WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/SPS/W/238 
5 May 2009 
 (09-2212) 
Committee on Sanitary a nd Phytosanitary Measures Original:   English 
  
 
THIRD REVIEW OF THE WTO SPS AGREEMENT –  
PROPOSAL FROM CHINA 
 
Comments from Australia on G/SPS/W/234
 
 
 
 The following communication, received on 4 May 2009, is being circulated at the request of the Delegation of Autralia
. 
 
_______________ 
 
 1. This document contains comments from th e Australian Government on G/SPS/W/223 – Third 
Review of the WTO/SPS Agreement – China’s Proposal, circulated on 19 February 2009. 
2. Australia thanks the People’s Republic of Chin a (China) for its proposal on Article 8 to be 
considered as part ofr the Third Review of the WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and 
Phytosanitary Measures (the SPS Agreement).  Aust ralia looks forward to discussions on this matter 
at the 44
th SPS Committee meeting in June 2009. 
3. Detailed comments are inserted below in relation to specific excerpts from the text of 
G/SPS/W/234. 
SPECIFIC COMMENTS ON G/SPS/W/234 TEXT: 
 "6. Based on the above observations, Chin a would like to propose the following: 
  (a) The SPS Committee should initiate discussions to identify typical steps of 
  control, inspection and approval procedures in relation to sanitary and    phytosanitary measures, as well as application recommendations and good 
  practice therein to provide guidance for implementation." 
Australian comment
: 
4. Australia notes that the relevant internati onal standard setting bodies (ISSBs) (the Codex 
Alimentarius Commission, the International Pl ant Protection Convention (IPPC) and the World 
Organisation for Animal Health (OIE)) already have in place detailed technical and practical guidance 
on control, inspection and approval procedures.  Control, inspection and approval procedures are 
essentially of a technical nature and technical exper tise is therefore needed for their development.  
Australia considers that the ISSB s (rather than the SPS Committee) have the appropriate technical 
expertise to evaluate current international guida nce and develop any further guidance as necessary. 
5. For example, the Codex Committee on Food Import & Export Inspection and Certification 
Systems (CCFICS) develops principles and guidelin es for food inspection, and certification systems.  
It also aims to harmoniZe methods and procedures wh ich protect the health of consumers, ensure fair G/SPS/W/238 
Page 2  
 
  trading practices and facilitate international trad e in foodstuffs.  Codex h as developed and adopted 
several texts covering the areas of concern raised by China.  These include:  
(a) Principles for Food Import & Export Inspection & Certification (CAC/GL 20-1995);  
and  
(b) Guidelines for Food Import Control Systems including an Appendix Principles and 
Guidelines for Imported Food Inspection Based on Risk (CAC/CL 47-2003).  
6. CCFICS is also currently developing Guidelines for the conduct of foreign audits, inspections 
and guidelines for national food control systems. 
7. The IPPC has adopted detailed International Standards on Phytosanitary Measures (ISPMs) 
on a range of inspection and certification procedur es.  ISPMs of particular relevance include:  
(a) ISPM 07 Export certification system; 
(b) ISPM 12 Guidelines for phytosanitary certificates; 
(c) ISPM 15 Regulation of wood packaging material in international trade (2009 
revision); 
(d) ISPM 20 Guidelines for a phytosanitary import regulatory system;  
(e) ISPM 23 Guidelines for inspection;  and 
(f) ISPM 31 Methodologies for sampling of consignments. 
8. The OIE has provided guidance on inspection an d certification in the Terrestrial Animal 
Health Code which has a chapter on Evaluation of Veterinary Services and a Section on Trade 
Measures, Import/Export Procedures and Veterinary Certification.  
  "(b) Such terms as "reasonable and necessary" in Article 1(e) and "reasonable 
  inspection" in Article 3 of Annex C of the Agreement should be discussed in 
  the SPS Committee so that necessary explanations and cl arification can be 
  made to facilitate their implementation." 
Australian comment:
  
9. Australia notes that a similar discussion was held on this topic several years ago when the 
Codex Guidelines for Food Import Control Systems (CAC/CL 47-2003) were being amended.  The 
guideline has a footnote referring to the WTO Decision WT/MIN (01)17.  The discussion paper (CX/FICS 04/13/9 – October 2004) from CCFICS has the text clarifying "reasonable interval". 
10. However, Australia considers that clarification of these terms within the SPS Agreement is 
unlikely to be helpful or useful because their me anings differ amongst ISSBs and in the context of 
specific technical uses.  Any clarification of these terms would be best considered on a case by case 
basis within specific text under consideration in  the ISSBs, such as the above CCFICS example. 
  "(c) The SPS Committee should draw the attention of OIE, IPPC and Codex of 
 the discussion and consult with them regarding the development of relevant  international standards pertaining to  control, inspection and approval 
 procedures, such as sampling, on-site inspection, determination of soil 
 freedom, etc., to further the implementation of Article 8 of the SPS 
 Agreement." 
  G/SPS/W/238 
 Page 3 
 
 
  Australian comment : 
11. See comments under (a).  The ISSBs are observe rs of the SPS Committee and provide regular 
update reports to the SPS Committee, as well as providing opportunities for the SPS Committee to have input to the work of the ISSBs.  
  "(d) Members should be encouraged to  share their experiences and difficulties 
 with implementing Article 8 of the SPS Agreement." 
Australian comment
: 
12. Australia agrees that Members could share information relating to Article 8. 
__________