Proposals for changes to 
Imported Food Control 
Regulations  
Imported Food section  
Compliance Arrangements Branch, Compliance Division  
 
Proposals for changes to imported food regulations  
Department of Agriculture and Water Resources  
ii © Commonwealth of Australia 2016  
Ownership of intellectual property rights  
Unless otherwise noted, copyright (and any other intellectual property rights, if any) in this publication is owned by 
the Commonwealth of Australia (referred to as the Commonwealth).  
Creative Commons licence  
All material in th is publication is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia Licence, save for 
content supplied by third parties, logos and the Commonwealth Coat of Arms.  
 
Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia Licence is a standard form licence agre ement that allows you to copy, 
distribute, transmit and adapt this publication provided you attribute the work. A summary of the licence terms is 
available from creativecommons.org/licen ses/by/3.0/au/deed.en . The full licence terms are available from 
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/legalcode . 
Inquiries about the licence and any use of this document should be se nt to copyright@agriculture.gov.au . 
Cataloguing data  
This publication (and any material sourced from it) should be attributed as: Proposals for changes to Imported Food 
Control R egulations , Department of Agriculture and Water Resources , Canberra, December 2017 . 
This publication is available at http://www.agriculture.gov.au/import/goods/food/imported -food -contr ol-
regulations . 
Department of Agriculture  and Water Resources  
Postal address GPO Box 858  Canberra ACT 2601  
Telephone 1800 900 090  
Web agriculture.gov.au  
The Australian Government acting through the Department of Agriculture and Water Resources  has exercised due 
care and skill in preparing and compiling the information and data in this publication. Notwithstanding, the 
Department of Agriculture and Water Resources , its employees and advisers disclaim all liability,  including liability for 
negligence and for any loss, damage, injury, expense or cost incurred by any person as a result of accessing, using or 
relying upon any of the information or data in this publication to the maximum extent permitted by law.  
  
Proposals for changes to imported food regulations  
Department of Agriculture and Water Resources  
iii Conten ts 
Submissions  ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................  iv 
How to have y our say  ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. iv 
Publishing of submissions  ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ....vi 
Next steps  ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ....vi 
Proposals for changes to imported food regulations  ................................ ................................ ..........  1 
What is being reviewed  ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ..........  1 
Links to imported food legislation  ................................ ................................ ................................ .....................  1 
What is not being reviewed  ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 2 
Summary of proposals  ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 3 
Certification in the Regulations  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..........................  3 
Prohibited plants and fungi in the Regulations  ................................ ................................ ............................  3 
Risk classified food in the Regulations  ................................ ................................ ................................ ............  3 
Inspection and analysis of foods in the Regulations  ................................ ................................ ..................  4 
Administration of the inspection of surveillance food in the Regulations  ................................ ........  4 
Context  ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ . 5 
Why Regulations are needed  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...............................  5 
Why the Regulations need to be remade  ................................ ................................ ................................ ........  6 
Cost recovery not in scope  ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 6 
Imported food reforms not in scope  ................................ ................................ ................................ .................  6 
Our proposals for change  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..............................  7 
Certification in the Regulations  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..........................  7 
Prohibited plants and fungi in the Regulations  ................................ ................................ .........................  10 
Proposal for inspection and analysis of foods in the Regulations  ................................ .....................  10 
Proposal for risk classified food in the Regulations  ................................ ................................ ................  13 
Proposal for administration of the ins pection of surveillance food in the Regulations  ...........  14 
Glossary  ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................  15 
 Proposals for changes to imported food regulations  
Department of Agriculture and Water Resources  
iv Submissions  
The Department of Agriculture and Water Resources  is seeking submissions on a range of policy 
proposals under the Imported Food Control Regulations 1993 . These proposals are being 
considered as part of the department’s review of the Regulations which are required to be 
remade prior to their sunsetting on 1 October 2018.  
Your submissions will help us assess whether we need to amend these proposals to better  meet 
your needs while still achieving the objective of the Imported Food Control Act 1992 . 
How to have your say  
The deadline for receipt of all submissions is 5pm on Friday 24 February 2017.  
The department will consider all relevant material provided with in submission s. While there is 
no set format for a submission, please make sure you include at least the following information:  
 the title of this consulta tion document  
 your name and title  
 your organisation’s name if submitting on behalf of an organisation  
 your contact details.  
Ensure your comments can be clearly read because copies may be made to help with assessment 
and evaluation. Assist us by identifying  the relevant section when making a general comment on 
a spe cific section of this consultati on document.  
You can return your submission in the following ways:  
Submission: Proposals for changes to imported food control regulations  
Imported Food Section  
Department of Agriculture and Water Resources  
GPO Box 858  
Canberra  ACT  2601  
foodimp@agriculture.gov.au  
If submitted by email, a  hard copy of your submission is not needed. The department 
endeavours to formally acknowledge receipt of submissions within three business days.  
Submissions  received after 24 February will not be considered unless an extension had been 
given before the closing date.  
 
Privacy:  Personal information collected by the department will only be used to enable the 
department to contact you about your submission and ma y be disclosed to specialists, another 
Commonwealth government agency, a State and Territory government agency or foreign 
government department, provided the disclosure is consistent with relevant laws, in particular 
the Privacy Act 1988 . 
The department re quests that, as a minimum, you provide your name and contact details with 
your submission. Please indicate if you do not wish to have personal information published with 
your submission or disclosed to third parties. Collected personal information will be used and Proposals for changes to imported food regulations  
Department of Agriculture and Water Resources  
v stored consistent with the Australian Privacy Principles as outlined in the department’s  Privacy 
Policy  available on the department’s website.  
Confidentiality: Subject to the Freedom of I nformation Act 1982  and the Privacy Act 1988 , 
content of submissions may be made public, unless you state you want all or part of your 
submission to be treated as confidential.  A claim for confidentiality must be justified and 
provided as an attachment, ma rked ‘Confidential’. ‘Confidential’ material will not be made 
public. The department reserves the ri ght not to publish submissions.  
No breach of confidence will occur if the department shares your submission with a third party 
referred to under ‘Privacy’ in seeking advice in  response to your submission.  
  Proposals for changes to imported food regulations  
Department of Agriculture and Water Resources  
vi Publishing of submissions  
All submissions will be published  on the department’s website . We will not publi sh material that 
is provided in -confidence, but will record that such informa tion is held. In -confidence 
submissions may be subject to release under the provisions of the Freedom of Informa tion 
Act 1991  (FOI Act) . Submissions will be published as soon as p ossible after the end of the public 
comment period. Where large numbers of documents are involved, the department will make 
them available on CD, rather than the website.  
If you are making a submission, you may wish to indicate any grounds for withholding 
information contained in your submission. Reasons could include that the information is 
commercially sensitive or that you wish personal information, such as names and contact 
details , to be withheld . An automatic confidentiality disclaimer from your IT sy stem will not be 
considered as grounds for withholding information if the department receives a n FOI Act 
request.  
We will take your indications into account when determining whether to release information 
under a n FOI Act request. Any decisions to withhold  information requested under the FOI Act 
may be reviewed by the Ombudsman.  
Next steps  
After the consultati on period has closed, the department will  assess all submissions and 
consider what further amendments may  be required to address the issues raised in submissions, 
while still achieving the objective of the Imported Food Control Act.  
The finalised policy for remaking of the Regulations will then be recommended to the Minister 
for Agriculture and Water Resources.  
Table 1 Key dates for remaking of the Regulations  
Date  Action  
To 24 February 2017  Public consultation on the 
proposed policy changes for the 
Regulations  
May 2017  Commence drafting of the 
Regulations  
August 2017  Public consultation on remade 
Regulations  
December 2017  Regulations remade  Proposals for changes to imported food regulations  
Department of Agriculture and Water Resources  
1 Proposals for changes to imported food 
regulations  
The Imported Food Control Regulations  1993  set out provisions relating to the operation of the 
Imported Food Inspection Scheme  (IFIS)  and give effect to : 
 the Imported Food Control Order 2001  that  the Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources 
can classify foods for inspection  
 set out the fees that apply to chargeable services for assessing imported foods at the border.  
Under the Legislation Act 2003 , legislative instruments made in 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993 and 
1994 will automatically be repealed on 1 October 2018. In many cases, a replacement 
instrument must  be made and registered before the instrument sunsets to ensure continuity of 
the law.  
The department is conduct ing a review to ensure that the Regulations are still relevant  and 
required before they expire  on 1 October 2018.  
These Regulations are still required  to achieve the objective s of the Act , however amendments 
ensuring  their continued relevance and compliance with current legislative drafting practices  
must  be considered . 
This public consultation allows the department to receive  submission s that will form part of its 
review process before  remak ing the Regulations.  Any changes recommended will be subject to 
government consideration and agreement.  
Further information on the current operation of the IFIS is available from the department’s 
Imported Food Inspect ion Scheme web page . 
What is being reviewed  
The department is undertaking a review to assess whether the current Regulations:  
 meet the needs of industry and government today and into the future , noting that the scope 
for this review extends only to minor am endments to existing policy  
 are clear, transparent and easy to understand.  
Links to imported food legislation  
The following are links to where the relevant legislation may be obtained:  
 Impo rted Food Control Act  
 Imported Food Control Regulations  
 Imported Food Control Order  Proposals for changes to imported food regulations  
Department of Agriculture and Water Resources  
2 What is not being reviewed  
Aspects of the IFIS  will not be considered in this review because they are being considered as 
part of other reviews and reforms processes. These are:  
 the fees and charges contained within the Regulations  
 the imported food reform activity that the department is progr essing.  
Further information on the imported food reform work is available from the department’s 
Imported Food Reform web page . 
The review of the Regulations will only consider minor amendments to the existing policy 
because the imported food reforms address  broader policy proposals on how we manage 
imported food safety risks.  Proposals for changes to imported food regulations  
Department of Agriculture and Water Resources  
3 Summary of proposals  
While the department considers tha t the Regula tions are still required , the y could  be improved 
by making several minor amendments to the policy for administration of the IFIS. The proposals 
in this consultation document provide for  the following changes to existing policy : 
 increased flexib ility for industry to satisfy mandatory requirements for the importatio n of 
some risk classified foods  
 amend ed policy on weights and volumes of food taken to be for private consumption for risk 
classified foods and prohibited plants and fung i to account fo r contemporary commercial 
trade in food  and to manage risks to human health  
 amend ed Regulations to align the inspection rate variation for risk foods with current 
Australian Standards and international standards  
 creating  flexibility in application of the f ive per cent inspection of surveillance foods  
 removal of  some of the switching rules that have never been used under the IFIS . 
The proposals are part of the department’s review of the Regula tions, and if supported, will seek 
to remake the Regulations with inclusion of these proposals during 2017.  
Certificati on in the Regula tions  
The department is proposing a new policy  to permit a  recognised quality assurance certificate as 
an alternative to the current mandatory foreign government certification requirement  for some 
risk classified foods . Under the Act, a  recognised quality assurance certificate is an alternative 
means of demonstrating the safety of a food. This new policy will provide flexibility for industry 
because  they will have the choice between using either option to demonstrate the safety of their 
food.  The department will also make amendments to regulations 26, 27, 31 and 32 to clarify how 
food imported under certification is managed and inspected.  
Prohibited plants and fungi  in the Regulations  
Secti on 7 of the  Act does not apply to food that is for private consumption. Subsection 7(2) of the 
Act provides that food is taken  to be imported for private consumption if it has a volume of less 
than 10 litres or a weight of less than 10 kilograms, unless th e regulations prescribe a lower 
volume or weight. The Regulations currently prescribe lower weights and volumes for 
concentrated liquid food, moisture -reduced food and spices.  
The department proposes a new policy which will make any amount of a prohibited plant or 
fungus subject to the Act because  these have potential to affect human health if consumed. This 
would not prevent the importer from putting their case to the department that the food is for 
private consumption and is therefore exempt. This policy would support state and territory 
government food laws and no longer provide automatic exemption from  the border inspection 
activity.  
Risk classified food  in the Regulations  
Risk classified foods are known to pose a medium or high risk to human health. This policy will 
reduce the amount imported that is considered to be for private consumption from 10  kilograms  Proposals for changes to imported food regulations  
Department of Agriculture and Water Resources  
4 to one kilogram . Changing patterns  of commercial imports indicate  that high -value , low-volume 
imports of risk classified foods are occurring  for commercial purposes. Amounts once 
considered for private consumption are now being used for commercial trade. This policy still 
provides for exemption from inspection where the importer declares the food to be for private 
consumption , but it no longer prov ides automatic exemption for weights of up to 10  kilograms . 
This amendment mean s that more food is referred for inspection, increasing the costs for some 
food businesses operating in imports of small quantities. However , only food that is for 
commercial sa le will be inspected because the importer has the opportunity to provide evidence 
the food is for private consumption. This will allow the appropriate regulation of imported food 
to achieve the outcomes of the Act in managing risks to human health.  
Inspection and analysis  of foods  in the Regulations  
The department has identified a range of issues with current regulations concerning rates of 
inspection in regulations 14 to 17 and 21, and with analysis applied in regulation 29. This 
proposal will amend the re gulations to address each of the following issues : 
 some rules have never been applied and on review are considered unnecessary  
 other rules  do not provide for a hazard to be initially analysed at a reduced rate for a risk 
classified food  
 the rules which govern how inspection rates are reduced for risk classified foods are no 
longer consistent with the current Australian Standard 1199 -1988 (Sampling procedures and 
tables for inspection by attributes) and other relevant international standards  
 the departmen t has also identified the need for more transparency in how it determines what 
analyses it will apply to surveillance foods.  
Administration of the inspection of surveillance food  in the 
Regulations  
This policy will provide greater flexibility in how the de partment allocates the five per cent 
inspection ‘envelope’ across all surveillance classified foods. With this flexibility, the department 
could target infrequent and new food importers for inspection, or conduct other short -term 
targeted inspection activi ty in response to information gaps  or community concerns . The 
department could then reduce surveillance inspection of imported food that will be used for 
food manufacturing within Australia. The flexibility would be provided through a notice 
published on t he department’s website.  
This addresses the issue where surveillance foods may take some time before the current five 
per cent rate of inspection and analysis would randomly select an importer’s goods. This 
anomaly means that non -compliance may not be dete cted until many months after the importer 
has been importing the food or after many consignments have been imported . This  means that 
potentially non -compliant foods may have been released into the market. It also creates 
confusion because the importer has ‘suddenly’ been found to not comply when they may have 
been importing the food for many months.  Proposals for changes to imported food regulations  
Department of Agriculture and Water Resources  
5 Context  
The department  is one of many government agencies responsible for regulating food in 
Australia. The department administers two sets of requirements with  which imported food must 
comply. Food imported into Australia must meet biosecurity requirements under the Biosecurity 
Act 2015  (Cwlth) .  It is also subject to the Imported Food Control Act 1992  (Cwlth) to meet 
requirements for  food safety and compliance with  Australia’s  food standards.  
To monitor importers’ compliance with sourcing food that meets Australia’s food standards, the 
department operates a risk -based border inspection scheme —the Imported Food Inspection 
Scheme (IFIS).  
Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ),  an independent statutory authority  within the 
Department of Health portfolio, develops and maintains the Australia New Zealand Food 
Standards Code (the Code). The Code lists Australia’s food standards requirements including 
contami nant s (such as microbiological and chemical), additives, labelling and genetically 
modified food , as well as production and processing standards.  
FSANZ provides advice to the department on food s that pose a medium to high risk to public 
health. The department classifies these as risk  food  under the inspection scheme, and classifies 
all other food as surveillance  food . 
To identify which food is of interest, and the rate at which they should be referred (that is, 
whether at 100 per cent or five per cent of consig nments), the department applies electronic 
profiles in the Department of Immigration and Border Protection Integrated Cargo System (ICS).  
Once food is referred, the department’s systems apply relevant tests and inspection rates based 
on the risk the food m ay pose and for some food , the compliance history of the food producer.  
When imported food fails inspection, follow -up action such as treatment of the food to bring it 
into compliance, destruction or export is undertaken. Additionally, subsequent imports o f the 
same food are subject to inspection at the rate of 100 per cent of consignments until a history of 
compliance is demonstrated.  
In addition to the department's imported food testing, the state and territory  governments and 
local governments  have respo nsibility for ensuring that all food, including imported food, meets 
the requirements of the Code at the point of sale.  
Why Regulations are needed  
The Regulations are delegated  legislation , impose legally -binding obligations  and establish the 
rules for how  the IFIS  is administered by the department .  
The Act provides the broad framework for ensuring food imported to Australia complies with 
Australian food standards and is safe to eat.  
The Regulations made under this Act allow for more detailed requirements to set out how things 
will work on a practical level, such as inspec tion rates for different foods under t he IFIS . Proposals for changes to imported food regulations  
Department of Agriculture and Water Resources  
6 Why the Regulations need to be remade  
The Regulations were drafted in 1992 and have had amendments made to them since that time. 
The format for the way  they are currently drafted is no longer consistent with modern drafting 
practices and approaches that  simplify legislation. For this reason, when the Regulations are 
remade there will be changes in the way  they are formatted and they will be simplified. This 
process will not change the underlying policy for how the IFIS is administered.  
The department in its preliminary review of the Regulations also identified several areas where 
minor amendments could be made to the current administr ative policy to deliver improved 
outcomes. These are the proposals that ar e raised for consultation in this document.  
Cost recovery not in scope  
The fees and charges contained within the Regulations are out of scope for this  review  activity. 
These were rev iewed in 201 5, with new fees and charges commencing  from 1  December 2015.  
This document contains no cost -recovery proposals.  
Imported food reforms not in scope  
Reviewing  the Regulations before  their sunset on 1 October 2018 is a separate activity to the 
imported food reform work being conducted by the department. Th is review of the Regulations 
will only consider minor amendments to existing policy because the imported food reforms are 
addressing broader policy proposals to improve how we manage imported foo d safety risks.  
Further information on the imported food reform work is available from the department’s 
Imported Food Reform webpage .  Proposals for changes to imported food regulations  
Department of Agriculture and Water Resources  
7 Our proposals for change  
Certification in the Regu lations  
Background  
Some hazards can only be effectively managed during production and processing of food. In 
addition, end point inspection and analysis are not reliable in ensuring that hygienic controls 
have been used in the production and processing of food.  
For these reasons, certification is used regularly by governments as a means for ensuring that 
hazards have been effectively managed and hygienic controls are used du ring the production 
and processing of a food.  
Under the Act the Secretary of the department can determine recognised foreign government 
certificates  and recognised quality assurance certificates.  
For the purposes of this document ‘food covered by certifica tion’ means food that is covered by 
either a recognised foreign government certificate or a recognised quality assurance certificate.  
Current approach  
The Regulations provide for:  
 the Minister to make an order identifying a risk food as a food that must be  covered by 
recognised foreign government certification (r egulation  7(a)(ii) ) 
 the holding of food while the food is subject to inspection (regulations 26 and 27)  
 the rate of inspection and analysis to be reduced for risk foods that are covered by 
certifica tion (reg ulations 31 and 32) . 
The issues with the current measures are:  
 the need for more flexibility for importers by providing for recognised quality assurance 
certificates as an alternative to the required recognised foreign government certificates  
 ensu ring that regulations 31 and 32 work as intended and are flexible enough to deal with 
where an analysis is not possible , for example in the case of Bovine Spongiform 
Encephalopathy (BSE)  
 ensuring that regulations 26 and 27 do not apply to a food covered by  certification, unless 
that food is subject to a holding order , and that regulation 27 only applies after a suitable 
compliance history has been achieved.  
Proposed approach  
Recognised quality assurance certificates  
Importers will be provided with more flex ibility if the Minister  for Agriculture and Water 
Resources  is also authorised to make an order identifying a risk food as a food that must be 
covered by a recognised quality assurance certificate. This flexibility will be provided because Proposals for changes to imported food regulations  
Department of Agriculture and Water Resources  
8 recognised forei gn government certification is negotiated between governments, while  
recognised quality assurance certificates can be negotiated directly  by the department  with 
overseas food processing operations. This flexibility will provide a means for importers to 
source products from approved overseas food processing operations even if government 
certification arrangements are being developed.  
It is proposed that regulation 7 be amended to authorise the Minister  for Agriculture and Water 
Resources  to make an order ide ntifying a risk food as a food that must be covered by a 
recognised quality assurance certificate.  
Flexible certification requirements  
Regulations 31 and 32 provide for the rate of inspection to be varied if the owner produces 
either a recognised foreign g overnment certificate or a recognised quality assurance certificate 
for a food. A recognised foreign government certificate is a certificate issued under section 18 of 
the Act. A recognised quality assurance certificate is a certificate issued under sectio n 19 of the 
Act. 
The authority in paragraph 16(2)(i) of the Act  provides for  regulation 31 to permit  the rate of 
inspection of a food to be varied if there is no reason to doubt the authenticity of the certificate. 
The authority in paragraph 16(2)(j) of th e Act  provides for  regulation 32 to establish  that the 
reliability of a certificate referred to in regulation 31 may be verified by all three of the 
following:  
 drawing samples of food at a rate that is not less than five per cent of the total consignment s 
certified  
 auditing the system operated by the foreign government instrumentality or approved 
overseas food processing operation  
 conducting documentation checks by requiring the foreign government instrumentality to 
verify certificates.  
To ensure that regulations 31 and 32 operate as intended, it is proposed that these regulations 
be redrafted, if necessary , to provide that:  
 the rate of inspection and analysis of a risk food covered by certification may be lowered if a 
certificate is provided to an authorised officer and the officer h as no reason to doubt the 
authenticity of the certification  
 the reliability of the certification must be verified by:  
 inspecting (with or without sampling for analysis) no less than five percent of 
consignments of a risk  food covered by certification  
 auditing  
 documentation checks for risk foods of a particular kind from a particular source.  
Regulation 31 only provides for  variation in the rate of inspection of a food if the owner of a food 
produces a recognised foreign go vernment certificate to an authorised officer. The regulation 
does not provide for the foreign government instrumentality or overseas food processing 
operation to provide this certificate directly to the authorised officer. Governments are 
developing 'e Cert’ arrangements to prevent fraud and deception. Under these arrangements the Proposals for changes to imported food regulations  
Department of Agriculture and Water Resources  
9 certificate is sent directly between governments rather than via the owner of the food. This 
mechanism provides greater certificate integrity.  
To implement these arrangements and as authorised by s 16(2)(i), regulation 31 could be 
amended to provide that the certificate would be provided directly to the authorised officer and 
not by  the owner of the food.  
Holding of food covered by certification  
Regulations 26 and 27 specify how fo od is to be held until the results of the inspection are 
provided in an imported food inspection advice issued under section 14 of the Act.  
Regulation 26 applies to both risk food and food that is the subject of a holding order. After 
sampling of these foo ds, the remainder of a consignment of these foods must be held at the place 
nominated in the food control certificate. However, these foods may be held at another place if 
an authorised officer approves the food being held at another place. This provides f or foods to be 
moved to particular storage places after sampling and until the results of the inspection are 
known  and advice is issued.  
Regulation 27 only applies to risk food that must be held at a particular place because of 
regulation 26, and does not apply to a food that is the subject of a holding order.  
Regulation 27 provides that despite regulation 26, an authorised officer may ‘release’ a food if 
that food is so perishable that it cannot be held until the results of the inspection are finalised 
(that is, until an imported food inspection advice is issued). This provides for high value, highly 
perishable foods to be released prior to  the imported food inspection advice being  issued. 
However, an authorised officer must have approved this dealing with  the food and any 
conditions imposed by the authorised officer for this dealing must be complied with.  
In practice regulations 26 and 27 are not meant to apply to a risk food covered by certification. If 
necessary, regulations 26 and 27 should be amended to provide that they do not apply to a risk 
food that is covered by certification unless the risk food is the subject of a holding order that has 
not been revoked.  
Regulations 26 and 27 use some expressions that are not defined  and would provide greater 
clarity if amended . For example:  
 ‘results of the inspection are known’ which may need to be described as ‘imported food 
inspection advice is issued’  
 ‘release’ which may need to be described as dealing with a food as if an imported food 
inspection advice had been issued for the food and that advice did not identify the food as 
failing food . 
In addition, regulation 27 should only apply if a risk food has previously been inspected and 
analysed at least five times and th e inspection and analysis ha ve not identifi ed the food as a 
failing food. Regulation 27 should be amended to provide that it only applies:  
 after the five previous consignments of the food have been inspected and analysed  
 for each of these five previous consignments both:  Proposals for changes to imported food regulations  
Department of Agriculture and Water Resources  
10  an imported food inspection  advice has been issued  
 each imported food inspection advice did not identify the food as a failed food.  
Prohibited plants and fungi  in the Regulations  
Section 7 of the Act provides that the Act does not apply to food that is for private consumption. 
Subsection 7(2) of the Act provides that food is taken to be imported for private consumption if 
it has a volume of less than 10 litres or a weight of less than 10 kilograms, unless the regulations 
prescribe a lower volume or weight. The Regulations curren tly prescribe lower weights and 
volumes for concentrated liquid food, moisture -reduced food and spices.  
Background  
Under the Act and the existing Regulations, up to 10 kilograms of a prohibited plant or fungus 
may be imported into Australia for private con sumption. Once a food has been imported into 
Australia, state and territory food laws would prevent the sale or handling for sale of this food.  
Prohibited plants and fungi  have the potential to affect human health. For this reason, it is 
considered that ad ditional controls should apply to these foods so that state and territory laws 
are not required to respond to a human health threat if these foods  were sold or handled for 
sale.  
Proposed approach  
The Regulations be amended to provide that the Act would app ly to any amount of a prohibited 
plant or fungus that is imported.  Where the importer provides evidence that the food is for 
private consumption, the food would then be released as it is exempt from the Act requirements.  
For the authorities in subsection 7(2) of the Act, this would mean prescribing a weight and 
volume of zero kilograms and zero litres for prohibited plant s or fungi . The effect of this 
measure would  be to ensure any amount of prohibited plant or fungus is referred for inspection 
and analysi s under the IFIS . 
On inspection , these foods would be found to be prohibited plants or fung i and therefore could 
not be imported  for commercial purposes . This is the same approach that would apply to these 
foods under existing state and territory food laws . 
This measure does not need to apply to food imported as a trade sample as this food is not for 
consumption by any person.  
Proposal for inspection and analysis  of foods  in the 
Regulations  
Background and current  approach  
A number of regulations specify the  rate of inspection and analysis of foods, specifically:  
 regulation 14 specifies the rate for which both risk foods and surveillance foods must be 
referred by Customs officers; a ll risk foods must be referred by a Customs officer and five per 
cent of sur veillance food must be referred  Proposals for changes to imported food regulations  
Department of Agriculture and Water Resources  
11  regulation 15 which specifies the three rates of inspection to which a risk food may be 
subjected, specifically: tightened (100  per cent ), normal (25  per cent ) and reduced (5  per 
cent ). These descriptions for rates of inspecti on are consistent wit h the Australian Standard 
1199,  and are consistent with Intern ational Standards Organization S tandard 2859 , and is 
referenced in the Codex Guidelines on Sampling (CAC/GL 50 -2004)  
 regulation 16  which specifies the rates at which a risk  food must initially be inspected, 
specifically, at the tightened rate if that risk food has the potential to pose a high risk to 
human health or at the normal rate if that risk food has the potential to pose  a medium risk to 
human health  
 regulation 17 which specif ies the ‘switching rules’  (the rules)  
 regulation 21 which specifies the rate of inspection of surveillance food and requires all 
surveillance food to be inspected  
 regulation 29 which provides that any food may be subjected to any microbiological, chemical 
or physical analysis necessary to determine if the food poses a risk to human health or 
complies with an applicable standard.  
For a risk food, the Regulations result in inspection and analysis that:  
 reduce the rate of inspection of a food that is found to be compliant ; this rewards owners of 
compliant food and allows the inspection to focus the inspection resources on those foods 
that are more likely to be non -compliant  
 increase the rate of inspection of any food that is found to be non -compliant ; this provides 
incentive  to owners of non -compliant food to bring their food in to compliance and also 
focuses inspection resources on those foods that are more likely to be non -compliant.  
Specifically, the rules provide that the inspection and analysis of a  risk food from a particular 
source may be:  
 lowered from the tightened rate (100  per cent ) to the normal rate (25  per cent ) of inspection 
after five consecutive batches of the food pass inspection  
 lowered from the normal rate (25  per cent ) to the reduced rate (5  per cent ) after 20 
consecutive batches of the food pass inspection  
 raised from the normal rate (25  per cent ) to the tightened rate (100  per cent ) when either a 
lot of the food is rejected on original inspection or there are reasonable grounds for b elieving 
the food does not comply with an applicable standard  
 raised from the reduced rate (5  per cent ) to the normal rate (25  per cent ) when either a lot of 
the food is rejected on original inspection or there are reasonable grounds for believing the 
food  does not comply with an applicable standard  
 raised from the reduced rate (5  per cent ) to the tightened rate (100  per cent ) when either a 
lot of the food is rejected on original inspection or there are reasonable grounds for believing 
the food does not com ply with applicable standards or poses a serious risk to human  health . 
Proposed Approach  
The issues identified with the current regulations are:  Proposals for changes to imported food regulations  
Department of Agriculture and Water Resources  
12  some rules  have never been applied and are considered unnecessary  
 the rules do not provide for a hazard to be i nitially analysed at a reduced rate for a risk food  
 the rules are inconsistent with Australian Standard 1199 and the r elevant international 
standards  
 there is need for more transparency in determining the analysis of foods . 
Unnecessary rules  
The department  has never used the rule  where the rate of inspection and analysis is raised from 
the reduced rate (5  per cent ) to the normal rate (25  per cent ) in sub -regulation 17(5). This is 
because foods that have been found to be non -compliant are inspected and analy sed at the 100  
per cent  rate to ensure any non -compliance has been resolved. It is proposed that the rule in 
subregulation 17(5) be removed.  
The department has never applied the rule where the normal rate (25  per cent ) applies because 
the risk food has the  potential to pose a medium risk to human health (subregulation 16(2)). It is 
proposed that this rule be removed. As a consequence of the removal of this rule, it would be 
necessary to amend subregulation 16(1) so that consistent with regulation 9, it refe rs to food 
that poses either a medium or high risk to human health.  
Reduced rate for a risk food  
Some hazards in risk foods have the potential to pose a high risk to human  health and should be 
initially analysed for at the tightened rate. However, some hazards in the same food may not 
pose a high risk to human  health and it is appropriate that these hazards be analysed for only at 
the reduced rate.  The current Regulations do not specifically provide this more proportionate 
approach.  
It is proposed that the Regulations be amended to provide that an analysis for a hazard may be 
commenced at the reduced rate if the hazard does not have the potential to pose a medium or 
high ri sk to human health.  
Inconsistency with Australian and international standards  
The Regulations require 20 consecutive batches of food to pass inspection before the rate of 
inspection and analysis may be lowered from the normal rate (25  per cent ) to the redu ced rate 
(5 per cent ). However, t he rules provide that only 10 consecutive batches are required to 
warrant a reduction from the normal rate to the reduced rate.  
To align more closely with Australian and international standards, it is proposed to provide th at 
only 10 consecutive batches would need to pass inspection before the rate of inspection and 
analysis could  be lowered from the normal rate (25  per cent ) to the reduced rate (5  per cent ). 
Transparency in determining the analysis of foods  
Inspection and a nalysis of foods can impose substantial costs on importe rs in terms of analysis 
costs and time in waiting for analyses to be reported. Currently, regulation 29 provides a general 
discretionary authority that allows the department to subject any food to any  microbiological, 
chemical or physical analysis necessary to determine if the food poses a risk to human health or Proposals for changes to imported food regulations  
Department of Agriculture and Water Resources  
13 complies with an applicable standard.  This general discretionary authority has not currently 
been assigned to any position of authority  withi n the department . 
The department  propose s that this authority be exercised by the Secretary, which c ould  then be 
delegated to appropr iate officers in the department . This amendment would provide  clear 
responsibility as to the person who  imposes an analysis  on a food . 
Proposal for risk classified food  in the Regulations  
Section 7 of the Act provides that the Act does not apply to food that is for private consumption. 
Subsection 7(2) of the Act provides that food is taken to be imported for private consumption if 
it has a volume of less than 10 litres or a weight of less than 10 kilograms, unless the regulations 
prescribe a lower volume or weight. The Regulations currently prescribe lower weights and 
volumes for concentrated liquid food, moisture red uced food and spices.  
Background  
Under the Act and existing Regulations, less than 10 kilograms of risk -classified food may be 
imported into Australia for private consumption. This is because the Act provides that an 
amount less than 10 k ilograms  is taken  to be for private consumption unless the regulations 
prescribe a lower amount. A lower amount has not been prescribed for risk foods.  
The Act does not apply to foods imported for private consumption. As a result, risk food imports 
of 10 k ilograms  or less are not required to comply with the Act, including the certification 
requirements for those risk foods where this is a mandatory certification requirement. This 
provides potential for importers to import quantities of high -value risk food for commercial 
purposes  and not be subject to inspection , analysis and certification requirements under the 
IFIS . 
Import data for a twelve month period indicated there were 5 652  lines of risk -classified food 
declared with a weight of up to 10 kilograms. Of these, approxim ately half were  for risk 
classified cheese.  
Proposed approach  
That  the Regulations be amended to provide that risk food  for private consumption be an 
amount that is not more than one kilogram . The effect of this measure would  be to ensure that 
any amount o f risk food  over one kilogram  is referred for inspection and analysis under the  IFIS. 
On inspection these foods would need to meet the requirements for risk food, including any 
mandatory certification requirements . 
This regulation would not restrict risk food  imports that are greater than one kilogram  from 
being imported for private consumption, provided that the person importing could demonstrate 
that the food  was for their private consumption . 
For the authorities in subsection 7(2) of the Act  to apply , this proposal would require the 
Regulation s to prescribe a weight of one kilogram for risk-classified food  that is taken to be 
imported for private consumption.  
As a transitional measure, the Regulations (as amended) and the Imported Food Control 
Order  2001  could  provide that, for amounts between 10  kilograms  and one kilogram , the new Proposals for changes to imported food regulations  
Department of Agriculture and Water Resources  
14 requirements would not be imposed for a period of three months. During this time, industry 
would be advised of these coming changes through information published on the departm ent’s 
website and during the physical inspection of any risk food  requiring inspection within the 
range of one to 10  kilograms . 
This measure would  not need to apply to foods imported as a trade sample as this food is not for 
consumption by any person.  
Prop osal for administration  of the inspection of surveillance  
food in the Regulations  
Background  and current approach  
A number of regulations specify that  five per cent of surveillance food must be inspected.  
Currently, the five per cent inspection rate is applied as a flat rate across all surveillance foods.  
A problem with the current regulations  is the greater potential for non -compliance with  imports 
of surveillance food by infrequent or new food importers , and the disruption and uncertainty 
when these im porters of surveillance food are found to be importing non -compliant food.  
Another problem is that if there is an identified information gap or a community con cern about a 
specific surveillance food, the current application of the five per cent inspection rate means it 
may take significant time for the department to gather information on that specific surveillance 
food under the IFIS . 
Proposed approach  
That  the Regulations be amended to provide greater flexibility in the way that the department 
allocates the five per cent inspection envelope across all surveillance -classified foods.  
With this flexibility, the department could target infrequent and new food importers for 
inspection, or conduct other short -term targeted inspection activity in response to inf ormation 
gaps.  
There will be a corresponding reduction in other surveillance foods to ensure the overall 
inspection rate for all surveillance foods does not exceed five per cent. For example,  inspection 
of surveillance foods that would be used for domestic  food manufacturing could be less than five 
per cent, as these foods are subject to post -border food regulatory controls. Inspection could  be 
set at zero per cent to minimise the regulatory burden on Australian food manufacturing, or 
raised to five per cen t where data may be required to inform government , or to 100 per cent 
where there are reasonable grounds to believe th at food would be a failing food.  
The flexibility would be through  a notice published on the department’s website  and indicate if 
specific surveillance foods will be targeted at a rate greater than five per cent.  Proposals for changes to imported food regulations  
Department of Agriculture and Water Resources  
15 Glossary  
Authorised officer  means the Secretary of the Department of Agriculture and Water 
Resources; or an Australian Public Service employee in the department 
appointed by the Secretary under subsection 40(1) of the Imported Food 
Control Act 1992; or , with some exclusions, a person appointed by the 
Secretary under subsection 40(2).  
Compliance agreement food  
 An agreement which may be entered into by the Secretary with a person 
in relation to food that may be imported into Australia in accordance with 
the terms of the agreement.  
Customs officer  Reference to a Customs officer is reference to an Officer of Customs 
within the meaning of the Customs Act 1901 , which includes such officers 
as the Secretary of the Department of Immigration and Border Protection 
or an A ustralian Public Service  employee of that department. Refer to the 
Customs Act for further detail.  
Food control certificate  
 Issued by an authorised officer following a pplication by the owner of the 
examinable food to which the application relates  for food which is to be 
inspected, or inspected and analysed under the food inspection scheme.  
Foreign government certificate  
 A certificate issued by an instrumentality of a s pecified foreign 
government stating that food of a specified kind meets applicable 
standards and does not pose a risk to human health.  
FSANZ  Food Standards Australia New Zealand is a bi -national government 
agency responsible for developing food standards a nd administering the 
Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code. FSANZ conducts the food 
risk assessment and advises the Department of Agriculture and Water 
Resources about food that poses a medium to high risk to human health 
and safety.  
Holding order  A legal document provided for in the Imported Food Control Act 1992 . Use 
of a holding order increases the rate of inspection of a failing food until 
subsequent imports demonstrate compliance with the requirements of 
the Act.  
ICS Integrated Cargo System is an a pplication managed by the Department of 
Immigration and Border Protection  and used to electronically report and 
record imports and exports coming into and leaving Australia. The 
application allows for the collection of duty and GST , and is used to 
moni tor the movement of goods , capture statistics and for intelligence 
purposes.  Proposals for changes to imported food regulations  
Department of Agriculture and Water Resources  
16 IFIS  The imported food inspection scheme,  or food inspection scheme, 
provided for under s 16 o f the  Imported Food Control Act 1992 , and set out 
in th e Imported Food Control Regulations 1993, provides for inspection 
of food at various rates at the border  in order  to assess importer 
compliance with sourcing food that meets Australian food standards and 
does  not pose a risk to human health.  
Inspection  Includes physical inspectio n (visual and label assessment), or inspection 
and analysis (samples taken and sent for a nalysis), as the case requires.  
Recognised quality assurance certificate  
 Certificate issued under a determination made by the Secretary of the 
Department of Agriculture and Water Resources  which states that 
particular food processed in a particular food processing operation meets 
applicable standards and does not pose a risk to human health.  
Risk food  Food which is set out in Schedule 1 of the Imported Food Co ntrol  
Order  200 1. 
Safe food  Food that will not cause illness or other physical harm  to a person eating 
it, provided that the food is used as it is intended to be used.  
Surveillance  food  Food which is not classified as risk  food, compliance agreement food or is 
the subject of a holding order, and which is referred to the electronic 
recording system, the Agriculture Import Management System . 
Switching rules  Colloquial term referring to the rules  in regulation 17 of the Import ed 
Food Control Regulations 1993 for varying the rate of inspection for a risk 
food from a particular source. The rules are based on Australian Standard 
1199 –1998 Sampling procedures and tables for inspection by attributes ; 
Australian Standard 2490 -1997 Sa mpling procedures and charts for 
inspection by variables for percent nonconforming; and are consistent 
with Intern ational Standards Organization S tandard 2859 -1999 -Sampling 
procedu res for inspection by attributes; and referenced in the Codex 
Guidelines on Sampling (CAC/GL 50 -2004) .