At last, cassava flour inclusion bill scales through

Cassva Bread

·       NAFDAC, SON ask for standard control on fertilizer

The cassava flour (mandatory inclusion in flour production) bill 2016 has scaled through the senate just as two other bills namely  the bill for an Act to provide for the establishment of the National Livestock identification and Management Bureau and the one for an Act to regulate the manufacture, importation, distribution and quality control of fertilizer were set to be amended for more inclusion by stakeholder before passage  by the Senate Committee on Agriculture chaired by  Sen. Abdullahi  Adamu at the public hearing  held by the committee at the National Assembly last week at Abuja.

The cassava flour bill  scale through despite opposition from flour millers who rather wanted all grains to be included in the bill rather than only high quality cassava flour.

 The cassava flour (Mandatory inclusion flour production) bill of 2016 was sponsored by Senator Rose Oko with three objectives that include (i) to provide a legal and regulatory frame work for the mandatory inclusion of cassava flour into edible flour production Nigeria; (ii) Provide incentives to encourage cassava farming and (iii) create a sustainable market for cassava flour which many stakeholders commended but pointed out that the political will during former President Obasanjo era had once made the flour millers to comply to off taking  10% High Quality Cassava Flour to supplement  wheat import gulping billions of dollars and creating jobs in the exporting countries.

The Nigerian Flour Millers Association through its representative from Golden Penny objected that the edible flour in the country should not be limited to HQCF inclusion alone, but rather extended to other grains like sorghum, millet and guinea corn  pointed that other grains also have better nutritional values.

The committee did not succumb to the position of Nigerian millers on the inclusion of other grains as they argued that the bill presented was specific as asking for an act to provide for a legal and regulatory framework for the inclusion of 10% cassava flour in the edible flour production in order to encourage farming and create market for HQCF presented in this context would not be accepted.

It was not only the senate committee that disagreed with the millers, the position of the Cassava Grower Association of Nigeria as stated in the memo submitted was in the favour of the bill as the National President, Pastor Segun Adewunmi pointed that the bill was very specific to cassava inclusion only saying asking for other grains inclusion on the ground of the health benefit better than the cassava was absurd.

Pastor Adewunmi said that the “benefit of 40% cassava flour inclusion in bread, experts have proven that cassava bread guarantee better health than the predominantly white wheat bread” stressed that Nigeria would save over 300 billion naira from yearly import of white wheat and jobs of over 500,000 farmers and 100,000 cassava processors by the time this act is put into practice. 

One of the prominent processors, Pastor Soladoye Timothy also faulted the stance of flour millers in his chat with Food farm News saying the opposing association has always been taking a hard position against  cassava inclusion into wheat as he went on to commend the hard stand of the National Assembly towards ensuring the passage of the bill for legal frame work for effective production and consumption of HQCF in Nigeria flour edibles with all parties at the value chains complying with the rules and regulations by the time is properly made effective.

Pastor Timothy said the battle for inclusion of HQCF in wheat had being a long battle since the era of President Olusegun Obasanjo whose regime put enforcement force in place with positive impact within the short period of the policy implementation and which witnessed unprecedented compliance by flour millers who are the off takers.

 He stressed the need for deliberate political will of the Government to make the act work for the development of the nation’s economy and job creation adding his association was absolutely in support of the 2016 bill presented for an act by the Senate Committee on Agriculture for cassava flour inclusion to wheat edible.

The positions of NAFDAC and Standard Organization of Nigeria (SON) may have halted the progress the bill for an act to regulate the manufacture, importation, distribution and quality control of fertilizer in Nigeria as request were made for amendment that would accommodate more clauses for its effective and proper implementation so as to ensure robust effective control and quality monitoring by appropriate agencies.

Also, the livestock bill asking for an act to provide for the establishment of the National Livestock Identification and Management Bureau was out-rightly rejected by the Federal Ministry of Agriculture & Rural Development (FMARD) under the leadership of Chief Audu Ogbeh and other major stakeholders who argued that all the prayers of the bill have been adequately taken care of saying the passage would amount to duplication of functions in the face of limited resources by the federal government.

Both the view of the FMARD and Animal Science Association of Nigeria (ASAN) aligned with the position taken by Nigerian Institute of Animal Science (NIAS) on the floor as “ 2.1  the sum of the provision of section 7,8 and 9 is that the bureau shall be exclusively saddled with the responsibility of Animal identification, traceability, and registration in addition to other related responsibility. Note that animal identification, traceability and registration are core animal husbandry practices. By the combined effect of section 2 (f), (g) and (h) of NIAS Act no. 26 of 2007. The NIAS is the only parastatal of the FMARD vested with the above function. Very instructive is section 2 (h) regarding the functions of the Institute which thus to promote the production of the high quality protein through scientific methods and to regulate all issues pertaining to animal Husbandry in Nigeria. Any attempt to confer the above responsibility on another agency will amount to duplication of roles which inevitably will breed chaos in the livestock industry”

Other agreed positions of the stakeholders in line with FMARD is stated as “the position of the department of animal husbandry services in respect of the proposed National Livestock Identification and Management Bureau bill are as stated below.

 

“The Federal Department of Animal Husbandry Services having gone through the bill, find it blinkered with far reaching consequences for constituted authorities, extant law and acts. The following observations highlight some of the consequences and aberration in the bill.

1.1    The two Departments: Animal Production and Husbandry Services and livestock departments mentioned in part 11 item 4 of the bill no longer exist in the FMARD. The existing Department as 2017 is Animal Husbandry Services (DAHS), Veterinary and Pest Control Services (VPCS), Nigeria Agricultural Quarantine services (NAQS).

1.2    The proposal in part 11 item 4 that the Bureau shall comprise animal production and husbandry services and livestock department of the FMARD did not take into cognizance the statutory mandate of the Department of Animal Husbandry Services which includes livestock identification, traceability, organization, registration and livestock population census as just one of its mandate (Please see the function no XXII of DAPHS). It also presupposes that the function contained in the bill is the only function of the two Departments. The statutory mandates of these two departments go beyond identification, management, traceability, registration and livestock census.

1.3    The functions, duties and power of the Bureau proposed in Part 111 of the bill will amount to duplication of effort with other existing structures of government and conflict considerably with the provision of the Federal Civil Service Commission and other regulatory agencies.

1.4    The definition of Minister and Ministry in Part 1 item 31 and 32 give the impression that there is a Minister of livestock and Federal Ministry of Livestock considering also that the bill in part 11 item 21c proposes that one person representing the Federal Ministry of Agriculture shall be a member of the Bureau.

1.5    The composition of the Bureau and structure proposed in Part V111 items 32-58 of the bill already exist with the Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development and the Departments (DAPHS, VPCS and NAQS) and structures just require strengthening and adequate funding to carry out their statutory mandates within the ministry.

1.6    The bill in part (V111) item 25-33 is proposing cessation of services of agencies, bodies or organization of the FG currently mandated to carry out functions the Bureau proposes to undertake. Most importantly, the bill is proposing to repeal and replace all extant laws and act of the National Assembly already enacted to carry out the functions the bill proposes to undertake. Thus the bill clearly undermines the National the National Assembly and presupposes that these extant laws and acts would become null and void without due process”

“The federal Department of Animal Husbandry Services opposes the bill under consideration and proposes the following in place of the bill.

2.1 the creation of the ministry of Livestock and Fisheries as recommended in the just concluded National Conference on Transformation of the Livestock industry as is the case in Kenya, Tanzania, Ethiopia, Botswana and Zambia with well-developed livestock industry.

2.2 the ministry of livestock will comprise the relevant Departments in charge of livestock and related resources and would also have livestock identification and management department to carry out animal identification, traceability and registration”