Report of the Eminent Scientists Group

The Report of the Eminent Scientists Group on the Draft Final Import Risk Analysis Report for Chicken Meat to the Director of Animal and Plant Quarantine

Dr John C Radcliffe AM
Emeritus Professor Malcolm Nairn AM
Dr Mark Lonsdale
Dr TJ Higgins

May 2008

Introduction

In 2004 the Eminent Scientists Group (ESG) was established to increase confidence in the administration of the import risk analysis (IRA) process conducted by Biosecurity Australia (BA).

This report by the ESG is made in accordance with its original terms of reference, which are to:

• review the draft final IRA report prepared by the IRA team to ensure that the IRA team has adequately considered all technical submissions received from stakeholders during the formal consultation period on the draft IRA, and
• within 60 days of being presented with the draft final IRA report, prepare a report to the Director of Quarantine on their findings and recommend any action considered necessary to overcome any identified deficiencies. The ESG will provide a copy of the report to the Chief Executive of BA.

The Secretary of the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry has additionally sought any advice the ESG considers may be of assistance beyond these formal terms of reference on matters relating to the science within this IRA.

On 31 March 2008, BA formally referred the draft final Generic Import Risk Analysis Report for Chicken Meatto the ESG. The report was received by members of the ESG on the date of referral.

To facilitate deliberations, the ESG was provided with:

• the draft final Generic Import Risk Analysis Report for Chicken Meat
• 21 submissions from stakeholders received during the formal, extended period of consultation on the draft report; and
• a summary table setting out stakeholder comments and BA's responses to those comments.

Following out of session consideration of these documents, the ESG met in Canberra on 8—10 April 2008 to prepare its findings. During the meeting, BA presented to the ESG on the consultation processes for the IRA and the risk assessment model used for the evaluation.

This assessment by the ESG provides observations on BA's treatment of stakeholder comments in the development of the draft final IRA report. ESG members agreed to the report out of session.

Assessment

The ESG notes that although there were on 21 submissions made by stakeholders, these encompassed a significant number and range of issues. BA has responded to these issues by, where appropriate, including additional information in the September 2007 draft final IRA report and by making revisions to the draft text. The ESG considers that the responses made by BA to the majority of the issues raised are of a high quality and comprehensively address the concerns of stakeholders.

The ESG considers, however, that in the interest of assisting stakeholder understanding of the issues, there may be scope for the further development of some of BA's responses.

Specifically, the ESG considers that further details is required to explain the conditions for the thermal inactivation of the avian influenza (AI) virus. The United States and Thailand raised objections to the requirement in the draft IRA for poultry meat to be heated to 70ºC for 1 minute to inactivate AI virus, arguing that is was excessive. BA's response was that heat susceptibility of AI and Newcastle disease viruses were sufficiently similar as to treat them the same. The ESG was referred to a record of a teleconference of 11 September 2007 of the IRA Team in which the heat susceptibility for Newcastle disease was discussed. This discussion resulted in the IRA Team resolving that the time for heat treatment (that is, 8.2 minutes) should be the same for AI and Newcastle disease. In response, BA indicated that more information was required on this issue and that further commissioned work was being investigated.

The ESG considers that stakeholder comments on the potentially significant human health risks associated with the introduction to Australia of antiboitic-resistant bacteria and - to a lesser extent - chemical residues and the assurance of their appropriate recognition and treatment have not been fully dealt with in the report. The ESG notes that human health issues are not matters for which the Director of Animal and Plant Quarantine has legislative responsibility and that, ultimately, any imports must comply with human health regulations. Nonetheless, the ESG is of the view that there may be merit in BA further discussing with the Department of Health and Ageing the inclusion of additional material included on arboviruses (which the ESG considered added significant value and which could in fact be included as a subsection of the proposed additional section).

The necessity for effective auditing and monitoring to ensure compliance with the standards set by the IRA was raised in a significant number of submissions. The ESG concludes there may be scope for BA to further develop responses to this issue to provide greater detail about the respective roles of BA and AQIS in ensuring import conditions are met.

Conclusion

Beyond these matters, the ESG concludes unanimously that the Chicken Meat IRA Team has prooperly considered the 21 submissions received from stakeholders on the final draft Generic Import Risk Analysis Report for Chicken Meat.