Yesterday, in conversations with parents of school-aged children, one topic kept resurfacing: the case involving nearly 300 tonnes of diseased pork being funneled into markets and school kitchens. The shared reaction was one of anger and deep concern for their children.

That sentiment is understandable. For millions of parents, each morning begins with a quiet trust - that the meals served at school are safe, carefully controlled, and worthy of the responsibility entrusted to the system.

That trust carries even greater weight when, according to the Hanoi Department of Health, the city manages 2,181 public schools, serving more than one million meals every day.

A school meal system of such scale, if properly run, is not merely a logistical service. It reflects the capacity of modern urban governance.

This is why the discovery of a network distributing nearly 300 tonnes of pork infected with African swine fever into public markets - and further into the kitchens of hundreds of preschools and primary schools - is an especially serious and unacceptable case, directly affecting student health.

At the same time, this moment calls for a measured response. Rather than allowing fear to spread unchecked, it should be treated as an expensive lesson - one that exposes vulnerabilities in the school meal supply chain and demands urgent correction.

Nearly 3,600 diseased pigs, equivalent to close to 300 tonnes of pork, were transported from various provinces to Hanoi, slaughtered at centralized facilities, and then legalized for distribution into the market. Eight individuals have been prosecuted.

The Ministry of Agriculture and Environment described the case as severe, revealing gaps in slaughterhouse management, quarantine processes, and enforcement.

In response, more than 2,900 schools in Hanoi have simultaneously reviewed their entire supply chains for boarding meals.

What is particularly concerning is that the contaminated meat passed through multiple checkpoints that should have protected consumers - from transportation and slaughtering to quarantine certification, suppliers, and ultimately school kitchens.

This suggests that the issue is not a lack of regulations, but rather that critical control points were weakened or bypassed.

Still, caution is needed. One case, however serious, should not cast blanket suspicion over a system that delivers more than one million school meals daily in the capital - where most schools, administrators, and suppliers continue to operate in compliance with food safety standards.

During a recent visit to France, one striking observation stood out: nearly all fresh beef, and much of the pork sold on the market, comes with detailed traceability codes.

These allow authorities and consumers to track products back to farms, slaughterhouses, and distribution units.

For cattle, each animal carries an identification tag from birth. For pigs, management is strictly organized by herd batches and slaughter lots. By scanning a code on packaging or labels, one can trace the product’s journey across key points in the supply chain.

Seen in that light, traceability is not an abstract ideal - it is a practical, proven solution.

The lesson here is not to foster extreme suspicion, but to raise standards of transparency and traceability across the entire system.

First, slaughtering and quarantine processes must be tightened through digital technology. Each batch should carry an electronic identity, linking data from farms to transportation, slaughterhouses, and final suppliers. Quarantine certification should no longer rely solely on ink stamps, but become verifiable, real-time data.

Such data-driven governance creates a powerful safety barrier, reducing the risk of contaminated meat entering the market. With over one million school meals served daily in Hanoi, this is both necessary and achievable.

At the same time, the school meal supply chain must be reorganized to prioritize traceability, compliance history, and actual supply capacity - rather than simply low cost. A supplier competing primarily on price, without robust traceability, cannot be a sustainable choice for student meals.

There is also a need to build a shared data system connecting education, health, agriculture, and law enforcement agencies to monitor school food supply chains. Managing more than one million meals per day cannot continue to rely on paper records, manual sign-offs, and fragmented inspections.

Schools themselves should be granted greater autonomy. When concerns arise about food sources, principals must have the authority to immediately suspend deliveries or contracts pending verification. In food safety management, rapid response often matters more than procedural completeness.

Finally, parents must be engaged as active participants in oversight, not merely passive recipients of information. Supplier lists, traceability documents, menus, and portion details should be made transparent and easily accessible, enabling joint supervision between families and schools.

The case involving nearly 300 tonnes of diseased pork will undoubtedly be handled strictly under the law. But what matters more is what comes after.

The system must be strengthened so that similar violations have little chance of recurring.

After this costly stumble, the hope is that gaps will be swiftly addressed - so that each morning, parents can once again send their children to school with confidence and peace of mind.

Tu Giang