Hon. Speaker Sir, the hon. Members
have called the attention of the House to the situation arising out of the
rampant adulteration of food and edible substances in the country and steps
taken by the Government in this regard. Of late, the subject of adulteration in
food items has been drawing a lot of attention of Parliament, the media and the
common man. I am happy that this august House has spared its valuable time to
discuss this matter that affects the health and life of everybody. I hope that
we may be able to come up with some concrete and valuable suggestions to act
upon. The Central Government lays down the standards for various food articles
and regulations on use of additives, labelling, contaminants etc. It primarily
plays an advisory role in its implementation besides carrying out140 various statutory functions and duties
assigned to it under the various provisions of Prevention of Food Adulteration
Act. It also160 issues
appropriate directions and alerts to the State Governments for keeping strict
vigil on the quality of food items within their respective jurisdiction for
ensuring safe and wholesome food for consumers. As regards the procedure, the
enforcement staff of the State authorities draw random samples of different
food items from all sources like manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers, and
also conduct raids at suspected places and get these samples analysed in the
food testing labs to see whether the samples conform to the standards laid down
under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. Action against such persons who
indulge in production and trade of adulterated or misbranded food articles is
taken by the concerned State Governments under the Prevention of Food280 Adulteration Act. If a person
manufactures, stores, sells or distributes any article of food which is
declared adulterated on account of quality or for manufacturing for sale,
storage, distribution of adulterated food which does not cause injury to
health, there320 is the
penalty with imprisonment for a term of minimum six months but which
may be up to three years and with a fine which shall not be less
than one thousand rupees. In case a person manufactures for sale or
stores, sells or distributes any article of food which is declared adulterated
for containing any colouring matter other than the prescribed standards, the
penalty is imprisonment for a term of minimum one year but which may be
extended to six years and with a fine which shall not be less than two thousand
rupees. In case of adulteration420
amounting to grievous hurt within the meaning under Section 320 of the Indian
Penal Code or endangering the life, imprisonment up to life is also
envisaged with a fine which shall not be less than Rs.5000.
With a view to improving the
implementation of food safety measures in the country, an attempt has been made
by the Central Government to480
consolidate and integrate a number of food related laws and rules by bringing
them under a common umbrella of the Food Safety and Standards Act and bringing
them under the supervision of a new single authority namely the Food Safety
and Standards Authority of India. The new Act deals with the issue of food safety
in a holistic manner including provisions like food recall, improvement
notices, compensation to the victim of unsafe food to be paid by vendor or manufacturer560 in case of injury or death of consumer
by adulterated or injurious food article. Food adulteration is an act of
intentionally debasing the quality of food offered for sale either by the
admixture or substitution of inferior substances or by the removal of some
valuable ingredient. Adulterants may be intentionally added to more expensive
substances to increase visible quantities and reduce manufacturing costs, or
for some other deceptive or malicious purpose. It is done in many
ways. This ranges from640
adulterating milk with water, mixing adulterants in food items and sweets,
artificial ripening of fruits, and often discussed phenomena of injecting fruits
and vegetables with chemicals. There have been reports about the
cases of misuse of animal fat and urea in production of milk and milk products.
The Central Government has issued instructions from time to time to States and700 Union Territories to keep a strict vigil
on the quality of milk and milk products by conducting special drives to draw
random samples of milk and milk products and take necessary preventive action
under the provisions of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. As I have
pointed out, the administration of all food safety laws rests with the
respective State and Union Territory Governments. Through this august
forum, I would urge upon all the State and Union Territory Governments and
their food safety administrators to tighten their enforcement machineries to
keep a strict vigil on the activities of the unscrupulous800 elements and to strive for speedy trials
so that the perpetrators of such heinous crimes do not play havoc with the
health and lives of the consumers and are also brought to book and to early
convictions. Sir, I assure840
the House that the Central Government would not be found wanting in taking
measures on its part for checking such malpractices.
Hon. Chairman Sir, some sections of
the old Foreign Trade Act are proposed to be amended through the present Foreign
Trade Amendment Bill, and the proposed amendments to the Bill are in line with the
recommendations of the Parliamentary Standing Committee. The amendments provide
for the imposition of quantitative restrictions as a trade safeguard measure.
As of now, though there are inherent powers under the Act, there is no
specific provision which empowers the authorities or the agencies required
to take action as a trade defence measure to impose quantitative restrictions.
By incorporating that through this amendment, we will960 ensure that if there is a surge in
imports, if imports are coming at prices which are lower than980 the prices at which they are produced or
marketed in the country or lower than the price in other markets of the same
product, then the quantitative restrictions can be imposed. There are
provisions under the Directorate General of Safeguards, but the provision of quantitative
restriction has not been there. That is why we propose to bring that in, and
this will be in conformity with the agreements to which India is a party. We
also propose to bring in tighter trade controls in the case of dual use goods
and related technologies in conformity again with the provisions of the Weapons
of Mass Destruction and their Delivery Systems Act which was passed by this
Parliament in 2005. It would enable stringent action to be taken in case of any
trade violations with respect to dual use1120
materials. Though this Act is in place since 2005, the enforcement
responsibility is with the Directorate General of Foreign Trade, which does
not have the powers to implement it. By incorporating this amendment, we
will ensure an effective implementation of the dual use technology trade
aspects. We are also bringing in technology and services within the ambit of
the Act and that is to facilitate trade in both services and technology.
In the last few years, particularly since the enactment of the Act, the trade
in services has increased manifold and it continues to grow.
The
Government has taken many measures under the Foreign Trade Policy to promote
the services trade, which is one of India’s core strengths and
globally recognized. Many incentives and support measures have been given to
the trade in services, and therefore, only those services which1260 specifically benefit from the various
incentive schemes under this Act will be brought within the ambit
through this amendment. About technology, 1280
I have referred to one aspect of technology. This is specifying the
technologies to regulate the trade, and particularly those technologies where
the potential of becoming a medium of proliferation is very much there. The
definition of technologies that has been included in the proposed amendment is
exactly on the line which has been suggested by the Ministry of External
Affairs. The amendment Bill also will ensure that all restrictions on imports
and exports of the goods notified by various ministries and departments
are available at one place. As of now, the different departments have
their own notifications for the restrictions either on imports or
exports. This would reduce the transaction cost because this will1400 all be brought within the ambit of the
Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Bill and it will cut down the
transaction cost for those who are engaged in this trade. I would like to
submit and inform the House that this1440
is also in conformity with India’s commitments at the World Trade Organization
and will not amount to any waiver of statutory requirement under any other law
as applicable. Section 8 of the Act gives the Directorate General of Foreign
Trade the powers to suspend or cancel importer-exporter code number if
there is reason to believe that any person has made an export or
import in a manner that is gravely prejudicial to the trade relations of
India. The proposed Bill will delete the word ‘gravely’ because having the word
‘gravely’ in the body of the Bill makes it difficult to prove what is gravely
prejudicial, particularly when these issues are taken to the Court. This
amendment would enable swift and exemplary action in trade dispute
matters. The objective of this Bill is also to rationalize and improve
the system of levying and realizing fiscal penalties through an effective
mechanism and enabling the Customs and Central Excise Settlement Commission
for settlement1600 of customs
and excise duties and interest.
