Food Safety
& Standard Act-2006 and Rules thereunder;
Respected Sir,
That top issues are:-
i. Lack of Testing Facilities /
Infrastructures,
ii. Less Industry Representation and
iii. Lack of Transparency.
iv. Standard of food Article (appendix)are of 1955.
v. Commissioner of FDA of only Maharashtra State is taking keen interest in implementing the Act.
1. The Act is prepared in the year 2006,
its Rules were finalised in the year 2011. Now the only State of Maharashtra is
implementing in said Act and Rules in very harsh manner. That the Act is new
but the Standard (Appendix) same are as of PFA Rules, 1955. The Act as
has been enforced is a death blow to Indian food industry and many of the
clauses are not appropriate to the prevailing trade situation and are
ambiguous. Unless changes are effected in the Act.
2. The stringent standards and Conditions
prescribed in the Food Safety and Standards Act and Rules is adversely affecting
small manufacturers and traders of food products. That many villages in the
country were yet to have easy access to potable. That implementing the
stringent standards and conditions existing Food Business Operator in rural as
well urban areas losing out to multinationals.
3. Need for awareness- That adequate
levels of awareness should be created and each and every food business
operators should be educated to raise their business to the standards expected
by the Food Standards and Safety Authority. For an initial period of three
years, no prosecution should be initiated for contravening the norms of
registration, licensing, and hygiene standards.
4. That till date admittedly not a single
laboratory in State of Maharashtra is NABL and notified by FSSAI, as per the
Provisions of Section 43. That the FDA having knowledge regarding the same,
inspite of this, the Officers of FDA are
drawing the sample/seizing the food articles and on the basis of the alleged Reports
issued by Food Analyst, thousands of proceedings are filed against Food
Business Operator and recovering the penalty/fine. Admittedly not single case
is tenable on the basis of the Report issued by Food Analyst.
5. That the agencies that enforce
it-primarily the FDA is holding small
farms, traders, Cottage Industries, Kutir Udyog, Sall Scale Industry etc. to
the same standard as big factories, farms and new coming food processing
industries. That as per the new Food Safety and Standard Act cores of rupees is
required to build the infrastructure. Now the question arises “Why should small
traders, Farms, Cottage Industries, Kutir Udyog etc. have to follow the same
rules as the companies that are washing half the nation’s spinach in the
same sink?” FSSAI under the garb of the Food Safety and Standard Act and
Rules frame thereunder aims to decouple
the push for food safety from the possibility that food safety regulations
might trample small farms, small traders, Farms, Cottage Industries, Kutir
Udyog etc..
7. Whatever numbers are chosen to define
“local” and “small,” what’s most important, from the perspective of small
traders, farms, Cottage Industries and Kutir Udyog, Small Scale Industries etc.
are that some form of distinction, however imperfect, between big and small,
local and non-local, be factored in.
8. That while there can be no controversial opinions in
punishing severely those found guilty of adulteration, at the same time, the
honest traders should not be punished. The FSS Act 2006 imposes fine over 100
times when compared to the old PFA Act. Such a hike is unheard of anywhere in
the world. There is a clear difference
between deficiency to follow an act and committing willful offences. The
law should give opportunity to set right the deficiency as well as to correct
the mistakes. The maximum penalty should be Rs 25,000 instead of proposed Rs 10
lakhs. There are a number of such anomalies.
9. That
on the one hand Govt. itself having no infrastructure, well equipped notified
and NABL laboratories to analysis the food articles at every district level. In
Maharashtra only 3-4 labs are in working condition but not a single lab is NABL
and are not notified by FSSI. So also none laboratory is having sufficient equipments/instruments
and expert analyst. This is the situation in Maharashtra what about the Nation.
10. There is an urgent need to upgrade the
current infrastructure and to create more to meet the needs of the growing
sector,” that quality assurance labs should be upgraded with all scientific
instruments for the proper testing of raw and finished products.
11. That
the new act has several clauses which are not practically possible to implement
in Indian context. That due to arbitrary and high handed act and role of
Officer of FDA Maharashtra in implementation of Act and Rules in the present
form, it shall lead to the closure of numbers Food Processing Industries of Maharashtra and
they may shift to nearby State and will force unemployment millions of people.
12. That prior enforcement of Food Safety Act
and it Rules the Central Govt. ought to have consider climate variability,
Traditional farming, exposed to the vagaries of nature, cannot cope with this
task. The government has still not realised the gravity of the climate
phenomenon. To be able to face challenges posed by the weather, agriculture
will require something like the Marshall Plan on a war footing.
13. The grains shall not be exported to the
other countries as we are using Pesticide, D.D.T. The countries who are trying
to enter Indian Market shall prohibit the Indian food article etc. on the said
grounds. That on the one side Central Govt. is granting subsidy in millions of
Rupees to Pesticide, Fertilizer, insecticide industries. That FSS Act strictly prohibits use of raw
material having pesticide, toxic etc.
14. In near future we have to eat only
processed food articles, vegetable, fruits its which is stored in the cold
storage.
15. The processing industry which is likely
to be entering in the Indian Market do not want court cases, they are ready to
compensate monetary if their goods found adulterated. For them fine of Rs.5 Lac
or Ten lac is not material.
16. Condition regarding sending of 2nd
sample part along with 1st Part – immediately is totally incorrect
and stringent. unwanted monetary burden on the vendor
17. If there is variance in both the Report –
who shall bear the expenses for sending the third sample part to Referral
Laboratory
18. Procedure regarding licensing and its documentations is
stringent, Licence fees is also excess
19. Condition of renewal of licence before 60 days (before 31st
Dec.) is incorrect—penalty of Rs. 100/- per day is harsh.
20. Condition of audit to vendor whose
turnover is more than 12 lac at the hand of private auditors appointed by
21. If anyone is preparing/repacking/ manufacturing number of food
articles, whether he has to take licence separately for each and every food
article.
22. If the act is not wilful
on the part of Vendor, why such harsh punishment
23. If food article – grains – pulses etc.
affect it quality or loss its original quality due to natural causes- then who
shall be held responsible and what is the fine and punishment for the same.
24. Condition regarding business without
licence – 5 lac fine and six month imprisonment is too harsh.
25. Now again question arises Whether all the
test of each and every food articles are carried out at each and every district
place within the stipulated period of 14 days. That when infrastructure is not
available with Govt. how Govt. can give the guarantee of safety and Standard
Food to a consumer .
26. In the current agricultural marketing
system, there is little that can be salvaged. The vicious cycle of CACP, APMC,
FCI and PDS needs to be replaced by a simple system where the futures commodity
markets are the default channels. Even if agricultural marketing is cleaned up,
can the Indian farmer produce enough food, fuel and fibre to meet the aggregate
demand?
27. That
the Act is of 2006 but till date no efforts had been taken by the authority of
FSSAI or its scientific body to prepare the fresh standard of the food article
as per climatic condition, geographical back ground of each any every State
till date and taking coercive steps against Food Business operators.
28. This appears highly unlikely in a situation of climate variability traditional farming, exposed to the vagaries of nature, cannot cope with this task. The government has still not realised the gravity of the climate phenomenon. To be able to face challenges posed by the weather, FSSAI requires something like the Marshall Plan on a war footing.