Replies to LegCo questions

LCQ2: Food safety incidents

Following is a question by the Hon Steven Ho and a reply by the Secretary for Food and Health, Dr Ko Wing-man, in the Legislative Council today (October 29):

Question:

A few food safety incidents have occurred in Hong Kong recently, including one in which a chain eatery used expired meat products supplied by Shanghai Husi Food Company Limited, and another one in which many eateries and food manufacturers used substandard lard imported from Taiwan. Some members of the public have pointed out that the aforesaid chain eatery disseminated confusing information after the incident had been uncovered, and the food tracing mechanism currently in place also failed to trace the sources and distribution of the substandard lard expeditiously, thereby undermining their confidence in food safety. Such members of the public have also pointed out that while it is stipulated in the existing legislation that the Director of Food and Environmental Hygiene may demand food importers and distributors to submit transaction records which they are required to keep, no time limit for compliance is prescribed in the legislation and the penalty for contravention also lacks deterrent effect. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) whether it will amend the existing legislation to require food importers and distributors to submit upon the authorities' request their transaction records within a specified time limit, and to increase the penalty for contravention; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

(2) whether it will conduct a comprehensive review of the effectiveness of the food tracing mechanism, in particular the arrangements for information dissemination and the announcement of the list of eateries involved, so as to ensure that the mechanism can effectively help the authorities in handling food safety incidents; and

(3) given that the authorities have proposed to legislate to require importers and exporters of edible oils to provide official certificates issued by the place of origin of edible oils for random inspection by them, how the authorities will verify the authenticity of such certificates?

Reply:

President,

The recent food safety incidents, such as those related to problematic food products from Husi Food Company in Shanghai and the substandard lard from Taiwan, involved a wide spectrum of parties and products. Also, the food products affected are those commonly consumed by the public and widely available in the market. The Government has been very concerned about these incidents and has been taking follow-up actions proactively. The Government has also taken appropriate measures in light of developments of these incidents in order to safeguard food safety.

In the course of investigation, apart from liaising closely with the food safety authorities of the places where the affected food products originated to keep tab on the up-to-date situation, the Centre for Food safety (CFS) also traced the source of these food products and their distribution from importers to distributors and downstream businesses. CFS invoked the power to request traders which might be affected by the incidents to submit information on the trading and use of the relevant products within the time limits set conferred upon the Director of Food and Environmental Hygiene (DFEH) under the Food Safety Ordinance (Cap. 612). This allowed CFS to assess the scale of the incidents and the movement of the food products in question more accurately, as well as to trace, mark and seal the products which might be affected, so as to prevent further sale of problematic food products.

My reply to the various parts of the question is as follows:

(1) Sections 4 and 5 of the Food Safety Ordinance provide that all food importers or distributors must be registered with DFEH as food importers or distributors. Besides, sections 21 to 24 of the Ordinance require any person who, in the course of business imports, acquires or supplies food by wholesale in Hong Kong, must keep transaction records of the business to which it has supplied the food and the business from which it has acquired the food.

Under section 27 of the Food Safety Ordinance, DFEH may, for the purpose of exercising powers or performing functions under the Ordinance, require to inspect, make a copy of or take an extract from a record kept by these food traders. Those who fail to keep such information or submit the information to DFEH within the specified time commit an offence and are liable to a maximum fine of $10,000 and imprisonment up to three months. While the Food Safety Ordinance does not specify a time limit for submission of such information, section 40(1) of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) stipulates that "Where any Ordinance confers upon any person power to do or enforce the doing of any act or thing, all such powers shall be deemed to be also conferred as are reasonably necessary to enable the person to do or enforce the doing of the act or thing." As such, DFEH may, in requiring the relevant person to submit the required information under section 27 of the Food Safety Ordinance, stipulate a reasonable time limit having regard to different urgencies of individual cases. Thus, DFEH is currently vested with sufficient power to require food importers or food distributors to provide transaction records within a reasonable time limit.

To enable effective tracing of the source and distribution of food products, CFS, by exercising the power vested in it under the Food Safety Ordinance, may require food traders to submit food import or acquisition and distribution records and relevant information within a specified time limit, which may be as short as 24 hours where necessary. This allows CFS to trace the food products which may be affected by food incidents to safeguard food safety. Take the substandard lard incident in Taiwan as an example. CFS, under section 27 of the Food Safety Ordinance, issued notices to over 780 importers, distributors and traders who might have imported, distributed or used the lard or lard products from Chang Guann Co. Ltd., requiring them to submit transaction records of the lard/lard products concerned within a specified time limit, in order to facilitate tracing, marking and sealing of the relevant products. Traders in general could provide the information required before the deadline. As such, it is not necessary to increase the penalty for contravention for the time being.

(2) In order to help members of the public keep track of the progress of the food incidents, CFS has provided updates on the investigation of the food incidents in a timely manner through press releases and its own website. With regard to the incident involving substandard lard from Taiwan, as at October 22, 2014, CFS held a total of eight media sessions to brief the public in a prompt manner on the progress of the investigation and the control measures implemented, so that the public could have a timely and better understanding of the incident and take corresponding preventive measures. CFS also issued a total of 19 press releases on the incident to keep the public updated on the latest development. It has also set up a dedicated webpage and has been providing updates to the webpage so that the public can learn about the progress of the incident promptly.

On September 13, 2014, DFEH made an order in accordance with section 30(1) of the Food Safety Ordinance to prohibit the import into and supply within Hong Kong of lard/lard products produced by Chang Guann Co., Ltd (Chang Guann) in Taiwan on or after March 1, 2014 and all food products made with such lard/lard products in Taiwan or Hong Kong, and to direct that all the products concerned must be recalled in the manner specified in the order. To protect consumers' right to know and to ensure that the recall would be conducted in a timely and systematic manner, CFS released a list of traders who might have distributed or used lard/lard products manufactured by Chang Guann. As the supply chain of the affected products involved different sectors (e.g. products might be handled by multiple distributors before reaching the end users), CFS needed time to verify the information. Moreover, at the time of publication of the list, traders concerned might have no stock of the relevant products, or have returned them to suppliers, or have removed them from the shelves, or have stopped using such products for some time. Therefore, we have to point out that the list may not necessarily reflect the prevailing situation of the recall. We will draw on the experience and explore ways to improve the recall arrangement, so that CFS can obtain from traders information on the supply chain more efficiently and update the list in a timely manner.

In the early stage of handling the incident of problematic food products from Husi in Shanghai, a chain restaurant which used Husi products failed to provide CFS with accurate information in a timely manner. As a result, CFS needed to verify the relevant information with the company and was unable to announce comprehensive and accurate information immediately. In light of the experience of handling recent food incidents, CFS held briefings on September 17, 18 and 24 this year with the trade to remind them that DFEH may require the trade to provide transaction records within a specified period under section 27 of the Food Safety Ordinance. As such, members of the trade are required to arrange their transaction records systematically for timely submission of the relevant information whenever necessary. In addition, CFS has strengthened the communication mechanism with the trade by requesting food importers and distributors to provide particulars of at least one contact person, with whom CFS can get in touch through a 24-hour contact telephone number and a mobile phone number during office and non-office hours in case of emergency food incidents. This will enable CFS to make immediate contact with the relevant traders when necessary to obtain the information required for safeguarding food safety.

(3) The Food and Health Bureau (FHB) is considering making regulations to safeguard safety of edible oil by requiring traders who import, sell or produce edible oil to ensure that the oil complies with the relevant requirements. Any trader who fails to do so commits an offence. FHB suggests that the legislation should require importers of edible oil to provide an official certificate issued by the place of origin for the inspection by FEHD as a proof of the oil's compliance with the relevant requirements. Copies of the certificate must also be provided by edible oil importers to their downstream distributors, retailers or food premises supplied with the oil for FEHD's inspection.

In this regard, we would make reference to the practices adopted in implementing the Imported Game, Meat and Poultry Regulations (Cap. 132AK) under the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance (Cap. 132). Under the Regulations, all imported raw meat (including meat and poultry) must be accompanied by an official certificate issued by a competent veterinary authority recognised by DFEH to prove that the meat or poultry concerned is fit for human consumption. As official health certificates are issued by the competent authorities of the export countries, CFS could contact the competent authorities concerned to verify the authenticity of the certificates if necessary.

The above proposals are preliminary ideas, details of which are to be discussed by the relevant departments. We will also take into account practices of the international community and other countries. We will seek to launch a public consultation on the legislative proposals early next year.

Ends/Wednesday, October 29, 2014
Issued at HKT 15:01

NNNN