The controversial implementation of the Food Safety & Standards Regulations 2011, has taken a fiery turn with FBOs (food business operators) in Mumbai, who have so far been out of the protests, going to town about the harassment that they are facing at the hands of food safety officers (FSOs). The situation in Mumbai, a city where skyscrapers jostle for space with sprawling slums of Dharavi (also a hub for the snack industry), is interesting. On the one hand, FBOs operating from the thickly populated bylanes of the city, have to contend with rodents, dust and overflowing garbage bins over which they have no control, and on the other, they are made to shell out hefty fines "for unhygienic conditions and improper labelling." This was revealed to F&B News by Karsanbhai, secretary, Mumbai Mewa Masala Merchants' Association, who pointed out that there was a petty khari biscuit manufacturer whose unit produced product that was sold loose and not as a packed branded product. However, FSOs who come visiting, fine him amounts ranging between Rs 5,000 and Rs 10,000, on the pretext that he had exposed the product to moisture. Then there was a dal retailer who was slapped with steep amounts that eventually totalled to Rs 5 lakh as penalties for failing to provide all the vital information on the pack's label, including its weight, its date of manufacture, and its price. Now in India most kirana shops sell dal in loose so "how can they ensure that it is labelled and has all these details," asked Karsanbhai. That's not all. There are scores of such cases of FBOs being charged under various sections of the Regulations for no apparent fault of theirs. It is this slapping of false charges and levying of hefty fines that has made the Mumbai Mewa Masala Merchants' Association recently file a petition challenging the implementation of 16 Sections of the Act (pertaining to the unhygienic conditions often seen in small-scale Indian food production units, etc.) in the Bombay High Court, and await the reply. Karsanbhai said, "We are hopeful of a revert in the next couple of days." Karsanbhai explains his association's stand: "We are not worried about the licensing regulations, but about the hefty fines. The petty vendors, especially the ones who sell open foodstuff by the roadside are troubled the most, because the FSOs swoop down on them and fine them exorbitant fines for failing to adhere to good hygiene practices." Apart from hygiene, another key issue for the FSOs for slapping charges is lack of valid licence. While the FSOs might be going by the rule book, Karsanbhai pointed out that some of the rules in this regard were not in accordance with ground reality. For instance, he states, "It does not make any sense to obtain a separate license for each establishment and each vehicle an FBO owns. If a delivery van breaks down en route to its destination, the driver cannot be held responsible for it. Further, when the office is informed about the breakdown, it quickly arranges for another van as replacement and continues the job. However, an FSO uses that as a pretext to make a quick buck, because although both the drivers and vans are licence-holders, the driver of the replacement vehicle does not possess 'that licence.'
BUVM plans agitation
Meanwhile, terming the Food Safety and Standards Act (FSSA), 2006, "a ditto copy of the corresponding British Act (called the Food Safety and Standards Act of the United Kingdom)," the Delhi-based Bharatiya Udyog Vyapar Mandal (BUVM) has planned an all-India demonstration against the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) at FDA Bhavan, Delhi, on July 9, 2012.
Over 18 states have confirmed their participation in the protest. They include Himachal Pradesh; Punjab; Haryana; Delhi; Uttarakhand; Uttar Pradesh; Madhya Pradesh; Chhattisgarh; Rajasthan; Gujarat; Maharashtra; Karnataka; Kerala; Tamil Nadu; Odisha; Jharkhand; West Bengal; Assam, and Sikkim.
Vijay Prakash Jain, national secretary-general, BUVM, stats, "Although the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India was established under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, it does not seem to be in consonance with the conditions prevalent in India."
"We will raise our objections to the Act, which is impractical, during our talks with the FSSAI officials. In fact, we are seeking an appointment with K Chandramouli, chairman, FSSAI, and Ghulam Nabi Azad, health minister, for a dialogue."
As for the demonstration, Jain said the decision to go ahead with it was made at BUVM's meeting on June 4, 2012.
BUVM, incepted 31 years ago, is the apex organisation for the unorganised trade and small-scale industries sector in India. Over 17,000 city-, district- and state-level associations of trade and small-scale industries are affiliated to this body, whose current national president is Shyam Bihari Mishra, former member of Parliament. This organisation is said to be apolitical.
Kishore C Mehta (Kharawala), secretary, BUVM, Mumbai, and secretary, Federation of Associations of Mumbai (FAM), confirmed that he was in Delhi to plan the protest, but said it would be premature to divulge any details on the same.
Fresh petition
Meanwhile, two Nagpur-based bodies, the Vidarbha Taxpayers' Association (VTA) and the Nagpur Residential Hotels Association (NRHA), are planning to approach the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court with a fresh petition against the FSSA, 2006.
"We had earlier withdrawn our petition voluntarily. Now that we have solid grounds, we will go ahead and file it before the High Court next week. If it is rejected on any grounds, we will move the Supreme Court," said Tejinder Singh Renu, secretary, VTA and NHRA. He also mentioned the report on pesticides in fruits and vegetables, and remarked about its absurdity because farmers didn't come under the purview of the Act.
Renu confirmed that VTA and NHRA had now garnered the support of four other trade bodies.
"The Nagpur Vidarbha Chamber of Commerce, Nagpur Itwari Kirana Merchants' Association, Piyush Traders' Hastimal Katoria, and Mohandas Chhataram have come forward to back our group," he said.
"We don't understand why the Union of India and the state are insisting that FBOs who run more than one establishment obtain multiple licences under the FSSA. To challenge this ridiculous stipulation, we have decided to re-file the petition," stated the petitioners.
"It clearly violates Section 31(6) of the FSSA, 2006, and Regulation 2.1.5(1) of the Food Safety and Standards (Licensing and Registration of Food Businesses) Regulations, 2011, which states that the designated officer has to issue single licences for different establishments owned by the same FBO, as they are situated in the local area for which the designated officer is appointed," they contended.
FSSAI and the union health secretary are the co-respondents named in the Nagpur petition, and have received summons from the High Court.
The petitioners have pointed out that section 31(6) of the Food Safety Standards Act, 2006, and Regulation 2.1.5(1) of the Food Safety and Standards (Licensing and Registration of Food Businesses) Regulations, 2011, make it clear that the designated officer has to issue a single licence for different establishments or premises belonging to the same food business operator, as long as those are situated in the local area for which such designated officer is appointed.
Deadline too short
Although the FSSAI set an August 5, 2012, deadline for getting the existing licences converted, it might not be long enough to convincingly answer all the petty food vendors' objections to the FSSA, 2006, and certain regulations of the same Act, which came into effect last year.
This was the opinion of Ravi Mehra, chairman, flavours sub-committee, Fragrances and Flavours Association of India (FAFAI), who spoke to F&B News over telephone.
"Retail associations in Madurai, Tamil Nadu, have filed a number of petitions in the Madras High Court, and got all of them stayed. That is because the 2011 rules are not in consonance with the Act, and anything that is outside the purview of the Act is invalid," Mehra said, adding that different segments of the industry had their own scientific committees and the panels were not represented enough by the small, unorganised FBOs, the section of the industry it was most likely to affect.
"There is no scientific basis for the implementation of the Act, its rules and regulations. Moreover, we are afraid of implementing it - that is where the problem lies. The regulatory approach is wrong, and from the stakeholders' point of view, it will not be incorrect to say that it isn't awareness or education, but sensitisation which is an absolute must. The law is draconian, and could promote more corruption than there is now," he said.
"Since the multinational players will obviously follow the rules prevalent overseas, the smaller stakeholders need to be taken into confidence. Only then can the Act be implemented," Mehra said.
Confidence high in MP
Babulal Rathi, president, Ratlam Jila Vyapari Mahasangh, said traders' bodies across Madhya Pradesh were in regular touch with him, and were not perturbed by the fact that August 5, 2012, was just a few weeks away.
"We indeed have a great deal of faith in the state government, led by Shivraj Singh Chouhan, chief minister and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader," he said, adding, "However, the ball is in the Centre's court now."
"At this point we would not like to think about an extension to the deadline, because we are prepared for August 5, 2012. If the government's response is not satisfactory, we will take a call on protesting again," Rathi said.
source:http://www.fnbnews.com
No comments:
Post a Comment