Zero tolerance in food safety

Translated from 21st Century Business Herald y Li Yang

The State quality inspection authority reported that the spirit Jiugui, a famous Chinese brand, contains about 2.47 times the permitted level of plasticizers.

Whatever the source of the harmful substance, what indicates the seriousness of the food safety issue was the attitude of the companies and relevant industrial associations after the problem was exposed.

The company first rejected the media reports, and the industry association firmly stood on the side of the companies from the very beginning until now. These attitudes are quite familiar to Chinese consumers, as the melamine scandal in dairy products already raised people’s awareness of similar cases.

The producer has been trying to persuade the public to believe in the safety of the spirit. The Chinese Alcoholic Drinks Association also said that almost all spirits produced in China contain these ingredients, which come from the plastic containers used in the production process.

Were it not for the media, the problem would have been kept an internal secret of the industry for a long time.

The Chinese food industry relies on the authorities’ supervision and control. The market does not play its due role as an effective mechanism to encourage the companies to behave themselves. And there are no legal bases for class action or to require companies to prove their innocence, so the consumers do not have enough institutional support to defend their rights.

Past experiences suggest that the Chinese government can build a developed and large administration network nationwide. But the network still cannot face up to the challenges of food safety in China now.

China needs to build up the class action system and require companies to collect evidence to prove their innocence on food-safety issues. The privately owned quality check organs should also be asked to participate in the watchdog groups, along with the State-owned counterparts to improve the efficiency of the supervision mechanism.

China could also learn from the European Union’s lessons and supervise the whole chain of the food industry, not only the final producers, which would be conducive to highlighting the responsibilities of the whole food industry structure. The punishments for wrongdoing companies and people should be heavy enough to deter potential followers.

The consumers’ zero tolerance on food safety issues means that all relevant parties should fulfill their responsibilities in safeguarding the people’s interests. Market, self-discipline, supervision and laws must be constructed as the four defense lines ahead of the media’s exposure.