Landmark US case seen as “a warning shot” for Ireland and EU food policy.
Earlier this month, the European Commission has recalled consignments of frozen Brazilian beef products imported into the EU, after it was found they contained hormones banned by the bloc. The banned hormones were detected in shipments that arrived into Europe earlier this month.
Co. Tipperary and Irish public health advocates are calling on the Government and EU institutions to accelerate action on ultra-processed foods (UPFs), following a landmark lawsuit filed this week, by the City of San Francisco against some of the world’s biggest food manufacturers.
And now, a case, taken by San Francisco; the first of its kind brought by a public authority, alleges that companies including Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, Kraft Heinz, Nestlé and others engineered and aggressively marketed ultra-processed products while knowing they were driving a crisis in obesity and chronic disease, in breach of unfair competition and public nuisance laws.
Ultra-Processed Meat.
Various groups promoting healthy diets in Ireland claim that the lawsuit should be “a wake-up call” for Ireland, where research shows ultra-processed foods account for around 45.9% of the average household shopping basket, placing the Irish State in line with the highest consumers in Europe.
What San Francisco is saying, very clearly, is that this is not just about individual willpower, it’s about products and marketing strategies that put profit before people’s health.
Ireland has one of the highest levels of overweight and obesity in Europe. We cannot ignore the role of an increasingly ultra-processed food environment in that picture.
According to the HSE and recent national surveys, around 60% of Irish adults and over one in five children are now living with overweight or obesity.
The San Francisco lawsuit draws heavily on emerging international evidence, including a major Lancet series published last month, which found consistent associations between high UPF intake and increased risks of obesity, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, some cancers, depression and premature death.
The message is that ultra-processed foods are not just empty calories, they are strongly linked with chronic disease across multiple organ systems. Ireland cannot afford to be a bystander while other jurisdictions start to hold industry to account.
While Ireland has introduced measures such as the sugar-sweetened drinks tax and restrictions on marketing high-fat, salt and sugar (HFSS) foods to children, the various groups promoting healthy diets, note that current rules focus mainly on nutrients, not on the degree of processing or the cumulative impact of additives, texture engineering and aggressive branding.
At EU level, the Farm to Fork Strategy includes a commitment to a harmonised, mandatory front-of-pack nutrition label and stronger nutrient profiles to restrict health and nutrition claims on unhealthy products. However, progress has been slow and does not yet directly address ultra-processing as such.
Various groups promoting healthy diets are urging the Irish Government to:
Back strong EU-wide front-of-pack labelling that is easy to understand and compatible with emerging evidence on UPFs;
Tighten marketing rules, particularly digital advertising and brand promotions aimed at children, to cover ultra-processed categories rather than just narrow nutrient thresholds;
Set clear procurement standards so that publicly funded schemes – including school meals, hospitals and other State services – progressively move away from serving ultra-processed products as default options;
Monitor and report the proportion of the Irish food supply and advertising spend accounted for by ultra-processed products.
Ireland now needs to recognise the same underlying problem: a food system where the cheapest, most available and most heavily promoted options are the very products most closely linked with long-term illness.
People in Ireland now has a choice, to wait and react, or to lead in protecting people’s health.
The Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs (DAERA) has declared a 20-kilometre Temporary Control Zone (TCZ) near Bangor, Co. Down, after surveillance indicated a possible case of Bluetongue virus (BTV) in two cows, latter the first suspected detection of the disease on the island of Ireland.
The TCZ came into force at 21:00 on Saturday last, November 29th, 2025. Under the restrictions, movement of susceptible species, including cattle, sheep, goats, deer and camelids, on or off any premises within that zone is prohibited, except when animals are being moved directly to slaughter under licence.
While preliminary results have triggered the alert, DAERA emphasises that full testing and investigations are ongoing. The suspected cases were detected via the Department’s active disease-surveillance programme.
Authorities stress the serious implications if the virus becomes established. Though bluetongue poses no known risk to human health or food safety, it can have devastating effects on animal health and welfare, with possible consequences including illness, death, reduced productivity, and trade restrictions. If established livestock and farm economies could face significant disruption.
In a joint north-south effort, authorities have called for heightened vigilance and strict compliance with biosecurity and movement controls. Farmers and all livestock keepers have been urged to monitor their animals closely and to report any suspicious signs immediately to their veterinarian or the relevant veterinary office.
Bluetongue (BTV) is a viral disease that affects domestic and wild ruminants, including sheep, cattle, goats, deer, as well as llamas and alpacas. The virus is transmitted by small biting midges (species of the Culicoides midge) rather than by direct contact between animals.
There are many different serotypes of Bluetongue virus; some strains cause little or no clinical signs in infected animals, while others, especially in more sensitive species such as sheep, can lead to severe disease.
Clinical signs may include fever; loss of appetite; swelling of the face, lips or tongue; salivation or nasal discharge; lameness; and, in severe cases, ulcers, respiratory distress, reproductive losses (such as abortion), or death.
Importantly, Bluetongue poses no risk to human health or food safety: it cannot infect people, nor can it be transmitted through consumption of meat or milk from affected animals.
Why it Matters, – Risk and Implications. The insects that transmit Bluetongue, biting midges, are present in Ireland, and are typically most active during the warmer months (historically April to November).
The disease remains present in many parts of continental Europe; virus-carrying midges or the movement of infected animals or biological products (such as germinal material) means there is an ongoing risk of incursion.
If Bluetongue becomes established, the consequences could include serious welfare problems for livestock, loss of production (meat, milk, wool), increased mortality in vulnerable flocks or herds, reduced fertility or loss of offspring in pregnant animals, and the possibility of movement or trade restrictions for live animals or animal products.
Because many infections, particularly in cattle or goats, may show no obvious signs, the disease can spread undetected, making early detection and active surveillance critical to preventing outbreaks.
For Farmers & Livestock Keepers – What To Do. (1) Remain vigilant for any signs of ill-thrift, swelling, mouth or nose lesions, drooling, nasal discharge, lameness, or unexpected abortions in animals. (2) Report any suspicion immediately to your veterinary service or the relevant animal-health authority, remembering that Bluetongue is a notifiable exotic. (3) Minimise risk of midge bites: use good bio-security practices, house animals in midge-proof accommodation where feasible, especially at dawn and dusk when midges are most active. (4) Be cautious when sourcing livestock, germinal products or breeding material from regions where Bluetongue is known to circulat.
For the benefit of the ordinary man in the street, what exactly is the EU–Mercosur deal?
The EU–Mercosur deal is a major trade agreement between the European Union and four South American countries, namely Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay(known together as Mercosur).
Its main purpose is to make trade between the two regions easier by: (1) Cutting or removing many tariffs (import taxes) on goods going both ways. (2) Opening up markets for EU cars, machinery, medicines and services in South America. (3) Giving Mercosur countries more access to the EU for products like beef, poultry, sugar and other agricultural goods. (4) Setting common rules on things like food safety, intellectual property, and government contracts, including environment and labour commitments, though critics say these may not be strong enough.
Supporterssay: It will boost trade and strengthen EU ties with South America. Opponents, especially Irish farmers, say: It will bring in cheaper agricultural imports produced under lower standards, thus harming rural economies, and could indirectly increase deforestation in South America.
The EU–Mercosur Agreement, now entering a contentious ratification phase across the European Union, represents one of the most far-reaching trade deals negotiated by the EU in decades. While the agreement promises tariff reductions, expanded market access and strategic benefits in South America, it also presents serious risks for Ireland’s agricultural sector, its environmental standards and long-term rural sustainability. For these reasons, Ireland is justified in maintaining a cautious, and in many respects critical, stance as the ratification process unfolds.
Politically, the agreement remains highly unstable. The European Parliament is deeply divided, with recent votes showing only a narrow margin between supporters and opponents. Key member states, including France, Poland, Austria, the Netherlands and Italy, have already expressed strong reservations. The European Commission has attempted to push the process forward, but the fact that ratification was paused earlier this year reflects the scale of political tension surrounding the deal. Ireland is far from isolated in its concerns.
From an Irish perspective, the most immediate threat arises in agriculture. The agreement would grant substantial additional market access for South American beef, poultry and sugar into the European Union. Even with quota limits, the increased volume of imports would land directly into the most sensitive areas of Irish farm production, particularly beef. Irish farmers compete in one of the most regulated, high-cost and environmentally scrutinised agricultural systems in the world. Allowing cheaper imports produced under lower labour, welfare and environmental standards risks undermining the viability of family farms that form the backbone of rural Ireland. The European Commission has floated an “emergency brake” to reimpose tariffs if imports surge, but farmers’ organisations in Ireland are unconvinced that such mechanisms would be swift, robust or transparent enough to prevent serious market disruption.
Environmental concerns deepen this opposition. Ireland, like all EU member states, is bound by stringent climate and biodiversity targets. Yet the Mercosur bloc includes regions facing chronic deforestation pressures, particularly in Brazil and parts of the Amazon basin. Critics fear that increased export incentives for beef, soy and other commodities could accelerate land-use change in sensitive ecosystems. Although the agreement contains sustainability clauses linked to the Paris Agreement, enforcement mechanisms remain weak. It would be inconsistent for Ireland, already struggling to meet its own climate commitments, to endorse a trade deal that may indirectly contribute to global environmental degradation.
A further issue is regulatory asymmetry. The EU maintains some of the highest standards in the world regarding food safety, traceability and animal welfare. While the agreement requires Mercosur exporters to meet EU standards at the border, there is limited assurance that production systems on the ground will adhere to equivalent requirements. This raises real concerns about fair competition and consumer confidence. Irish farmers and processors, who invest heavily in compliance, would face competitors who do not operate under the same regulatory burdens.
Ireland also has legitimate procedural concerns. The decision by some in the European Parliament to challenge the structure of the agreement before the Court of Justice highlights unresolved questions about democratic scrutiny. Attempts to rush ratification without adequate debate risk eroding public trust in EU trade policy at a time when transparency is essential.
Finally, the strategic argument advanced by the European Commission, that the deal is needed to diversify trade and secure access to raw materials, does not outweigh the potential social and economic consequences for Ireland’s rural communities. Diversification is important, but not at the expense of domestic sectors that have already absorbed significant pressures from climate policy, volatile markets and rising production costs.
For all these reasons, economic, environmental, regulatory and democratic, Ireland is justified in maintaining a firm, evidence-based opposition to the EU–Mercosur Agreement in its current form. Any trade deal of such scale must protect the interests of Irish farmers, uphold the integrity of EU environmental commitments and ensure equal standards for all producers supplying the European market. Until those conditions are met, Ireland’s stance is both prudent and necessary.
IFA calls for housing order to protect poultry as avian flu confirmed in Co Carlow.
The Irish Farmers’ Association (IFA) has called for the introduction of a housing order requiring free-range poultry farmers to keep their birds indoors, as authorities confirm an outbreak of avian flu in a commercial turkey flock in Co Carlow, a county bordering on Co. Tipperary.
The virus, which causes the disease, is known as HPAI H5N1 and has been in circulation among wild birds over the past year.
Mr Nigel Sweetnam, Chair of the IFA National Poultry Committee, said the measure is urgently needed to help contain the spread of the highly contagious disease and safeguard farmers’ livelihoods. He urged all poultry farmers to be on high alert and to contact their vet and the Department of Agriculture, immediately, if they suspect any signs of avian flu.
Mr Sweetnam said farmers should watch for indicators such as high mortality and lethargic birds, and highlighted the importance of establishing exclusion zones around affected farms where movement of birds in and out is tightly controlled under veterinary supervision.
With the whole pattern of bird flu changing/mutating; the virus has appeared earlier than usual this year and in different geographical areas, with two outbreaks in Co. Cork.
Mr Sweetnam believes that a housing order should be comparable to restrictions in place during the Covid-19 pandemic, thus limiting movement and requiring birds to be kept indoors. The IFA continues to engage with the Department of Agriculture on measures to contain the outbreak and protect Ireland’s poultry sector. The Department is reminding all flock owners to maintain the highest standards of biosecurity, including disinfecting footwear and equipment, restricting visitors, and preventing contact between domestic poultry and wild birds.
Scientific facts published by Local Authority Waters Programme (LAWPRO). See HERE.
Water Quality in River Suir in Thurles only 33% satisfactory down from 61% in 2010-2012 which equals a relative drop of 46% in about 12 years.
Almost no aquatic life.Samples taken down stream of Thurles Bridge in town centre (Barry’s Bridge) on 11/09/24, result in no invertebrates typical of clean water such as Mayflies or Stoneflies – essential food for trout and salmon.
A few water shrimps (Gammarus), some biting Midge larvae (Simuliium) Extensive Cladophora algae.
Current data raises a harsh question: if our drinking water is so delicately balanced, how much “extra load” can rivers accept without tipping into crisis?
A small sample of floating bottles, River Suir, Thurles town centre. Pic: G. Willoughby. (Image taken Sept. 29th 2025)
Slurry Spreading: Tipperary’s Silent Pollution.
Hypocrisy is very much alive and well in Ireland, with the strict promotion of standards loudly proclaimed, yet quietly ignored when it comes to agriculture.
If an individual is caught illegally dumping a mattress or a bag of household rubbish, the law comes down hard. The penalties are steep: on-the-spot fines, €4,000 if convicted in the District Court, and up to €130,000 on indictment for more serious offences. Add to that the local authority’s investigation and legal costs, plus extra charges for continuing offences, and the message is crystal clear — thesepolluters will pay.
But here is the contradiction: when sewage or agricultural slurry is allowed to seep into our rivers, with the blessing of Tipperary Co. Council itself, the penalty is nothing, zero, zilch, no costs, no fines, no legal prosecution, and no accountability.
Just a small sample of the discarded litter at Barry’s Bridge, in River Suir, Thurles Town centre. Pic: G. Willoughby. (Image taken Sept. 29th 2025)
This double standard undermines public trust, punishes the ordinary citizen while shielding powerful interests, and leaves communities to live with the consequences — polluted drinking water, fish kills, and waterways turned into toxic drains. The rules are strict when it suits, yet curiously silent when the polluter is a farmer or an industry player with political influence.
Until agricultural slurry is treated as seriously as other forms of dumping, Tipperary and the rest of Ireland will continue to suffer the hidden, silent pollution that seeps into every stream and spring water well.
Tipperary was renowned for its rivers and lakes, the Suir winding through Thurles, the Shannon and its tributaries, and countless smaller streams supporting fish, wildlife, and local communities. Yet these waters are under increasing pressure, largely from the way slurry is managed on farms.
Slurry, a liquid mix of animal waste, provides a quick nitrogen boost to grass, making it popular among farmers. But its environmental costs are severe. Being liquid; slurry runs off easily during rainfall, carrying nutrients into rivers and lakes, triggering algal blooms, oxygen depletion and fish kills. Strong odours signal ammonia emissions, while heavy tankers compact soils, further increasing runoff.
By contrast, traditional dung releases nutrients slowly and enriches the soil with organic matter, improving structure, fertility, and biodiversity. Though slower to handle, it poses far less risk to water quality.
Evidence from EPA and Local Water Authorities The EPA’s 2023 report shows that many Irish rivers are failing to reach “good ecological status,” often due to nutrient pollution. In Tipperary, seven public water supplies, including Borrisokane, Nenagh, and Roscrea, are on the EPA’s Remedial Action List, meaning urgent improvements are needed. Dr. Fran Igoe from LAWPRO reports that water quality satisfaction in Tipperary has dropped from 61% to 33% over a 12 year period, with rivers around Thurles and Templemore particularly badly affected.
Voices from the Field Local anglers and fishing clubs have become strongly outspoken. Mr Joe O’Donoghue of Ormond Anglers says, “It’s doing untold damage to the river – the ecosystem is disappearing. Fly life we used to see in the evenings … it’s gone.” Inland Fisheries Ireland has prosecuted companies in Tipperary for slurry-related pollution. Ms Lynda Connor, regional director, states: “Ensuring clean and healthy water is not just a responsibility, but a necessity for the survival of fish and the ecosystems they thrive in.” Now the leading question “So why has Inland Fisheries Ireland not prosecuted Tipperary County Council for permitting sewage to flow into the River Suir?
Mixed effluent flowing from a pipe on the river walk close to the rear of Thurles shopping centre. Pic: G. Willoughby (Image taken Sept. 29th 2025)
Time for Action. Tipperary as a county can no longer rely on excuses. The County Council, Uisce Éireann, and the Department of Agriculture must now act together and this will require:
Enforcement of slurry regulations with inspections and severe penalties.
Support for farmers to adopt safer alternatives, including dung use and low-emission spreading technologies.
An investment in water infrastructure, buffer zones, and monitoring.
An engagement with stakeholders such as anglers, environmental groups, and local communities in oversight and planning.
Short-term gains from slurry can no longer be allowed to outweigh the long-term damage to rivers, drinking water, and local ecosystems. Tipperary’s waters deserve decisive action now, before more fish die, more rivers are polluted, and the county’s natural heritage is irreversibly harmed.
Now regarding my last communication, which further updated details of the 12 year old River Suir pollution problem in Thurles; seven emails in total were sent 10 days ago, on Friday September 19th 2025 to:-
(1)Ms Sinead Carr(CE Tipperary Co. Council), [sinead.carr@tipperarycoco.ie]; ) Result: No Reply or acknowledgementreceivedto date.
(2)Ms Sharon Scully, (Thurles Municipal District Admin)[sharon.scully@tipperarycoco.ie]; Result: No Reply or acknowledgementreceived to date.
(3)Mr Darragh O’Brien (darragh.obrien@oireachtas.ie) (Minister for Climate, Energy and the Environment & Minister for Transport). Result: Correspondence acknowledged. (Ref: HPLG-MBO-03271-2025). Reply “Your correspondence is currently receiving attention and a further reply will issue as soon as possible”.
(4)Mr Alan Dillon (alan.dillon@oireachtas.ie) (Minister of State with responsibility for Small Businesses and Retail and Minister of State with responsibility for Circular Economy). Result: No Reply or acknowledgementreceived to date.
(5) Mr Timmy Dooley (timmy.dooley@oireachtas.ie) (Minister of State with responsibility for Fisheries, Minister of State with responsibility for the Marine). Result: Correspondence acknowledged. (Ref: CCAE-MOSD-00280-2025). Reply:“I would like to acknowledge your recent correspondence regarding Pollution of the River Suir. The contents of your email have been noted and I will bring this to the Minister’s attention and we will respond accordingly”.
(6)Environmental Complaints section EPA[E.Complaints@epa.ie], Result: Reply received as shown hereunder.
(7)Mr Robert O’Brien(A/Executive Scientist, Environment & Climate Action, Tipperary County Council, Civic Offices, Clonmel, Co. Tipperary).[robert.obrien@tipperarycoco.ie]. Result: Reply received as shown hereunder.
Hello George, You are correct to highlight the seriousness of the pollution of our rivers and the priority that must be given to public health and safety. Any immediate actions that could have been taken are completed. To address the overall issue and root cause will require a longer-term approach. The consultative process is not intended to be a talking shop, but this pilot study ensures accountability, coordination and long-term protection of the river and community. I appreciate this can be frustrating but reversing water quality decline often takes years to be realised. Any information you request must be formally applied for under the Freedom of Information Act 2014. Regards……….
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish.AcceptRead More
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
Recent Comments