Silvercrest and its implications for the Irish Food Industry

mathepac

KyussBishop wrote: »

... Have a regulator that tests food products occasionally, ....

We have the FSAI which discovered the problem originally and informed the retailers via the UK authorities.

KyussBishop

mathepac wrote: »

We have the FSAI which discovered the problem originally and informed the retailers via the UK authorities.

Oh I know, but they have to enforce proper punishments to deter stuff like this; companies involved need to be hit with very hard fines (not just 'cost of doing business' stuff either, fines which undo profits generated, and more), to give a serious disincentive to messing with food ingredients like this.

maninasia

squod wrote: »

Don't worry about it. I'm sure there'll be an inquiry into this which will find that there's nobody at fault. No-one will get fired and some minor change to the ''system'' will be offered to appease the public.

It was the Irish!
It was the Polish!
It was the Romanians!
It was the Transylvanians!

maninasia

KyussBishop wrote: »

Oh I know, but they have to enforce proper punishments to deter stuff like this; companies involved need to be hit with very hard fines (not just 'cost of doing business' stuff either, fines which undo profits generated, and more), to give a serious disincentive to messing with food ingredients like this.

I agree, America has a system of class action lawsuits, where you can go after big companies by collecting examples of fraud or illegality direct from consumers and get them to pay billions of USD in compensation.

murphaph

KyussBishop wrote: »

Well, there's a pretty easy way to do something about it: Have a regulator that tests food products occasionally, and who puts out extraordinarily stiff fines for breaches (more than enough to undo all profits from the breach, even if it bankrupts the company).

People aren't going to risk the destruction of their business, if proper regulations are put in place and enforced very strongly.

But in the case of Silvercrest (or Findus or whoever), what should they test for? Every known toxin to human health? That's not possible. Your value burger would cost more than its weight in gold.

You can't legislate for every circumstance. If Silvercrest don't test for the presence of roadkill DNA and then it's found in one of their burgers because a third party supplier defrauded them, is Silvercrest really at fault?

Sponge Bob

French blame a Cypriot who bought from the Dutch who bought from Romania now.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2013/0211/breaking4.html

serfboard

Sponge Bob wrote: »

French blame a Cypriot who bought from the Dutch who bought from Romania now.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2013/0211/breaking4.html

Slightly more information here

An initial investigation by French officials revealed that French firm Poujol bought the frozen meat from a Cypriot trader, France's Junior Minister for Consumer Goods, Benoit Hamon, said in a statement on Sunday.

The trader had, in turn, received it from a Dutch food trader, and that Dutch company had purchased the meat from two Romanian slaughterhouses.

Poujol supplied the meat to a Luxembourg factory owned by French group Comigel.

The meat was then sold under the Sweden-based brand, Findus

So thats Romanians->Dutch->Cypriots->French (Poujol)->Luxemburgers(;) Comigel)->Findus

All of which goes to prove this very well made point.

murphaph wrote: »

There could be muck in just about any processed food product because the longer the supply chain, the easier it becomes to substitute or indeed deliberately poison an ingredient.

KyussBishop

murphaph wrote: »

But in the case of Silvercrest (or Findus or whoever), what should they test for? Every known toxin to human health? That's not possible. Your value burger would cost more than its weight in gold.

You can't legislate for every circumstance. If Silvercrest don't test for the presence of roadkill DNA and then it's found in one of their burgers because a third party supplier defrauded them, is Silvercrest really at fault?

What's so difficult about doing basic DNA and chemical analysis on your suppliers product? (this kind of testing is relatively inexpensive today)

Take one sample from a batch, randomly, every couple of weeks or a month, and then run some relatively inexpensive tests to verify the safety of the food and that the supplier hasn't been tampering; really easy.

Considering that it's getting cheaper all the time to do tests like this, having such tests mandated for the public good, for food safety (which is extremely important as it can harm peoples health), makes a lot of sense; enforcing responsibility at multiple levels of the supply chain, also wouldn't allow distributors off the hook by saying "we get this product from Romania", it would equally put them on the line for ensuring the safety of the food they produce (as things should be).

Grainne2012

So isn't this the very same processing plant and owner involved in the Intervention Beef Scandal, and the taxpayer-funded Beef Tribunal?
I find it hard to imagine that anything is a genuine mistake - seems more like a decades-long strategy to me....

antoobrien

Grainne2012 wrote: »

So isn't this the very same processing plant and owner involved in the Intervention Beef Scandal, and the taxpayer-funded Beef Tribunal?
I find it hard to imagine that anything is a genuine mistake - seems more like a decades-long strategy to me....

Does the fact that it wasn't his company that put in the dodgy material, but his suppliers - who were supposed to be european certified - have any bearing on things or are we just looking for the usual easy target to blame?

Grainne2012

Are you serious? I'm not looking for an "easy target". Why do YOU think they are?

I know Ballybay (Silvercrest) and Lough Egish (Rangeland) very well, and have family in the area. The Ballybay factory was closed for years after the Intervention scandal. Every dog in the street knew what was going on. You should look at the Oireachtas reports of the time if you are unaware of it.

antoobrien

Grainne2012 wrote: »

Are you serious? I'm not looking for an "easy target". Why do YOU think they are?

I know Ballybay (Silvercrest) and Lough Egish (Rangeland) very well, and have family in the area. The Ballybay factory was closed for years after the Intervention scandal. Every dog in the street knew what was going on. You should look at the Oireachtas reports of the time if you are unaware of it.

I'm perfectly well aware of who goodman is, which is why I'm accusing everyone on here of shooting at the soft targets.

The evidence available right now suggests that the contaminated material was introduced without the knowledge of Silvercrest.

Is that relevant or does the seemingly irrational need to find and hang a scapegoat quickly trump it?

Grainne2012

Sorry, I'm not understanding you at all.
Why "soft target"? Why "scapegoat"?
Why do you assume innocence and responsibility elsewhere when there are YEARS of evidence as to how this crowd does business?
Do you seriously think a business with this kind of turnover is run blindfolded?
I'm interested in your opinion - I just don't get what drives it

antoobrien

Grainne2012 wrote: »

Sorry, I'm not understanding you at all.
Why "soft target"? Why "scapegoat"?
Why do you assume innocence and responsibility elsewhere when there are YEARS of evidence as to how this crowd does business?
Do you seriously think a business with this kind of turnover is run blindfolded?
I'm interested in your opinion - I just don't get what drives it

I can sum up your attitude as "no need for a trial, he's guilty and we know it, just hang him already."

The entire premise of the argument is based on the fact that it is a company owned by Goodman. Is added scrutiny called for: yes. Does it mean that it's automatically fraudulent activity - no.

As I said earlier in the thread I worked in companies (not food) where the local plant had the final say in where they bought supplies - costing from 1c to tens of thousands of euro. There were some pretty strict accountability measures in place in some of them as thy were producing healthcare products.

If there was a problem with the products as a result of the purchasing practices, it was the brand that took the hit - regardless of whether it was the decision of somebody in the factory or higher up the chain.

I'm inclined to believe Silvercest because of the controls and standards that have been introduced over the past 20 odd years. Then there's the fact that Rangeland (which afaik is not associated with ABP) and now Findus were also caught out.

I'd easily believe that the checks across the entire European food industry were lacking, but I don't think they'd knowing buy material that they believed to be dodgy because of the probability of criminal prosecution if caught.

Grainne2012

Well, I'd rather you didn't "sum up" my attitude to be honest, as you are way off mark. "Hang him"? Hmmm, no, I think I said "seems like a strategy"
Yes I did read what you'd written in previous threads.
No it doesn't change my personal knowledge of the meat plants in the area, and the way they are operated.
Past behaviour is often an indicator of future behaviour.

I wasn't making an "argument", so it doesn't require a premise.
However, I can see that you value your own opinion above that of anyone else, so ok, knock yourself out with it.
Have a nice day.

maninasia

murphaph wrote: »

But in the case of Silvercrest (or Findus or whoever), what should they test for? Every known toxin to human health? That's not possible. Your value burger would cost more than its weight in gold.

You can't legislate for every circumstance. If Silvercrest don't test for the presence of roadkill DNA and then it's found in one of their burgers because a third party supplier defrauded them, is Silvercrest really at fault?

Again it depends on the claims made. Personally I think the consumer should be able to sue Tesco and Silvercrest directly for endangering health and fraudulent behaviour.

I don't think a regular joe-soap on E-bay could get away with buying cheap gold from Poland and selling it to customers in Dublin and then clamining they didn't know it was lead?

The testing for horse DNA, pig DNA etc is really pretty simple, the fact is the companies don't want to start testing for this stuff as it opens up a can of worms and increases their costs. They would have to pay more for laboratory testing costs, they would also be forced to choose from higher quality and therefore higher priced suppliers. Now the whole thing has blown up in their faces.

I find it interesting that a company like Identigen didn't conduct these sort of tests on burger meat or processed foods previously...or did they?

maninasia

antoobrien wrote: »

I'm perfectly well aware of who goodman is, which is why I'm accusing everyone on here of shooting at the soft targets.

The evidence available right now suggests that the contaminated material was introduced without the knowledge of Silvercrest.

Is that relevant or does the seemingly irrational need to find and hang a scapegoat quickly trump it?

Hmmm. Silvercrest knew their supply was coming from Poland, it was cheaper than the others, did they ask questions, did they audit the plant? Why not?

Was it a case of what I don't know can't hurt me?

How come they were buying the same material from different channels, a little odd to me?

Did the ABP group give the purchasing manager in Silvercrest a mandate to cut costs to the bone? Was Silvercrest really operating so independently than ABP? It's part of the same company.

How about the customers, they lied to them saying it was 100% Irish ingredients as per the contract with Tesco, if they lied about that, with one of their biggest accounts? They also lied to their customers (unfortunately lying to your customers is legal in this regard..as so many Irish brands do every day, disgraceful).

How come Tesco didn't check Silvercrest and their suppliers thoroughly? Was it a case of 'what they don't know wont hurt them' again, as long as they got the cheapest burgers?

How come Tesco is still purchasing meat from ABP group...strange behaviour. All this focus on Silvercrest and not the group is far too convenient.

antoobrien

Grainne2012 wrote: »

I wasn't making an "argument", so it doesn't require a premise.
However, I can see that you value your own opinion above that of anyone else, so ok, knock yourself out with it.
Have a nice day.

My opinions are based on the facts I have to hand and are not ranked any higher than anybody else's, unless those opinions are based on rumour innuendo & supposition - like yours.

Your rant (I can't really justify calling it an opinion) is contrary to known evidence, so unless you'd like to share what you have witnessed with us, I suggest you keep your (potentially libellous given the lack of evidence) accusations to yourself.

Grainne2012

Are you always so rude, presumptuous and aggressive, or is it just when you are defending meat scams?

antoobrien

maninasia wrote: »

Hmmm. Silvercrest knew their supply was coming from Poland, it was cheaper than the others, did they ask questions, did they audit the plant? Why not?

Was it a case of what I don't know can't hurt me?

I think you're looking for a conspiracy on the cost item where there may not be one. A lot of business have gone east looking for cheaper suppliers and found them.

I'd wager though there was a lack of auditing or insufficient follow-on auditing after an initial set of tests would have been done in order to maintain the quality of the supply. That is what would worry me about the whole situation.

maninasia wrote: »

How come they were buying the same material from different channels, a little odd to me?

Why? It could be as simple as neither supplier being able to supply the full required amount, or a hedge against ability to supply - eggs in one basket kind of thing.

maninasia wrote: »

Did the ABP group give the purchasing manager in Silvercrest a mandate to cut costs to the bone? Was Silvercrest really operating so independently than ABP? It's part of the same company.

I can't comment on that, because I don't know what went on inside Silvercerst, but that would be consistent with what I have witnessed in other companies. If there is a dictate from head office to cut costs, it's usually up to the locals to do it.

maninasia wrote: »

How about the customers, they lied to them saying it was 100% Irish ingredients as per the contract with Tesco, if they lied about that, with one of their biggest accounts? They also lied to their customers (unfortunately lying to your customers is legal in this regard..as so many Irish brands do every day, disgraceful).

I don't recall seeing 100% Irish beef on the burgers, but then I never went in for the own brand stuff either.

The laws on labelling are strage - as long as the burger was "produced" in a country it is 100% e.g. something like half the cheese sold in the UK as being "british" is actually manufactured here and sent to the uk for packaging.

maninasia wrote: »

How come Tesco didn't check Silvercrest and their suppliers thoroughly? Was it a case of 'what they don't know wont hurt them' again, as long as they got the cheapest burgers?

They're supposed to have given Silvercrest a list of suppliers that they could deal with. So what Tesco dumped them for is probably breach of contract.

maninasia wrote: »

How come Tesco is still purchasing meat from ABP group...strange behaviour. All this focus on Silvercrest and not the group is far too convenient.

Well it's kinda understandable - Silvercrest is where the problem is (so far) from Tesco's POV and apparently were dumped for breach of contract. Why punish the rest of the group without evidence? A company can't unilaterally walk away from a contract without some fairly serious grounds.

maninasia

Well it's kinda understandable - Silvercrest is where the problem is (so far) from Tesco's POV and apparently were dumped for breach of contract. Why punish the rest of the group without evidence? A company can't unilaterally walk away from a contract without some fairly serious grounds.

What more 'grounds' do you need, if you'll pardon the pun . Horse meat Polish burgers not good enough for ya?

Seriously, I can guess the reasons Tesco haven't shut the, out completely yet, because APB is the biggest beef supplier in Europe , in the indo article today.
If Tesco shut them out, they drive up their own costs as the source of supply at this scale and with the pre-approved plants etc. is limited, it's a commercial decision.

Just like the decisions that got them into this mess in the first place.

It's not easy to pin this down as a conspiracy, it may simply have been a conspiracy of silence in the industry, of which APB and Tesco are among the biggest players.

antoobrien

maninasia wrote: »

What more 'grounds' do you need, if you'll pardon the pun .

Seriously, I can guess the reasons Tesco haven't shut the, out completely yet, because APB is the biggest beef supplier in Europe , in the indo article today.
If Tesco shut them out, they drive up their own costs as the source of supply at this scale and with the pre-approved plants etc. is limited, it's a commercial decision.

Just like the decisions that got them into this mess in the first place.

It's not easy to pin this down as a conspiracy, it may simply have been a conspiracy of silence in the industry, of which APB and Tesco are among the biggest players.

Very true - although it will more likely depend on whom Tesco had the supply contract with. If they had the burger contract with Silvercrest, rather than ABP then they can't legally walk away from contracts with other ABP owned companies. Their legal department will have told them that before purchasing will have told them going elsewhere will cut into their margins.

maninasia

Well I am sure they can find grounds to breaking the contract if they really want to, but yes, I guess something along those lines.

antoobrien

Grainne2012 wrote: »

Are you always so rude, presumptuous and aggressive, or is it just when you are defending meat scams?

So challenging an opinion in an open forum is aggressive presumptuous and rude now?:rolleyes:

The presumptuousness here is being displayed in posts that want us to ignore the fact that there is no evidence that Silvercrest knowingly put materials in their meat that contained horse meat etc and punish them based on the history of the ownership of the company.

I'm not defending any scams that may or may not have happened. I'm questioning what I see as a knee jerk reaction - apparently based on bad blood towards the company - that calls for a company to be punished for perceived wrongs, despite a lack of evidence of those wrongs actually being committed by that company.

So what information do you have that the papers haven't published yet and have you brought it to the attention of the relevant authorities - food safety, gardaí, ministry etc, or is everything you have based on hearsay?

Sponge Bob

It strikes me that the battle lines are drawn between established 'old eu' agribusiness in France/UK/Sweden/Ireland and their smaller and lesser known eastern counterparts. I'll bet on the big boys winning. I'll bet on the truth coming in a distant third.

Mr.Micro

Grainne2012 wrote: »

Are you always so rude, presumptuous and aggressive, or is it just when you are defending meat scams?

You are perfectly right IMO. The responsibility is with Goodman, that his source of filler or whatever other rubbish is used, is not harmful, documented and from a safe source. His company is just as culpable for using horse as the source. One test by Goodman for each batch of this filler would be all it takes costing very little. There is no defence for the producers in this case. They were/are quite happy to dupe the public with this filler stuff and label it as beef. Why bother with labels at all sine clearly they mean nothing to these cowboys, or should I say horse wranglers.

Farmer Pudsey

I think a lot of posters fail to realise the pressure that small supermarkets put on suppliers not to mind big ones like Tesco's. It shows the margin that these food companies work under. All the Irish Co-op that were involve in meat processing have left the buisness. They have exited the chicken, pork, lamb and beef processing industry. Brands like Galtee dennys are all in the hands of private companies,

When a consumer look at a product the first look at the price they may look a bit further after that. Big supermarkets know this so they want the food produced at a certain price to compete with other retailers and they want to be able to advertise certain so called facts about there food. At present Irish Beef is being used to keep down the price of beef to farmers in the UK.

The competition authority has failed to find any competition issues with Irish meat processors. This is even though over the last 10 years irish beef prices have lagged the EU norm and are usually behind British prices buy a substancial amount. This is true especially of beef pork and lamb at present. Over the last year we have trailed the UK price by about 50 cent/kgs at farmgate level it is closing at present but the gap will open again in July. This equate to 150+ euro/head on finished cattle.

Before some mentions the fact that we should market ourselves remember that 90% of Beef and Lamb is exported and I imagine the same with pork. The price of processed food is astonishing low. It is also amazing that in the case of Silvercrest that it was only the value burgers that had the horse meat in them was this an accident?

Or was it a case see no evil hear no evil speak no evil by Supermarkets. If you look at it logically Tesco wanted to be able to label a low fat content on there value burgers. They often demand of small suppliers that they show them there accounts to make sure that they are not making too much profit. Horsemeat is very lean so was ideal for labeling purposes. Yes it gave a list of suppliers to Silvercrest but when it audited did it reall look. Look at Anglo, AIB and first Nation and there auditors.

Yes when the problem was found they were able to flap there hands and beat there breasts and cry crocadile tears and blame Silvercrest. But in reality they must have known that the price these burgers were produced at were way below cost if Irish or British beef was used.

Mr.Micro

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

I think a lot of posters fail to realise the pressure that small supermarkets put on suppliers not to mind big ones like Tesco's. It shows the margin that these food companies work under.

What has that got to do with putting illegal uncertified meat of dubious content and origin into foodstuffs and not labeling as so, but calling it beef when it was not? Why should the consumer suffer because of this? Its the consumer that is the loser not the others.

The price of processed food is astonishing low. It is also amazing that in the case of Silvercrest that it was only the value burgers that had the horse meat in them was this an accident?

No surprise the in this case as the stuff was not genuine, but charging for a product that was not what it said on the label.

Yes when the problem was found they were able to flap there hands and beat there breasts and cry crocadile tears and blame Silvercrest. But in reality they must have known that the price these burgers were produced at were way below cost if Irish or British beef was used.

So Tesco are to blame for the crooks who make counterfeit products and the latter are what blameless or have no duty of care to the public consumer? The other outfit, Rangeland foods were making burgers for all the burger retail outlets in Ireland, so what is their excuse for using horse meat.

creedp

Mr.Micro wrote: »

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

What has that got to do with putting illegal uncertified meat of dubious content and origin into foodstuffs and not labeling as so, but calling it beef when it was not? Why should the consumer suffer because of this? Its the consumer that is the loser not the others.



No surprise the in this case as the stuff was not genuine, but charging for a product that was not what it said on the label.

So Tesco are to blame for the crooks who make counterfeit products and the latter are what blameless or have no duty of care to the public consumer? The other outfit, Rangeland foods were making burgers for all the burger retail outlets in Ireland, so what is their excuse for using horse meat.

I think the problem here for the food industry is that this issue is now quickly becoming wider than simply replacing beef with what many seem to be saying with safe horsemeat. This so called scandal will create a growing concern for standards in the food processing industry especially when many suggest that its no surprise that retailers are doing this in order to continue to maintain lucrative contracts with unscrupulous retailers. This is the attitude of profits at any cost. The real question now is has the processing industry restricted itself to replacing beef with horse or has it gone further and compromised health and safety by reducing the cost of processing in any other ways which might be much more problematic for consumers. As I said previously the big problem now is perception and the perception of the food industry, especially the meat processing industry has taken quite a hammering

lionela

carpejugulum wrote: »

Consumers should know you can't buy a good meat product at that price.
Tesco knows you can't buy a good meat product at that price.
But Silvercrest still deserve to take a hit for their dishonesty.

Corporate greed is alive and well in Ireland.

Farmer Pudsey

lionela wrote: »

Corporate greed is alive and well in Ireland.

This is not just an Irish problem some people would want to wake up and smell the coffee. Neither is it just a food processing problem.

When big companies sign a contract that they know the other company can have little or no profit in this is called competition:cool:

Farmer Pudsey

Mr.Micro wrote: »

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

What has that got to do with putting illegal uncertified meat of dubious content and origin into foodstuffs and not labeling as so, but calling it beef when it was not? Why should the consumer suffer because of this? Its the consumer that is the loser not the others.

No surprise the in this case as the stuff was not genuine, but charging for a product that was not what it said on the label.

So Tesco are to blame for the crooks who make counterfeit products and the latter are what blameless or have no duty of care to the public consumer? The other outfit, Rangeland foods were making burgers for all the burger retail outlets in Ireland, so what is their excuse for using horse meat.

Yes Tesco's are just as much to blame as Silvercrest as are ALDI, LIDL Dunnes Burgerking.

http://news.eircom.net/breakingnews/20995545/

When you sign contracts that leave little or no margin for the other half of a contract then there is a serious issue.

When you look at companies like the Kerry Group that exited from food processing then you have to see and look at the bigger picture.

This would be like Boeing signing a deal with Rolls Royce for jet engines knowing that the engines could not be made for that price and then flapping there hands when the planes fall out of the sky.

creedp

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

This is not just an Irish problem some people would want to wake up and smell the coffee. Neither is it just a food processing problem.

When big companies sign a contract that they know the other company can have little or no profit in this is called competition:cool:

Problem is that unsustainable cost cutting in the food processing industry has the potential to be more harmful to the consumer than in a lot of other industries. Maybe the coffee that needs to be smelt here is that the unfettered growth of large private corporations and the unquestioned view that competition and globalisation can only be positive, particularly in the food sector, is not good for the consumer in the long run. It will be interesting to see where all this ends up! For me its just another example of a industry simply killing itself with greed. We've had our fill of the financial services industry over the last couple of years. Are we now entering the same story with the food processing industry.

coolshannagh28

This all relates back to a cheap food agenda , a priority for western governments,who will turn a blind eye to any competition or food fraud issues so long as the consumer remains docile .
In turn the multiples are allowed to manipulate the market and abuse primary producers who work for non existant margins particularly in Ireland as outlined by Farmer Pudsey.
The only good that this scandal can do is wake consumers up to the fact that reasonably edible food cannot be produced for the prices on supermarket shelves and as input and commodity prices rise ,food prices must also rise despite the best efforts of government and supermarkets .
With regard to ABP the market will take care of them ,their lax traceability is not acceptable in the current market and as they inevitably lose contracts ,smaller more scrupulous processors may enter the market providing much needed competition in the strangled Irish beef sector

maninasia

creedp wrote: »

Problem is that unsustainable cost cutting in the food processing industry has the potential to be more harmful to the consumer than in a lot of other industries. Maybe the coffee that needs to be smelt here is that the unfettered growth of large private corporations and the unquestioned view that competition and globalisation can only be positive, particularly in the food sector, is not good for the consumer in the long run. It will be interesting to see where all this ends up! For me its just another example of a industry simply killing itself with greed. We've had our fill of the financial services industry over the last couple of years. Are we now entering the same story with the food processing industry.

We can look at this news as a very positive event. Consumers will wake from their torpor, and the market for better more wholesome food will grow and realise cheaper does not mean better. Smaller more nimble companies can go after that market. There is a business opportunity here along with an education opportunity and a health opportunity.

Food scandals are common all over the world, and it's almost always connected with processed food.

beazee

The law (...) only enforced recently, also banned carts drawn by donkeys, leading to speculation among food-industry officials in France that some of the “horse meat” which has turned up on supermarket shelves in Britain, France and Sweden may, in fact, turn out to be donkey meat.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/horsemeat-found-in-british-supermarkets-may-be-donkey-8489030.html

But that's Findus Romanian ass lasagna.
What's the story with Polish horsey burgers?

murphaph

The more I read about this unfolding story the more I think Ireland can win big from it.

The latest news is that 2 plants in the UK are suspected of passing off horse meat as something else. Not some filler from a supplier that let them down, actual substitution taking place in the UK itself.

So long as no such stories surface in Ireland then we can play the "hey, we found the dodgy DNA in the burgers that came from a substitution made in Poland, etc. but here in Ireland we only produce the best", or whatever.

Apparently a German supermarket has also withdrawn lasagne from the shelves for testing. This will and is turning out to be a European wide problem and Ireland can definitely come out smelling of roses IMO.

This is a purely financial way to look at it, as we are in the Economy section.

Mr.Micro

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

Yes Tesco's are just as much to blame as Silvercrest as are ALDI, LIDL Dunnes Burgerking.

http://news.eircom.net/breakingnews/20995545/

When you sign contracts that leave little or no margin for the other half of a contract then there is a serious issue.

When you look at companies like the Kerry Group that exited from food processing then you have to see and look at the bigger picture.

This would be like Boeing signing a deal with Rolls Royce for jet engines knowing that the engines could not be made for that price and then flapping there hands when the planes fall out of the sky.

Yes I agree with you the big companies put enormous pressure on a supplier to produce a product for a low price. Its been going on for years and why so many are opposed to he rise of the big global chain supermarkets. having said that there is no excuse for a producer to make counterfeit goods that risks harming the consumer just to meet the margins. If the producer cannot make the goods for the agreed price then they have to let it go and not sink into criminality. The big companies will have to learn from this as well that quality goods cannot be made from rubbish or a poor price for the producer.

rodento

Just got a lot worse

OPERATIONS have been suspended at an Irish meat plant found to be exporting horsemeat labelled as beef to a Czech customer.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/operations-suspended-at-tipperary-plant-exporting-horse-meat-labelled-as-beef-29088715.html

Greenmachine

Nail in the coffin.
There goes the beef industry.

dixiefly

rodento wrote: »

Just got a lot worse

OPERATIONS have been suspended at an Irish meat plant found to be exporting horsemeat labelled as beef to a Czech customer.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/operations-suspended-at-tipperary-plant-exporting-horse-meat-labelled-as-beef-29088715.html

If this is proven to be true then the people responsible should get jail.

goat2

i am absolutely disgusted that our own should be found to be dishonest, putting the beef industry in this country in jeopardy,
we have the best beef and meat products in this country,
and it is now down to greed, just greed, selfishness, greed,
dont care for the backbone of this little island, it takes only one,
all in the name of greed,
i hope that whoever it is will end up eating burgers in jail,