Must we eat poison until we fail ‘international’ standards?
Our subservient attitude and lack of self-confidence are often revealed by the smug satisfaction with which we often claim that our projects or practices are designed to meet or have reached “international standards”.
Advertisement
We are happy when our “superiors” accept our practices and products. And yet we have institutions which have been established to ensure that we make that which is good, sell what is safe, satisfy customers and eat that which nourishes and does not poison the body.
In spite of these institutions with well-qualified personnel, we consume poisonous substances in palm oil until similarly qualified persons advise their governments not to allow our palm oil onto their markets because of the health hazard it poses. We then take action because our palm oil does not meet “international” standards.
This nonsense must stop. Our institutions should maintain the standards set by the state in our laws and regulations. Our practices should be designed to meet the needs of Ghanaians. No country or international body can legislate the requisite standards for Ghana. Of course, if we do not meet the standards set by our partners in trade, we cannot export our vegetables and oils. But surely it is an indictment on our capability and standards that we export that which is not fit for human consumption. It suggests that we eat that which is rotten.
It is good that our police are reported to be taking vigorous action against 22 traders found to be dealing in adulterated palm oil. I, however, find it odd that the police have now invited officials of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to submit a written statement on the laboratory analysis of the offending products. Rumours of the adulteration of palm oil have been rife for some time. Surely the FDA should have collected samples from the market, made analysis and taken action long ago.
I have a letter from the Food and Drugs Authority (FDA) (I can never keep track of the ever-changing names of our institutions) dated August 31, 2015, about a complaint made by a trader in drinks by the Coca-Cola Bottling Company. The FDA found that “foreign particles were observed in five bottles of Fanta Lemon Carbonated Drink” purchased from the Coca-Cola Bottling Company. The FDA found that “the presence of the particles was as a result of failure of the Bottle Washer to adequately wash the returned empty bottles from the trade”. The company observed the incident and steps were taken to rectify the anomaly.
I was glad that the FDA observed that “the operations of the company are also being continuously monitored to ensure product safety and quality”. I am, however, informed that there has not been much improvement and many outlets have made complaints without any satisfactory outcome. The FDA has a lot more to do.
I do not know whether it is a matter of resources but the authority should have officers who collect food items from the shops at random and submit them for analysis. Items found to be below standard should be withdrawn and the culprits dealt with in accordance with the law. It appears to me that who to enforce the law in such matters is not clear. The Food and Drug Authority should have the power to remove or request the removal of offending items from the shops. But who prosecutes the offender if that is necessary? Does the FDA advise or instruct the police to act as appears to be the case in the matter of adulterated palm oil or does the FDA itself prosecute and if so, does it have the wherewithal to act?
The situation appears to be similar to other institutions such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Who sees to it that the drains are not choked with refuse, that people do not urinate into gutters and that excruciating noise is not unleashed upon innocent citizens at 4 a.m.? Is it the EPA, the Metropolitan Assembly or the police? And if it is the police, have they the resources at 12 midnight or 4 a.m.?
As we approach elections, let us demand that the parties state their position on the issues which affect the people. Food and drugs; noise and environmental pollution are matters of life and death. The people must be truly alive before they vote.