An amendment made by the UK to the code of practice (CoP) for basmati rice, which assures its quality for consumers there, has triggered a controversy.
The All India Rice Exporters Association (AIREA) says the change could benefit India, but experts have questioned it charging the UK with diluting the area of cultivation and questioning the credibility of the Seed Act, 1966.
Why the CoP
The CoP was introduced in 2005 by the UK Rice Association (UKRA) along with British Rice Millers Association and British Retail Consortium to “safeguard the reputation of basmati rice marketed in the UK”.
The code was evolved as imported basmati was alleged to be 50 per cent impure several decades ago. The UKRA came up with the COP, which was followed across the European Union specifying that basmati “could be no more than 7 per cent impure”. It also listed 15 permitted varieties — nine of them traditional and six that were modern cultivars.
The CoP was implemented through DNA fingerprinting developed by Bangor University, Wales. “The system worked well until 2017, when the code was updated to add 25 new modern cultivars. This followed an explosion in new breeding in the 2000s and 2010s,” said Katherine Steele, senior lecturer in sustainable crop protection at Bangor University, in an internal newsletter.
Alternative DNA markers
Steele said the university had developed alternative DNA markers for fingerprinting that showed six of the new varieties — five from India and one from Pakistan — were not properly bred for fragrance. As a result, these six have now been de-notified or taken off the list of basmati varieties.
But experts such as S Chandrasekaran, author of “Basmati Rice: The Natural History Geographical Indication”, contend that the DNA marking is a new invention by the British and its efficiency is yet to be proved.
“What samples were drawn? How? What were the parameters? Who authenticated the findings?’ wondered Chandrasekaran.
Striking feature
A striking feature of the amended code is that the British Rice Millers Association is no more part of the code. “The amended code says it will ‘strive to uphold the reputation’ from ‘concerned to safeguard the reputation. The change in the word from ‘concern’ to ‘strive’ indicates more action might follow,” he said.
The code says the All-India Rice Exporters Association (AIREA) was consulted. “The amended code has a list of 35 varieties of basmati. The six varieties deleted are no longer being used. The new code will strengthen our hold in the basmati market. We had been taking this up with them,” said AIREA executive director Vinod Kaul.
Chandrasekaran said there are a few issues that pertain to India’s credibility in the new code. “How can the UK arbitrarily delist seed varieties that figure in the Seed Act, 1966? This means the credibility of the Indian authority is being questioned,” he said.
Basmati boundary
Second, the code has diluted the boundary of basmati which was referred to as Indo-Gangetic plains. “The code issued in 2017 mentions basmati-rice growing States in the region. It has now been amended as ‘on both sides of the Indian and Pakistani borders’,” he said.
In particular it has dropped “which currently includes Punjab (on both sides of the Indian and Pakistani border), Jammu, Haryana, Uttaranchal and western Uttar Pradesh in India”, the expert said.
Kaul said there was no change in the Indo-Gangetic plain. “The area remains the same,” he said.
Chandrasekaran said there were two other issues with the amended code. “One, APEDA is India’s nodal agency for geographical indication (GI) tag. Why was it not consulted on this issue?
Bias towards Pakistan?
“Two, the amended code is in contravention and a dilution to the notification the Agriculture Ministry issued on September 18, 2017, on basmati rice-growing areas and refers to the GI certificate issued on February 15, 2016,” he said.
No comment was received from official sources who businessline approached for comment until this report was published.
An analyst said the UK and European Union seem to have “a bias in favour of Pakistan”. Pakistan has not notified any standard or anything related to basmati.
“Eurofin labs is conducting tests in Pakistan on the quality of basmati in the absence of Islamabad not specifying standards for the fragrant rice. Is the amended code serving the interests of Pakistan?” the analyst, who spoke on condition of anonymity, asked.
Factual errors
Chandrasekaran said the new code had factual errors. While specifying the removal of five Indian varieties, mentions Punjab basmati. “India has notified five Punjab basmati varieties and there is no ‘Punjab basmati’ notified by India. The 2017 code twice mentions Punjab basmati 2. Maybe, it is a clerical error,” he said.
The analyst objected to UK Department and Environment, Food and Rural Affairs funding the research team of Bangor University along with the Rice Association as it meant “indirect support”.
On other hand, Steele said she has been arguing for allowing not more than one per cent of impurity in basmati rice, the rule that applies for many products including non-genetically modified foods.
“There’s no real reason for the basmati exception, and it is also arguably easier to enforce a 1 per cent rule because of the way that DNA testing works,” she said.