It did not amount to an inquisition, yet it was not kid-glove treatment either. The relief on the face of the Commissioner-designate after three hours of questioning, on everything from animal feed to e-commerce, indicated what he had been through.
If Mr David Byrne had a chance to mingle with his MEP examiners in advance of taking to the political centre stage for the first time, the signals were easy to decipher - he was "not a target". Unlike many outgoing commissioners before him, he did not have "a political past" - despite the best attempts of Green MEP Ms Patricia McKenna.
But such is the fractious and endlessly complex nature of subjects such as GM foods, dioxin contamination and BSE - and many more related issues coming under the health and consumer protection portfolio - this was never going to be a jaunt, especially as the previous commission did not cover itself in glory in face of health scares.
The man introduced to the needs and rights of consumers at an early age (in his father's shop) and now heralded as the consumers' champion at the new commission table, had plenty of pro-consumer speak. "I'm a firm believer in the need for transparency. This will be a guiding influence for me," he said. By declaring his stances and intentions, and sometimes setting deadlines, there was no opportunity for MEPs to dismiss his "consumer is king" talk as rhetoric.
A White Paper on food safety is to be completed quickly; its measures should be implemented by 2002. By the end of 1999, he would issue proposals to improve the "rapid alert system" used in response to health scares. There would be Europe-wide agreement on the crunch question: "what constitutes serious and immediate risk?"
Today, the priority has to be the food we eat, because of obvious shortfalls. Tomorrow, he noted, the threat may be from a completely different source. "We must be in a position to deal with the fullest possible range of potential threats, such as communicable diseases, contaminated blood products, defective medical devices or dangerous consumer products," said Mr Byrne.
Most EU consumers will welcome his acceptance of the case for labelling GM foods, including those derived from GMOs, and "even having GMO-free labels where this applies". He advocated full traceability of GM foods but shunned the idea of a moratorium unless there was scientific basis for it. "There is much we can do here," he said.
The extreme reluctance of GM food producers to go down this transparent route looks likely to lead to one of the most intractable disputes of his tenure, even if he does not have full responsibility for GM foods. What is neutral information to a consumer can be a health warning to a food company.
Many MEPs admired Mr Byrne's willingness to declare his position on some current controversies, even if the political consequences of showing his hand now may prove to be problematic later. He was firmly against the use of antibiotic growth promoters in animal feed and hormones in beef production. There was no question of allowing US hormone-treated meat into Europe, with agreement to label the produce as a compromise. If scientists advise against it on health grounds, "no label can overcome that".
"You can have fun with the Americans!" the chairwoman, Ms Caroline Jackson (Cons), interjected. He should expect more "fun" with them over GM foods, and BST (bovine somatotrophin), as he said there was "plenty of evidence" justifying an EU ban on the hormone used to boost milk yield on animal welfare grounds.
The most effective way of overcoming the shortcomings of urine testing for performance enhancing drugs used in sport needed to be found, he added. He would also have to confront the difficult question of how consumer confidence in food may be restored, possibly with the help of a new agency with the same standing as the US Food and Drug Authority.
Green MEP Ms Nuala Ahern announced Mr Byrne had "finally cleared up" questions hanging over his involvement with the Moriarty tribunal. Ms Jackson said she wished to tiptoe on to the issue of his shareholding in a west of Ireland fishery. The Commissioner-designate cheerily said he would dispose of it, if advised there may be a conflict of interest. But by this stage, the chairwoman was repeatedly referring to him as "Commissioner Byrne". The verdict of the inquiring environment committee could easily be discerned.