Australia eases import restrictions

[burnt]

- with some restrictions as they seem to want to know exactly where the beef originated. Exactly.

Nine-year ban on beef imported from mad-countries lifted

* Asa Wahlquist
* From: The Australian
* March 02, 2010 12:00AM

AUSTRALIA'S nine-year ban on beef imports from mad cow countries was lifted yesterday, but it will be several months before overseas beef products arrive on the nation's supermarket shelves.

Under the new rules, the country of origin must apply to Food Standards Australia New Zealand for permission to export beef to the region. Once the request is received, FSANZ will take a minimum of 20 weeks to assess each application, and it reserves the right to send inspectors to the country of origin for an in-country inspection, further prolonging the waiting period.

No countries have yet applied to send beef to Australia following the lifting of the mad cow ban.

Food and Beverage Importers Association executive director Tony Beaver said he was not surprised no applications had been received, due to the bureaucratic protocols in place.

"It will take quite some time for the classifications to be completed and for any new products to be returned to the market," he said.

In 2001, Australia banned beef from countries where the brain-wasting disease bovine spongiform encephalopathy occurred. BSE can infect people if they eat pieces of the brains or spinal cords of infected animals.

Only imports of muscle meat, or products of muscle meat, which does not carry BSE, will now be permitted into Australia. Fresh meat will also require clearance from Biosecurity Australia.

Before the bans, most beef imports were in the form of processed products such as soup and the gelatine in confectionery. The US exported an average of 34 tonnes of beef a year to Australia before several cases of BSE ended the trade in 2001. Australia exports about 280,000 tonnes of beef a year to the US.

Australian Red Meat Advisory Council secretary Justin Toohey said the changes to the beef import rules were "about aligning our science-based protocol".

"It is not about trade," he said. "Our new protocols are science-based, and it is not going to lead to a flood of beef unless it is economically viable and they can meet our strict conditions."

The conditions include traceability that is equivalent to or better than Australia's. "We can pick 50 head of cattle anywhere in this country and within 48 hours know their property of origin and know the property of origin of their cohorts," Mr Toohey said.

The US could not meet that requirement at present, while the price differentials between Britain and Australia would make it "most unfinancial" for the British. It is understood the Japanese have expressed interest in exporting beef to Australia.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/nine-year-ban-on-beef-imported-from-mad-countries-lifted/story-e6frg6nf-1225835822336

http://www.cattlenetwork.com/Australia-Lifts-Imported-Beef-Ban-9-Years-After-Mad-Cow/2010-03-01/Article_Latest_News.aspx?oid=995321&fid=CN-LATEST_NEWS_&aid=760

[PORKER]

Under the new rules, the country of origin must apply to Food Standards Australia New Zealand for permission to export beef to the region. Once the request is received, FSANZ will take a minimum of 20 weeks to assess each application, and it reserves the right to send inspectors to the country of origin for an in-country inspection, further prolonging the waiting period.

No countries have yet applied to send beef to Australia following the lifting of the mad cow ban.
The conditions include traceability that is equivalent to or better than Australia's. "We can pick 50 head of cattle anywhere in this country and within 48 hours know their property of origin and know the property of origin of their cohorts," Mr Toohey said

I got news for Mr. Toohey, With ScoringAg's recordkeeping and traceback UNIX database His 48hrs is dam slow as ScoringAg can do it in less than 5 seconds. Besides it can have all 50 head from 50 countries cut into 300 packages each and still do it under a minute !

[flounder]

Backflip over mad cow beef ban

Nicola Berkovic

From: The Australian March 09, 2010 12:00AM


THE importation of beef from countries that have had outbreaks of mad cow disease will be delayed by at least two years following a backdown by the Rudd government. Agriculture Minister Tony Burke yesterday bowed to community pressure and ordered a full risk analysis of beef imports from countries where bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or mad cow disease, had been reported.

The review comes eight days after the lifting of a ban on beef imports from countries that have had the disease.

That decision followed a threat by meat exporters, including Canada, to go to the World Trade Organisation over unfair trade barriers.

A spokeswoman for Mr Burke said the review would cover fresh or frozen beef, but not processed or cooked beef products, such as oxtail soup, and drinks such as the beef tea product Bovril.

The review, to be conducted by Biosecurity Australia, will examine beef imports from all countries other than New Zealand.

Start of sidebar. Skip to end of sidebar. Related CoverageRisky red meat imports shelved Daily Telegraph, 3 hours ago Turnaround sees risk study on beef imports Adelaide Now, 10 hours ago Oxtail soup first beef import The Australian, 5 days ago Labor to axe drought relief The Australian, 6 days ago N American push on mad cow ban The Australian, 24 Feb 2010 .End of sidebar. Return to start of sidebar. Mr Burke said he had taken the decision following "significant community concern" about import standards.

Admitting it was unusual for a minister to intervene in such a decision, Mr Burke said the level of concern had warranted the formal review process.

"Conducting an import risk analysis is the best way of reassuring the Australian community that effective protocols will be put in place to provide for the safety of imports."

He said he believed the two-year review process would not put Australia in breach of its international trade obligations, because it was a science-based procedure.

Independent senator Nick Xenophon, who campaigned against the lifting of the ban, welcomed the review as a "victory for commonsense".

"The importation of meat from mad cow disease-affected areas could have potentially put Australian consumers at risk, and could have destroyed Australia's claims that we are a clean, green, BSE-free market," Senator Xenophon said.

Nationals senators Fiona Nash and John Williams also hailed the decision as a sensible move to protect consumers and beef producers.

However, the Cattle Council of Australia, which argued that the analysis would only burden international trade, said it was disappointed a protectionist "scare campaign" influenced the decision.

President Greg Brown said he was worried about the delay the process would create. "If the Americans put a 24-month process on us, we would be out of the market . . . considering they take a hell of a lot more beef from us than we do from them," he said.

The confusion over beef imports had also damaged the reputation of Australian beef in the domestic market, Mr Brown said.

Australia banned British beef in 1996.



http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/backflip-over-mad-cow-beef-ban/story-e6frg6nf-1225838417701



seems they woke up and could smell the BSe that was coming from the USDA

[Sandhusker]

"The US exported an average of 34 tonnes of beef a year to Australia before several cases of BSE ended the trade in 2001. Australia exports about 280,000 tonnes of beef a year to the US. "


Another mutually beneficial international trade deal....

[brightview]

Sandhusker,
We are a nett exporter of beef, whereas US is nett importer You want clean beef, we got it. Our politicians - city-bred and city-raised - have no real hold on the subject, except to try to gain political points and cuddle an ally who can't feed its millions with its own produce. Our farmers and their organisations went for the throat on this one and we "gently" persuaded our representatives in Canberra that it was not on.
Our NLIS might not be perfect, but it is Australia-wide in its application. Can you scan a tag in Fl and trace back through intermediaries to Ut where tag was applied?
Lee

[burnt]

brightview - Welcome to the boards.

I am interested in learning how Australia has gone about its BSE surveillance and testing program.

How did Australia handle the issue of cattle imported from Britain?

[Sandhusker]

[burnt]

[Sandhusker]

If diseases are deliberately not being detected, how would electronic tracing make a difference?

[Oldtimer]

[PORKER]

Mad cow disease draft laws pass Senate

CANBERRA, March 15 AAP
March 15 2010, 7:41PM
Agriculture Minister Tony Burke's commitment to protect Australia from mad cow disease is one step closer to becoming law.

The federal government lifted the 10-year ban on imports from countries affected by bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), commonly known as mad cow disease, earlier this month.

But community outrage at the scrapping of the import risk analysis prompted Mr Burke to reinstate the safety measure.

Nationals Senate leader Barnaby Joyce said he and Liberal senator Richard Colbeck's bill, introduced to the upper house two weeks ago, made that commitment law.

"We have put down in paper form what the minister has said in an audible form the other day," Senator Joyce told parliament on Monday.

"To show that he is genuine, the Labor Party should be part of this bill."

Under the legislation, only beef imports assessed under the old, tougher, criteria would be allowed into Australia.

The minister must also be satisfied that the country imported beef comes from has a birth-to-death traceability program to identify an animal's origin.

That traceability must be at least as rigorous as Australia's National Livestock Identification Scheme.

Finally, country of origin labelling standards which make it clear where imported beef comes from will be implemented.

Senate Manager of Government Business Joe Ludwig said there had not been enough time to consider the draft laws so Labor couldn't support them.

"This is a hasty piece of legislation which the opposition is keen to simply rubber stamp through this chamber," he said.

The bill was, however, backed by the Australian Greens, Independent senator Nick Xenophon and Family First senator Steve Fielding to pass 36 votes to 25.

The Food Importation (Bovine Meat Standards) Bill 2010 now goes to the lower house.

[flounder]

AUSTRALIA

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA

Proof Committee Hansard

SENATE RURAL AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS AND TRANSPORT REFERENCES COMMITTEE Reference: Import restrictions on beef

FRIDAY, 5 FEBRUARY 2010 CANBERRA CONDITIONS OF DISTRIBUTION This is an uncorrected proof of evidence taken before the committee. It is made available under the condition that it is recognised as such. BY AUTHORITY OF THE SENATE [PROOF COPY] TO EXPEDITE DELIVERY, THIS TRANSCRIPT HAS NOT BEEN SUBEDITED

SNIP...

Friday, 5 February 2010 Senate RRA&T 1

RURAL AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS AND TRANSPORT

Committee met at 9.01 am

CHAIR (Senator Nash)—I declare open this public hearing of the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee. The committee is hearing evidence on the committee’s inquiry into the impact and consequences of the government’s decision to relax import restrictions on beef. Before the committee starts taking evidence I remind all witnesses that, in giving evidence to the committee, they are protected by parliamentary privilege. It is unlawful for anyone to threaten or disadvantage a witness on account of evidence given to a committee and such action may be treated by the Senate as a contempt. It is also a contempt to give false or misleading evidence to a committee. The committee prefers all evidence to be given in public but, under the Senate’s resolutions, witnesses have the right to request to be heard in private session. It is important that witnesses give the committee notice if they intend to ask to give evidence in camera. If a witness objects to answering a question, the witness should state the ground upon which the objection is taken and the committee will determine whether it will insist on an answer, having regard to the ground which is claimed. If the committee determines to insist on an answer, a witness may request that the answer be given in camera. Such a request may, of course, also been made at any other time. On behalf of the committee, I thank all those who have made submissions and sent representatives here today for their cooperation in this inquiry.

RRA&T 2 Senate Friday, 5 February 2010

RURAL AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS AND TRANSPORT

[9.03 am]

BELLINGER, Mr Brad, Chairman, Australian Beef Association

CARTER, Mr John Edward, Director, Australian Beef Association

CHAIR—Welcome. Would you like to make an opening statement?

Mr Bellinger—Thank you. The ABA stands by its submission, which we made on 14 December last year, that the decision made by the government to allow the importation of beef from BSE affected countries is politically based, not science based. During this hearing we will bring forward compelling new evidence to back up this statement. When I returned to my property after the December hearing I received a note from an American citizen. I will read a small excerpt from the mail he sent me in order to reinforce the dangers of allowing the importation of beef from BSE affected countries. I have done a number of press releases on this topic, and this fellow has obviously picked my details up from the internet. His name is Terry Singeltary and he is from Bacliff, Texas. He states, and rightfully so:

You should be worried. Please let me explain. I’ve kept up with the mad cow saga for 12 years today, on December 14th 1997, some four months post voluntary and partial mad cow feed ban in the USA, I lost my mother to the Heinemann variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD). I know this is just another phenotype of the infamous sporadic CJDs. Here in the USA, when USA sheep scrapie was transmitted to USA bovine, the agent was not UK BSE—it was a different strain. So why then would human TSE from USA cattle look like UK CJD from UK BSE? It would not. So this accentuates that the science is inconclusive still on this devastating disease. He goes on to state:

The OIE— the International Organisation of Epizootics, the arm of the WTO— is a failed global agent that in my opinion is bought off via bogus regulations for global trade and industry reps. I have done this all these years for nothing but the truth. I am a consumer, I eat meat, but I do not have to sit idly by and see the ignorance and greed of it all while countless numbers of humans and animals are being exposed to the TSE agents. All the USA is interested in is trade, nothing else matters.

Even Dr Stanley Prusiner, who incidentally won the Nobel Health Prize in 1997 for his work on the prion—he invented the word ‘prion’, or it came from him—states:

The BSC policy was set up for one purpose only, trade—the illegal trading of all strains of TSE globally throughout North America, which is home to CBSC, IBSC and HBSC, many scrapie strains and two strains of CJD to date. (PLEASE NOTE THESE TYPO ERRORS, SHOULD HAVE READ cBSE, lBSE, and hBSE...tss)

I would also like, while I have the opportunity, to explain the beef-off-the-shelves myth. At the first Senate hearing on 14 December, it was explained that the reason why they allowed BSC beef into Australia was the beef-off-the-shelves policy, whereby if we found a case of BSC in Australia they would have to recall all—

Friday, 5 February 2010 Senate RRA&T 3

RURAL AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS AND TRANSPORT

Senator HEFFERNAN—Which of course is total BS.

Mr Bellinger—Correct. This is written in the FSANZ document—Food Standards Australia New Zealand. Why isn’t this same policy in New Zealand? It is not—it is only in Australia. We are the only country in the world to have this idiotic policy. So we again call for the tabling of the WTO obligations paperwork. We do not believe that exists.

Mr Carter—We have an additional concern about human health. We are not scientists, but on 18 December, four days after the last hearing here, the BBC reported a new wave of deaths due to variant CJD linked to eating BSE infected beef could be underway. This is based on the work of Professor John Collinge of the National Prion Clinic, who reported that a 2009 death in Scotland was from a different genetic pool to that of the 166 deaths already reported in the UK. Those are all thought to share one gene, but Professor Collinge and his colleagues estimate that up to 350 people in this new group, represented by the person who died in Scotland, could get CJD. He thinks that CJD has moved into a new phase, and the incubation period is a long one. We tender the Australian Red Cross donor policy sheet, which bears out what Senator Back brought up last time, questioning the Chief Medical Officer, and we say that blood from people who were in the UK between 1980 and 1996 is not acceptable. That is the current ruling. We believe this now should be extended to anyone who has visited the UK, and this new evidence should ensure that Australia revisits the science of CJD.

CHAIR—Thank you, Mr Carter. Before we kick off, can I just remind colleagues that we are short of time today, so I ask that we do not traverse ground the we have previously covered and make sure that we stick to new information that is required. Mr Bellinger, when you started you referred to your view that this decision to allow the importation was politically based. I know you are going to go into this in the course of the next 20 minutes or so, but could you just give us a quick outline of what your definition of politically based is and why you think the decision was politically based?

Mr Bellinger—On the lowering of BSE standards: if you go back to 2006, for example, there were five categories for describing countries that had BSE and Australia was in the category for BSE free. Suddenly, by the time the United States got their third instance of BSE, through the influence of Robert Zoellick—who was the trade minister that signed the BSE corresponding side letter in 2004 and was George Bush’s appointment to the WTO—they suddenly changed the five categories to three categories and, instead of being BSE free, Australia became BSE negligible risk. At the time I put out a press release alerting the media to the dangers of this happening, and we are coming to the stage here when suddenly our government is saying, ‘Now let’s allow the importation of beef from BSE affected countries.’ I believe that the WTO has been influenced by large multinational meat processors and retailers to change and allow the trading of BSE beef throughout the world.

CHAIR—Thanks, Mr Bellinger.

Mr Carter—Of course, the side letter that Minister Vaile signed was at the request of Mr Zoellick, who is now in the position that Mr Bellinger has explained.

Senator HEFFERNAN—I just want to put the committee on notice that, if we do not get through what we have got to get through today, I suggest we have another hearing, because this

RRA&T 4 Senate Friday, 5 February 2010

RURAL AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS AND TRANSPORT

is the greatest ambush of Australia’s farmers of all time by a government. The evidence given at the last meeting was deadset lies. The proposition that this whole change of government policy was led by the industry is a deadset lie. While Simon Crean might want to change his mind because of the WTO and his lack of knowledge, the Australian beef industry, as you know, is under great challenge, not only from the currency but also from the undermining of our markets. This is a disgrace.

I will go to the meat-off-the-shelves proposition. By the way, there is no obligation to take meat off the shelves; it was something dreamt up by someone buried in the bureaucracy, who is probably taking notes down in the department now. There is absolutely no obligation but, if they wanted to stick to it, all they really had to do was do mandatory SRM removal. Now the renderers did not like that idea. It was going to cost money. Can you explain to us where you think the meat-off-the-shelves proposition came from?

Mr Bellinger—I think it was an ill-informed, misguided statement delivered from RMAC to the minister. They may have thought, by some weird dream, that by having this beef-off-theshelves policy it would somehow illustrate to the WTO that we cannot import beef from BSE affected countries—totally erroneous and totally stupid. Of course, if you look at the legislation on food recalls, it is handled by the states. I did an interview on 2NZ, a local radio station, 10 days ago in reply to Tony Burke’s statement on this beef-off-the-shelves policy, where he said that if a beast was found to have BSE in the Northern Territory then beef would have to be taken off the shelves in Tasmania—totally erroneous. It does not exist. It is the states who handle this. I am amazed that a minister could make this sort of statement.

Senator HEFFERNAN—You were talking about the next wave of possible human infection in the UK. It is a fact, actually—I have done some work on it. There are three genes that have been identified. One is very accepting: if you have that gene and you eat the meat, you get the consequences—mad cow disease. There are two genes that they have not worked out yet. One is more resistant than the other. Are you aware that there is a lot of science around that says, through this new understanding of the gene mutation, there could well be a new wave of mad cow disease in humans?

Mr Bellinger—I will hand you over to John Carter. He has done more research on this than me.

Mr Carter—It is Professor Collinge and the National Prion Clinic in the UK who have done this work. It is not as though it is some backyard person. I am certainly not a geneticist, but it appears to me, particularly from the work that Bob Steel has done, that these things are crossing barriers. To me, the science is not proven at all.

Senator HEFFERNAN—No. There seems to have been a change of government position in assessing the science, to risk analysis from a lesser proposition. Are you aware of when the government changed from the precautionary principle to risk analysis in terms of assessing these sorts of risk?

Mr Carter—To me, those are just words. In 1997 the UK government Lord Phillips inquiry stated that up to 136,000 people could lose their lives to CJD, and later the Blair government raised this to 250,000. Then, of course, when America gets BSE suddenly it is really no problem.

Friday, 5 February 2010 Senate RRA&T 5

RURAL AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS AND TRANSPORT

Senator HEFFERNAN—Look, this is just a trade issue. The government came in here.

Senator Sterle, I believe, will make some reflection upon your earlier remarks to say that this—

Senator STERLE—Absolutely, if you give me a chance. The clock is ticking.

Senator HEFFERNAN—Would you like to do it now?

Senator STERLE—Finish your question. No, because you will interrupt. So you have your run and then I will have my say.

Senator HEFFERNAN—The proposition was put to us last time that this was driven by the industry. I followed Simon Crean on 5AA the other day. He talked about ‘using the best principles’. He had idea what he was talking about, but they did say that this was driven by the industry—and the department accepted it, and I hope they are all listening down there, because they are a bunch of liars. They accepted the proposition—

Senator STERLE—Chair—

Senator O’BRIEN—Using this hearing to slander people in that way is completely unseemly.

snip...see full text 110 pages ;


http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard/senate/commttee/S12742.pdf


TSS