Replies to LegCo questions
LCQ7: Food imported from Japan
Following is a question by the Hon Wong Kwok-hing and a written reply by the
Secretary for Food and Health, Dr Ko Wing-man, in the Legislative Council today
(May 4):
Question:
In response to a nuclear radiation leakage incident at the Fukushima nuclear
power plant in Japan in 2011 (Fukushima nuclear incident), the Director of Food
and Environmental Hygiene has issued an order under section 78B of the Public
Health and Municipal Services Ordinance (Cap. 132) to prohibit the import of
certain fresh produce, milk, milk beverages and milk powder from the five most
affected prefectures of Japan, namely Fukushima, Ibaraki, Tochigi, Chiba and
Gunma. A scheme of targeted radiation testing on all food products imported from
Japan has also been carried out since then. In this connection, will the
Government inform this Council:
(1) of the types and quantity of those Japanese food products from which
excessive radiation levels were detected after such food products had been put
on the market, each year since the Fukushima nuclear incident;
(2) as it has been reported that the food testing standards prescribed by the
authorities in respect of certain radionuclides (e.g. caesium) in imported food
products are lower than those prescribed by other jurisdictions (including
Mainland China, South Korea and Taiwan), of the reasons for that;
(3) as it has been reported that radionuclides strontium and polonium will cause
leukaemia and lung cancer respectively, why the authorities have not enacted
legislation to regulate the permitted levels of such radionuclides in food
products; whether the authorities will include strontium and polonium as items
to be tested on food products imported from Japan; if they will, of the details;
if not, the reasons for that;
(4) as it has been reported that at present, the authorities only prohibit the
import of food products from the aforesaid five prefectures of Japan, while
other jurisdictions (e.g. Mainland China, South Korea and the United States) ban
the import of food products from more places in Japan, of the reasons and
justifications for the authorities adopting an approach which is less stringent
than other jurisdictions; whether the authorities will expand the ban on
imported food products to cover more places in Japan; if they will, of the
details; if not, the reasons for that; and
(5) as it has been reported that in respect of certain food products imported
from Japan and sold on the market, the description of their places of origin is
very general (e.g. only the broad term "Japan" is shown) without showing the
names of the prefectures and cities where the food products concerned were
produced, and in some other food products, wrong places of origin are shown,
whether the authorities have assessed if the importers and retailers concerned
have contravened the relevant food labelling requirements; if they have assessed
and the outcome is in the negative, whether they will enact legislation to
require that the package labels of imported food products must bear detailed
description of places of origin; if the assessment outcome is in the
affirmative, of the legislation and penalties involved; of the number of persons
who have been prosecuted and convicted since the Fukushima nuclear incident for
committing relevant offences and the punishments imposed by the court on them in
general?
Reply:
President,
Following the Fukushima nuclear power plant incident in Japan in 2011, the
Director of Food and Environmental Hygiene (DFEH) issued an order under section
78B of the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance (Cap. 132) on March
24, 2011 to prohibit the import of vegetables and fruits, milk, milk beverages
and milk powder from the five most affected prefectures of Japan, namely
Fukushima, Ibaraki, Tochigi, Chiba and Gunma. The import of all chilled or
frozen game, meat and poultry, poultry eggs and all live, chilled or frozen
aquatic products from the five prefectures is prohibited, unless they are
accompanied by a certificate issued by the competent authority of Japan
attesting that the radiation levels do not exceed the guideline levels. The
order is still in force. Anyone found to have contravened any terms of the order
is liable to a maximum fine of $100,000 and imprisonment for up to 12 months.
The Centre for Food Safety (CFS) has all along enhanced the surveillance of the
radiation levels of food imported from Japan according to a risk-based approach.
The CFS has been testing the radiation levels of every consignment of food
products imported from Japan. Only food products with satisfactory test results
will be released for sale in the market. Besides, the CFS, through the regular
food surveillance programme, takes food samples at the retail level for
radiation tests to monitor the radiation levels of food products to safeguard
food safety.
My reply to the questions of the Hon Wong Kwok-hing is as follows:
(1) Following the Fukushima nuclear power plant incident in Japan in 2011, the
CFS immediately stepped up the surveillance of the radiation levels of food
imported from Japan. As at April 15, 2016, the CFS tested more than 320 000
samples of Japanese food. Since the said order came into effect, the test
results of all samples were satisfactory. The CFS also updates the test results
on food imported from Japan and the latest figures on its website every working
day.
(2) and (3) The CFS has referred to the standards laid down by the Codex
Alimentarius Commission (Codex) (Note) in the Guideline Levels for Radionuclides
in Foods Contaminated Following a Nuclear or Radiological Emergency (the
guideline levels) when testing the radiation levels of food. The guideline
levels are internationally recognised standards for protecting public health.
The Government has set up an Expert Committee on Food Safety (Expert Committee)
under the CFS to advise the DFEH on the formulation of food safety strategies
and measures. According to the Expert Committee, three radionuclides, namely
Iodine-131 (I-131), Caesium-134 (Cs-134) and Caesium-137 (Cs-137), are the main
radionuclides posing health risks and are most relevant in the acute phase of
nuclear emergencies. The Expert Committee also considered the adoption of the
Codex guideline levels by the CFS appropriate in addressing the public concern
over food safety. Besides, the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance
(Cap.132) also stipulates that all food for sale in Hong Kong (including the
food imported from Japan) must be fit for human consumption.
(4) In the wake of Fukushima nuclear power plant incident, individual countries
or regions have implemented measures deemed fit to their risk assessment results
and local circumstances. As such, the places of origin, the number of
prefectures and categories of food products covered under their import control
measures imposed on Japanese food may differ from those implemented in Hong
Kong. Generally speaking, compared with Australia, New Zealand and Canada (which
have now lifted all the import control imposed after the incident) as well as
Singapore (which has only imposed limited control over the import of food
products from Fukushima and imposed conditions on the import of food products
from certain prefectures), the import control of Japanese food products
exercised by the Mainland, Taiwan, Korea and Hong Kong is more stringent.
Regarding the control measures implemented by the United States (US), the US
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) imposes import restriction on Japanese foods
(Import Alert 99-33) by referring to the list of food products that are
prohibited from export compiled by the Japanese Government based on the results
of their on-going food surveillance. When the Japanese Government updates the
list, which can be found on the website of the Ministry of Health, Labour and
Welfare of Japan, the FDA will make changes to the import alert accordingly. In
other words, the Japanese food products and prefectures subject to import
restrictions in the US mirror the export prohibition measures taken by Japan.
As mentioned in paragraph 1 above, following the radiation leakage at the
Fukushima nuclear power plant in Japan in 2011, the DFEH issued an order to
prohibit the import of a number of food products from the five most affected
prefectures, namely Fukushima, Ibaraki, Tochigi, Chiba and Gunma. The CFS has
also been closely monitoring and testing food imported from Japan for radiation
at the import, wholesale and retail levels. In the case of Hong Kong, apart from
the food items prohibited from export by the Japanese authority, the food
prohibited from importing into Hong Kong also include those covered by the order
issued by the DFEH.
Moreover, as mentioned in paragraphs 3(2) and 3(3), the Public Health and
Municipal Services Ordinance (Cap. 132) stipulates that all food for sale in
Hong Kong must be fit for human consumption. This requirement applies to all
imported food (including Japanese food), regardless of whether the food is
subject to the restrictions imposed by the Japanese authority or the order
issued by the DFEH.
Having regard to the latest development, we will keep in view the control on
food imported from Japan, taking into account assessments made by international
agencies such as the International Atomic Energy Agency, control measures
implemented by other jurisdictions, local food surveillance results, handling of
the Japanese authority in the Fukushima nuclear power plant incident and other
relevant factors. Generally speaking, while we accord top priority to food
safety, we also need to take into account the latest development of the above
factors and the requirements of the World Trade Organization.
(5) At the import control level, during the CFS's routine surveillance of each
consignment of food imported from Japan for radiation testing, importers are
required to provide the CFS with relevant information including the places of
origin and the prefectures concerned to facilitate the CFS's identification of
food from the five Japanese prefectures on which import restrictions are imposed
so as to safeguard food safety.
On labelling, under the Food and Drugs (Composition and Labelling) Regulations
(Cap. 132W), the name and detailed address of the manufacturer/packer should be
provided on the label of prepackaged food. Otherwise, the prepackaged food
should be labelled with an indication of its country of origin, together with:
(i) the name of the distributor or brand owner in Hong Kong and the address of
the registered or principal office of the distributor or brand owner in Hong
Kong, with the full address of the manufacturer or packer of the prepackaged
food in its country of origin provided in writing to the Food and Environmental
Hygiene Department (FEHD) in advance; or
(ii) a code marking identifying the manufacturer or packer in its country of
origin, with particulars of the code marking and of the manufacturer or packer
to whom it relates provided in writing to the FEHD in advance.
If prepackaged food labelled with an indication of its country of origin is in
compliance with the above legislative requirement, indication of the prefecture
may serve as supplementary information on the label.
On traceability of food, the Food Safety Ordinance (Cap. 612) requires food
traders to maintain proper transaction records to ensure that the CFS can trace
the source of food effectively and take prompt action in the event of a food
incident. Even if the information of the food manufacturer or packer is not
shown on the food label, with the transaction records kept by food traders, the
CFS can still trace the source of food if necessary, thus safeguarding public
health.
According to section 61 of the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance
(Cap. 132), if any person falsely describes a food or misleads as to the nature,
substance or quality of the food on the label of the food sold by him, he shall
be guilty of an offence and be liable to a maximum fine of $50,000 and
imprisonment for up to six months. In addition, according to the Trade
Descriptions Ordinance (Cap. 362), "trade description", in relation to goods,
means an indication, direct or indirect, and in whatever forms and by whatever
means, with respect to the goods or any part of the goods, including claims as
to place of manufacture or country of origin. The Trade Descriptions Ordinance
does not make it mandatory to specify information on goods or their packaging.
However, in the course of trade or business, all trade descriptions marked on or
attached to goods must be true and correct. Making a false or misleading
statement about goods to a material degree may constitute an offence of false
trade description. Any person who contravenes the relevant provision of the
Trade Descriptions Ordinance is liable on conviction to a maximum fine of
$500,000 and imprisonment for up to five years.
In the CFS's regular inspection of Japanese food, no irregularity in relation to
labelling has been found so far.
Note: The Codex Alimentarius Commission was co-established by the Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and the World Health Organization
to serve as an international authority to set food-related standards and
guidelines for protecting the health of consumers and ensuring fair trade
practices in the food trade.
Ends/Wednesday, May 4, 2016
Issued at HKT 17:42
NNNN