China’s new food safety law quietly took effect on 1 June. The country is trying to rebuild the public’s confidence in the safety of its food products, including seafood. Over the past few years, China has been cited for exporting melamine-tainted fish feed and seafood containing prohibited antibiotics and fungicides, such as chloramphenicol and malachite green.
On Friday, Eric Hargan, a partner at the Chicago law firm McDermott Will & Emery specializing in food safety, talked to SeafoodSource about the significance of China’s new food-safety law and its efforts to improve its shattered food-safety record. Hargan served as the acting deputy secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, from 2005 to 2007, directly under Secretary Mike Leavitt. From 2003 to 2005, he served as the agency’s deputy general counsel.
Hedlund: How significant is China’s new food-safety law?
Hargan: It’s a big deal. There are 4,000 pharmaceutical companies and 500,000 food-processing companies. For the U.S., it’s bewildering. In the United States, you may have three companies producing [one food item]. In China, you may have 500 companies for an equivalent item. It’s a lot for inspectors trying to figure out what’s going on. Now they’re creating standards that will drive a lot of people [out of business] and will allow for greater safety — it’s an unmitigated good for China and the United States.
Is China getting a bad rap?
A lot of times it is just a few bad apples. But you have to pay attention, especially with the Chinese producers that have found a good market in the United States — like catfish and shrimp. When there’s money to be made, a lot of companies will be drawn into that market with the idea that they’ll also make money. In that case, you may see a temporary draw-in of producers who aren’t sensitive to what they’re supposed to be doing, including family-owned fish farms that don’t have the education and wherewithal to participate in the U.S. market in the way that they need to.
Is China aware of its reputation and questionable food-safety record?
China has become aware of the impact of public perception on [its food industry]. Public perception can really elevate or crater an entire industry or a particular company, and it can happen very quickly. Part of that’s driven by entry into the U.S. market, and part of that’s driven by development of different submarkets within China. China, as it becomes wealthier, is going through the same transition the United States went through and every country goes through, which is a switch from an emphasis on quantity to quality of food. Sophisticated consumers in large cities in China are starting to demand the same kind of things that their counterparts in other countries do. You see that in this new food-safety law. Now China is working toward a system that’s more stringent, regular, practical and centralized — that’s a big deal.
It takes time. Something like this lingers in the public perception. The idea that you’re now competing in a market with a lot of competitors and not just providing a need that people are going to have to buy from you no matter what — that perception is taking hold. If you don’t provide something this way, someone else will. But it’s going to be a while.
Will the new food-safety law be effective?
Awareness is growing, because of mass education, and the fact that there are now fines, de-licensing and other economic penalties, though it’s unclear whether there will be criminal enforcement. Now it is a problem economically for the individual companies that violate [food-safety requirements]. They’re not going to make a profit. They’re going to be fined by the government; they’re going to be exposed. Wholesalers, distributors, [retailers] and consumers are going to be driven away, and that’ll be that.
China is now allowing FDA food inspectors in its country. How significant is that?
It’s just a few people, but it means that there’ll be a lot more education about what the U.S. standards are, and that’s only good. And there’ll be a lot more communication from the Chinese side on what they expect and what the realities are. We have to figure out a way to make this work, and we are.
What about the FDA? Is it equipped to ensure Chinese seafood imports are safe?
FDA is under-resourced. There’s no question about that. When you have a budget of $2 billion — that’s a drop in the bucket of what FDA is being asked to do. FDA regulates 25 percent of the U.S. economy, and it’s got $2 billion. It’s not much. Now they’re getting more money and bringing in more people. And they’re trying to solve their succession issue. A bunch of senior people were overstrained. They were efficient, but overworked. They didn’t have the money or time to bring in new people and train them. Because it’s not just bringing them in; it’s training them. But now they’re ramping up in this area. They’re going to have more resources. It’s still not enough, but it’s more. There will be bumps, because the average experience level at FDA is going to go down, but it’s solving the problem that’s been chronic in the FDA for the last umpteen years. Their budget increase every year was essentially salary increases.
Will simply increasing the number of seafood inspections solve the problem?
It will not solve the problem. It’s going to have to be turned back on third parties and the producers to monitor themselves, because FDA will never in our lifetime have the kind of resources that it would require to do that many inspections. And it’s not clear that that’s also not an antiquated model. In terms of globalization of the [food supply], you are never going to be able to do that. You’re not going to be able to have FDA inspectors in every food-production establishment walking through every eight hours to look at everything. It can’t realistically happen. But China understands that, and they’re adapting to that.