RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE G/TBT/W/55
9October 1997
ORGANIZATION(97-4303)
Original: English Committee onTechnical Barriers toTrade
AUSTRALIAN PAPER ONTHE FIRST TRIENNIAL REVIEW OFTHE OPERATION
AND IMPLEMENTATION OFTHE AGREEMENT ON
TECHNICAL BARRIERS TOTRADE
Communication from Australia
Thefollowing communication, dated 1October 1997, withrespect totheTriennial Review
oftheAgreement onTechnical Barriers toTrade hasbeenreceived from thePermanent Mission of
Australia withtherequest thatitbecirculated toMembers oftheCommittee.
_______________
I. OBJECTIVES OFTHE REVIEW
1. Australia believes thattheTriennial Review should establish aframework forencouraging
maximum adherence totheprovisions oftheAgreement by:
(a) Reducing thepromulgation offuture national technical regulations, where theyare
notnecessary, orlimiting themtotheirspecific requirements, aligned asfaraspossible
withprevailing international standards;
(b) maximising adherence totheCode ofGood Practice byallstandardizing bodies;
(c) optimisingthelevelofharmonizationofconformityassessmentsystems,andtofacilitate
thenegotiation ofmultilateral rather thanpurely bilateral MRAs; and
(d) making progress towards theimplementing theportability concept of"onestandard,
onetest,onetimeandonecertificate".
2. Australia fullysupports theneedforWTO Members tosecure amore effective implementation
oftheAgreement. Thekeytoachieving thisisthedevelopment ofabetter understanding between
WTO Members ofthepractical stepsthatshould befollowed inthepreparation, adoption andreview
oftechnical regulations. Inthisregard, Australia supports theviewthattheutmost careshould be
exercised when determining themostappropriate instrument, which maynotnecessarily beatechnical
regulation.
II. THE CODE OFGOOD PRACTICE
3. Australia notes thatthefailure ofsome WTO Members tohavetheirnational orsub-national
standardizing bodies accept theCode, andmore importantly, work toit,diminishes theeffectivenessG/TBT/W/55
Page2
oftheAgreement asawhole. Itleaves itmore openforstandardizing bodies tocontinue todevelop
national standards notharmonised withinternational standards.
4. Itisofconcern toAustralia thatother standardizing bodies areyettodeclare adherence to
theCode. Article 4oftheTBTAgreement requires central government standardizing bodies to,and
asksWTO Members totakesuchreasonable measures toensure thatregional, governmental and
non-governmental bodies, accept andcomply withtheCode. Moreover, paragraph GoftheCode
effectively requires standardizing bodies toparticipate tothegreatest extend possible inthework of
international standardization bodies. Itistherefore imperative thatthere bewidespread adherence by
national bodies toAnnex 3iftheTBTAgreement istofunction properly. Inthesameway,itisessential
thatinternational bodies suchasISOandIECalsobeencouraged toadhere totheCode ofGood Practice.
Ifregional bodies areencouraged toadhere totheCode, thenitwould seem logical, given thekey
rolethatinternational standards areplaying, forbodies suchastheISOandIECalsotobeencouraged
toadhere.
5. Where technical regulations aredeemed byMembers tobenecessary, those regulations must
bewritten specifically forthepurpose andmustnotbemore thanisnecessary toachieve thespecific
policy objective. Inthisregard, itmaywellbethecasethattherelevant voluntary standard, beit
national orinternational, contains more thanisnecessary toachieve thespecific regulatory objective.
Thissituation raises thequestion oftheextent towhich national standards should reflect thecontent
ofinternational standards andalsothecycle ofreview ofinternational standards tobring them upto
dateandtoensure thattheyinclude onlythose provisions orinclude newcriteria thatarenecessary
tomeetlegitimate objectives.
III. TBTAND THE PACE OFINTERNATIONAL STANDARD MAKING
6. Australia believes thatanyreview oftheWTO Agreement onTechnical Barriers toTrade should
focus oninternational harmonization ofregulatory standards rather thanonderegulation. Inthisarea,
aprincipal cause ofconcern isthepaceofdevelopment ofnational regulatory standards inresponse
tonewtechnologies orchanges inthemarket place. Inevitable, these standards willbedeveloped
nationally withinternational standards onlybeing developed some years later.
7. Some WTO Members havepointed outquite accurately thatproblems often existinaligning
national standards tointernational standards theyconsider nottoberelevant because ofdifferent national
circumstances orthepaceofchange particular inttechnology. While thismatter isindeed onefor
concern, Australia considers ittobebeyond theambit oftheTriennial Review andbelieves thatit
should bestbefollowed upwithin therelevant international standardizing bodies ofwhich many WTO
Members arealsomembers.
8. While limitations ontheaccuracy andtimeliness ofinternational standards mustraisequestions
astotheirsuitability foruseinaregulatory sphere, inaccuracies ininternational standards should not
necessarily preclude theiradoption. Thisisparticularly validfornational standards insofar asnational
standardizing bodies canretain "national differences" toreflect newdevelopments intechnology or
particular social, geographic etc.requirements.
9. Some WTO Members haveraised verygood points inrespect ofthevoteonaparticular
international standard andthedomestic implementation ofthatstandard, i.e.thatWTO Members who
votepositively fortheintroduction ofaninternational standard haveagreater responsibility toensure
thattheirnational standards, whether neworsubsequently amended, dovetail withtheprovisions of
theinternational standard. Thiscould beconsidered anissue fortheinternational bodies whomight
beasked toconsider advising member bodies whose Governments areWTO Signatories, toincludeG/TBT/W/55
Page3
consideration oftheintent toimplement theinternational standard asanational standard indeciding
theirnational voteonacceptance orotherwise ofinternational draftstandards.
10. Australia agrees withtheproposal thattheCommittee draw upaprocedure which willmake
itpossible tomeasure theextend towhich Members andstandardizing bodies adopt andinanyevent
apply international standards, guides orrecommendations. Intheevent thattheinternational standard
isnotapplied, thegrounds therefore would bespecified inthenotification.
IV. CERTIFICATION AND TESTING ISSUES
11. Thegoalof"onestandard, onetest,onetime" isworthy ofsupport, perhaps withtheaddition
of"onecertificate".
12. Australia believes thatinternational acceptance ofcertification should beaccepted notonly
inprinciple but,more importantly, inpractice. Australian industry andstandards bodies underscore
thatconformity assessment systems should beinaccordance withrelevant guides orrecommendations
issued byaninternational body, andthatmultiple testing andcertification requirements havetheeffect
ofundermining theimplementation ofharmonized standards infacilitating trade. Australia believes
thatoneofthegoals oftheReview istomove towards certification becoming trulyportable.
13. Therelationship oftheTBTAgreement tointernational ISO/IEC guides iscritical andthere
isanurgent needfortheseguides tobeformally recognized withtheTBTAgreement. Theacceptance
ofsuchguides inrelation totheoperation ofaccreditation bodies andfortesting, inspection and
certification bodies iscritical from thepoint ofview oftheability ofMembers topursue mutual
recognitionagreementsonconformityassessment.Whetherthedocumentsremainas"guides"orbecome
established as"standards" isamatter fortherelevant ISOcommittees.
V. MUTUAL RECOGNITION AGREEMENTS
14. Inrespect ofmutual recognition agreements (MRAs), itcould beuseful todistinguish between
government-to-governmentMRAsatthepoliticalorregulatoryacceptancelevel,andtheMRAsconcluded
between specialty conformity assessment bodies atthetechnical orpractitioner level. Australia 's
imminent MRA withtheEuropean Commission onconformity assessment isagood example ofthe
"acceptancelevel"typeofMRA.ThenetworkofMRAswhichAustraliahasestablishedwithcounterpart
national accreditation bodies isanexample ofthetechnical-level typeofMRA. Therelationships,
orpotential relationships, between thesetwotypes ofMRAs isalsoofrelevance, as"acceptance" MRAs
mayneedtobeunderpinned bytechnical MRAs.
15. Australia agrees thatwork should beundertaken intheWTO todevelop draftguidelines for
mutual recognition agreements. For"technical level" MRAs therearealready anumber ofinternational
procedures fortheestablishment andmaintenance ofMRAs (seetheILAC response totheWTO for
examples ofsuchguidelines forestablishment ofMRAs between laboratory accreditation bodies).
Similar procedures have been prepared byother accreditation bodies such astheInternational
Accreditation Forum (IAF) andtheEuropean Accreditation Cooperation (EAC). InAPEC, there are
alsodevelopments under wayfortheestablishment ofmodel government-to-government MRAs.
16. Australia notes thatthecurrent trend ismore towards thedevelopment ofmultilateral MRAs
asthese aremore cost-effective toestablish andmaintain thanbilateral MRAs.