Far more than PR at stake in China's food crises

In the first half of the year it was fish, eel and other seafood imported from the mainland, which turned up on Hong Kong's doorstep containing malachite green, a banned chemical carcinogen.

Fast-forward to the latter part of 2006 and the chemical of choice is now Sudan Red, a registered cancer-causing dye, in eggs sourced from the mainland.

Add into the mix the regular dose of bird flu outbreaks, swine flu and contaminated vegetables, and it's difficult to find much positive to say about either China food safety standards, or the respective Governments' ability to communicate clearly with consumers on matters of risk and consumer safety.

Just weeks ago, the mainland Government issued a national notice instructing suppliers to clean up their industry, with the support of no fewer than six Government bodies, including the powerful State Administration of Industry and Commerce and the State Food and Drug Administration.

But the communication to consumers, in Hong Kong and other key export markets like Japan, remains sadly lacking, leading to media and public speculation, with an end result of misinformation.

According to food safety-experts, a key bone of contention is the lack of an effective communication system, in an industry which has largely shown itself to be reactive rather than proactive.

Another matter for consideration is the need for a sophisticated food tracing system, which would allow authorities to quickly pinpoint the source of the alleged contamination, thus minimising the overall risk to consumers and the public hysteria that typically accompanies a food health scare.

Broadly, there is, as yet, little in the way of a coordinated response to the food safety crisis.

Only when China's industry can demonstrate, in an open and accountable manner, its commitment to quality and public safety, will its food suppliers' reputation recover significant lost ground.