Maggi not alone. We need to know the junk we're eating
The Maggi episode has brought the issue of food safety in public discourse like never before. For the first time since the Food Safety and Standards Act came into existence in 2006, we have seen the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) act in a decisive manner on an issue of public health and consumer protection. The way in which the central food regulator and food safety commissioners in different states took the investigation into Maggi to its logical conclusion is noteworthy.
In light of its past record of being industry-friendly, I did not expect the authority to initiate tough action like total recall of all Maggi variants from the market following detection of lead and violation of labelling rules. After all, not very long ago, Nestle along with other food giants — Pepsi, Coca Cola, ITC, Hindustan Lever, Britannia, GSK etc, sat on the scientific committees of FSSAI.
It was only after the expose in Mail Today in August 2009 and subsequent reprimand by the Supreme Court that the food authority purged all its scientific panels, getting rid of food industry representatives. For almost two years, the authority resorted to all the tricks to dodge the issue. In 2012, it came to light that several food brands — including Maggi, Pediasure, Horlicks, Nutrichoice, Special K etc — were under the scanner for misleading commercials and for making tall health claims. Maggi was also found to be mislabelling its multi-grain noodles by claiming "No MSG Added" — the very count on which Nestle has been hauled up now.
But the investigation in 2012 was allowed to linger and perhaps capped under pressure from industry lobbies. Not just this, the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) in March 2012 tested several junk food brands — Maggi included — and found them to contain higher amounts of trans fats, sugar and salt than claimed on their labels.
Similar results were reported by Ahmedabad-based Consumer Education and Research Centre earlier. Despite such damning evidence from civil society organisations, food safety authority refused to budge and did nothing. Had the authority woken up to growing evidence about junk food companies openly flouting regulations earlier, the current episode would not have assumed this proportion.
FSSAI, along with state food safety commissioners, also needs to make its working transparent. The authority does not put in public domain any information such as agenda notes and minutes of its meetings. After the Mail Today exposé in 2009, officials were virtually gagged. The central authority and state food safety agencies claim to have tested lakhs of samples, booked thousands of companies and recovered crores of rupees as penalty in the past five years.
These details were uploaded on FSSAI’s website last when the Maggi controversy reached its peak. However, names of food companies prosecuted and fined have not been revealed. Consumers have a right to know which products have been found to violate norms and which companies are in the dock. This data should be made public immediately otherwise it would mean that FSSAI is trying to shield the culprit.