Interview of the President of the Association “Ukrkondprom” Alexander Baldynyuka newspaper “Governmental courier” № 81 (4725) from 08 May 2012 year.
Another paradox of our reality: Today, manufacturers must prove, it is not going to break the law and not violate its. This system is somehow perceived by all as a tribute, in fact we have a situation here in the style of the famous writer Orwell. Imagine, you have to bear every morning to help police, night allegedly did nothing illegal. Only on the basis, you have the physical ability to commit something. Ridiculously?
If touch Safety Control System, example, food, that such approaches are plenty skosobochenyh. To further, If you have multiple organizations or bodies, are endowed with every right to control. A seven nyanok, we know ... Especially, that nurses do not look at the state of "ward", and more on the convexity of pocket.
Thanks to the persistent efforts of a team of specialists, which is directed Coordination Center of Economic Reforms under the President of Ukraine, last year managed to make, seemingly, unbelievable: corresponding bill, although "fighting", but took repeated coordination with ministries and agencies, To get to the Cabinet. However, decisive battle around the appropriate reforms - Bill in Parliament - is yet to come.
One of the most active advocates new approaches to control food safety said Alexander Baldynyuka, President of association of confectionery, and food concentrates industries krohmalopatokovoyi. Suffice it to say, his publication "The belly guard" in one of the most popular magazines still actively walking space of the Internet. Because editors have asked him, as already recognized expert in the field of food safety, answer a few questions.
- Once it is operated by another group of reformers such a regrettable inheritance? Greater risk of repeat predecessors?
- The current bill formally - government. But the actual concept of reform developers are experts not only Ukrainian state institutions, but also international organizations (International Finance Corporation of the World Bank, European Commission etc.) Ukrainian experts and public organizations, League including food producers. And say, that innovation - not a Ukrainian invention. A similar system for monitoring food safety have been tested and successfully operates in the EU.
- Alexander V., What is based on the belief initiators, fans of profit in muddy water did not pick up the key to this version reform? They, domestic schemers, very creative ...
- We must at all costs to create a more accountable and transparent monitoring system. Therefore, one of the key changes - creation of a single body of state control of food safety with a clear mandate, which will provide state control "from farm to fork".
For now we have the so-called operating system multykontrolna: multiple government bodies have the authority to monitor the safety. The final amount of these bodies is not as easy to install, but it at least five or six structures, powers are often duplicated. This clear, who bears ultimate responsibility for the overall situation in the country.
And this situation, according to the same controller, very difficult.
Readers can using infographics, prepared according to the Inspectorate for Consumer Protection, easily verify this. For truly awful statistics. It means, the system does not work effectively. Regardless of the number of inspections, the share of counterfeit stored dangerously high.
Do you think you heard, to someone responsible for consumer protection pleaded guilty to failure of the policy of protection? And despite the fact, that the state has full authority to control in this area.
In addition, controller means so many large-scale funding from the pockets of taxpayers and unnecessarily large number of inspections.
so, multykontrolnoyi scrapping the current system is a requirement of time. Another thing, officials authorized supervisory structures today are not very happy this term. For this hidden, sorry, selfish interest.
- In preparation for our interview, notice the abundance of criticism, що такий єдиний орган створюють на основі ветеринарної служби. Is it advisable to give veterinarians monitoring functions, essentially, health of people?
- As for me, Such criticism is absolutely unfounded. The bill is not about transfer of functions vets, and to establish a single competent authority. And its members will include not only vets, but health doctors, hygienists, immunologists, virologists etc.. That all experts, necessary to ensure control at all stages of production and sale of food. I have already said about the chain "from farm - to table".
Critics just blindly criticize, ignoring a winning situation for the general fact. Why are we in this situation calm? Because the state veterinarian has approved the structure of the specialists world-class system of their bodies, vertical structure of territorial inspections, extensive to the level of district. That is, this institution is a good basis for the development of a single competent authority.
- Today in society for quality and food safety are not only heard complaints, but also severely punish the perpetrators requirements. This, as you say, the competent authority is able to stretch the shoulder?
- An important novelty of the bill is to establish the right controller to check the company without notice. Today we need to warn venture 10 days: I come to you. And while going, defaulting manufacturer easily destroy all evidence of his guilt. To reduce abuse, on the other hand, these checks will be clearly regulated. The controller can analyze only the list of issues, specified in the model "check lists".
Also, the annual number of planned inspections will be determined taking into account factors, affecting the potential threat of dangerous goods on a specific enterprise.
- Give, but you said about strengthening the responsibility of all participants in the food business for serious violations. They say, now significantly increased fines, introduced even imprisonment in serious cases ....
- The bill purports, to prevent or minimize the appearance of dangerous products on the market. And this measure is absolutely justified. Producer, is etched consumer, should bear a serious responsibility.
But it would be wrong to assume, reform focuses on punitive measures. It is important not only to respond to abuse, but his attempts to warn. To this end, the bill provides for the mandatory introduction of HACCP ("Hazard analysis and critical control points") in all enterprises of food industry. Its essence lies in establishing production management process in the enterprise, which would set a dangerous factors at each stage of the production process and created mechanisms to overcome these threats.
- But do not forget: the introduction of such a system would create an additional financial burden on food businesses. Will the Ukrainian producer to pull himself also is?
— Насправді чутки про надмірно високу вартість НАССР істотно перебільшені. So, some companies, which fulfill all sanitary requirements are impossible because, example, design features facilities, may face the need to restructure production, then - the need to invest in industries heavily danger. But, on the other hand, Can prevent the continued existence of potentially dangerous food industry?
HACCP, by the way, is a prerequisite for food enterprises in Europe and the US. This system gives business benefits and. It provides manufacturers sales growth in Ukraine and abroad, reduce production costs, helps manage business risk and attract investors.
- Yet it will be difficult for business law. Requirements enterprises increase. Will businesses producing something back?
- So, very much. Essentially, reform introduces a presumption of innocence Manufacturer. This will remove a significant amount of unnecessary, inefficient and burdensome for business instruments of state regulation with respect Certification, the mandatory examinations, registration procedures, of permits. For example, no need to get hygienic report…
- How, without the same control and not control?!
- Do not agree with you. This tool pulling money from businesses, which does not guarantee security. Indeed, preventing unscrupulous manufacturer to produce perfect and take samples for examination, and produce an entirely different product? But for hygienic report, as in a bunch of other permits, the company should officially (and informally) pay. Of course, that the costs borne by the final consumer.
According to the concept of reform, the manufacturer is not obliged to prove the state, that he did not violate. Responsibility for compliance with indicators of food safety rests with the company, which is to conduct laboratory studies of samples for your self, for, To protect themselves from liability.
- But there is also the question: чи залишається контроль за якістю у компетенції держави?
- Reform of rethinking the concept of quality according to European approaches. In the EU,, usually, the state does not regulate the quality of products in our understanding. There she focused on bringing true manufacturer to inform consumers about its properties. Quality - is, essentially, set of consumer properties, that has the product. Each consumer evaluates itself, combination of properties it wants to get, buying a product. That quality - a market category.
The main thing here, apparently, in another. In that, the packaging manufacturer to accurately and fully informed consumer, what ingredients the product contains. One of the main problems of our food market and is just in the, that unscrupulous manufacturers often mislead the consumer as to, what lays in the product. And we buy cheese with vegetable fat or meat sausage without meat. These "products", by the way, may not be dangerous, but the consumer is introduced misleading. And it is here that the state must ensure effective control over the duty of the manufacturer.
Also, the state reserves the right to determine the minimum characteristics of traditional products, the observance of which will follow. For example, oil should contain only milk fat, and chocolate should not be cocoa butter equivalents. If the manufacturer wants to add the equivalent of a product - please. But in this case, lost the right to call a product like chocolate, and the presence of equivalent must be indicated on the label.
And then let the consumer decides, what to buy. For cases of poisoning usually occur not because of poor quality, and violating safety indicators. In addition, передбачається контроль за споживчим пакуванням, that contact with food. Will be much tougher penalties for violation of these requirements.
All concerned citizens directly. Therefore, they should not put the blame on the government in all cases, but most do not stay away.
Andrew Hearts
for "Governmental Courier"
http://www.ukurier.gov.ua
Leave a Reply