a contributing factor in the ill health of some Gulf War veterans and sheep farmers.
My Lords, the Government have spent more than £4 million on research to investigate claims of ill health as a result of low-level exposure to organophosphates in sheep farmers. Another £8.5 million has been spent on investigating Gulf veterans’ illnesses. None of the research so far has confirmed a link between chronic low-level exposure to organophosphates and ill health in humans. Some studies relating to sheep dip remain to be completed, and their results will be reviewed on completion.
The noble Countess made a correction in her Question. Carbamates are a group of pesticides allied to OPs, but they are not components of sheep dips. They have not been raised in this context or by Gulf War veterans as a specific cause of illness.
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. Does he appreciate that it is now 16 years since the noble Lord, Lord Tyler, when he was in another place, and I started asking questions about sheep dip? Why do we rely entirely on British research in this country, when an enormous amount of research from the United States, Italy, Australia and New Zealand shows that low-level exposure to organophosphates causes ill health among sheep farmers and Gulf veterans? That was true also of Japanese people who were exposed to them during the recent terrorist attack. When will Her Majesty’s Government take their head out of the sand like the proverbial ostrich and deal with people’s ill health, rather than fencing so that they do not get involved in litigation? There are many sick people around who need help and attention but who are laughed at by the medical profession because nobody acknowledges that they are ill.
My Lords, nobody in government is laughing at people’s illnesses. In response to the first part of the noble Countess’s question, I say that I have been answering questions on this issue for 11 years, because it has been in front of the current Government as it was of the previous one.
We are taking account of research not just in this country. Research projects are under way, as the noble Countess knows, but some of them will not come to fruition until later this year or early next year. For example, we already have a permanent British liaison officer, based in Washington DC, who is tasked with ensuring that the UK has full view of US research into Gulf veterans’ illnesses and providing a channel for communicating our own work to interested parties.
The noble Countess referred to Australia. The Veterinary Medicines Directorate has assessed the Australian preliminary view of diazinon and concluded that the report contains nothing to suggest that diazinon sheep dips should be banned in the UK. The Veterinary Products Committee and its medical scientific panel have endorsed that assessment. However, as the noble Countess knows, research is ongoing. We have committed to a timescale for that of later this year and early next year.
My Lords, does the Minister consider that the very large multinational chemical manufacturers are acting responsibly in this matter? In particular, does he believe that they should be making a contribution to the very considerable cost to which the noble Lord has referred, both for research in this country and for the treatment of the victims of organophosphates?
My Lords, as I have said, so far there has been no proven or confirmed link between chronic illness and low-level exposure. I do not know about the manufacturers; they may be used for other things. For example, with sheep dips, the procedure was changed from 2001 and it is virtually impossible for a farmer to be contaminated. Since 2001, we have had only nine suspected adverse reactions, which were in respect of older products made before 2001. If farmers follow the instructions for the closed system, they should be perfectly safe. When they are given bags of the material to put in the water trough and pierce it with a screwdriver rather than let the water do the work, that is asking for trouble. So it is a question of vigilance and following the rules. But in respect of the present system, there does not appear to be a problem.
My Lords, I, too, am grateful to my noble friend. How does total spending compare, here and in the United States, on research into the still medically unexplained illnesses of Gulf War veterans, including the effects of their exposure to organophosphates; and what has spending here so far achieved?
My Lords, I know that I am answering for the Government on this issue, but I shall get my noble friend Lady Taylor to send my noble friend a specific response. I do not have any figures on what the Americans are spending. They are spending an enormous amount, as they had a lot of people in the field in the first Gulf War—more than 100,000, anyway. So a lot of work is going on there. We are kept fully up to date with that work, as I have said, with a liaison officer permanently based in Washington. But I shall get a letter to my noble friend.
My Lords, in view of the availability of a variety of alternative compounds to organophosphates for the use of sheep dips, what warning is given to sheep farmers, in addition to protective clothing, about the potential toxicity? How is that information made available via Defra?
My Lords, the instructions were always clear. In the past, under the old system, the farmers made it clear to me, in my first visit to MAFF—as it was—as a Minister, that putting on the heavy rubber clothing was incredibly difficult and restricted their mobility. The closed system, which came about in 2001, is much more practical, and full instructions are given by the manufacturers. In addition, there are alternatives, such as injectables and pour-ons, but their efficacy is not always as good as dipping the sheep. Defra is currently funding research into non-chemical means of dealing with the mites. So there is research, but it will be some years before we get a possible alternative to organophosphates on a non-chemical basis, so that it is safe for everybody except the mite.
My Lords, will the Minister acknowledge that science demonstrates that there is a sub-group of about 10 per cent of the population that is extremely susceptible to organophosphates exposure? Does he accept that even the Health and Safety Executive acknowledges that inhalation is a problem with people susceptible to exposure to organophosphates? How do you stop breathing when you are working with your sheep after they have been dipped?
My Lords, I fully understand where the noble Countess is coming from, but she is inviting me to make a scientific judgment, which I am not qualified to do. All the information I have is that the science is not there. However, there are projects still to be completed, which I detailed in my letter to the noble Countess and to the noble Lord, Lord Tyler, on 20 February. I regret the time that this is taking, but that is one problem of the review of literature that the Committee on Toxicity needs to address, which will not be completed until towards the end of 2009. Some other research projects should be completed by this April and two more by this September—and, of course, they will be fully reported on.