Food safety rule violations: Regulator should get its act together on wrong-doers, say experts

In the context of Maggi noodles episode recently (where the district administration of Shahjahanpur, Uttar Pradesh, _s_lapped a fine of Rs 45 lakh for noodles containing ash ‘above permissible limits of human consumption’), and a number of companies that have been penalised for compliance issues, a question arises: Why are more companies being found not to be FSSAI-compliant? FSSAI, on its part,  says that the test done on Maggi noodles was incorrect as the content of ash found in the noodles was within the limits set for human consumption. “We have done away with ash residue in all food requirements. There is a limit for insoluble ash in food products. Some products seem to have ash-like substance and it is not harmful,” said Pawan Kumar Agarwal, CEO, FSSAI. Questioning the lab findings, Nestle India said it has not received the order yet and would file an appeal urgently once it receives the order. “While we have not received the orders passed by the adjudication officer, we have been informed that the samples are of year 2015 and the issue pertains to ‘ash content’ in Noodles,” said a Nestle India spokesperson. What should the FSSAI do to make companies compliant with safety standards? Experts suggested that the regulator can follow some of its suggestions to make it powerful and instil fear in companies so that they do not flout rules. Heavy fines should be levied: Why are more companies being penalised? Is it that the regulator is becoming more vigilant?  Or is it that the companies themselves have no fear of repercussions, ask experts. “It could be either one of these reasons,” said Chandra Bhushan, deputy director general, Centre for Science and Environment (CSE). Companies are not worried as the fines are a pittance, he said. Bhushan pointed that all the non-compliant issues raised are done at state-level, arguing that the state-level bodies are more regular. FSSAI needs to be more stringent: The FSSAI should consider bringing in independent experts into the regulatory framework so that views of others besides of its members are taken into account, said an industry expert. Bhushan pointed to a CSE study that unearthed the abuse of antibiotics in chicken served by fast food companies. The hypocrisy, according to Chandrabhushan, is that most of these fast food majors have agreed to ensure that there will be no misuse of antibiotics in countries abroad where they are located. “However, nothing of this sort is being done in India,” he said. [caption id=“attachment_4156901” align=“alignleft” width=“380”]  Representational image. Reuters[/caption] FSSAI has set the tolerance level for antibiotics and other pharmacologically active substances only for sea foods including shrimps, prawns or any variety of fish and fishery products under the Food Safety and Standards (Contaminants, Toxins and Residues) Regulations, 2011. No tolerance level has been set for antibiotics and other pharmacologically active substances in poultry meat and meat products by FSSAI. However, the FSSAI is taking cognisance of the same, he said, after CSE flagged the issue. Onus on companies to self-regulate: The food industry makes products for consumers and it is the duty of companies to ensure it is safe, say experts. How many companies in India recall products like in the West? For instance, Toyota withdrew 270,000 vehicles because its engines were faulty Or Unilever recalling its icecream because it may contain metal in it. “We don’t hear of any company in the food sector doing this in India. Are they waiting for the regulator to catch them?” asks Bhushan. He says food industry is not lacking in technical or managerial expertise. What they need to do is to ensure they are responsible for the entire chain – from procuring raw materials to production and distribution – they are involved with. He cites hazardous pollution level in Delhi. “Why can’t companies upgrade their pollution norms and not wait for the government to clamp it down? Aren’t they responsible,” he asks. Companies should work with farmers: From farm to fork, there has to be a co-ordination, says Bhushan.  “If you are a good company, you will work with farmer, ensure good farming practices and see water is not contaminated. Instead of just providing farm loans waiver, the government should also make farmers responsible for the methods of farming, said Smita S Lele, member, Fellows of Maharashtra Academy of Science, and the Biotech Research Society of India, registrar and professor of biochemical engineering, Institute of Chemical Technology, Mumbai. “Most of our raw material grown in our country would be disqualified if measured against high-end machines,” says Lele. Currently, the FSSAI does not have high quality equipments, enough laboratories or manpower like the US or UK does, said Bhushan, adding that it is a severe constraint. We are not a policing agency: Pawan Kumar Agarwal, CEO, FSSAI says as a food regulator the aim is to work with food companies so that they meet the set standards. “No food company will want to jeopardise its reputation by deliberately not meeting rule of the land. The company’s and brand image is important for them and we as a regulator are not out to tarnish them,” he said. However, he says, the entire ecosystem is evolving and the bar is being raised continuously, adding compliance issues will crop up. “No company in the world will be 100 percent right.” The FSSAI neither has all the required machinery, nor does it have resources to ensure each process and every food item is tested before it enters the market, said Aggarwal. “When a batch of food products is found to be not meeting food safety standards, it does not mean a particular company is good or bad. Only random samples are tested. But the FSSAI will ensure that more and more companies continue to be careful and the margin of error gets minimised,” he said.