Online Reporter
Bulawayo City Council’s decision to endorse a sweeping ban on firewood-fuelled braais at commercial food outlets is such a welcome move. It is not only a regulatory change — it is a cultural reset, and it will be experienced in the real world as cost, pressure and potential closures.
The proposed policy, described as an effort to tighten health and food safety standards, is built around a clear logic: firewood braais create smoke and pollutants; poor infrastructure and inconsistent food-handling practices can lead to contamination; and unsafe fire practices can trigger harm to patrons, staff and surrounding property.
The council argues that the “proliferation of braaiing activities” has outpaced the regulatory framework, creating conditions that require stronger oversight under the Public Health Act and local by-laws. Generally, the public health rationale is difficult to deny.
The policy rests on concerns echoed by health experts and environmentalists: burning firewood releases nitrogen oxides and carbon monoxide, pollutants linked to respiratory illnesses such as asthma and bronchitis. In a city where many residents already face air quality challenges, these health impacts are not theoretical. When council says it is mandated to ensure that food articles are wholesome and free from disease, that is a standard of governance every city must uphold.
Stricter requirements for washable floors and walls, stainless steel working tables, cutting boards, running water, hand-washing facilities, separate toilets and prescribed cooking-space layouts are all reasonable health measures. The same applies to prohibiting careless disposal of ashes and ensuring that fires are extinguished after use. Nobody should celebrate a system that normalises contamination, exposes patrons to fire risks, or treats food safety as an optional luxury.
The policy does not merely ban firewood. It also proposes a comprehensive system of approvals and certificates: town planning clearance, approved building plans, fire clearance and occupation certificates before commencing operations. Braai operators would need council approvals and registration for braai activities in addition to other licences.
There are also minimum infrastructure requirements, including minimum braai space of 20 square metres and a sitting area of at least 10 square metres. Standards for distance from walls or boundaries — 2,4 metres — are intended to reduce fire hazards, and restrictions on combustible materials within three metres further signal the seriousness of safety.
These are not minor regulatory adjustments. They require engineering, permits, inspections, and investment. For a small braai operator who built a business with improvised structures and limited capital, the policy may function as a de facto shutdown unless phased timelines, technical assistance and financial support are introduced.
If council expects immediate compliance without offering transitional arrangements, it may inadvertently create a two-tier environment: the formal operators who can pay for compliance, and the informal operators who survive by bending rules — precisely the cycle that good regulation tries to break.
Some of the policy’s details are particularly telling. Ashes are not to be disposed of in refuse bins but must be transported to landfill sites at operators’ own cost. Fire accelerants are also set to be banned, and operators must provide fire-fighting equipment as recommended by the chief fire officer, ensuring fires are completely extinguished after use.
These provisions show an understanding that fire safety and environmental responsibility are not only about what fuel is used but also about how businesses manage the aftermath of cooking. However, when costs are shifted to small operators — such as landfill transport — council must recognise that the “small” operational burdens collectively become significant for businesses that are not subsidised.
The city is right to regulate unsafe food handling and harmful smoke exposure, but it must regulate with implementation discipline.
First, council should publish a clear implementation timeline with realistic deadlines. The transition must be phased, allowing operators to upgrade rather than facing one sudden regulatory deadline that forces closures. If compliance takes time, then enforcement should follow the timeline rather than outrun it.
Second, council should consider support mechanisms. These could include partnerships with suppliers to reduce the cost of compliant grills and installation. Even simple interventions — such as group purchasing arrangements, technical workshops, or standard designs for compliant braai stands — could reduce uncertainty and cost.
Third, the city should strengthen advisory and inspection services. Operators cannot comply if the rules are only delivered as threats. Training on food hygiene, hand-washing facilities, storage practices, fire safety protocols, and correct fuel handling should be treated as part of regulation, not as an afterthought.
Fourth, exemptions or graded compliance might be necessary for smaller operators, depending on how council defines “commercial food outlets” and how braai spots are categorised. If policy applies broadly to restaurants, takeaways, clubs and recreational facilities, then classification should be precise enough to avoid punishing businesses that pose minimal risk in practice while ignoring high-risk operations elsewhere.
Finally, council must communicate the policy with honesty about what it will cost and why. If residents understand that the goal is fewer respiratory illnesses, safer fire practices and better food hygiene — and that the city is also committed to helping small businesses transition — then resistance can shift from outright rejection to constructive cooperation.
Bulawayo’s proposed ban on firewood-fuelled braais is grounded in legitimate public health and safety concerns. Smoke has consequences. Unsafe fire practices have consequences. Poor food hygiene has consequences. No city should ignore those realities.
If the transition to safer and cleaner braai methods is implemented without support, it risks turning a health reform into an economic blow. The city will have achieved cleaner cooking for some, while others lose livelihoods — and the social cost will be counted later, in unemployment lines, empty braai spots, and businesses that never recovered.
The challenge for Bulawayo is to make this policy a bridge between tradition and safety — one that honours the braai culture while insisting that food handling and fire safety meet modern standards.
