A bad batch of an injectible antibiotic called Xinfu (clindamycin phosphate glucose) appears to have killed 13 people in China. (SCMP 8/10/2006). Inexplicably, the official government toll is 7 in the provinces Hunan, Sichuan, Hebei, Heilongjiang, Shaanxi, and Hubei provinces. (Xinhua 8/10). There have also been severe adverse reactions in more than 80 patients. (Xinhua 8/9). Of course, the government has denied any cover-up. The company responsible for the bad antibiotic, Anhui Huayuan Worldbest Biology Pharmacy Co, has been ordered by the State Food and Drug Administration to recall all of the products, but millions of units are outstanding.

The government’s handling of this matter raises questions about how truthful and open about the extent of such emergencies and its own handling of them, similar to the handling of SARS a couple of years back and the cover-up of the Songhua river spill. The extent of such drug safety problems are not new. There have been serious incidents involving fake drugs as well as contaminated foods in the past.

What is particularly interesting, I think, is the parallel to the environmental area. There, the regulatory system has also badly failed the public. Yet, for both, drug safety and pollution control, the central government appears to have made significant statements of concern and sems to take the issue seriously. In fact, officials statements calling for more inspection and enforcement, as well as blaming the problems on “local protectionism” sounds awfully much like the rethoric on environmental matters. (Xinhua 8/9)

Please see http://unfccc.int/secretariat/employment/vacancies/items/1216.php

The application deadline is September 18, 2006.

With the help of Lori of our IT Department, I have been revamping my personal website at Vermont Law School (http://www.vermontlaw.edu/faculty/tyang). It is still a work in progress, so some parts of the web have not been changed/updated, yet. However, on one of the web pages, the beginning of each of my Citizen Yang blog entry will be excerpted. Hopefully, this should make the blog accessible to folks in places where blogspot is blocked.

An AP report last week that discussed the China’s trans-Pacific contribution U.S. air pollution made for an angry reaction by a SEPA official. According to EPA estimates, on any given day, 25% to 33% of Los Angeles particulate matter air pollution originates from China. Li Xinmin, director of the Pollution Control Department of SEPA, said that such assertions were “irresponsible.” (SCMP 8/4/2006 & Xinhua 8/4).

This little dispute is only the latest fall-out from issues of trans-Pacific air pollution. Last spring US EPA Administrator Steve Johnson, while on a visit to China, said that part of US mercury pollution originated from China. Chinese media took that to mean that the US was blaming China for its mercury pollution problems. Johnson had to do some mighty back-pedalling. The story went pretty much unreported in the US.

Also, in another demonstration of the ferocity of public “campaigns” in China – about 50,000 dogs were slaughtered in Yunnan province (in southern China) after 3 people died of rabies. (NY Times 8/2 and SCMP 8/4) According to the AP, dogs were taken from their owners, even while they were being walked, and beaten to death. After 5 days, only police and military dogs had been spared. In fact, the SCMP reported today also that Jining City in Shandong Province would engage in a similar extermination campaign since 16 people in the city have died of Rabies over the last 8 months. The city has about 500,000 dogs.

For details, see http://www.fordfound.org/employment/jobdetail.cfm?id=128 . Deadline is 10/20/2006.

SEPA announced yesterday that they will open 11 new regional offices (including 6 offices focused on radiation safety). (Link to SEPA (Chinese) announcement, and Xinhua article.) At a minimum, there’ll be better communication and information flow between provincial/local events and Beijing. But unless the creation of the regional offices comes with increased staffing, resources, and authority, it’s not clear how much of a difference these changes will make in terms of regulatory implementation and enforcement.

Here’s an interesting item from the China Daily: A fifty-year-old law professor from Dalian University of Technology took an almost 1-hour dip in the Arctic. The reason why? Just because he enjoys winter swimming.

Today, the SCMP carried an article about a quite remarkable environmental conference sponsored by SEPA (State Environmental Protection Administration). (SCMP 6/19/2006, “Public services sidelined by growth, say scholars”) Among the speakers were a number of high level officials, including “National People’s Congress vice-chairwoman Gu Xiulian , Sepa viceminister Wang Yuqing , Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference vice-chairman Zhou Tienong and Song Jian , chairman of the All-China Environment Federation, an NGO under Sepa.” All of them criticized the weak efforts of the central government’s to get environmental problems under control, compared to efforts to promote economic development and foreign investment. Serving out the strongest criticism, however, seemed to be two professors from the China University of Political Science and Law (CUPSL), professor Jiang Ping and professor Wang Canfa. Jiang Ping, according to SCMP, is a former president of CUPSL and Wang Canfa is the director of the Center for Legal Assistance to Pollution Victims (CLAPV) (Wang was recently featured prominently on the CBC documentary “China Rises” as an environmental crusader). (Wang has agreed to speak at a VLS conference on China and the Environment next March.)

While criticism of environmental degradation issues is heard all the time, I have seldomly heard it being directed so squarely at the central government. It’s quite courageous to speak out like this, but I also hope for the sake of both Jiang and Wang that this will not get them into trouble.

But there is also another issue that this raises – I wonder whether criticism of the central government’s environment policies is going to a new level. In my opinion, in the past, the central government has largely received a “pass” in criticism about its environmental policy and law enforcement. Mostly, people (or at least many of the environmental folks I have met) have accepted the argument that China’s serious environmental degradation is necessary to advance’s its economic development. Alternatively, folks have blamed the local governments for failing to implement central government policies. The article might be an indication of a change.

Here’s an excerpt from the article:

Jiang Ping , a former president of the China University of Political Science and Law, said the prolonged debate over the pace and direction of China’s reforms had highlighted the government’s failure to protect public interest. “The review of [China’s economic] reforms in recent years has reminded us that the insufficient supply of public goods has resulted in widespread dissatisfaction among the people and even mass [protests],” he told an environmental forum yesterday.

Professor Jiang said the government, which had been obsessed with investment and economic growth, should shoulder most of the blame for worsening pollution, and increasingly expensive education and health care – the main causes of the soaring number of street protests on the mainland.

“The change in roles [required by administrative reform] means the government must deal with the rising demand for public services rather than placing too much emphasis on how to attract foreign direct investment,” he said.

His views were supported by Ding Yuanzhu , a senior researcher from the National Development and Reform Commission, and Wang Canfa , an environmental expert at the China University of Political Science and Law.

Both Dr Ding and Professor Wang lashed out at the authorities’ monopoly on policy-making.

Dr Ding, from the commission’s Academy of Macroeconomic Research, said the lack of a democratic decision-making mechanism that involved all parties concerned – especially the public – should be addressed in the government-led administrative reform.

Professor Wang added that the government was wrongly using its role to oversee security and social equity to push for faster economic growth. Professor Jiang warned that rampant environmental accidents and disasters, and revelations about the country’s ecological degradation had seriously undermined the authorities’ credibility.

“While forced evictions are caused by the government’s pursuit of development, pollution – which has harmed public health – highlights the authorities’ lack of accomplishment and affects its credibility,” he said.

More than 300 government officials, business leaders, scholars and NGOs attended the forum organised by the State Environmental Protection Administration (Sepa) yesterday.

The forum, which focused on building an environmentally friendly society, heard a range of stark warnings exposing the extent of pollution and harsh criticism of the country’s single-minded pursuit of economic growth.

The Central government is planning to spend 1.3 trillion yuan on pollution control measures for the next 5 year plan (2006-2010. (SCMP 2/19/2006.) The announcement was made by Mao Rubai, director of the Environment and Resources Committee of the NPC. The statement was the first time this information has been made public. That comes out to 260 billion yuan per year, about 1.6 percent of GDP. It compares with 1.4 percent of GDP spending on pollution control measures in 2004.

The magnitude of the SEPA budget is designed to make-up for inadequate spending in the last 5-year plan and continued environmental deterioration.

There was another pollution spill, this time of 60 tons of coal tar into the Dasha river. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-5890943,00.html) This makes it 76 spills within the last 6 months.