The bill was stepped down after lawmakers opposed it, particularly its proposed prohibition of unbranded edible oils.
The House of Representatives has stepped down a bill seeking to prohibit the production, importation, distribution, sale and consumption of unbranded and unfortified edible oils in Nigeria.
The bill, sponsored by Chike Okafor (APC, Imo), was brought before the House for second reading but faced strong opposition from lawmakers who argued that its provisions could negatively affect rural producers and duplicate the functions of existing regulatory agencies.
The sponsor, while presenting the bill, said the health implications of consuming unbranded and unfortified edible oils had become alarming, citing the increasing incidence of heart-related diseases and other health challenges.
According to Mr Okafor, 67 per cent of Nigerians consume unbranded edible oil, while only 31 per cent of edible oils in circulation in the country are fortified.
He said the proposed legislation aimed to protect Nigerians from the harmful effects of consuming unsafe, unfortified edible oils.
“The statistics of harmful and damaging effects of unbranded oils on our people from the consumption of very poisonous, unfortified and unbranded edible oil are alarming. The number of patients with heart-related diseases and heart attacks is on the increase. Sixty-seven per cent of Nigerians consume unbranded edible oil.
“Only 31 per cent of edible oils in circulation in Nigeria are fortified. The World Health Organisation says fortification of staple foods is a proven cost-effective strategy to address micronutrient deficiencies and improve public health,” he said.
The bill sought to prohibit the production, importation, distribution and sale of unfortified and unbranded edible oils in Nigeria.
It also proposed that relevant authorities collaborate with research institutes, universities and state ministries to facilitate the production of improved seedlings and establish cooking oil processing mills through public-private partnerships.
Mr Okafor said the measures were intended to improve food safety, protect public health and reduce preventable deaths associated with the consumption of unsafe edible oils.
The bill further provided penalties, including imprisonment, for violations, as well as a transition period for existing businesses to comply with the proposed regulations.
He urged his colleagues to support the bill, saying the matter was one of public health and national importance.
“Let us go into the public hearing and then take on all the other issues that will come with it. But this is a call for the health of Nigerians,” he said.
However, several lawmakers opposed the bill, particularly its proposed prohibition of unbranded edible oils, saying the measure could adversely affect millions of rural Nigerians whose livelihoods depend on small-scale oil production.
Paschal Agbodike (APGA, Anambra) said the bill could take away the means of livelihood of rural dwellers whose products might not be registered with the relevant regulatory agencies.
He said many communities, particularly in the South-east, had a long tradition of producing palm oil and other edible oils through family-owned and local industries.
“Most of us were trained by our parents using local industries where they produce red oil, and he is telling us that the bill is calling to prohibit production,” Mr Agbodike said.
He questioned whether small-scale producers should be required to operate as large registered companies before they could legally produce and sell edible oils.
“Are you saying there must be a very big registered company before they can operate?” he asked.
Gaza Jonathan (LP, Nasarawa) also opposed the bill, arguing that its subject matter largely fell within the existing responsibilities of the National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC).
Mr Jonathan said the focus should instead be on strengthening legislative oversight over NAFDAC and other regulatory institutions to ensure that existing laws are properly enforced.
“When you look at this bill, I have been trying to see how I can marry it with the functions of NAFDAC. There is already an institution that is carrying out this function, which is NAFDAC,” he said.
He described the proposed legislation as potentially duplicating the responsibilities of existing agencies, noting that the Standards Organisation of Nigeria (SON) also had responsibilities relating to the quality of products manufactured and sold in the country.
Mr Jonathan, however, called for greater attention to food safety, saying regulatory enforcement should not focus primarily on drugs while neglecting the food consumed by Nigerians.
“Thus far, there has been a lot of emphasis on drugs. More emphasis now needs to be put into food,” he said.
Satomi Ahmad (APC, Borno) also argued that existing agencies, including SON, already had the mandate to regulate product quality.
He said the solution was to strengthen the capacity and operational framework of existing institutions rather than create additional legislation that could result in overlapping responsibilities.
“Instead of creating another bill, we should be strengthening the existing institutions’ modalities in monitoring and coordinating local content production, so that we will get what is best for our people to consume,” Mr Ahmad said.
Sada Soli (APC, Katsina), however, defended the bill, saying it did not seek to establish a new regulatory agency but was intended to address gaps in the existing legal framework.
He said the proposed legislation could complement existing laws, including those governing NAFDAC, rather than undermine them.
