CHAPTER 8
APPROPRIATE FRAMEWORK FOR ASSESSMENT AND CONSULTATION ON
IMPORTATION DECISIONS
Introduction
Current approach to assessments of importation assessments
Committee observations
Consultation with Industry - Committee's 1995 AQIS
Inquiry
Introduction
8.1 As part of this inquiry, the Committee examined the effectiveness
of the consultative process between AQIS and the chicken meat industry
on the 1991 and 1994 risk assessments and protocols. To some extent, this
examination raised the same issues addressed by the Committee in its 1995
examination of AQIS.(1)
8.2 In this Chapter, the Committee makes a limited examination of how
the possible importation of cooked chicken meat raises questions about
two matters: consultation between AQIS and industry; in particular industry
likely to be affected by an AQIS decision on an import risk assessment.
Secondly, the Committee examined the assessment process leading up to
a decision on an import application affecting an Australian industry is
effected.
Current approach to assessments of importation
assessments
8.3 The Committee does not at this stage given the short time-frame allowed
for its inquiry suggest more than clarification of the current mechanisms
under which the processing of applications for imports is made, and how
these might be better or ideally managed.
8.4 The Committee quotes several exchanges in regard to this matter from
Hansard, as they provide a picture, from officials' view, of how
the assessment consultation process works.
8.5 In evidence to this Committee, on 22 October 1996, during examination
of the AQIS estimates of expenditure for 1996-7, Mr Hickey set out how
AQIS saw this process
Mr Hickey,The objective with these processes is to attempt to coincide
the decision points as closely as possible so that when a decision on
access is taken the government is also in a position to consider any
adjustment issues that might arise. I cannot answer for the Industry
Commission as to the processes that would be followed up to the point
of reporting nor could I tell you about any consultation processes on
the economic impacts.
If you were to draw a line, for example, through the chicken meat access
request that we have at the moment, what has happened there is that
the minister met with the industry and discussed both the technical
issues to do with the access request that we are dealing with and also
any adjustment issues that would arise from granting access. He established
two working parties in that case, one to consider the economic issues,
which we are not involved in, and another to consider the technical
access issues, which we are involved in. In that case he is seeking
to coincide both decisions at around the same time. I am saying that
the objectives, I think, would be similar.(2)
8.6 In answer to later questioning from Senator Murphy - in relation
to the application for importation of uncooked Pacific salmon - Mr Hickey
again detailed the decision-making framework:
Mr Hickey,Can I try to clarify this. There are three areas in which
assessments would be made with these major access requests. The first
is the scientific and technical assessment that AQIS is responsible
for.
Senator MURPHY,I understand that.
Mr Hickey,The second is the economic impact of the introduction of
the disease of concern,and that is a factor that is entirely relevant
to the quarantine decision making processes and a matter that we do
take into account and on which we sought advice from ABARE. ABARE provided
advice to us which was attached to our discussion paper on the economic
impact of the introduction of the disease. The third area is the economic
impact of the importation of the product, the competitive effects and
any subsequent adjustment processes that might take place within the
industry as a result of the importation of that product.
Senator MURPHY,Yes, I understand that.
Mr Hickey,Our assessment on the technical and scientific issues takes
into account the ABARE work that has been done on the impact of the
introduction of the diseases, but the other,
Senator MURPHY,On the industry.
Senator MURPHY,I would have thought AQIS's role did not just begin
and end with the salmon industry. I thought you would have had,I know
in fact you have,a much greater and wider role in the introduction of
diseases into this country in terms of the natural environment.
Mr Hickey,That is right, the environmental issues as well.(3)
8.7 During his discussions with the Committee on 28 August 1996, Dr Gebbie
of DPIE provided some further detail:
Senator BOB COLLINS - ............... when we left office this year
in the runup to the campaign, the then Minister for Trade and I had
completed a draft submission to cabinet, which you almost word for word
quoted a paragraph from. The submission was drafted by the department,
so that is hardly surprising. It was based on this premise,and I think
it is a very valid one,that, particularly in this postGATT environment,
the removal of a former complete legitimate prohibition in quarantine
terms has the same impact on the industry economically as the removal
of a tariff instantly.
That submission proposed the establishment of a permanent IDC to consider
on a case by case basis applications for,and there will be many of them
in future,
Senator WOODLEY,IDC, Bob?
Senator BOB COLLINS,I am sorry, interdepartmental committee. Do you
have any idea where that formal process has gone? That particular submission
never went to cabinet because of the election, but has that thinking
continued?
Dr Gebbie,Yes, I can answer that, Senator. Indeed, the process was
continued and endorsed by the current minister.
Senator BOB COLLINS,Excellent.
Dr Gebbie,In my opening remarks I referred to the department adopting
a more systematic approach to consideration of these things and that
was what I was referring to,the establishment of an interdepartmental
committee. In principle, the idea is for this committee to commence
work at the same time AQIS commences its work on the risk assessment
process for an import entry request on a new product.
The two processes would work parallel. Again, I emphasise that they
are quite different processes and they cannot be part of the same process.
But they are both equally important in providing the full information
to the government at the end of the day. The idea is that, by the time
AQIS has completed its risk assessment and determined its position there,
the government will also have available to it at the same time the IDC's
assessment of the economic impact of entry under the AQIS conditions
on the domestic industry. So you have the full picture there in front
of ministers.
That process is working. As I indicated earlier, with chicken meat
there was a mismatch in the timing for historical reasons largely. But,
in future, say, for salmon and some of the other products we are considering,
those processes are running parallel and there is no reason to think
that the answers to both sides of the equation will not be available
there for the government at the same time eventually.
8.8 The picture presented by Mr Hickey and Dr Gebbie is - on the Committee's
reading - a three stage process:
- First stage - biorisk assessment by AQIS;
- Second stage - Bioeconomic assessment by appropriate body (such
as ABARE, Industry Commission or the IDC responsible for the economic
impact of importation);
- Third stage - consultation with industry and others and report
to government.
Committe observations
8.9 The Committee's principal observation is, in relation to the current
processing of application for importation of salmon meat - and to some
extent with the importation of cooked chicken meat - the second and third
stages of this process are not combined, but may have become entwined
by default. The result is a process which is confused and lacking in transparency
and coherence to an outside observer.
8.10 It is essential, in the Committee's view that this process be clarified.
It is now important, both from the point of view of Australian interests,
and from the point of view of other countries, that the Australian assessment
process be clear and well understood at all stages.
8.11 The Committee accordingly recommends that the Government
provide the Parliament and the community with a clear explanation of the
assessment process at the earliest possible time.
Consultation with Industry - Committee's 1995 AQIS
Inquiry
8.12 In its 1995 AQIS report, the Committee discussed observations about
the consultation processes followed by AQIS. In relation to evidence it
had received the Committee had this to say about AQIS/industry consultations
15.23 The Committee formed the view that the dissatisfaction expressed
by some industries does not necessarily reflect concern about the amount
of consultation so much as concern about AQIS' view of the role
of consultation in its operations. For example, evidence from the Egg
Industry Co-operative indicates that AQIS' notion of consultation is
to develop a position independently on an issue, and then to seek comment
on that position from the affected industry. It was argued that a more
appropriate and productive process would be to involve industry at the
earliest opportunity.(4)
8.13 The Committee was asked by the Senate to examine the administration
and conduct of the importation of cooked chicken meat by AQIS and DPIE.
During its examination, and reflecting on the conclusions drawn by the
Committee in its 1995 AQIS Report, the Committee has again come to the
conclusion that the role of consultation in the decision-making framework
followed by AQIS and the Department needs to be fully explained to the
Parliament and the community. Such an explanation by government will allow
the stakeholders in any decision to be aware of the process that is being
followed.
8.14 Having become aware of how the dispute resolution mechanisms contained
in the SPS Agreement will operate, the Committee is concerned that the
future course of import applications proceed in the knowledge by stakeholders
of the process that will be followed. Where such process entails consultations
with industry, they should be transparent.
8.15 In this regard, the Committee again draws the Government's attention
to the proposal for Management Advisory Committees (MAC's) referred to
in its 1995 AQIS Report(5)for comment, and if appropriate,
for some consideration in the Government's response to that Report.
8.16 The Committee wishes to emphasise that its experience during this
inquiry has reinforced its findings and conclusions in its 1995 AQIS report:
that consultations do occur, they are of central importance
to AQIS assessments, but to have credibility with participants in industries
concerned with production of goods affected by possible imports, they
must be transparent. The Committee looks forward to an early response
by the Government to the Committee's findings in its 1995 AQIS report
and this report.
Senator Winston Crane
Chairman
Canberra - October 1996
ENDNOTES
- Report on AQIS, op. cit., Chapter 15,
p.183.
- R&RA&T Legislation Committee, Supplementary
Estimates Hearing 1996-1997, 22 October 1996, Evidence, p. 303.
- Ibid, p. 304.
- Report on AQIS, op. cit., pp. 188-189.
- Ibid, p. 189.