Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
19 October 2021 | Story Leonie Bolleurs | Photo Supplied
Prof Arno Hugo was recently elected as Vice-Chair of the Professional Advisory Committee (PAC) for Food Science in the SACNASP.

Prof Arno Hugo from the Department of Animal Science at the University of the Free State (UFS) was recently elected as Vice-Chair of the Professional Advisory Committee (PAC) for Food Science in the South African Council for Natural Scientific Professions (SACNASP).

SACNASP, similar to other professional bodies, is the registration, regulatory and enabling body for natural science professionals. The Natural Scientific Professions Act, 2003 (Act 27 of 2003) mandates SACNASP to register practising natural scientists in one of various fields of practice. Food science is one of 26 fields of practice gazetted for natural science.

Acknowledged as experienced professional

As Vice-Chair of the PAC, Prof Hugo – who is familiar with the processes – is acknowledged as an experienced professional to evaluate applications in this field of practice, where candidates apply for professional registration in Food Science.

He explains that the Advisory Committee ensures that candidates have adequate and relevant training in the natural sciences and in the field of food science. “For registration as professional natural scientist in this specific field, the appropriately qualified candidates must also have one to three years of working experience in the food industry, depending on the level of their food science qualification,” he says. 

Prof Hugo is also involved in interviewing candidates who want to register as professional food scientists via the route of recognition of prior learning (RPL). “Candidates with relevant qualifications can also register as professional food scientists via RPL if they have 10 years of working experience in this field,” he states.

Furthermore, he also evaluates the qualifications and work experience of foreign nationals applying for critical skills visas to work as food scientists in South Africa, due to a shortage of food scientists in South Africa. 

Food safety – a basic human right

According to Prof Hugo, consumers should not have to hope and trust that their food is safe to consume.

Food safety is internationally regarded as a basic human right. Prof Hugo says people must have access to clean (meaning safe) food and water at all times. “When food processing and preservation activities are performed at commercial level, or food – including processed food – is traded to consumers who have no control over the process, the consumers should not only ‘trust’ that their food is safe to be consumed after processing. 

“There need to be processes in place to ensure that consumers are served safe food and water.”

He believes that in order to achieve this, only sufficiently trained and registered scientists should be responsible for ensuring that food safety and quality principles are always applied and adhered to during the manufacture of food products.

“Individuals who want to work in this space must therefore show training and competency to take responsibility for risks such as food spoilage or food poisoning. We all remember the 2018 outbreak of Listeria in the meat processing industry, which caused the death of 200 consumers,” he adds. 

Importance of quality education and lifelong learning skills

Prof Hugo is of the opinion that it is very important that education and lifelong learning skills, through continuing professional development (CPD), are of a high standard and are available to scientists who are contributing to the country's growth, as well as social and economic development.

“The Minister of Higher Education, Science and Technology consults a statutory body such as the SACNASP for input on the science professions. SACNASP is also mentioned in the White Paper on Science and Technology as the custodian of CPD, through which additional skills/re-skilling of scientists are conducted,” he explains.

He says some of the advantages of being registered as a professional natural scientist with SACNASP include that you are recognised as a professional; there is public confidence in you as a scientist, you are more marketable; and you adhere to a code of conduct (you are trusted for ethical values).

Regarding the work he is doing as the Vice-Chair of the Professional Advisory Committee (PAC), Prof Hugo says: “I consider this voluntary work as a privilege and part of my community service to the industry that employs our students.”

News Archive

Position statement: Recent reporting in newspapers
2014-10-03

 

You may have read reports in two Afrikaans newspapers, regarding recent events at the University of the Free State (UFS). Sadly, those reports are inaccurate, one-sided, exaggerated and based not on facts, but on rumour, gossip and unusually personal attacks on members of the university management.

Anyone who spends 10 minutes on our Bloemfontein Campus would wonder what the so-called ‘crisis’ is about.

We are left with no choice other than to consider legal action, as well as the intervention of the South African Press Ombudsman, among other steps, to protect the good name of the institution and the reputation of its staff. No journalist has the right to launch personal and damaging attacks on a university and its personnel, whatever his or her motives, without being fair and factual. In this respect, the newspapers have a case to answer.

But here are the facts in relation to the reports:

  1. No staff member, whether junior or senior, is ever suspended without hard evidence in hand. Such actions are rare, and when done, are preceded by careful reviews of our Human Resource Policies, labour legislation and both internal and external legal advice. Then, and only then, is a suspension affected. A suspension, moreover, does not mean you are guilty and is a precautionary action to allow for the disciplinary investigation and process to be conducted, especially where there is a serious case to answer.
  2. At no stage was the Registrar instructed to leave the university; this is patently false and yet reported as fact. We specifically responded to the media that the Registrar does outstanding work for the university and that it is our intention for him to remain as our Registrar through the end of his contract in 2016.
  3. The Rector does not make decisions by himself. Senior persons, from the position of Dean, upwards, are appointed by statutory and other senior committees of the university and finally approved by Council. No rector can override the decision of a senior committee, and this has not happened at the UFS even in cases where the Rector serves as Chair of that committee. The impression of heavy-handed management at the top insults all our committee structures, including the Institutional Forum – the widest and most inclusive of stakeholder bodies at a university – which reports directly to Council on fairness and compliance of selection processes.
  4. In the case of senior appointments, Council makes the final decision. Council fully supports the actions taken on senior appointments, including a recent senior suspension. The fact that one Council member resigns just before the end of his term, whatever the real reason for this action, does not deter from the fact that the full Council in its last sitting approved the major staffing decisions brought before it. The image therefore that the two newspapers try to create of great turmoil and distress at the university, is completely unfounded.

Even if we wanted to, the university obviously cannot provide details about staffing decisions, especially disciplinary actions in process, since the rights of individuals should be protected in terms of the Human Resource Policies and procedures of the UFS. But that does not give any newspaper the right to speculate or state as fact that which is based on rumour or gossip, or to slander senior personnel of the university. For these reasons, we have been forced to seek legal remedy and correction as a matter of urgency.

Make no mistake, underlying much of the criticism of the university has been a distress about transformation at the UFS; in particular, the perception is created that white colleagues are losing their jobs. The evidence points in the opposite direction. Our progress with equity has been slow and we lag far behind most of the former white universities; that is a fact. More than 90% of our professors are white; most of our senior appointments at professorial level and as heads of department are still overwhelmingly white. Reasonable South Africans would agree that our transformation still has a long way to go and only the mean-spirited would contend otherwise. But based on the two Afrikaans newspaper reports, an impression is left of the aggressive rooting out of white colleagues.

In the past few years the academic standard of the university has significantly improved. We now have the highest academic pass rates in years, in part because we raised the academic standards for admission four years ago. We now have the highest rate of research publications, and among the highest national publication rate of scholarly books, in the history of the UFS. We have one of the most stable financial situations of any university in South Africa, with a strong balance sheet and growing financial reserves way beyond what we had before. We now attract top professors from around the country and other parts of the world, and we have the highest number of rated researchers, through the National Research Foundation, than ever before. And after the constant turmoil of a number of years ago, we now have one of the most stable campuses in South Africa. Those are the facts.

The UFS is also regarded around the world as a university that has become a model of transformation and reconciliation in the student body. The elections of our Student Representative Council are only the most visible example of how far we have come in our leadership diversity. Not a week goes by in which other universities, nationally and abroad, do not come to Kovsies to consult with us on how they can learn from us and deepen their own transformations, especially among students.

Rather than focus on what more than one senior journalist, in reference to the article in Rapport of 21 September 2014, rightly called ‘a hatchet job’ on persons and the university, here are the objective findings of a recent survey of UFS stakeholders: 92% endorse our values; 77% agree with our transformation; 78% believe we are inclusive; and 78% applaud our overall reputation index.  Those are very different numbers from a few years ago when the institution was in crisis.

This is our commitment to all our stakeholders: we will continue our model of inclusive transformation which provides opportunities for study and for employment for all South Africans, including international students and colleagues. We remain committed to our parallel-medium instruction in which Afrikaans remains a language of instruction; we are in fact the only medical school in the country that offers dual education and training in both Afrikaans and English for our students - not only English. We provide bursaries and overseas study opportunities to all our students, irrespective of race. And our ‘future professors’ programme is richly diverse as we seek the academic stars of the future.

We are not perfect as a university management or community. Where we make mistakes, we acknowledge them and try to do better the next time round. But we remain steadfast in our goal of making the UFS a top world university in its academic ambitions and its human commitments.

END

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept