Paul Tyler: Peter Smith, from the Support Group.

Peter Smith: Mr Meacher, I would like to add to what Mrs Sigmund was saying and it's really the whole climate of the way this thing is done and covered up that we have seen almost like a sausage machine. We saw Camelford go through it, we watched the OP's go through it, we've seen all the other groups - I think the MMR people are going through it at the moment. We need to fully investigate the way the whole system works for us here because not actually working for us is working against the population.

Paul Tyler: Next? Who'd like to have a... yes, Dough Cross.

Douglas Cross: I'm a forensic ecologist, in other words I do a lot of work on ecology in court. I'm concerned with the lack of evidence. There has been a suggestion recently, I'm not sure how official this is, that Dame Barbara should be invited to prepare a third report...

(loud laughter)

... whether or not it is true, I don't know. I hope it is not, because this is a perfect example of the way in which these scientists are recycled. As an independent scientist, I was living here too. I must support Doctor Richard Newman because Richard and I did an initial health survey which was pooh-poohed by all the health authorities which turned out to be very similar in fact and results to the one, the official - I've forgotten the name of the guy now, but the official report shortly after and this morning on television a lady was actually trotting out the same symptoms that Richard and I picked up in our report. Like Richard, I had a certain amount of opposition. There were attempts, I think by the water authority, to smear my name as a scientist. These things have been going on and on. Are they different now? Mr Meacher, you mentioned the Water Act and the effect of the review of procedures. I can tell you that in the two years before South West Water was finally prosecuted, there were at least a dozen similar incidents, two of which I know were almost as serious. One of which - in Northern Ireland - involved the loss of thirty tons of this material, not twenty, and which only a few months ago I was still helping to investigate in Northern Ireland. The attitude at the moment, I believe, of the Chief Medical Officer of Health over there is that 1500 micro grams per litre is still perfectly acceptable despite the legal limit of 200 micro grams under the EC regulations. I'm not sure, really, that things are that much better.

Paul Tyler: Anybody else? Well, Minister, would you like to respond to...

Raymond Bower: May I just say something? I'm very grateful for these reassurances, however valuable they may be, but most people here's concern is for their health and not the environment. That's the big unanswered question - that's what we really want to know about.

(applause and agreement)

Nigel Mazlyn Jones: I think I would like to make one comment on behalf of the North Cornwall Residents' Association. I'm Nigel Jones, I helped to found, along with other local people, the North Cornwall Residents' Association, a democratically elected and transparent body affiliated to the Residents' Associations of Great Britain. We were prior to the Lowermoor Support Group and we helped as a campaigning body, a co-ordinating body, and we disbanded a couple of years ago and we formed to take the thing eventually to court and through it. What I want to say as a local resident for twenty seven years and I think I am one of the few people to have campaigned in the area by leafletting door to door, speaking to most trades people in Port Isaac, Tintagel, Rock, Boscastle, St. Teath, St. Breward, Camelford, is that the divisions in this society that were created by NOT getting attended to by all the bodies that have been referred to, created masses of social stress and continue to create social stress. Only on Friday a representative of a trade body in Camelford here took me to task for an hour lambasting me for mentioning indeed again, this water crisis as they see it always being raised as the tourist time approaches.

Indeed, our MP Mr Tyler was criticised by the Camelford council only last year but after debate and discussion I'm glad to say the council decided to back calls for a public enquiry and it's a pity that the Chamber of Commerce in Camelford and that the Town Council in Camelford had not been divided as we were divided in the beginning, into these two groups who were fearing the effect upon their trade, had found because the Department of Health had issued, sorry, the Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Health Authority, had dictated to the doctors of whom I have spoken to two at length, who confirmed that they received utterly no guidance for the first two and a half weeks following the incident, and when they did receive guidance from Cornwall & Isles of Scilly Health Authority, they were told "to expect no long term health effects."

However, as time has shown, there appears to be question marks now especially regarding the Dr Altman report over long-term health effects. So we have a split society where trades people and businesspeople have been known to put pressure on their employees and in two or three cases have sacked them, in 1988 and 1989, for being part of what they regarded as trouble-making pressure groups. Other employees soon learn in this local area, the least populated in England, with I think second from the bottom of the scale in the employment league, second from the bottom of the scale in the wages league, they soon realise that even their part-time seasonal jobs were in doubt. Certain people could not get easy employment when known to be associated with "trouble-making" groups such as my own.

The only reason I was able to continue was because I was self-employed and nobody could sack me. Local doctors having received the guidance not to expect long-term health effects, were then rather loathe to create any anxiety in their patients and followed that procedural line as dictated by the Cornwall & Isles of Scilly Health Authority and of course when the word got out we all know that we do not represent to our doctors when we have a sore lip, nor do we go for a little bit of diarrhoea, nor do we go for stomach problems.

Nobody expected or thought or knew, that they would have any kind of long term effects, that they still don't know, but they have heard all the reports and whispers that there may be a linkage to Alzheimer's disease, but as the Cornish local people, the indigenous Cornish, often say "well, I haven't been to my doctor for 20 years." Some hardened people, farmers and people will get extremely poorly before they will actually trot to their doctors and the general idea that people were accepting £200 or £300 in compensation, there were hundreds took compensation of £200 or £300 for bottled water. A lot of people knew that person A, person B had not had any bottled water, but they still put their claim in, and they still got their £200 or £300, so society also split along the lines of "they're just after the money, we know what they're up to". Or it split along the lines of "they've always been hypochondriacs" and within each village, even to this day, there are people, elderly especially, that I've met in private who will not speak in public, who were scared at the time to speak up for fear of ridicule, and this fear of ridicule, I cannot emphasise or underline too much, has affected this debate for twelve years. And as far as we local people see it, it has actually helped the Department of Health who are the Cornwall & Isles of Scilly Health Authority's bosses, to quieten this whole thing up.

We were divided as a society, and therefore we were ruled. And we never got the public enquiry that we asked for. Gerry Neale here asked for it and then he withdrew his request; the whispers were, from our friends in the media, "Gerry Neale's been leaned on" The whispers were he's been told he's upsetting the water privatisation campaign, so we all said in this area, "oh, dear, it appears we've been slaughtered on the altar of privatisation." That's a lot of what we feel; these divisions exist today. The stresses, tensions, anxiety in themselves we accept, the doctors accept, they have had to give more treatments to local people for anxiety and depression. In any society at any given time there are a lot of people who are ill. It doesn't take many straws to break many camels' backs. We had our backs broken.

(Applause)

Paul Tyler: Anybody else want to come in at this stage? I'm not.. you can come back later, but if anyone wants to come in now? Yes, a quick one.

Douglas Cross: Yes, well, this is a classic example of where we had problems with the medical authorities. A lot of livestock died or were severely damaged in this incident. There was no doubting what the cause was. I collect a lot of data and yet all this material was ignored. Now it seems to me that if large animals like cows and sheep die or are seriously injured, by drinking the same material that the public got, there is a presumption that the public was at risk. Instead, the Authority brought in a tame vet who produced a totally useless report, which said that there was nothing wrong. That aluminium is the third most common element in the earth's crust and therefore it could not possibly be dangerous. Now again, I was an unqualified person in the medical profession's eyes, because I don't have a medical qualification. The fact that I also know a bit about toxicology in a different context appears to be totally irrelevant. In other words, local skills are available in many of these instances and they are suppressed or ignored. This is an extremely dangerous situation.

Paul Tyler: Good, now...

(Applause)

Paul Tyler: ... yes, please come in.

June Hills: I wasn't going to say anything, but I will. What Nigel was saying about Alzheimer's; now I had organ tests, which said Alzheimer's, and in the last couple of years I've had more brain scans, which says I have a form of Alzheimer's. Now I've got to live with that. I'm only 61 and I've got to live with that, so, and now my memory and everything is terrible and I'm always ill and tired. You know, what sort of life am I going to have in the next years before I finally end up with cancer or whatever and I die? So if nothing is done about it NOW, health, it's got to be really, really looked into and I can't stress that more. And I shall get upset if I carry on so just PLEASE HELP US.

(Applause)

Paul Tyler: Now, clearly, Michael Meacher is not the Minister for Health but he has given us an express undertaking today, and I'm sure you all appreciate this, that he will take back just these sort of questions - the very personal, very important questions that you've just raised but also the wider ones that others have raised. Would you like to respond now? This is not foreclosing the debate, we can continue this, but I think it would be useful to pick up some of the points that have already been made.

Michael Meacher: Well, thank you very much, and listening to the points that are being made, which I must say are being made very powerfully and very eloquently, and one of the great advantages in coming and meeting people is you do see face to face in a way that you never otherwise would just how strongly and passionately they feel about it and you begin to understand why. I will do exactly as Paul said. Let me just take the points that were raised perhaps where I can make some response and Owen Hydes here, I don't know if you want to come in - I'm sure Paul will agree - after I've spoken and add to it.

First of all, Jenny... Jenny Thompson. The study on childhood health and what happened to the children who were very young at the time, my understanding is that there is a report which has been following their progress and will be published in June of next year which I think is very important. I like to think that it's not all that new Government, I'm not sure it's all that New Labour any more, but it's certainly not new government, but I like to think that the Labour Government was going to be more open. I stand for openness passionately. I think one should be totally transparent in dealing with matters. If things have not gone right, and in this case they didn't initially, I think we should admit to it and that we should try and learn the lessons. But the worst thing that could be done is to try and cover it up and there are clearly many people here who feel very strongly that that is what happened. I mean it's not for me to make a judgement because it was twelve years ago I was not around at that time in terms of keeping a close interest in these matters, but clearly there is a profound and deep feeling that the matter was covered up and that is really bad news, and if it is of any value I want to say very deeply how much I regret that now as a government minister.

Doctor Miles, I think, answered the points that Nigel Jones was putting to him and there's nothing further I can add. I, too, regret very much that the Altman Report did not come out much earlier. My understanding is that publication was a matter for him and I'm not clear why between 1991 and 1999 when it came out in the public domain, why there was the eight year delay (comment inaudible)..sorry?

Douglas Cross: I believe some of it was sub-judice.

Michael Meacher: I see, well, I don't know about that but it is a great pity because again the only thing that satisfies people is if all the information that people have collected - and other people may criticise and indeed there have been reports in the BMJ which have not wholly accepted what Dr Altman said - but the important thing is to have a public debate and let everyone give the evidence on which they rely so that other people can make their own judgements about where the truth lies.

On the contamination, Liz Sigmund, from Bastreet I'm not briefed on that. I will certainly get the matter investigated and I will see you get a full report. On the question of Dr Richard Newman, and the point that Nigel Jones is making here, the way that people who've spoken out have been ridiculed and a number of people have touched on the fear that people have to say what they really felt because others in authority within the establishment would pooh-pooh it, again I think that that is very corrosive.

It doesn't mean to say that everyone gets it right, on these matters there is a genuine and in eradicable degree of uncertainty. The lady who spoke so powerfully and emotionally as the last of the contributors, obviously I cannot speak about an individual case, but the important thing is - no, and I'm sure you were not seeking me to do so and I think it is very important that you had the courage to say what you did and I think it's extremely important - but the important thing is that this is brought out in the open and fully investigated and that there is total transparency. That's what didn't happen at the time. On the question, and this is a wider question Liz Sigmund raised, which I think is a very big issue it does raise the issue who do people trust today?

I know that over GM people don't trust the government, they don't trust officials, they don't trust ministers. If you don't trust the scientists, and I'm not sure how far the scientists are trusted, unfortunately over BSE I mean, I know Dick Southwood quite well, who chaired the BSE Committee, who said in 1990 that there was no danger. He is a totally, anyone who meets him, he is an obviously sincere and genuine man but he got it wrong, he got it badly wrong and it does leave a very uneasy feeling in people's minds - who can you ultimately trust, and I don't know the answer to that question and you cannot make people trust those in authority if they're not willing to do so, as I say I think the only way is to be totally open, and say this is what we believe, this is what we've investigated, this is our report, this is all the evidence and it is for you to make up your own mind. It could be peer review by other authorities, and it could be open to public debate, and subject to public criticism.

I think it's the only way to proceed; it is no longer in our society the case that there is a repository of authority, anywhere, on which people totally believe. It may be sad, but that's I think where we are and I just think total honesty is the only way to deal with it. Peter, Peter Smith, also you raised this question of the way the system works and clearly the restoration of public confidence in dealing with these very difficult issues - I have to deal with GM: I'm not a technical specialist and feelings are utterly, totally polarised and it is extraordinarily difficult, and the only way I know to deal with this is to say, which is what I have, is that in respect of the - I know this is going a bit off the point but - the farm-scale evaluations that there is going to be total openness with the data that we produce, the basis on which decisions are made and there will be a public debate in which everyone will share, and I think that is the only way to do it.

Dough Cross raised the question of whether there is to be a third Dame Barbara report - well, that's the first I've heard of it! I think it unlikely. However, I am aware that there was a serious incident in Ireland. I am very well aware of that, and of course it is the case that this is not, this is a unique case in some ways but incidents in terms of water being made available unfit for human consumption, there are, I think, three or even four hundred incidents across the whole country each year - many of them pretty minor, this was a very serious one, but they do happen. The only point that I'm saying is that there is now, I repeat again, a DUTY on the Secretary of State to take enforcement action where a water company serves up water that is not wholesome and it is a criminal offence for which they can be taken to court and prosecuted and I have made clear repeatedly that I want to see those offences, when proven - they have to be proven, of course, on the basis of evidence, when proven - that the penalties should be SIGNIFICANTLY higher than what I would regard as the derisory level which are often served up at the present time.

What else can I say? Nigel Jones, again, speaks very forcibly and very well, I'm not sure that there is anything I can add to what he said so strongly. The link to Alzheimer's disease is clearly, I well understand, a very serious one. I'm not a medical specialist and I think it is only those who have exhaustively explored the evidence, are able to make that kind of judgement. I know there are many people who fear that connection. I certainly think that it is very important that that evidence should be put into the public domain as rapidly as possible. The other thing that went so badly wrong, as several people said here, is was the delay, that there needed to be action taken straight away, honesty straight away, and as longer studies are needed, then those longer studies are commissioned and put in place at the earliest possible time and carried through and then published as quickly as it could be.

It's the way this has dragged on and on and on, which is so unacceptable and if we have done nothing else, it is to learn that lesson about the way in which these incidents need to be handled, and I just sincerely and deeply apologise again for the mistakes which were unquestionably made.

I don't know whether...? If you want to add? I'm not pressing you...right..

Owen Hydes (Drinking Water Inspectorate):

Yes, good morning, ladies and gentlemen, first of all may I say that I fully understand the feelings of the people in this community about what happened twelve years ago, and I sympathise greatly with you. I represent the Drinking Water Inspectorate; the Drinking Water Inspectorate did not exist at the time of the Lowermoor contamination incident. The Minister has explained some of the things that have been put in place, many of them directly as a result of the incident, that are now put in place to minimise the chances of such an incident happening again.

I'd just like to say a few words about how we go about the process of investigating incidents. Water companies are required by law to notify the Drinking Water Inspectorate, to notify the local authority and to notify the health authority of any contamination incident. If that incident is serious we must be notified immediately, whatever time of day or night. The water company has to produce an interim report on the incident within 72 hours, and a final report within one month. All these incidents are investigated by the Drinking Water Inspectorate and the results of our investigations are made public.

Since we came into being in 1990 there have been on average about one hundred incidents affecting drinking water quality. I have to say that the majority of these incidents were pretty minor, and there was never any question about there being any health risk to the populations concerned. So, the supply of water which is regarded as unfit for human consumption is a rare event. But nevertheless since 1990 the Drinking Water Inspectorate has brought 25 successful prosecutions against water companies for supplying water unfit for human consumption. Most of these prosecutions have been in respect of water, which has been discoloured, its appearance has been so awful that you couldn't expect people to drink it.

So I hope that that demonstrates that the system that is in place is working and further, I would have to say, that if this incident were to occur today - and heaven help us it doesn't - there is no question that the Drinking Water Inspectorate would bring a prosecution against the water company. Mrs Sigmund raised an incident that happened in Bastreet; I'm afraid that because I haven't been in my office for three weeks, I'm not aware of the details of that incident, but I can assure you that that will have been notified to the Drinking Water Inspectorate and we will be carrying out a thorough investigation of that incident and I will ensure that you are appraised of the results of that investigation.

Paul Tyler: Now are there any questions particularly for Mr Hydes? And then I'd like to go back to health issues again. Yes, please.

Michael Williams: I didn't quite catch what you said, did you see there had been 100 incidents since 1990?

Owen Hydes: No, there has been an average of about 100 notifications of incidents affecting drinking water quality per year since 1990, so we're talking about 1,000 in total.

Michael Williams: You actually said 100 in the ten years. I was just going to ask what you did with the rest of your time!

(Laughter)

Owen Hydes: My staff are investigating incidents!

(Laughter) Paul Tyler: Any other? Yes, yes.

Michael Williams: You say you've taken action to minimise incidents. In other words that means you've done something to prevent them.

Owen Hydes: Yes.

Michael Williams: Could you explain?

Owen Hydes: Yes, indeed, I'd be very pleased to. The first thing is that we require each water company to have an emergency plan about how it will deal with a contamination incident. And that emergency plan will set out how a company will set up an incident management team, so that officers in the company clearly know who is responsible for doing what and that will include the notification to the Drinking Water Inspectorate, to the local authority and to the health authority.

The plan will set up how the water company will investigate the cause of the incident and how it will initiate remedial action. But most importantly that plan has to set out how the company will inform its consumers about the incident and what action the consumers may need to take in order to mitigate the effects of the incident. Commonly that action could be to boil water before drinking and cooking, if the water might be judged to be microbiologically unsound. It's also a requirement that those emergency plans are rehearsed periodically. The Drinking Water Inspectorate inspects water companies' emergency plans and it asks to see details of the rehearsals of those plans. And it expects water companies to modify those plans in the light of any rehearsals and of course in the light of any incidents that have occurred, so that lessons are continually learned and plans are updated.

The Minister mentioned certain things that happened immediately after the incident in terms of security at water treatment works and so on; all of those things happened before the Drinking Water Inspectorate was set up, but since we have been set up as part of our routine inspection of water companies, we do check that they have in place operational procedures and we check that they carry out those operational procedures at their treatment works and within their supply systems so as to minimise the chance of anything going wrong. So I hope that's given you an explanation of some of the things that have been put in place.

Paul Tyler: Can I just ask a question? This is a wonderful opportunity! If this afternoon your mobile phone went, and somebody said "we've had an unfortunate accident and twenty tons of aluminium sulphate has been put in the wrong tank in a water treatment works at - where do you live? -

Owen Hydes: Where do I live? In West Sussex!

Paul Tyler: Well in West Sussex, not Cornwall for a change. What would the advice be that you would expect the water company in that area to give to its consumers? It would not, presumably, be to boil all their water?

Owen Hydes: No.

Paul Tyler: What advice would you be giving?

Owen Hydes: Well.

Bridget Pentecost: To add orange juice to it?

Owen Hydes: The advice that would be given would be decided by the water company, the local authority and the health authority, basically it would be the health authority's advice, but I'm sure in this particular case the advice would be, not to use the water for drinking and cooking and I would expect the water company either to put tankers of clean and wholesome water on the streets that were affected so that people could get water, or to deliver bottled water to the consumers. And...

Bridget Pentecost: Can I just say?

Owen Hydes: ... and, sorry, there was another point that Paul raised. If such an incident happened today, one of my inspectors would immediately be dispatched to the site to initiate the investigations.

Paul Tyler: Do you want to follow up on this?

Bridget Pentecost: Can I just say this to you? I know you're not in Northern Ireland.

Owen Hydes: No

Bridget Pentecost: Northern Ireland belongs to England and comes under British rule so all the implementations that are in place cover Northern Ireland as well, and yet it happened there, not very long ago. So how reassured are those people there today under British rule? Because all these wonderful rules you've just pointed out...

Owen Hydes: I can't answer that question directly because...

Bridget Pentecost: But it's the same, it's the same...

Owen Hydes: Well, the Drinking Water Inspectorate only deals with England and Wales..

Bridget Pentecost: And Northern Ireland. It's under England.

Owen Hydes: No, there is a separate Drinking Water Inspectorate in Northern Ireland that is completely independent from me...

Bridget Pentecost: How convenient, you've answered my question. This is just wasting time.

Michael Meacher:

This is an important question. Yes, yes. We mustn't be cynical about this. Let me ask a question. My assumption is that if we believe that these practices and procedures are necessary in the light of our experience and we do that we liase closely - you liase closely - with the Drinking Water Inspectorate in Northern Ireland and although we do not have rights of authority over them, we would expect in terms of good practice that they would adopt the same procedures. Now, hasn't that happened?

Bridget Pentecost: Let's hope they aren't the same ones that we adopted, or they'll be there in twelve years time...

Owen Hydes: I believe that the law is similar in Northern Ireland but what I don't know is the detail of the procedures that they adopt in Northern Ireland.

Michael Meacher: Let us, if you'd like to give me, if you wish, your name and address afterwards, right, and forgive me but not at this moment - but let us have a word about this afterwards and I will see that you get a full response about what happened in Northern Ireland.

Bridget Pentecost: I know what happened.

Michael Meacher: Well, right, fine, but if you wish what I'm saying is we will give from the government side what we think were the reasons it happened, why it happened, and again what actions have been taken to ensure that doesn't happen again. Because these incidents are never totally the same, they're similar, but they're not identical. But if you want I will get a full response to you.

Paul Tyler: That gives me a good opportunity just to emphasise that Michael Meacher has been very generous with his time and he will be available to have a quick word with people at some stage during the lunch interval or after lunch. I think we're going to probably make the afternoon as informal as possible, so if anyone wants to raise an issue like that, and to give some information to the Minister there'll be an opportunity to do so. I want to just pursue for a few minutes - are there any more questions for the Drinking Water Inspectorate?

Sybil Griffiths: I've very impressed with all the various methods you have for dealing with future incidents, my concern is with what happened to us. Now, I lived in Cornwall for 23 years, I'm actually presently living with my sister in Hampshire. I can drink the tap water there. When I came today I actually asked was the coffee that was presented at coffee time made with bottled water or tap water? Of course, it was made with tap water. I cannot drink that. I want to come back to Cornwall to live, but the actual stress of having to have bottled water by me all the time, calling on a friend who maybe isn't using tap water and having to refuse a cup of tea is a major imposition on our life. We were promised many years ago by South West Water that they would stop using aluminium sulphate in the cleansing system. Has it been honoured? No, and most of these people here today and the majority of residents who were affected by the poisoning are allergic to aluminium in the minutest forms.

? (Name Not Known): Yes, that is correct.

Sybil Griffiths: Every day our life is affected by it. Even in a simple form I cannot use a deodorant, as 99% of deodorants produced are aluminium based, and I appreciate all you are doing for future incidents but what has the Drinking Water Inspectorate done for the residents here? And for people like me who cannot drink the tap water in the area I have spent the majority of my life in.

Paul Tyler: I think there are one or two other people who have got similar questions. Would anyone else like? Then I'll ask Mr Hydes to come back again in a moment. Any more questions? Yes, Peter.

Peter Smith: I mean, sensitisation - of the two hundred patients I met, the majority of them, I would say, very clearly were just as Sybil says and if they go away from Cornwall they feel like new people; as soon as they come back and start bathing in the water - this is one of the things you didn't mention - bathing in the water will bring it on as well. So there's no escape. But this is a question for both people here today. First of all I'd just like to make a point that the Northern Ireland thing is not a private company, I believe it is still a public utility....

Owen Hydes: "It's the government"

-----------------------------------------