Food safety laughable
Again, the soap opera of food safety in Taiwan is making Taiwan look like a backward country. Not long ago, it was the melamine-tainted milk and dairy products and the plasticizer added to beverages and condiments. This time, it is maleic anhydride-modified industrial starch that has frustrated and confused the general public. Whether you are a resident or a visitor, rich or poor, powerful or impotent, all people in Taiwan are exposed to the risk of eating these tainted foods.
It is apparent that the law, the government and the entire food industry have failed in protecting consumer interest.
The failure to ensure food security in Taiwan according to the law has created a bad culture in the food industry.
Many companies, including big corporations, do not make consumers a priority, because there are no consequences for not doing so.
What they claim for their defense is that they are victims too. There has been no apology nor compensation from them to date. No one can hold them accountable. Just like previous food scare episodes, this one will soon be forgotten, with the next one in the making.
To be fair, the blame cannot be put on the current government alone. The problem of food safety crosses many administrations in Taiwan.
However, the current solution of making retailers or food stall owners accountable for providing inspection certificates on their store front is a sham.
The solution to the problem lies in the hands of the government. It is the dog that wags the tail, not the other away around.
Until the government establishes its authority over the food industry and holds it accountable, the culture will remain.
The real victims are consumers who buy the toxic food, take it into their bodies, get sick and pay hefty prices in health costs.
However, they must bear some of the blame themselves too. Why, in all the years Taiwan has been a democracy, have so many citizens not discussed these affairs publicly?
Democracy should have a price tag and consequences, but if the voters are ignorant, and end up electing an inept government, they have only themselves to blame.
Yang Ji-charng
Columbus, Ohio
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
RSS