Routine, Crisis and Muddle? Mishandling the Egg Crisis
| Author | Alan Doig |
| Published date | 01 March 1990 |
| Date | 01 March 1990 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/014473949001000102 |
Teaching
Public
Administration:
Spring
1990 vol. X no.1
pp.15-26
ROUTINE,
CRISIS
AND
MUDDLE?
MISHANDLING
THE
EGG
CRISIS
INTRODUCTION
ALAN DOIG
Faculty
of
Social
and
Environmental
Studies
University
of
Liverpool
In
May
1989,
in
its
response
l
to
the
Commons
Agriculture
Committee's
report
on
salmonella
in
eggs,Z
the
Government
made
three
significant
statements.
First,
it
said
that
'consumers
should
not
be
expected
to
shoulder
responsibilities
for
preventing
food
poisoning
which
properly
lie
with
egg
producers'.
Second,
it
acknowledged
that
the
level
of
egg
sales
which
existed
before
the
Minister
of
State
at
the
Department
of
Health's
remark
on
3
December
1988
('most
of
the
egg
production
in
this
country,
sadly,
is
now
infected
with
salmonella')
would
only
be
restored
through
'the
success
of
the
major
programme
of
measures
that
Government
has
launched
to
secure
the
highest
possible
standards
of
health
and
hygiene
in
the
(egg)
industry
and
the
industry's
ability
to
assure
consumers
that
its
own
house
is
in
order'.
Thirdly,
and
more
significantly,
the
Government
rejected
the
impression
the
Committee
might
have
given
that
normally
healthy
people
could
consume
raw
eggs
or
uncooked
egg
dishes
without
risk.
Everyone,
emphasised
the
Government,
should
avoid
eggs
in
these
forms
while
'the
present
risk
of
infection
continues'.
Furthermore
although
the
risk
of
infection
in
eggs
might
be
'very
small',
the
consumption
of
large
numbers
of
eggs
made
the
'public
health
consequences
of
contamination'
a
serious
problem.
The
Government's
remarks
-
accepting
the
presence
of
a
serious
public
health
issue,
and
the
responsibilities
of
the
Government
and
the
egg
industry
in
dealing
with
it
-
were
a
marked
contrast
to
its
performance
both
before
and
after
Mrs
Currie's
comments
in
December.
Ministerial
confusion,
interdepartmental
prevarication
and
the
angry
reaction
of
the
egg
producers
and
their
political
supporters
not
only
led
to
Mrs
Currie's
resignation
and
the
expenditure
of
over
four
million
to
protect
the
egg
producers'
livelihood
but
also
to
increasing
public,
media
and
political
attention
which,
according
to
unattributable
ministerial
concern,
was
turning
the
row
over
Mrs
Currie's
remarks
into
a
'a
political
issue
....
running
out
of
control'.
Why
the
issue
of
salmonella
in
eggs
should
become
a
source
of
political
controversy
-
and
ministerial
resignation
-
concerns
not
only
how
the
issue
was
handled
within
Whitehall
but
also
how
it
reached
the
public
arena
and
how
it
was
handled
there.
At
the
same
time
the
existence
of
the
controversy
provided
information
and
insights
into
how
various
parts
of
the
political
system
both
create
and
respond
to
that
controversy.
15
Teaching
Public
Administration:
Spring
1990 vol. X no.1
pp.15-26
ROUTINE,
CRISIS
AND
MUDDLE?
MISHANDLING
THE
EGG
CRISIS
INTRODUCTION
ALAN DOIG
Faculty
of
Social
and
Environmental
Studies
University
of
Liverpool
In
May
1989,
in
its
response
l
to
the
Commons
Agriculture
Committee's
report
on
salmonella
in
eggs,Z
the
Government
made
three
significant
statements.
First,
it
said
that
'consumers
should
not
be
expected
to
shoulder
responsibilities
for
preventing
food
poisoning
which
properly
lie
with
egg
producers'.
Second,
it
acknowledged
that
the
level
of
egg
sales
which
existed
before
the
Minister
of
State
at
the
Department
of
Health's
remark
on
3
December
1988
('most
of
the
egg
production
in
this
country,
sadly,
is
now
infected
with
salmonella')
would
only
be
restored
through
'the
success
of
the
major
programme
of
measures
that
Government
has
launched
to
secure
the
highest
possible
standards
of
health
and
hygiene
in
the
(egg)
industry
and
the
industry's
ability
to
assure
consumers
that
its
own
house
is
in
order'.
Thirdly,
and
more
significantly,
the
Government
rejected
the
impression
the
Committee
might
have
given
that
normally
healthy
people
could
consume
raw
eggs
or
uncooked
egg
dishes
without
risk.
Everyone,
emphasised
the
Government,
should
avoid
eggs
in
these
forms
while
'the
present
risk
of
infection
continues'.
Furthermore
although
the
risk
of
infection
in
eggs
might
be
'very
small',
the
consumption
of
large
numbers
of
eggs
made
the
'public
health
consequences
of
contamination'
a
serious
problem.
The
Government's
remarks
-
accepting
the
presence
of
a
serious
public
health
issue,
and
the
responsibilities
of
the
Government
and
the
egg
industry
in
dealing
with
it
-
were
a
marked
contrast
to
its
performance
both
before
and
after
Mrs
Currie's
comments
in
December.
Ministerial
confusion,
interdepartmental
prevarication
and
the
angry
reaction
of
the
egg
producers
and
their
political
supporters
not
only
led
to
Mrs
Currie's
resignation
and
the
expenditure
of
over
four
million
to
protect
the
egg
producers'
livelihood
but
also
to
increasing
public,
media
and
political
attention
which,
according
to
unattributable
ministerial
concern,
was
turning
the
row
over
Mrs
Currie's
remarks
into
a
'a
political
issue
....
running
out
of
control'.
Why
the
issue
of
salmonella
in
eggs
should
become
a
source
of
political
controversy
-
and
ministerial
resignation
-
concerns
not
only
how
the
issue
was
handled
within
Whitehall
but
also
how
it
reached
the
public
arena
and
how
it
was
handled
there.
At
the
same
time
the
existence
of
the
controversy
provided
information
and
insights
into
how
various
parts
of
the
political
system
both
create
and
respond
to
that
controversy.
15
To continue reading
Request your trial