|
|
|
You can get e-magazine links on WhatsApp. Click here
|
|
|
|
|
|
EU, US rejecting Indian consignments following Sudan scare
|
|
Monday, 01 August, 2005, 08 : 00 AM [IST]
|
|
Our Bureau, New Delhi
|
Non-compliance by Indian exporters with many of the sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) norms has led to a continued rejection of food consignments by the European Union (EU) and the US, it is learnt. The European Commission had earlier informed that it would not accept any food consignments having Sudan dyes, particularly in chilli powder. Sudan dyes have been classified as carcinogenic by the International Agency for Research on Cancer and are, therefore, banned for use in food in the EU.
After this notification there has been a number of cases of rejection of Indian chilli powder. Recently in June, Italy rejected an Indian consignment of crushed hot chilli containing unauthorised colour Sudan 1 and Sudan 4. In June, the EU rejected 12 Indian food consignments while US rejected 216.
UK rejected two Indian consignments of dog chews as it contained salmonella; Germany rejected an Indian consignment of curcuma routed through UK and Netherlands as it also contained salmonella. UK rejected Indian chilli powder as it contained aflatoxins and Germany found presence of salmonella in the peeled sesame seeds exported from India through Poland. Salmonella was also detected in coriander powder exported to UK. Ginger powder exported to Italy was found to contain clostridium perfringens.
Presence of aflatoxins is another cause of rejection. Aflatoxins were found in crushed chillies exported to Italy and in red chilli powder exported to UK. Indian food supplements exported to Poland was found to contain forskolin, while frozen squid exported to Spain was found to contain cadmium. US rejected 216 Indian food and drugs consignments of over 50 leading export houses on SPS and technical norms in June. The reasons cited for rejections include 'filthy', 'unapproved', 'not listed', containing salmonella', 'needs FCE', 'pesticide residues', 'lacks N/C', 'unsafe colour'. Some of the rejections were due to improper labelling, not indicating the process of manufacture and the name of the firm.
In this context the chairman of Agriculture and Processed Food Export Development Authority (APEDA), KS Money said: "APEDA has a limited mandate over 15 commodity groups (involving 240 commodities). The organisation has a limited strength of only 100 skilled manpower to look after a gigantic task. He said that APEDA was not the only responsible body in the country.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|