Why should safety of consumers at home be ignored?
Thursday, 24 December 2009
CONSUMERS in this country are greatly concerned about the quality of their daily consumables, may it be fish or fruit or edible oil. The rampant use of hazardous chemicals in food items by unscrupulous producers and traders has made most food items unsafe. Scores of media reports and intermittent penal actions by the authorities have not been able to dissuade these elements from indulging in activities that are endangering the life of millions of people. After foot-dragging, year after year, a piece of legislation has recently been enacted with a view to protecting the rights of the consumers. But the application of the provisions of the act in question is yet to be started.
The government, in the meanwhile, is contemplating adoption of another law - the Fish and Animal Feed Law - which is very much relevant to the physical safety of consumers at home and in countries that import frozen foods from Bangladesh. The Fisheries and Livestock Directorate has already drafted a bill, which, according to a report published in this paper recently, will be placed in the upcoming session of Jatiyo Sangsad (parliament). The objective of the law would be to regulate fish and animal feed manufacturers and importers and stop antibiotics with carcinogenic properties from getting into the food chain. The director-general of the department concerned has admitted that the manufacturers and importers often produce and import substandard and adulterated fish and animal feed, exposing millions of people to deadly diseases.
The latest move, as it seems, has come in the backdrop of the detection of carcinogenic antibiotic, Nitrofuran, in the fresh water prawns exported to the European Union (EU) countries from Bangladesh early this year. The EU sent back several consignments of the fresh water prawns, thus, denting the image of the country's frozen food sector. The government acted swiftly and imposed a voluntary ban on the particular prawn species in May last. Despite the claim made by the frozen food exporters that they have, in the meanwhile, totally eliminated the use of Nitrofuran, the government is yet to lift the ban. The ban, sooner or later, would hopefully be lifted.
But one logical question is: Did the government stop local marketing of the cultured prawns, in which the toxic antibiotic was found? There is no reason to believe that frozen food exporters or fish farms have destroyed the fresh water prawns meant for export. Obviously, those have been sneaking into the local market and unsuspecting consumers have been buying the same. The official agencies are more concerned about the revenue from export than the safety and security of the consumers at home. This is true in the case of every food item. The livestock department does not bother to examine the feed and chemicals being used by the cattle-rearing and fish farms. Authorities of city corporations and pourashavas are reluctant to carry out their designated jobs about health and food-related safety of citizens. The Bangladesh Standards and Testing Institutions (BSTI) is more of a certification agency than a quality controller of the consumables.
So, enactment of a new law is unlikely to carry any meaning other than adding it to the long list of existing laws, rules and regulations, if the same is not enforced with right earnestness. There are plenty of good laws. But in the absence of their strict enforcement, the people are hardly benefited out of those. Hopefully, the proposed law to control the use of substandard fish feed and harmful chemicals, if passed, would also be applied, wherever necessary, for reasons of ensuring physical safety of the local consumers, side by side with actions for protecting national economic interests.
The government, in the meanwhile, is contemplating adoption of another law - the Fish and Animal Feed Law - which is very much relevant to the physical safety of consumers at home and in countries that import frozen foods from Bangladesh. The Fisheries and Livestock Directorate has already drafted a bill, which, according to a report published in this paper recently, will be placed in the upcoming session of Jatiyo Sangsad (parliament). The objective of the law would be to regulate fish and animal feed manufacturers and importers and stop antibiotics with carcinogenic properties from getting into the food chain. The director-general of the department concerned has admitted that the manufacturers and importers often produce and import substandard and adulterated fish and animal feed, exposing millions of people to deadly diseases.
The latest move, as it seems, has come in the backdrop of the detection of carcinogenic antibiotic, Nitrofuran, in the fresh water prawns exported to the European Union (EU) countries from Bangladesh early this year. The EU sent back several consignments of the fresh water prawns, thus, denting the image of the country's frozen food sector. The government acted swiftly and imposed a voluntary ban on the particular prawn species in May last. Despite the claim made by the frozen food exporters that they have, in the meanwhile, totally eliminated the use of Nitrofuran, the government is yet to lift the ban. The ban, sooner or later, would hopefully be lifted.
But one logical question is: Did the government stop local marketing of the cultured prawns, in which the toxic antibiotic was found? There is no reason to believe that frozen food exporters or fish farms have destroyed the fresh water prawns meant for export. Obviously, those have been sneaking into the local market and unsuspecting consumers have been buying the same. The official agencies are more concerned about the revenue from export than the safety and security of the consumers at home. This is true in the case of every food item. The livestock department does not bother to examine the feed and chemicals being used by the cattle-rearing and fish farms. Authorities of city corporations and pourashavas are reluctant to carry out their designated jobs about health and food-related safety of citizens. The Bangladesh Standards and Testing Institutions (BSTI) is more of a certification agency than a quality controller of the consumables.
So, enactment of a new law is unlikely to carry any meaning other than adding it to the long list of existing laws, rules and regulations, if the same is not enforced with right earnestness. There are plenty of good laws. But in the absence of their strict enforcement, the people are hardly benefited out of those. Hopefully, the proposed law to control the use of substandard fish feed and harmful chemicals, if passed, would also be applied, wherever necessary, for reasons of ensuring physical safety of the local consumers, side by side with actions for protecting national economic interests.