Troubled spice route

FSSAI's action is welcome but belated

In a belated move, the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) has swung into action. It has asked states to collect different brands of powdered spices for testing. This follows a ban imposed in early April by the food regulatory authorities in Singapore and Hong Kong on two widely sold Indian brands, MDH and Everest, in which the presence of the carcinogenic pesticide ethylene oxide was discovered. Lab reports on samples from India will be placed before an expert committee and a consolidated report is likely in about 25 days. The government is also in the process of formulating guidelines for the use of ethylene oxide in samples of spices for domestic and export markets. This flurry of regulatory activity must be welcomed but it also raises questions about its efficiency and ability to take proactive action.

The fact that India has taken over a month to respond to the complaints of regulators in overseas markets that are significant for Indian spice exporters will certainly raise questions, not least because the crisis over lethal pesticide traces in India’s food exports has been festering for a while. Last year, for instance, the US recalled three spice mixes from MDH for containing salmonella bacteria and the media reported a rapid rise in European Union (EU) alerts on pesticide residues present in basmati-rice consignments from India. These developments have a doubly damaging potential. The immediate one is to severely impact a booming spice export business of $4.25 billion (2023-24), accounting for 12 per cent of global spice exports. At a time when key overseas markets are turning unpredictably protectionist, slow and opaque responses to food-safety complaints is a contrarian signal to send. The second and no less insidious is the public-health implication for a country where public spending on health care remains sub-par.

Dangerously high pesticide residues in packaged food and drink have been an issue that has been tirelessly highlighted by organisations such as the environment and health advocacy group Centre for Science and Environment for more than two decades, without conspicuous response from the regulator. The recent ban by the Hong Kong and Singaporean food safety regulators underlines the dangers. Their scrutiny pointed to high levels of ethylene oxide, which is not recommended for use in food. In other words, its presence in any food item renders it unfit for human consumption, and prolonged ingestion is potentially carcinogenic. The serial rejection of shipments from both these brands by international bodies did not appear to have galvanised the Spices Board, which comes under the Ministry of Commerce, or the FSSAI into immediate action.

Vigilance in food regulation demands more than setting standards or responding to the demands of industry lobbies. Last year, the Punjab government and rice exporters responded to the threat of rejection of basmati-rice stocks by the EU by working with farmers to stop spraying banned insecticides. Their efforts, however, are being thwarted by pesticide manufacturers, a politically powerful lobby in India that has a long history of putting profit before public health. These are issues that the FSSAI urgently needs to address. The health of Indians and India’s booming food export industry depends on it.