In recent years, food scandals, including the ongoing tainted lard incident, have not only destroyed the credibility of the food industry, but also damaged public trust in the government as a watchdog for food safety. As the public questions why the industry is yet to learn its lesson, a key problem behind the scandals has come to light — the “profit-only” culture, in which the government plays an essential role.
The latest food scare began when oil producer Chang Guann Co was found to have manufactured lard oil using recycled waste oil, affecting more than 1,000 downstream food manufacturers, restaurants and street vendors.
At the same time, a tea retailer that has been in business for more than a century was found to be mixing lower-priced imported teas and selling them as more expensive, local high-altitude teas.
In April, beef, pork and lamb were found to have been injected with chemicals and water to increase their weight; and in February, popular hotpot chain Tripod King was found cooking its soup with additives, despite advertising its use of only vegetables and fruits.
Last year, the public was overwhelmed by the adulterated oil case, the high-end Top Pot Bakery scandal and the news that Chyuan Shun Food Enterprise Co, a major rice producer, was caught selling low-grade imported rice as high-quality locally grown rice — for the 18th time.
Lack of tighter regulations as well as lax enforcement contributed to the series of food safety crises, but at the root of the problem lies the profit-only culture.
There is an old saying in Taiwan: “There will always be people doing business at the risk of being beheaded, but no one would do business that loses money.”
Undoubtedly, people run businesses to make money, but besides making money, businesses must also ensure ethical conduct.
Unfortunately, ethics are not highlighted in education or in government policies.
Taking a look into the undergraduate curriculum of a business school in Taiwan — that of the National Sun Yat-sen University, for example — professional knowledge, including marketing, financial management, organizational management, business law, accounting, information management and business strategy are taught as required courses, but business ethics is not.
At government level, officials and lawmakers are reluctant to toughen regulations on business, often siding with businesses — especially large corporations — when they break laws or when environmental or labor disputes occur.
When organizing events, one of the top priorities is to assess possible economic benefits and how profit can be maximized.
For instance, during each inaugural ceremony for the Hakka Tung Blossom Festival, the Hakka Affairs Council minister always says that the previous year’s festival was a success, not because of how it had helped preserve or enhance understanding of the Hakka culture, but rather because of the profits that the participating businesses had made.
When the Tourism Bureau created an uproar among Amis Aborigines in Hualien County as it arbitrarily planned to make the tribe’s sacred ritual of Ilisin a tourist event, and even tried to have minority dance troupes from China perform at the Amis event, it defended itself as merely wanting to attract more tourists to stimulate the local economy.
Financial incentives are hard to ignore, but there are more important values that should be prioritized ahead of producing profits.
If we cannot get rid of the tainted culture, we may never be able to get rid of tainted foods.
The Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) between the US, India, Australia and Japan has found a new lease of life after China’s militarization of the South China Sea, acquisition and fortification of a new — and China’s first — naval facility in Djibouti, and growing naval activities in the Indian Ocean. With the Chinese navy consolidating its presence in the Indian Ocean and building a base in Djibouti, as well as foraying into the Mediterranean and Baltic seas, major European powers have been unsettled. France and Britain are already busy stepping up their naval presence in the Indo-Pacific region. In February,
Former US secretary of state Mike Pompeo delivered a very short, succinct and accurate speech in regards to the US relationship with Taiwan in November last year. This information has again angered Beijing, which has stated that the existence of a free and independent Taiwan will not be tolerated. Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Wang Wenbin (汪文斌) has said Pompeo’s language is interfering with the sovereignty of China. Pompeo was stating the facts. Taiwan has never been a part of the People’s Republic of China or the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), therefore it is not a territory of China. The
Where is the world’s disposition today vis-a-vis the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)? Is it similar to that in Munich, September 1938 when Europe’s powers appeased Adolf Hitler over the “Sudetenland,” despite existing treaty commitments? In other words, analogous to the failure to recognize the PRC’s aggressive intent and to mobilize in response to serial CCP outrages, e.g., Tiananmen and South China Sea; suppression of Hong Kong in violation of a treaty agreement; the internment and genocide of the Uighurs, and its complicity in the death of nearly 3 million people globally via its Wuhan Coronavirus. Do these “passes” now amount to
The EU on Wednesday cohosted a Global Cooperation and Training Framework workshop with Taiwan and the US. They discussed the restructuring of the global supply chain and joint financing of small and medium-sized enterprises. This was the first time the EU, represented by European Economic and Trade Office in Taiwan Director Filip Grzegorzewski, cohosted such an event. Launched in 2015, the framework aims to help bring Taiwan’s expertise to the global stage. Essentially, it was designed to find ways to include Taiwan in global efforts, as it remains excluded from international organizations. With Taiwan’s successful containment of COVID-19 and its vital role