Food safety laws may soon get sharper teeth — and not everyone agrees with the plan. The Health Minister has called for an urgent review of the Food and Safety Act, arguing that it should include immediate, on-the-spot fines for those who break the rules. This move, he says, would close long-standing gaps in how food safety violations are handled. But here’s where it gets controversial: Should businesses face instant penalties without lengthy court proceedings, or does that open the door to unfair enforcement?
Over the past three years, the Ministry of Health has taken legal action in 35 cases involving breaches of the Food and Safety Act. These prosecutions resulted in roughly $25,000 in fines. However, the current law has serious limitations — it only allows penalties to be imposed through court proceedings. In other words, if someone sells contaminated food today, it might take months or even years before they actually face consequences. That’s a delay the Health Minister, Dr. Ratu Atonio Lalabalavu, believes the system can no longer afford.
Dr. Lalabalavu made these remarks in Parliament while responding to Opposition MP Jone Usamate, who asked how health inspectors guarantee the quality of meat products sold in supermarkets. The Minister explained that, under current regulations, inspectors cannot impose fixed penalties on the spot — a measure that many other countries already use to keep food businesses in check. He confirmed that the Ministry is actively reviewing the Act to include such powers and make enforcement both faster and more effective.
Presenting the latest statistics, Dr. Lalabalavu revealed that 32 cases were recorded against a wide range of food-related businesses — from coffee shops and takeaways to supermarkets, dairy outlets, and street vendors. Together, these cases led to fines totaling $20,000. Three additional cases involved the sale or preparation of food under unhygienic conditions, highlighting ongoing weaknesses in food safety compliance. “This shows exactly why tougher oversight is needed,” the Minister said, stressing the importance of maintaining public trust in the food supply chain.
In the last fiscal year alone, inspectors visited more than 2,600 food establishments across the country. Those inspections led to 372 Abatement Notices and six closure orders — evidence, the Minister said, that his team is serious about raising safety standards. Yet, he warned that more work lies ahead as new risks and enforcement challenges continue to emerge within the food system.
During the debate, Opposition MP Rinesh Sharma raised a troubling issue: some supermarkets allegedly switch off their freezers at night to save energy, potentially putting meat products at risk. Dr. Lalabalavu responded that inspectors handle such cases individually and often carry out surprise visits. Particularly when there are reports of unstable power supply, his team conducts unannounced checks to ensure food remains safe for consumers. “We do these spot checks whenever and wherever they are needed,” he said.
Still, this proposal raises an important question for the public: Should inspectors be allowed to issue immediate fines — or would that give too much unchecked power to regulators? The debate over how far the government should go in policing food safety is far from settled. What do you think — should the system favor speed or fairness?
