Increasing high risk foods imported under foreign government certification arrangements Under the existing IFC Act 1992, food can be imported under a foreign government certification arrangement. The Act enables the department to enter into a government-to-government certification arrangement with the national competent authority of a country exporting food to Australia, providing confidence that the food has been produced safely. Consignments of imported food accompanied by a recognised foreign government certificate may be inspected and tested at a reduced rate (five per cent). Foreign government certification arrangements are currently in place for certain risk classified seafood from Thailand (fish, crustaceans and bivalve molluscs) and Canada (fish and crustaceans) and Roquefort cheese from France. Use of a foreign government certificate in the clearance of food imported to Australia is normally voluntary but under an order may be mandated. Recognised government certification is currently mandatory for raw milk cheese and beef and beef products for Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) food safety requirements. Foreign government certification arrangements benefit the exporting country, the importer and also potentially the consumers of these foods. The exporting country benefits as it is exposed to less trade and reputational risk from non-compliant food being exported. The importer of risk foods benefits as consignments of these foods are inspected and tested at a reduced rate (five per cent) representing financial savings to the importer. The consumer benefits from potentially safer food, as the exporting country’s competent authority has provided assurance that the food complies with Australia’s food safety standards. In comparison, no such government assurance is provided for other risk foods imported into Australia. However, importers may request assurances from suppliers under commercial arrangements. To increase the amount of risk food that is imported under a foreign government certification arrangement and therefore certified as being compliant with Australia’s food safety standards, the department could actively seek to increase the number of arrangements in place. This could be achieved by promoting the advantages of these arrangements to countries exporting a high volume of a risk food to Australia. Importers choosing to source foods from suppliers with this certification will benefit from reduced border intervention. Table 1 summarises the countries that had the most ‘risk food’ lines referred to the department for inspection and analysis under IFIS from 2013-2015 by commodity type (excluding New Zealand).
Appendix A: Consolidated list of questions Option 1–Food Import Compliance Agreements Question 1 If you are a food importer and would be interested in entering into a tiered FICA, what proportion (%) of foods you currently import would you most likely want covered in the agreement? Option 3–Supply chain assurance Question 2 (a) If you are a food importer, what assurances do you gain from your suppliers to ensure the food has been produced, manufactured and handled safely? What costs do you incur to obtain this assurance? (b) If the food you import comes with some form of food safety certification, do you verify compliance with the certification and if so, how? What costs do you incur in undertaking this verification? (c) Are the kinds of foods likely to require supply chain assurance clearly defined? If you are an importer of these kinds of foods, do you already require certification for supply chain assurance, such as a recognised food safety management scheme? If so, do you pass on any associated costs to consumers? Option 3–Emergency response Question 3 Often at the beginning of a food safety issue being identified, there is incomplete information on the cause of the issue. However, depending on the level of risk it may be necessary to take immediate action. What would be the impact to your business if imports of a specific food were restricted (held) at the border to gain additional assurances on the safety of the product? Option 3–Monitoring and responding to emerging food safety issues Question 4 (a) If you are a food importer, can you describe how you monitor and respond to emerging food safety issues (e.g. receive information from suppliers, industry associations, government alerts). (b) What do you consider would be the most effective mechanism to communicate emerging food safety issues to importers? Option 3–Traceability Question 5 (a) Is it reasonable to assume that importers registered as food businesses with their local authority already have the ability to trace food one step forward and back in compliance with current state and territory legislation? (b) Are you aware of other supporting material available to food business to establish food recall plans, including templates and tools?