King Car Industrial Co, a reputable company in the food business, chose to purchase ingredients for its powdered instant beverages and soups from Duqing Inc in China’s Shandong Province as a means of diversifying sourcing and ensuring a constant supply of raw materials in the face of rising prices and commodity shortages.
When news came out about contaminated milk powder from China, King Car asked Duqing if melamine — an industrial chemical used to make plastics and fertilizers — was present in any of its products.
Duqing gave its word that there was none. Nevertheless, in the interests of consumer health and safety and acting on its own initiative, King Car sent samples of all its products to the Food Industry Research and Development Institute for testing.
The firm’s powdered instant beverages tested positive for melamine.
As soon as King Car received the results, the firm took a number of steps to resolve the issue.
It informed the Department of Health, recalled affected products, checked its remaining stock of possibly tainted items and kept them under lock and key.
The company also set up a hotline to deal with consumer inquiries and complaints and announced its willingness to accept responsibility for and pay compensation to any consumers who had suffered ill effects.
In contrast, at least until Thursday last week, Duqing covered up the facts by sending King Car a written guarantee that its products did not contain melamine.
There is a stark contrast between these two companies — one Taiwanese and the other Chinese — in their attitude to consumer protection and their willingness, or reluctance, to accept corporate responsibility for their actions.
I have a few suggestions on how to deal with this case and companies that behave like this.
We should encourage companies to take the initiative to send suspicious product samples for testing, and recall all products and take remedial measures whenever contamination is found.
At the same time, we should condemn companies that ignore the safety of customers and cover up the facts. In such cases, the Department of Health should promptly inform the World Health Organization, while consumers’ groups should report such incidents to the global consumer protection body Consumers International.
Taiwan’s Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF) should immediately protest to Beijing through existing channels of communication.
Second, the government should test all processed and unprocessed foodstuffs imported from China to safeguard consumer health.
In the spirit of corporate accountability, importers should test samples of their products or send them to qualified laboratories for testing before placing them on the market.
The SEF and China’s Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait should negotiate terms for testing foodstuffs traded in both directions and establish a procedure of mutual notification.
Duqing hid the truth and had no regard for the health of its customers. It knew that its products were contaminated with melamine but issued a document guaranteeing that they were melamine-free. This constitutes a criminal act.
Importers should file suit for compensation, because crimes like these should not be tolerated.
Lee Shen-yi is honorary chairman of the Consumers’ Foundation.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG AND EDDY CHANG
US President Donald Trump has gotten off to a head-spinning start in his foreign policy. He has pressured Denmark to cede Greenland to the United States, threatened to take over the Panama Canal, urged Canada to become the 51st US state, unilaterally renamed the Gulf of Mexico to “the Gulf of America” and announced plans for the United States to annex and administer Gaza. He has imposed and then suspended 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico for their roles in the flow of fentanyl into the United States, while at the same time increasing tariffs on China by 10
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
Last week, 24 Republican representatives in the US Congress proposed a resolution calling for US President Donald Trump’s administration to abandon the US’ “one China” policy, calling it outdated, counterproductive and not reflective of reality, and to restore official diplomatic relations with Taiwan, enter bilateral free-trade agreement negotiations and support its entry into international organizations. That is an exciting and inspiring development. To help the US government and other nations further understand that Taiwan is not a part of China, that those “one China” policies are contrary to the fact that the two countries across the Taiwan Strait are independent and
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
RSS