Australian Quarantine Review Secretariat Australian Quarantine a shared responsibility

IMBALANCE BETWEEN PLANTS AND ANIMALS

Download 1.49 Mb.

Page	40/62
Date	05.05.2018
Size	1.49 Mb.
	#47737

1 ... 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 ... 62

9.6 IMBALANCE BETWEEN PLANTS AND ANIMALS

As highlighted in Chapter 2, all elements of the continuum of quarantine ¾ pre-border, border and post-border ¾ have tended to have a stronger focus on animals than plants. This is also generally true of animal and plant health services. Reasons for the bias towards animals include:

· the greater emotional impact of pests and diseases of animals compared to the impact of plant pests and diseases, given that most plant pests and diseases have little visible effect on the community;
· a large number of private veterinary practitioners with a legal obligation to report serious pest and disease outbreaks, ensuring that early detection and reporting are more likely with animal than plant pests and diseases;
· better diagnostic technology with animal industries than with plant industries;
· better tracing systems for the movement of most infected animals or animal products than with plants or plant products;
· a relatively small number of animal pests and diseases affecting a limited number of domesticated animal species, including those forming the basis of very large and valuable industries, compared to the very large number of exotic pests and diseases affecting numerous plant species that are often the basis of only relatively small industries;
· a longer history of international collaboration and coordination of management and resources for animal health and quarantine than for plant health and quarantine; and
· until recently, little public appreciation of the significance of plant incursions on Australia's natural environment.
The Review Committee is strongly of the view that this imbalance needs to be redressed to raise the profile of plant health and quarantine in Australia, but should not be at the expense of animal health and quarantine. Two structures that greatly assist government and industry focus on resources and other issues in the animal area, both domestically and internationally, are the newly formed AAHC and the Commonwealth Office of the Chief Veterinary Officer (CVO). The Review Committee believes that the plant industries would benefit significantly by the establishment of a similar Council and position for plants within Australia.

9.6.1 Australian Animal Health Council

AAHC is a non-profit company limited by guarantee, established under Australian corporations law and accountable to the Australian Securities Commission. Its shareholders are the Commonwealth and State Ministers with agricultural responsibilities as well as the Presidents of the Australian Veterinary Association and the eight peak national commodity councils of Australia's livestock industries (the Australian Chicken Meat Federation, the Australian Dairy Farmers' Federation, the Australian Egg Industry Association, the Australian Horse Council, the Cattle Council of Australia, the Pork Council of Australia, the Sheepmeat Council of Australia, and the Wool Council of Australia).

AAHC was formed following a major review of animal health services in Australia during 1994. This review, as well as recommending the formation of the AAHC with both industry and government representation, identified seven core functions in animal health that were required at a national level. These are:
· disease surveillance, diagnosis, reporting, prevention, control and eradication;
· policy development in animal health, veterinary public health and animal welfare;
· negotiation of trade protocols, development of standards and certification for export;

· exclusion of exotic disease;

· maintenance of professional standards and expertise;
· development of national codes of practice for animal care, husbandry, welfare and veterinary public health; and
· national registration of veterinary chemicals and biologicals.
AAHC was established to give a higher profile to and broaden the input base for animal health planning in Australia. It is intended to be the peak animal health body ¾ the point of reference for strategic policy development, for national program funding and for animal health matters that require negotiation and resolution. The AAHC will also monitor standards for the provision of animal health services in Australia.
The objectives of AAHC are to :
· provide strategic leadership in the identification of national priorities and the development of national policy for Australia's animal health system;
· ensure that the performance of the national animal health system meets market and commercial requirements; and
· ensure international confidence in the capability of Australia's animal health services.
AAHC currently has three Task Groups operating, of which two specifically address issues and concerns related to Australia's capability in preparedness for and response to incursions of exotic pests and diseases of animals. The Task Groups cover:
· Animal Disease Preparedness;
· Endemic Disease Management; and
· Animal Health Services.

9.6.2 An Australian Plant Health Council

There is no central coordinating body to identify national priorities in plant health and to facilitate joint industry and government cooperation in maintaining acceptable national plant health standards that meet consumer and market requirements. This deficiency was raised in a number of submissions to the Review. The creation of a similar body to AAHC for plant industries would address a significant number of the expressed concerns, particularly the need to develop and maintain some formal mechanism for effecting coordinated national leadership and direction in plant health issues.

The establishment of an Australian Plant Health Council (APHC) with wide industry and government representation would be pivotal in advancing a number of issues facing the Australian plant sector, including development of management and funding mechanisms for plant health in Australia and preparedness for and response to incursions of exotic pests or diseases (see Section 10.5.3). APHC could also take responsibility for the development and management of national databases and information systems on major pests and diseases of plants in Australia, and address the issue of the need for scientific and diagnostic support for the plant sector (see Section 9.7).
Recommendation 91: The Review Committee recommends that the Department of Primary Industries and Energy take a leadership role to incorporate an Australian Plant Health Council with responsibilities for plant health (including forestry) equivalent to those of the Australian Animal Health Council for animal health.
The Review Committee believes that the level of concern within the Australian community with respect to plant health and quarantine is sufficiently strong to support the incorporation of APHC. The importance of the issues of concern to the Australian plant industries can no longer afford to be overlooked or dismissed as being too hard to address. Instead, the challenge should be taken up by the community, but particularly by industry and by governments. In the interim, it is important that one organisation be responsible for undertaking a coordination role with respect to Australia's plant health policies.
Recommendation 92: The Review Committee recommends that until the Australian Plant Health Council is incorporated and operating, the Department of Primary Industries and Energy undertake a coordinating role with respect to plant health.

9.6.3 The Chief Veterinary Officer

The Office of the CVO is a specialist area within the Commonwealth Department of Primary Industries and Energy (DPIE). Its core functions include :

· providing policy, strategic and specialist advice to other areas of DPIE, the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand (ARMCANZ), the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Resource Management (SCARM), industry, and other groups on animal health, fish health, food safety and chemical residue issues;
· undertaking national coordination and emergency management of animal health (including the health of finfish and other aquatic animals), food safety and chemical residue emergencies; and
· managing special projects of national significance, such as the SCARM Task Force on Incursion Management.
The CVO represents the Government on a number of important national and international committees and boards. This role enables the CVO to contribute to the development of national and international policies and guidelines for animal health (including aquatic animal health).

9.6.4 A Chief Plant Protection Officer

There is no formal Commonwealth equivalent to the CVO for plants in Australia. Currently, national issues relating to plant health and quarantine — including representation at overseas technical meetings on plant health and quarantine — are generally handled by the head of plant policy within AQIS. This officer also has day-to-day line-responsibility for the development of Australia's plant quarantine policies and has no dedicated staff to provide support in emergency situations that may arise. The occupant of this position thus has limited time and resources to devote to more strategic and longer-term management issues affecting plant health.

The Review Committee is strongly of the view that the issues facing plant health in Australia are sufficiently significant and numerous to warrant the creation of a Commonwealth position for plants — the Chief Plant Protection Officer (CPPO) — along the lines of the animal equivalent, the CVO. The CPPO would be responsible for:
· providing policy, strategic and specialist advice on plant health to DPIE, ARMCANZ, SCARM, industry, other agencies and the general public;
· undertaking national coordination and emergency management of plant health issues;
· representing Australia's interests at international meetings and develop networks both domestically and internationally to promote the health of Australia's plants and plant products;
· undertaking special projects with respect to plant health issues, as required; and
· acting as a focal point for contact on national plant health issues.
The Review Committee believes that the position of CPPO should reside within DPIE, although it is important that the CPPO maintains strong and close links with Quarantine Australia. The CPPO should be supported by a small unit identified as the Office of the Chief Plant Protection Officer. In essence, the Offices of the CVO and the CPPO would provide an operational link between DPIE and Quarantine Australia on the inter-relationships between the development of animal and plant health policies and strategies and quarantine policies and strategies. The Offices of the CVO and the CPPO would also be a source of independent advice to the Minister for Primary Industries and Energy on quarantine issues.
Recommendation 93: The Review Committee recommends that a Chief Plant Protection Officer be designated at a Commonwealth level with responsibilities in plant health, equivalent to those of the Chief Veterinary Officer for animal health.

Download 1.49 Mb.

Share with your friends:

1 ... 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 ... 62