AFTER the BSE fiasco which sent consumer confidence in beef into free-fall, the government really ought to have learned the lesson of how important it is to be trusted by the public on food safety.
But, no, it now stands accused of a cover-up on baby milk.
Nine brands have been found to contain disturbingly high levels of chemicals which could impair fertility.
Which are they? Ministers will not say.
Surely, people have a right to know.
It is scandalous that the government refuses to name the brands so that parents can choose to avoid them.
The official response, however, is typical of government in this country - a mixture of secrecy and patronising we-know-best platitude. "There is no cause for concern," says the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. That's the very play-it-down attitude that created all the distrust and panic over BSE - and an unresolved crisis for farms and the meat industry that is costing taxpayers billions of pounds.
This disclosure about possible dangers in baby milk only came about through a leak. Previously, ministry officials had been in secret talks with firms in a bid to discover how the chemicals - used in the softening of plastics - come to be powdered baby milk.
But now the threat is revealed, worried parents, still kept deliberately in the dark, don't know how to steer clear of the risk brands. They cannot even turn to doctors, health visitors or midwives for advice - because they are no wiser than the rest of us. Isn't that outrageous? Yet, why should the government adopt this line? The old, familiar suspicion arises that ministers give priority to the producers' interests, not the consumers'.
If they will not do their duty properly, voters should remind them of it. For permitting the possibility of babies being chemically poisoned through their food is absolutely no part of any responsible government's function.
Furthermore, the whole recurring business of our food ministry's inability to distinguish to the the public's satisfaction between the interests of the producers and consumers should be ended by the establishment of an independent food safety inspectorate - then we would know better whose word we might trust.
Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article