The news of China banning milk powder import from many companies in New Zealand might be incomprehensible to many in Nepal. And that is exactly when ignorance stops being bliss and becomes bane.
Our ignorance and/or why-do-I-care attitude towards consumer rights is a costly habit. Our ignorance seems to be the combined effect of state negligence, companies’ excessive power on markets, and consumers’ diffidence in asking questions or raising issues. And then slowly that ignorance turns to indifference, which leads to the collapse of the whole concept of consumer rights. This trend is in the making in Nepal.[break]
payload23.cargocollective.com
Let’s go just two months back in time. The investigation by the Department of Food Technology and Quality Control (DFTQC) then had found milk from many companies (including state-owned DDC) contaminated with coliform. This contamination renders milk undrinkable, increasing the possibility of diseases like cholera and diarrhea.
When asked how they were planning to proceed with the results of the investigation, Executive Director of the DFTQC said in an interview that they were planning to seal some production plants and “warn and let go” some others. Mere two months later, not even the public cares about the quality of the milk from plants that were questioned.
In this context, let’s put some light into the state of consumer rights in reference to food-related items in Nepal. I have dissected the issue from three angles: state, companies and consumers.
State
When the state owned DDC couldn’t live up to set standards, the state’s effort to protect and implement consumers’ right became doubtful. Over time, we have seen how the foundation of “quality control” in the country is laid on “warning and letting go” of defaulters—which was repeated in the case of milk contamination. These are marks of a state’s negligence—visible in its services, statements and control mechanism. Moreover, this is also an example of how the state is gradually losing its power to perform supervising duties.
With a bird-flu epidemic on the brink of outbreak, the government lifted the ban on buying/selling of chicken meat. Decreeing a ban, without proactive steps to close the loopholes in implementation, was not enough to regulate the trade of chicken. Neighborhood meat shops were still selling it, and restaurants still had chicken items on their menus. Imagine what lifting it entirely will do to public health!
Companies
Most of the companies in food business in Nepal are growing as small businesses. The good thing about small businesses is that they turn individuals into entrepreneurs, give employment to those who would otherwise be unemployed, and contribute to the economy. But, the problem arises when there are too many of them in operation, because the state’s means and ways of monitoring these businesses are poor.
While our state’s supervision of even established food companies is ineffective, these mushrooming small food businesses just add to the degrading food quality in the market. We can take the case of gudpak/pustakari, or even most of the packed rice/cereals/flour from small food processing and packaging industries—which are mostly sold without proper labeling. And it has never happened that I don’t find some grains of sand or mud when I eat locally made lapsi candies. The packaged cereals come with some stones packed along.
Consumer right is violated even more blatantly by the big industries in the field. Water-packaging plants’ resistance to state supervision is the epitome of economic-terrorism. The association of these plants called a nation-wide-strike and stopped the supply of water; an obstruction of essential goods that is punishable under the law of Nepal.
Such exertion of force and exercise of unlawful power, however, has become commonplace in Nepal. The concept of “setting up standards and following them” has become unattainable.
Consumers
Though consumers appear at the end of the market-economy chain, they are its central force. And consumers only remain central as long as they understand and exercise their powers. Consumers International (CI), a global federation of consumer groups, which acts as a global watchdog to protect consumer rights, has adopted Consumer Bill of Rights which defines eight basic consumer rights (four of which are right to choose, redress, information and be heard). The last three of the rights can only be practiced if food companies follow state guidelines and orders. In Nepal, due to the state’s diminished control and companies’ increasing powers, the food business has turned into “state’s-benevolence-business” and “we-make-the-laws” business.
Despite these shortcomings, consumers can still improve their lot by making smart purchasing choices. We buy processed and packed rice for a higher price than the same rice on a field. Then why do we so willingly accept the stones that come packed in the rice sack, when we have paid more for stone-free rice? So the next time you find stones in your rice sack, inform the producer/packager that their product isn’t meeting the standard.
You can even tell your local vendor that you won’t buy the product from that company again. When you do this, it is also important that you spread the word; sometimes word-of-mouth works like nothing else. When you and your neighbors start boycotting a product, the local vendor will opt for a better product.
You have the power to make decisions and choices. Do not buy a product that doesn’t meet basic standards. Check if the product weighs as much as it claims to weigh. When the manufacturer’s name is not listed on the packaged food, don’t buy it. If the expiry date is blotched, go for another producer.
This is a competitive market, there are plenty of options available to you. Even though one option may not be better than another, at least you can keep up your search for a better product. If most consumers were to exercise this power, the producers who do not meet standards will be forced out of the market due to diminished sales. So when you are making these choices, you are also encouraging competition in the market which will result in better quality goods at better prices in the long run.
However, it makes me sad to say that for those sections of country where a single egg can cost as high as Rs. 200, it is a whole different story.
The author is an Economics graduate with interest in Public Policy
barshaaa@gmail.com
Related story
Desperate search for missing girls as nearly 80 dead in Texas f...
