Report of the Conference on International Food Trade Beyond 2000:
Science-Based Decisions, Harmonization, Equivalence and Mutual Recognition

Melbourne, Australia, 11-15 October 1999

Food and Nutrition Division
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Rome, 1999

Table of Contents

I. Introduction

1. An FAO Conference on International Food Trade Beyond 2000: Science-Based Decisions, Harmonization, Equivalence and Mutual Recognition was held in Melbourne, Australia from 11 to 15 October 1999. The Conference was held in cooperation with the World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Trade Organization (WTO). 353 participants, including the representatives of 75 countries and observers from 26 international governmental and non-governmental organizations, attended the Conference (see Appendix III for List of Participants).

II. Opening of the Session (Agenda Item 1)

A. STATEMENT BY THE REPRESENTATIVE OF FAO

2. Mr. Hartwig de Haen, Assistant Director-General, Economic and Social Department, FAO, welcomed delegates on behalf of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations to the Conference organized in cooperation with WHO and WTO and with the effective collaboration and strong support of the Federal Government of Australia and of the Government of the State of Victoria. He noted that the Conference had been convened on the eve of the 3rd WTO Ministerial Conference which would take place in Seattle and would launch the "Millennium Round" of multilateral trade negotiations, and that public interest in the Millennium Round was intense, especially in agriculture and food trade.

3. Mr. de Haen noted that consumers had become increasingly concerned about the quality and safety of the food supply. Many recent food contamination problems had contributed to a lack of confidence in the safety of food among a significant number of consumers. FAO was greatly concerned about these problems and strongly believed that efforts should be made to establish and operate surveillance programmes that would provide early warning about emerging food quality and safety problems and enable effective controls at both national and international levels. He expressed the hope that the Conference would provide the necessary guidance to the international community on how to deal with food quality and safety issues in an effective manner.

4. Mr. de Haen highlighted the experience of both FAO and WHO in the use of risk assessment in conducting the safety evaluation of food additives, agricultural and veterinary chemicals and environmental and industrial contaminants in foods, relying in particular on the well known work of the Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) and the Joint Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR). He stressed that the work of the Codex Alimentarius Commission was, and should continue to be, based on sound science, and that approval for the use of chemicals in foods should continue to be made only when adequate scientific data concerning safety was available. When dealing with food contamination, and where scientific data and evidence of safety were absent or incomplete, prudence dictated that precaution should be taken to protect consumers adequately.

5. In reference to standards for domestic versus internationally traded products, Mr. de Haen noted that FAO encouraged both developed and developing countries alike to apply Codex standards in their national legislation for both domestic and internationally traded food products and that unfortunately, developing countries would not be able to do so without substantial and sustained technical assistance from the rest of the international community.

B. STATEMENT BY THE REPRESENTATIVE OF WHO

6. Mrs. P. Singh, Executive Director, Sustainable Development and Healthy Environment, WHO, made a statement on behalf of Dr. Gro Harlem Brundtland, Director-General of WHO. Mrs. Singh thanked FAO for taking the initiative in organizing this important Conference in collaboration with WHO and WTO, and highlighted WHO's collaboration with FAO in a number of areas of food safety for almost half a century.

7. Mrs. Singh noted that WHO's mission was to protect and promote the health of humans worldwide and that the globalization of food trade had presented new and difficult challenges in minimizing the risks of foodborne diseases and associated human suffering. The importance of offering consumers a wide variety of safe and good quality foods that were accessible, nutritious and affordable was noted, and that the globalization of food trade offered important sources of foreign exchange for the economic development of many countries.

8. Mrs. Singh stressed the commitment of WHO in collaborating and conducting sound scientific risk assessments on which the credibility of the food safety aspects of texts elaborated by the Codex Alimentarius relies, and in providing its Member States, especially the developing countries, with much needed technical support. With regard to microbiological risk assessment, Mrs. Singh stated that WHO, jointly with FAO, would convene a series of expert consultations to conduct risk assessments of microbiological agents.

C. STATEMENT BY THE REPRESENTATIVE OF WTO

9. Mrs. G. Stanton, Senior Counsellor, WTO, made a statement on behalf of Mr. Michael Moore, Director-General of the WTO. Mrs. Stanton noted that recommendations arising from the previous 1991 Conference on Food Standards, Chemicals in Food and Food Trade proved indispensable in ensuring that the Codex Alimentarius and member governments could move forward with new rules on international trade which resulted from the conclusion of the Uruguay Round negotiations in 1994. The final phase of the implementation of both the SPS and TBT Agreements, that is their application by the least developed Member countries of the WTO, will take place on 1 January 2000.

10. Mrs. Stanton stressed the need for the work of Codex in developing international food standards in order for trade to continue and expand. It was stated that global food trade could help provide food to those who need it most, and can provide consumers with greater choice. But the food must be safe, and the trade must be fair. Although difficulties remain to ensure that people throughout the world, and in particular those in developing countries, can fully benefit from increased food trade, WTO looked forward to continued and coordinated work with FAO and WHO in meeting these challenges.

D. STATEMENT BY THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF VICTORIA

11. The Honourable Mark Birrell, Minister of Industry, Science and Technology, made a statement on behalf of the State of Victoria, and noted that it was a great privilege for Victoria to host this important event. It was noted that the Victorian Government had recognized their food industry as one of the most important, and that it gave full support to the role of FAO and its mandate to raise levels of nutrition and standards of living, to improve agricultural productivity and to better the conditions of rural populations.

12. Mr. Birrell highlighted Victoria's reliance on environmentally sustainable farming, making the best use of limited water supplies and using leading technology, including the application of HACCP based systems to ensure safe and high quality food. Mr. Birrell also recognized the importance of international standards based on independent scientific criteria as well as open market access.

13. Mr. Birrell noted that Victoria's Food Industry Advisory Committee, chaired by the Premier, enabled all sectors to contribute to the challenges facing the industry. The Government supported these efforts, with the recognition that the real work was done by the industry itself in setting ambitious goals, collaborating across the food chain, keeping apprised of the competition and anticipating and satisfying export customer needs.

E. STATEMENT BY THE REPRESENTATIVE OF AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FORESTRY - AUSTRALIA

14. Mr. K.H. Matthews, Secretary of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry - Australia, made a statement on behalf of the Honorable Warren Truss, Australian Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. Mr. Matthews noted that the Conference provided a unique opportunity to highlight the importance of food safety and the vital role that the work of the FAO, thorough the Codex Alimentarius Commission, played in developing international food standards to underpin the further expansion of agro-food trade.

15. The Secretary stated that it was essential that consumers could have full confidence in both domestic and international food regulatory systems, which meant that the provision of safe, wholesome food must be an integral part of expanding trade. It was equally essential that the development of food standards continued to be based on objective scientific principles and risk assessment so that standards did not become technical barriers to the free flow of agro-food products.

F. OPENING STATEMENT BY THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA

16. Senator the Honourable Judith Troeth, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry - Australia, made opening remarks on behalf of the Government of the Commonwealth of Australia. Senator Troeth welcomed all delegates, and especially overseas participants, to the Conference on International Food Trade Beyond 2000. Senator Troeth expressed the great honour of the Australian Government in hosting a forum of this magnitude that brought together representatives from around the world to her home State of Victoria.

17. The Senator noted that the timeliness of the Conference was a great opportunity to emphasize the commencement of the new round of multilateral trade negotiations under the auspices of the World Trade Organization, and to reflect the vital role played by open markets free from non-tariff barriers which in turn promoted international trade. The next round of the WTO negotiations also offered an opportunity to bring about less distorted markets for foodstuffs by increasing market access and reducing or eliminating trade distorting domestic and export programmes.

18. Senator Troeth highlighted the efforts of FAO in enhancing the food security of many of its developing country members as agricultural and food production was the key to growth, employment and poverty alleviation. In addition, she pointed out that the Conference would focus particularly on food safety and food safety systems, as well as the vital role of FAO and WHO through the Codex Alimentarius Commission in developing international food standards to underpin expanding international trade in agro-food products. In this regard, Senator Troeth emphasized that food safety decisions, including the development of international food standards, must be based on objective scientific evidence, risk assessment and risk management principles.

19. Senator Troeth noted Australia's honour in having played a major role in facilitating the work of Codex through its hosting of the Codex Committee on Food Import and Export Inspection and Certification Systems, a body which was addressing the practical application of so many of the principles underlying the WTO Agreements.

20. Senator Troeth concluded her remarks with best wishes to all delegates for a productive and rewarding Conference, as well as her hope that all had an enjoyable stay in Australia.

III. Election of Officers (Agenda Item 2)

21. On the proposal of the delegation of Cambodia, seconded by the delegations of Venezuela and the United States of America, the Conference unanimously elected the Honourable Michael J. MacKellar (Australia) to be Chairman, and the following six persons to be Vice-Chairpersons:

22. The Conference appointed Sundararaman Rajasekar (New Zealand), Charles Crémer (Belgium) and Pedro Bastidas (Venezuela) as rapporteurs to assist in the review of the English, French and Spanish versions of the draft report of the Conference.

IV. Adoption of the Agenda (Agenda Item 3)1

23. The Conference adopted the Provisional Agenda as the Agenda for the Session. The Conference agreed that its recommendations would be adopted by consensus. The Conference noted that matters discussed in Melbourne and the recommendations arising form these discussions should form the framework for international cooperation and consultation between governments and all interested parties for many years beyond 2000. The main recommendations of the Conference addressed to governments and international organizations are delineated under each specific agenda item. The general recommendations of the Conference drawn from these specific recommendations and addressed to governments and international organizations are presented in Appendix I.

V. Introduction (Agenda Item 4)

A. RESPONSE TO THE 1991 JOINT FAO/WHO CONFERENCE ON FOOD STANDARDS, CHEMICALS IN FOOD AND FOOD TRADE2

24. The present Conference was the third in a series that commenced nearly 40 years ago. The first FAO/WHO Joint Food Standards Conference in 1962 established the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme. The first Conference gave direction for the first meeting of the Codex Alimentarius Commission and formed the basis of the Commission's work programme for almost 30 years. A Joint FAO/WHO Conference on Food Additives had been held in 1955, and this had led to the successful and on-going programme of the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA). A combined Joint FAO/WHO Conference on Food Standards, Chemicals in Food and Food Trade, held in cooperation with GATT, was then convened in 1991. The objectives of this Conference were closely linked to the multilateral trade negotiations then underway in the Uruguay Round. The early stages of negotiations of the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures and for the revision of the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade were then underway. The 1991 Conference offered an opportunity to prepare food control officials in national governments for participation in these negotiations and to prepare the Codex Alimentarius Commission for the changes that would result from the Uruguay Round negotiations. It urged FAO and WHO to strengthen technical support for developing countries so as to allow them to build their national capacities.

25. The response to the 1991 Conference was positive and effective. The Conference provided invaluable guidance on how each of the sponsoring Organizations might assist their Member countries. In particular, the Conference provided advice to the Codex Alimentarius Commission on how it might adjust its activities to meet more directly changing community needs and perceptions. The FAO in particular, and the WHO, increased their assistance to developing countries to adopt adequate food laws and regulations and to establish food control infrastructures. The 1991 Conference's recommendations regarding the activities of the Codex Alimentarius Commission were quickly adopted.

26. The Conference recognized the achievements of the 1991 Conference and the impact of its recommendations on governments, FAO and WHO, the Codex Alimentarius Commission and on the Uruguay Round Negotiations.

B. THE CODEX ALIMENTARIUS COMMISSION3

27. In addition to describing the responses of the Codex Alimentarius Commission to the recommendations of the 1991 Conference, the paper considered the relationship of Codex and the SPS and TBT Agreements and considered the status of food standards in the future. It was stated that the new status which had been accorded to Codex under the SPS and TBT Agreements had not been without some negative effects. Until there was a clearer understanding of the implications of these two Agreements, it could be expected that Codex members would continue to act very cautiously in approving new standards, guidelines and other recommendations. However, as more cases were dealt with by the WTO, many of the uncertainties facing Codex Member countries were likely to be clarified.

28. The Conference noted the achievements of the 23rd Session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission, held in July 1999, in the changes to the Rules of Procedure to enhance the participation of countries and also to provide for consensus, wherever possible, in Codex decision-making. It also noted the procedural changes allowing more targeted flexibility in the establishment of ad hoc Task Forces to deal with specific food standards issues, and the adoption of principles for the participation of international non-governmental organizations in the work of Codex.

29. The Conference supported the need for continued strengthening of the scientific basis behind the formulation of Codex quality and safety requirements. It also noted that Codex commodity standards, which described the many quality factors required for ensuring fair practices in the food trade, would continue to be prepared and maintained in a compact and user-friendly form. It agreed that many traditional aspects of food standardization; quality, prevention of fraud and consumer deception, conformity to compositional criteria, and labelling, were once again coming to the forefront, in addition to the emphasis currently being placed on food safety.

30. The Conference expressed its appreciation for the work of the Codex Alimentarius Commission and its fullest support to the current direction of the Commission's work. The Conference stressed in particular the importance of the work of the Commission in providing standards, guidelines and other recommendations on consumer health protection and the facilitation of trade. It reiterated the importance of science-based decision making in all matters relating to food safety, noting however that the delineation of legitimate factors other than science and their role in the decision-making process was still under discussion.

31. The Conference stressed that Codex standards for food quality and safety, including labelling aspects, should be carefully prepared to ensure that they were not over-prescriptive and not more restrictive than necessary to meet the objectives of the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme.

Main Recommendation:

32. Stressing the importance of consumer health protection in the work of the Codex Alimentarius Commission, the Conference called upon the WHO to give greater emphasis to its work and strengthen its involvement in relation to the Codex Alimentarius Commission. The Conference also called upon FAO and WHO to review their current relationship under the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme with a view to establishing a more equitable arrangement.

VI. Food Trade and Implementation of the SPS and TBT Agreements (Agenda Item 5)

A. CURRENT STATUS OF FOOD TRADE, INCLUDING FOOD QUALITY AND SAFETY PROBLEMS4

33. The background paper for this agenda item was presented by Mr. Kevin Hammer. He informed the Conference of the importance of international food trade in the economies of many countries and of the role of food quality and safety standards and regulations in this field, particularly following the WTO Agreements on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) and Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT). It recognized that while food safety is a priority in consumer attitude and government programmes, other aspects of food quality, including compositional, sensory and nutritional characteristics, would continue to be important in the competitive and successful marketing of food internationally.

34. The Conference noted with concern the economic losses incurred by many developing countries because of the rejection or detention of their food exports. It emphasized the need for these countries to strengthen their food control systems including the inspection and certification of foods for export.

35. The Conference noted that despite efforts made by all concerned to prevent food contamination, foodborne illnesses continue to pose a serious public health problem in many developing as well as developed countries. Many current and emerging problems encountered in international trade in food involved microbiological contaminants.

36. The Conference discussed a proposal to establish an International Information and Advisory Centre for the collection, analysis and dissemination of data on the detention and rejection of food consignments in international trade. It failed to reach a consensus on the need for and ways and means needed to establish such a Centre.

Main Recommendations:

37. To evaluate the true status and extent of food quality and safety problems on a global basis, FAO and WHO should gather and collate information from member countries and consider the potential for setting up a worldwide register of incidents of food related illnesses and identifying the reasons for them together with associated food safety control deficiencies.

38. FAO and WHO should consider convening an expert consultation to comprehensively and clearly identify on a global basis food-related biological, chemical and physical hazards, and to the extent possible, emerging hazards, with the objective of providing information to the Codex Alimentarius Commission for use in future risk analysis activities to develop food safety priorities for standards, codes, guidelines and recommendations.

39. The Conference recommended that governments should make available, preferably by electronic means, information on food goods that had been detained or rejected at the point of import. This information should be made available for further follow-up by the exporting country and also to alert other countries of possible problems related to food imports. The Conference recommended that FAO, WHO and Codex Alimentarius should study the need, feasibility and practical conditions of introducing an international system allowing exchanges of information about the existence of potentially hazardous foodstuffs in the international trade.

B. REVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SPS AND TBT AGREEMENTS5

40. The background paper for this agenda item was presented by Mrs. Stanton. She pointed out that in 1995, the World Trade Organization had superseded the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), which had set rules for governments with respect to international trade since 1948. WTO rules are legally binding on its134 Member Governments; that is, governments have agreed to implement WTO rules even if it means that domestic legislation must be changed. WTO procedures for resolution of trade disputes ensured implementation.

41. The WTO SPS and TBT Agreements are most directly relevant to the work of Codex. The TBT Agreement covers mandatory technical regulations and voluntary standards and conformity assessment procedures, with the right of governments to apply regulations needed to achieve legitimate objectives, including protection from deceptive practices. The five principles of the TBT Agreement are non-discrimination, harmonization, avoidance of unnecessary trade barriers, equivalence or mutual recognition and transparency.

42. The SPS Agreement covers food safety and animal and plant health protection, giving governments the right to give priority to health protection over trade. The need for trade restrictions in order to ensure health protection, however, must be scientifically justified, either on the basis of Codex standards, guidelines or recommendations for food safety, or based on risk assessment. Other principles and provisions parallel to those of the TBT Agreement include equivalence, the use of measures no more trade restrictive than necessary to ensure health protection and transparency.

43. The three-year reviews (1998) of the SPS and TBT Agreements indicated that the Agreements were working well, the situation was continually improving and governments increasingly used them. There were, however, concerns raised in regard to the need for more conscientious use of international standards, the implementation of measures no more trade restrictive than required to achieve the objective, and for the SPS measures, the need to ensure science-based decisions. Additional concerns were expressed in the areas of transparency, the involvement of developing countries in standard setting, increased technical assistance, the avoidance of multiple testing procedures (TBT) and adherence to the Code of Good Practice by all standardizing bodies. Mrs. Stanton noted that these concerns addressed implementation issues and not the substance of the Agreements themselves.

44. It was noted that to avoid many trade problems, Members agreed to provide information about measures that might affect trade before these were put into force. Notification of measures should be done while these are still at a draft stage, allowing trading partners to evaluate the impact on their exports and to submit comments before the requirement was finalized.

45. The Conference noted the suggestion that any review of the SPS and TBT Agreements should include arrangements for the participation of INGOs, including consumer organizations, as observers. However, it was noted that such proposals were beyond the scope of the present Conference.

C. CHALLENGES FOR DEVELOPING COUNTRIES IN MEETING THE OBLIGATIONS OF THE SPS/TBT/CODEX6

46. The background paper for this item was presented by H.E. Cham Prasidh. He pointed out that the present international trade in food had evolved over many centuries. No longer did it simply comprise of commercial transactions that take place between buyers and sellers, but instead had become a complex operation that took place at two levels. At the commercial level, buyers and sellers negotiate and agree on prices and product specifications and at the compliance level governments of exporting and importing countries interact to ensure food products meet the statutory requirements of importing countries.

47. The Conference recognized that developing countries were very concerned about the health and welfare of their populations and their ability to participate in international trade and that all means necessary must be taken to ensure the production, processing, distribution and sale of food was carried out in a manner so that the consumer is protected and trade enhanced. However, many developing countries were faced with many serious problems making the competition for funding difficult and thus funds for controlling food quality and safety were in many instances inadequate. In addition, in many developing countries personnel were lacking in expertise and facilities were either inadequate or non-existent.

Main recommendations:

48. To ensure that adequate resources become available for implementing effective food control systems, there is an urgent need for developing countries to become aware of the economic and health benefits of such systems at the highest political and policy levels in the country.

49. FAO, WHO and WTO should consider providing assistance to developing countries to develop national food control strategies which should also enable briefing national authorities at the highest policy making level on the health and economic implications of food control systems, implications of WTO SPS/TBT Agreements and the work of Codex and thus facilitate (assist) in obtaining adequate funding of such programmes.

50. The Conference called upon countries to adhere to the Codex Code of Ethics for International Trade in Food in order to ensure that food products exported to developing countries met international or national requirements.

51. The Codex Alimentarius Commission, whilst acknowledging that food safety standards cannot be compromised, should, when elaborating and deciding upon Codex standards and any related texts, take into consideration the special needs of developing countries including infrastructure, resources, technical and legal capabilities. Codex standards and related texts should not have the effect of creating unnecessary, unjustified or discriminatory obstacles to the exports of developing countries.

VII. Basis of Food Quality and Safety Regulations and Decision Making for Consumer Protection and Trade (Agenda Item 6)

A. BASIC APPROACHES TO CONSUMER PROTECTION - FAO/WHO MODEL FOOD ACT: CONTROL PROCEDURES7

52. The Conference was informed of the role of food legislation in national food control systems and of the advantages of stating in the basic food act the fundamental principles of consumer protection while placing the more technical requirements of food quality and safety control in regulations or guidelines. The Conference was further informed of the impact of the WTO Agreements on SPS and TBT on some of the provisions of the food laws and regulations, particularly those related to the principles of proportionality, equivalence and mutual recognition.

53. The Conference noted the need for countries to regularly update and/or revise their food legislation to take into account present needs for consumer protection and domestic and international trade. It underlined the usefulness of using the FAO/WHO Model Food Law for this purpose after making the necessary adaptation to meet the specific situation and needs of each developing member country. The Conference emphasized the need for member countries to develop the necessary infrastructure and capabilities to ensure the enforcement of the food legislation.

54. The Conference was informed that FAO's food quality and safety policy stems from its original mandate, the World Food Summit Plan of Action, and the numerous decisions of its Governing Bodies which promote the production, processing and distribution of good quality, safe and nutritious foods.

B. HARMONIZATION OF FOOD REGULATIONS AND FOOD QUALITY/SAFETY MEASURES BASED ON CODEX STANDARDS, GUIDELINES AND RECOMMENDATIONS8

55. In introducing the paper, Mr. Lindenmayer stated that WTO Agreements had emphasized the importance of WTO Members harmonizing their food regulations with international standards, guidelines and recommendations. In doing so, they have elevated Codex standards as international reference points in settling trade disputes involving SPS or TBT measures.

56. He described the six-step "regulatory impact analysis" process followed by the Australia-New Zealand Food Authority (ANZFA) to ensure that measures taken to protect the consumer are the least trade restrictive. He noted that the experience of ANZFA was that the use of outcome-based standards enabled countries to develop the regulatory measures that were the most suitable and cost effective for them.

57. The Conference stressed the need for Codex Standards to be based on sound scientific principles consistent with good regulatory practice. This ensured that Codex objectives of protecting the health of the consumer and ensuring fair practices in food trade are being achieved in a manner that minimized the negative impacts of food regulation on international trade.

58. The Conference emphasized the importance for Codex Members to commit themselves to working together to ensure that the best possible regulatory outcome is achieved at the international level in order to facilitate commitment to greater harmonization of food standards.

59. Some delegates expressed concern over the emphasis given to risk assessment in food control work, while overlooking the importance of good manufacturing and hygienic practices, which could lead to serious problems.

Main recommendations:

60. The Conference reaffirmed its commitment to the Codex Statements of Principle concerning the Role of Science in Codex Decision-Making Process and the Extent to Which Other Factors are Taken into Account and to its Statements of Principle Relating to the Role of Food Safety Risk Assessment and recommended that the CAC:

C. ASSURING FOOD QUALITY AND SAFETY: BACK TO THE BASICS - QUALITY CONTROL THROUGH THE FOOD CHAIN

The Role of Industry9

61. The background paper for this agenda item was presented by Dr. W.M. Strauss. He pointed out that the food industry, broadly described as being from the producer through the processor and marketer, was the primary source of innovation in the development of food products. It was also the main provider of information and data on the nature, composition, quality and safety of foods to governments, international organizations and to consumers.

62. Ways to enhance industry involvement, implemented in appropriate ways, provided short term and long term benefits for all. Industry's desire to meet market needs provided the impetus for collaboration with government, consumers and academia. Progress could be achieved by structuring programmes that improved market access and also addressed national needs for economic growth.

63. Industry could provide economic support for programmes, academic research and technology transfer to facilitate the use and development of best practices in all countries. Industry could and would take a long term view of development opportunities when the goals of Codex and WTO are centre stage, but tended to avoid investments and challenges that were constrained by technical barriers, lack of transparency or economic forces that constrained innovation. The areas in greatest need for technology transfer and the application of best practices present the most complexities because their markets may be small and the economies may be weak. Therefore, economic growth is the key to empower development, poverty alleviation and assuring continued access to good quality and safe foods.

64. Industry relies on sound, consistent and transparent decision-making processes in order to meet its responsibility to supply good quality, nutritious and wholesome food and agricultural products to consumers. In the opinion of the food industry, uncertainties in decision-making should be addressed by scientific evaluation of probabilities of risk.

65. The Conference expressed its appreciation of the role of industry in providing and sharing information with all interested parties through established mechanisms of risk assessment and risk communication.

Main Recommendation:

66. The Conference recommended that the food industry should use and, in cooperation with FAO and WHO, promote the use of best practices and technology transfer to achieve enhanced and sustainable agricultural and fisheries production.

The Role of Governments10

67. The background paper for this agenda item was presented by Professor J.A. Abalaka. He pointed out that while the quality and safety of food was viewed as the joint responsibility of government, industry and the consumer, government played a pivotal role in this relationship by providing the enabling environment and the laws (regulations and guidelines) that regulated the activities in the food industry in the interest of all concerned.

68. The process of assuring a safe, nutritious and wholesome food supply was the responsibility of government and it involved many critical and complex issues among which was an understanding of risk assessment, risk management and risk communication. Food laws and regulations were essential for providing the legal framework for establishing an effective food control infrastructure. Food legislation served to define what was expected as the minimum standard for a large and diverse industry. To the consumer, it defined what was safe and wholesome for consumption. To the industry, it also specified the criteria to be met if a manufactured food is to be accepted.

69. A key responsibility of every government is the protection of its population against health hazards and commercial fraud from food. This is achieved through food control systems. This responsibility, in most countries, involved more than one government department. In some countries, such control systems have been developed to varying degrees of sophistication, in others they need strengthening, while in some they were almost non-existent.

70. Governments must also respect the international treaty obligations entered into either on a bilateral or multilateral basis. The SPS and TBT Agreements are the most relevant agreements to the area of food control. Therefore, developing countries are facing the need to spend more funds on their regulatory bodies for enhancement of their capacities and capabilities in order to strengthen their national food regulatory systems, improving their information technology systems and participating more actively in meetings of technical committees as well as in various Commission meetings dealing with food production, food regulations and safety.

71. Governments should strive to meet Codex standards, thereby protecting themselves from challenges under the SPS and TBT Agreements, and adapting them, where necessary, to suit national conditions. This view, however, should not preclude governments or regional groupings from elaborating and/or harmonizing standards that promote their internal or sub-regional interests as long as this does not impede progress towards international harmonization or infringe upon legal obligations under the WTO Agreements.

72. The Conference noted the opinion expressed by the author that much can be achieved by governments of developing countries by meeting on their own the challenges posed by the advent of the TBT and SPS Agreements, including the appropriate use of technical assistance from donor agencies. Donors can only complement, but not substitute for, government decision-making. The concept of good governance should take precedence over the quest for external donor support.

Main Recommendations:

73. Governments should clearly acknowledge the role of consumers, producers, industry and their representative bodies in the development of national and international food standards to improve transparency and engender commitment. Similarly, efforts should be made to establish national consultative structures for Codex Alimentarius that included the participation of all interested parties.

74. Developing countries should accept the challenge of strengthening the capacities and capabilities of their national food regulatory systems by increased expenditure on improving their information technology systems and participating more actively in meetings of technical committees and commissions dealing with food production, regulation and safety.

75. Governments should strive to apply Codex standards to all imported, exported and domestically produced and traded foods.

76. When governments of developed countries or international organizations provide assistance they should do so on the basis of time-sequenced programmes in which the results of assistance should be evaluated over a time period and success or failure assessed to provide guidance on whether assistance should be continued or discontinued.

The Role of Consumers11

77. The background paper for this agenda item was introduced to the Conference by Dr. E. Groth. He pointed out that in the past consumers, and consumer organizations that represent the voice of consumers in policy forums, have not been so prominently involved in most international food policy debates. Many consumer organizations perceived that decisions affecting what consumers will eat in the coming century were being made behind closed doors, by business and government experts, in for a where the public was often not invited to participate.

78. The primary solutions to the resolution of this problem were to be found in proper communication, openness and transparency. Risk communication should be recognized as a two-way process, a dialogue that respects and addresses the concerns of all parties. In the opinion of the author, openness and transparency in the manner in which decisions are taken are as important as the soundness of the decisions themselves and should be addressed at all levels of the Codex and WTO decision-making processes as well as at the national level.

79. In this regard, consumer organizations were of the view that science could only provide one basis for the decision-making process. Even with the scientific basis well-founded subjective decisions in the implementation of risk management were required. Legitimate factors other than science relevant to this process therefore needed to be identified and principles for their application determined. The development of a suitable definition of the precautionary principle or a statement of precautionary approach and the conditions under which it would be applied were also needed. In the author's opinion, these tasks were among the highest priorities of Codex.

80. In the wider arena, it was becoming clear that consumer preferences were a legitimate market force that could be addressed through labelling. Adequate and informative labelling tended to make risk voluntary, thereby reducing the impact of risk on the food selection habits of the consumer. In the view of the author, this should be an important consideration in relation to the entry into the marketplace of genetically modified foods.

81. The Conference noted with appreciation the efforts made by the Codex Alimentarius Commission in involving consumers' organizations in its work at almost all levels of debate, including the consideration of proposals concerning the possibility INGO participation in the Executive Committee. It also noted the efforts being made at the national level to involve consumers' organizations in the work of national Codex Committees and other structures that developed food standards. It was proposed that consideration should be given to the possibility of similar participation in the work of Joint FAO/WHO expert groups and the relevant committees of the WTO. It was suggested that if labelling requirements increased costs of production and distribution of foods, consumers should also bear a fair share of the increased cost burden.

Main Recommendations:

82. Governments and international agencies should continue to look for opportunities to secure funding that would enable more consumer organizations from all regions of the world to participate more effectively in food policy processes. Trust funds, grants and other funding mechanisms needed to be explored.

83. FAO, WHO, government agencies, and industry should make greater efforts to learn and respond to consumers' legitimate concerns about food safety and quality and to ensure that food-related communication is a two-way, respectful, interactive process. Consideration should be given to using interactive web sites and other traditional media appropriate to the development status of the target group, so that citizens, consumer organizations and others could respond to government proposals and make input.

84. Consumer organizations need to commit resources and to invest more of their time and expertise in mastering the expanding array of food quality, safety and trade issues. Consumer organizations also need to increase coordination of their work in national and international food policy and trade discussions.

The Role of Academia12

85. The background paper for this agenda item was introduced to the Conference by Professor Kraisid Tontisirin. He pointed out that food and nutrition professionals have a direct and catalytic role in ensuring nutritional well being through good quality and safe food for consumers, the community and society at large. While much could be done with existing knowledge and technology in this context, substantial research was still required to simplify and standardize laboratory and other methods of investigation, to improve information collection and to develop simple and efficient technologies to reduce food hazards at various levels. In particular, innovative approaches in planning, implementation and training for food control measures could help to ensure food safety and quality for the local consumer, for local markets and export. This indeed called for coordinated and concerted efforts by national governments, academia, consumer bodies and the industry and where appropriate facilitated by international agencies.

86. In this context, through education and training, research and services as well as sensitizing policy formulation, academia can provide the necessary action base for promoting implementation of educational strategies for assuring food quality and safety.

87. Academic institutions contribute to assuring food quality and safety through research in the fields of food science and technology, nutrition, toxicology and epidemiology and related fields. They may use formal education and training, for example programmes in food and nutrition, toxicology, quality control in the food industry, appropriate technology for food processing to consumer protection and nutrition objectives. They assist in describing the bases for good manufacturing and good hygienic practices for food production, processing and handling. They also provided non-formal training through the development and implementation of relevant consumer education and information programmes helping to overcome these educational barriers. Academic institutions can participate in national monitoring and surveillance programmes to determine dietary patterns and intakes of nutrients, contaminants, residues and other food components.

88. Academic institutions also provide analytical or consultancy services to various groups of consumers and industry as part of their extension programmes/projects. For example, they can routinely analyze food products, both unprocessed and processed, to determine the quality and safety of these products. Data on sources, occurrence, analytical findings, estimated intake from diets, health implications and regulatory provisions can be examined with regard to pesticides, mycotoxins, nitrates, intentional food additives and drinking water contaminants.

89. In the views of the authors, food quality and safety education should be an integral component of the national food control and education policy. There was a need to foster multi-sectoral co-ordination and infrastructure for food quality and safety. Food quality and safety instruction should be incorporated into the formal education curricula right from the primary school through to university. The multi-sectoral group overseeing food policy development should ensure that appropriate expertise was involved in curriculum development, particularly for primary schools.

90. Research, being an integral part of national food quality and safety programmes, should periodically provide a review or update of research priorities. Sharing and utilization of research outcomes into national food policies would help to better manage food quality and safety. This would also promote uniform data collection and allow agencies immediate access to up-to-date information. Sharing information across agencies, departments and the industry should then lead to the development of an information system. Close involvement of health, agriculture, education and rural development is necessary.

91. The Conference stressed the importance of needs-based informal training, especially to small primary producers so as to overcome problems of quality, safety and post-harvest losses at the production level, as well as at later points in the food chain. Informal training and community-based approaches were identified as the best means of achieving these goals.

92. The Conference also noted the possibility of establishing networks of national, regional and international "centres of excellence" for the exchange of information and technology transfer with participation of institutions on both a "north-south" and "south-south" basis.

Main Recommendations:

93. The Conference recommended that Member Governments should support relevant food safety research; enhance surveillance systems for, and reporting of, foodborne diseases; increase research coordination and cooperation so that risk analysis data will be more universally accepted; and contribute national data to international database systems.

94. Member governments should seek ways of making expertise, systems, and research results more readily available to developing countries.

95. The Conference recommended that there should be close coordination of government institutions, academia and industry for training in hygienic production of food as well as controlling the associated hazards and food losses.

96. Academic institutions, the industry and other interested parties should encourage and facilitate the establishment of food science and technology associations and establish national, regional and international networks for the development of risk analysis data.

VIII. Prospects for the Future (Agenda Item 7)

A. EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES - ENSURING THE QUALITY AND SAFETY OF FOOD13

97. The paper was presented by Dr. Dominique Taeymans. He informed the Conference of the rapid increase in world population and its impact on food supply requirements, as well as the role of the food and drink industries in producing safe and high quality food at affordable prices to meet these needs.

98. The application of diversified technologies at the farm level to increase plant or animal production yields in developing countries was highlighted. These included the selection of high performance varieties, improved cultivation practices and the use of irrigation and fertilization systems and plant protection techniques. It was noted that these measures needed to be combined in an optimized form through an integrated production system.

99. The use of new technologies as a means to ensure the quality and safety of food from the producer to the consumer was noted. These included the use of new methods of processing and packaging to extend the shelf life and freshness of perishable foods and to ensure the nutritional adequacy of food. It was noted that the use of good manufacturing practices and quality assurance systems in controlling hazards also ensured the production of safe and wholesome food by using preventative methods to monitor process controls. The HACCP approach had been adopted by both the food processing industry and governments as a key element in assuring food quality and safety. It was stated that in considering future food technology trends, the widespread acceptance of technologies would depend on education and public information.

100. The Conference generally agreed with the recommendations in the paper, and accepted the suggestion that traceability was also an important control factor in the production of foods.

Main recommendations:

101. International organizations, supported by expertise in the private and public sector, should provide technical assistance to promote knowledge and contribute to the availability of safe and nutritious foods at a global level through the development and implementation of education and training programmes to explain new technologies and good production practices.

102. Codex Alimentarius should further develop guidelines for the application of internationally agreed food safety regulations based on risk analysis. FAO, WHO and governments should facilitate the creation of international intergovernmental fora to address safety assessments of new technologies and food products.

B. EMERGING PROBLEMS: CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL14

103. The paper was presented by Dr. T. Van de Venter. He noted that foodborne diseases were one of the most widespread public health problems of recent times, and that their implications for health and economies were increasingly recognized. In spite of evidence indicating underreporting of the incidence of foodborne diseases, it had been possible to identify certain trends, such as an increase in foodborne diseases in many parts of the world, as well as the emergence of new or newly recognized chemical or biological foodborne problems.

104. The author noted that emerging, or in some cases re-emerging, foodborne problems were most commonly considered to be those problems which have newly appeared in a population, have extended to new vehicles of transmission or have existed but for various reasons are rapidly increasing in incidence or geographic range. They may also have been widespread for many years but have only recently been identified because of new or increased knowledge or methods of identification and analysis of the disease agent.

105. Some delegations were of the opinion that countries should individually or regionally, in cooperation with the WHO, enhance foodborne disease and microbiological pathogen surveillance throughout the food chain on both established and emerging problems. The need to strengthen the capacity of governments to respond to health risks posed by chemical and microbiological hazards in food, especially through technical cooperation and assistance to developing countries, was also emphasized.

106. Other delegations noted that high quality epidemiological data was required for the surveillance of microbiological hazards and that the establishment of such an information system could be resource intensive. These delegations noted that the lack of this data impeded the application of a quantitative risk assessment. It was also stated that resources could be more effectively utilized in the prevention of foodborne illnesses through the use of good agricultural and manufacturing practices and quality assurance systems.

Main recommendations:

107. The Conference recommended that a global information system be elaborated and implemented by the WHO in respect of emerging foodborne problems and that the use of information and education be encouraged as a tool for the control of emerging problems.

108. The Conference recommended that FAO and WHO be asked to determine which methods of sampling and analysis needed to be elaborated in association with specific emerging chemical and biological problems and provide validated methods for global application. This information should be globally distributed through the proposed international information system. FAO, WHO and other relevant bodies should continue and strengthen the dissemination of information, manuals and training on methods of sampling and analysis.

109. Appropriate international organizations, with the assistance of their members, should elaborate a systematic plan of action to encourage and assist countries in developing acceptable and efficient food control systems, while simultaneously indicating the minimum or basic parameters or requirements for such purpose. These should include the ability to apply the three elements of risk analysis. Measures that would encourage and assist all countries in designing and implementing efficient national food control systems should be coordinated and intensified.

110. The Conference recommended that Member States should support a strong and visible WHO Food Safety Programme. In particular, the WHO should:

C. EMERGING PROBLEMS - FOOD ALLERGENS15

111. The document was presented by Dr. Steve L. Taylor. Dr. Taylor noted that although food allergies had probably affected mankind since the dawn of time, the medical community and regulatory authorities had largely ignored them until recent years. The author was of the opinion that since the outcome of inadvertent exposure to the offending food can be extremely serious and even deadly for some food-allergic individuals, the impact of food allergies on public health should be given greater consideration by regulatory authorities than was currently the case.

112. Food sensitivity was defined as an abnormal physiologic response to a particular food. Food sensitivities can be divided into two major categories: food allergies and food intolerances. Food allergies are abnormal responses of the immune system to certain components of foods that are typically naturally occurring proteins. Food intolerances are defined as any form of food sensitivity that does not involve immunologic mechanisms.

113. The author noted that the most recent session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission had adopted a list of foods and ingredients that are known to cause hypersensitivity that should always be declared. Future additions and/or deletions from the list will be considered by the Codex Committee on Food Labelling on the basis of advice received from JECFA. The recommendation arising from the 1995 FAO Technical Consultation on Food Allergies to reduce the 25% rule to 5% in order to provide hypersensitive consumers with increased assurances that food components would be declared on product labels was also adopted by the Commission.

114. Some delegations were of the opinion that the Codex list should be amended following the collection of additional information and its consideration by JECFA. In this regard, some delegations agreed with the author's recommendation that highly refined peanut and soybean oil should be exempted from the food allergen list as the products did not contain sufficient amounts of protein to elicit allergic reactions. However, the Conference did not support this recommendation pending the evaluation of additional data by JECFA at the earliest opportunity.

115. In recognition of the importance of food allergies and intolerances to the health and well being of a small, but significant, proportion of the public, delegations supported the continued examination of food allergens through JECFA and Codex. These delegations supported the notion that expert consultations or a specific JECFA panel should be established or existing panels modified to examine specific food allergens on an ad hoc basis when required.

Main Recommendations:

116. Governments should amend their food labelling regulations to reflect the decisions of the 23rd Session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission to provide for the labelling of foods and food ingredients known to cause allergies or other intolerance reactions and to include in their regulations the lists of foods and food ingredients that have been and may be identified in the future.

117. Because the issues surrounding food allergies and intolerances require advice from individuals with specialized experience, an Expert Committee or panel on food allergies and intolerances should be constituted by FAO and WHO to provide guidance to JECFA on such issues.

D. NUTRITIONAL, ENVIRONMENTAL AND SUSTAINABLE FOOD PRODUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

Changes in Cultural and Consumer Habits16

118. In presenting the paper, Prof. Traill explained that total apparent food consumption had increased everywhere in the last 30 years, but especially in Asia, and continuing growth in food consumption could be expected in the developing world. He indicated that continuing increase in consumption of animal-based foods could be expected, particularly in Asia, as a result of continuing income growth. In contrast, income elasticities in OECD countries were now so low that little further income-related change could be expected in the composition of those countries' diets. Health-related factors may stimulate increased fruit and vegetable consumption in these countries. As incomes and economic systems worldwide converge, worldwide food consumption patterns will also converge. Significant dietary differences will however remain, because of cultural factors. Thus, although the modern characteristics of food quality will become more important everywhere as incomes rise, they will manifest themselves in different ways in different cultures.

119. Looking ahead, Prof. Traill indicated that as quality attributes of food become ever more important to consumers choice, the barriers to trade liberalization will be countries' desires to protect such consumer choices.

120. The process of consumer food choice is complicated and often seems irrational, yet consumer perceptions, rational or not, have important implications for agricultural and food markets and for trade in those products. Consumer education and information (e.g., labelling) are frequent responses of policy makers, who assume that educated and informed consumers make more sensible choices.

Main recommendations:

121. The Conference recommended that producers and regulators should be better educated and informed about the nature of consumers' food choice processes. In that way, they may avoid costly mistakes and better understand the types of education and information to supply.

122. The Conference recommended that sound consumer research should be undertaken as a vital measure to assess consumers' use of and reaction to different types of labelling and study the concerns and behaviour of consumers in different countries, particularly developing countries.

123. The Conference recommended that top priority be accorded to `trust-building' in the international agro-food system so as to enhance consumer confidence in the quality and safety of food supply. It noted that building trust is essential to the development of a vibrant international trading system in agricultural and food products and to the acceptance of continuing technological innovation.

Promoting Science-based Dialogue on Emerging Technologies and Problems17

124. The document was presented by the author, Dr. Dieter Arnold, who informed the Conference of the importance of science and technology in reducing food losses, extending shelf life and improving quality, wholesomeness, safety and nutritional characteristics of foods. Newer technologies such as biotechnology could contribute positively to increasing food supply worldwide, and improving the nutritional quality of certain basic food crops in addition to enhancing other aspects such as resistance to pests, drought and low temperatures. Many novel foods and food ingredients produced through biotechnology were already on the marketplace. The introduction of these novel foods raised a number of questions related to appropriate risk assessment policies and their flexible adaptation to technical progress in order to ensure maximum consumer protection and avoid unnecessary barriers to trade.

125. The Conference noted that approaches for assessing novel foods are different from those applied to chemical molecules and therefore require alternative toxicological and nutritional evaluations based on objective scientific data; this is particularly true when "substantial equivalence" cannot be demonstrated. The possibility that altered or newly introduced proteins could cause allergic reactions deserved particular attention.

126. The Conference recognized the need for a dialogue between researchers, biotechnologists, the agricultural industry, regulators, politicians, and consumer representatives on the best use of emerging technologies so as to take advantage of the positive aspects of these technologies and obtain consumer confidence in the safety of foods produced by these technologies.

Main recommendations

127. The Conference recommended that:

Nutrition, Environment and Sustainable Food Production18

128. In introducing the paper, Prof. Wahlqvist explained the importance of evidence based nutrition and ecoscience in policy making and project planning. He highlighted the role of the international community in fostering practices in food production that promote food security, food safety, and sustainability. Alliances between the various constituencies of the international community are required to match ecosystem needs. Prof. Wahlqvist underlined the importance of food variety, social and physical activity for good nutrition and well being, reflected in longevity and healthy aging. Biodiversity, trade and cultural diversity had a direct impact on food variety and nutrition enhancement.

129. The Conference stressed the importance for many developing communities of applying the food-based dietary guidelines developed by FAO and WHO. These guidelines supported sustainability and took account of the best available food, nutrition and health science.

130. The Conference recognized the importance of good governance in managing natural food resources, food production, food processing, food trade and public health nutrition. It drew the attention to the need to pay due regard to changing demography, health patterns and environmental factors for developing strong and appropriate food and nutrition policies.

Main recommendations

131. The Conference recommended that:

IX. Assuring Science-Based Decisions (Agenda Item 8)

A. EXPERT ADVICE AND RISK ANALYSIS - VALIDITY OF THE PROCESS AND DEALING WITH UNCERTAINTY19

132. The paper was presented by Dr. John L. Herrman, International Programme on Chemical Safety, WHO, Geneva who drew attention to the long-standing contribution of the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) and the Joint FAO/WHO Meetings on Pesticide Residues (JMPR) to the science-based decision-making process of the Codex Alimentarius Commission. The advice of JECFA and JMPR had also proved to be invaluable to Member governments in developing their own standards and to FAO and WHO.

133. Dr. Herrman pointed out that neither JECFA nor JMPR were part of the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme and were independent of the Codex Alimentarius Commission. The members of JECFA and JMPR were independent and served in their personal capacities, not representing any government, institution or special interest group. He drew attention to the procedures that were in place to prevent conflicts of interest and the care taken in the selection of experts by the Directors-General. As noted in the opening remarks of Mr. de Haen (FAO), the matter of the selection of experts continued to be on the common agendas of the Directors-General. Dr. Herrman pointed out that the base of scientific experts available to FAO and WHO should be expanded and called on Member states to assist in this process. He also pointed out the high cost, including the cost in human resources, of the involvement of these experts in the work of JECFA and JMPR; cost that devolved to the experts themselves or to their institutions.

134. In addition to the recommendations in the paper that were generally accepted by the Conference with some amendments, it was proposed that the credibility of the JECFA and JMPR would be enhanced by provisions allowing for the attendance of observers from non-governmental organizations.

Main recommendations:

135. The Conference, noting that scientific committees like JECFA and JMPR have the responsibility to base their assessments on the principles of risk analysis as adopted by the Codex Alimentarius Commission, recommended that Codex committees, when referring chemical or biological agents to scientific committees for assessment, should clearly indicate what they want. General guidelines for risk assessment policy should continue to be provided through joint Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization consultations involving risk assessors and risk managers together with recognized INGOs.

136. A qualitative or quantitative estimate of uncertainty should be provided by the risk assessors in the expert scientific advice, identifying all sources of uncertainty and variability. Codex Committees should take into account this uncertainty in the decision making process to protect the health of the consumers rather than other considerations.

137. FAO and WHO should consider a policy wholly consistent with the need for an independent and transparent risk assessment process in particular in relation to the selection of the scientific experts, the working procedures and the tightening of the conflict of interest requirements.

138. FAO and WHO should provide adequate resources to the expert bodies for risk assessments of chemical and microbiological agents in food in a way consistent with an independent and transparent risk assessment process and to ensure confidence and competence in expert evaluations.

B. DETERMINING THE APPROPRIATE LEVEL OF PROTECTION: THRESHOLD OF REGULATIONS/IMPLEMENTATION20

139. In presenting the paper, Professor Somogyi pointed out that, while there was full acceptance of the need to base food safety decisions on scientific principles, the limits of science must be recognized. In particular, it must be noted that science and our state of knowledge was constantly evolving and that adequate scientific evidence may not be available at any particular time to answer all questions relevant to the evaluation of specific food safety matters. Therefore, precautionary reasoning had to be built into the risk analysis process to adequately protect the consumer from hazards.

140. Professor Somogyi pointed out that the determination of the appropriate level of protection in relation to food safety was not science-based per se, but that the level of protection once chosen should be consistent, defendable and logical. He noted that regardless of philosophical differences, a great deal of harmonization in methodologies leading to progressively increasing convergence of results could be achieved through international co-operation. Nevertheless differences, partially substantial differences, still remained.

141. In relation to the concepts of the threshold of regulation or the threshold of toxicological concern, Professor Somogyi was of the opinion that these were intellectually stimulating concepts with potential for far reaching practical applicability. He recommended that these concepts should be submitted to further rigorous scrutiny and extensive peer-review. Among the topics that needed investigation was the question as to whether concentrations of chemicals capable of triggering physiologically discernible actions (e.g., perception of scent in fragrances or taste in flavourings) were beyond any doubt devoid of toxicological effects. In the meantime the threshold approach could well be considered as an appropriate method for setting priorities for further toxicological testing and/or evaluation of substances in question.

142. The Conference stated that precaution was and remained an essential element of risk analysis. The Conference also noted that there was no common understanding of the term "Precautionary Principle" as it might relate to food safety. It was also noted that the Codex Committee on General Principles had already initiated discussions on this issue and its possible application to food safety. The possibility of convening a special symposium to explore these issues was raised, but it was generally considered that the most appropriate forum for these discussions was, indeed, the Codex Committee on General Principles.

Main recommendations:

143. Recognizing that precaution has been and remains an essential element of risk analysis it was agreed:

144. The Conference reconfirmed the importance of ascertaining a high standard, independence and transparency in the operation of international scientific advisory bodies.

145. It recommended that the concept of the Threshold of Toxicological Concern should be submitted to further rigorous scrutiny and extensive peer-review.

146. The Conference appreciated efforts that had been made to identify the legitimate factors other than science that could be included in the Codex decision making process, but expressed the need for urgency in completing this review.

X. Harmonization, Mutual Recognition and Equivalence
(Agenda Item 9)

A. HOW AND WHAT IS ATTAINABLE?21

147. The paper was presented by Mr. Digby Gascoine, who defined the harmonization of standards as the adoption of the same standards by different countries so that goods produced in a country can be sold freely in another country which applied the same standards. The author noted that Codex standards that addressed health risks are able to provide a basis for harmonization because they reflect sound, contemporary and internationally recognized science.

148. Mutual recognition was defined as the outcome of a process of evaluation which leads two or more countries to agree that the standards and/or associated systems employed by each country are such as to allow goods marketed in one country to be freely marketed in the other country which is a party to the agreement.

149. The author noted that international recognition of diverse approaches had led to the principle of equivalence being included in trade agreements, and specifically in the SPS and TBT Agreements. Article 4 of the SPS Agreement states in part that "Members shall accept the sanitary or phytosanitary measures of other Members as equivalent, even if these measures differ from their own or from those used by other Members trading in the same product, if the exporting Member objectively demonstrates to the importing Member that its measures achieve the importing Member's appropriate level of sanitary or phytosanitary protection". Article 2.8 of the TBT Agreement states that "Wherever appropriate, Members shall specify technical regulations based on product requirements in terms of performance rather than design or descriptive characteristics".

150. The author highlighted the benefits of equivalence, and noted that without agreement on the judgement of equivalence trade disputes would increase. The Conference was informed that the most recent session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission agreed that the Codex Committee on Food Import and Export Inspection and Certification Systems should continue to consider the establishment of guidelines for the judgement of equivalence of sanitary measures associated with food inspection and certification systems. The Commission had also agreed that the Committee should proceed to develop guidance on the judgement of equivalence of systems for inspection and certification in relation to technical regulations other than sanitary measures.

151. In discussing the recommendations concerning harmonization, it was noted that the importance of upholding the principle of consensus should be emphasized at both the Committee and Commission levels to ensure that Codex standards were acceptable and implementable by all member countries. Other delegations, while supporting the need for harmonization, noted that technical assistance was needed to ensure that developing countries could trade freely through harmonized export inspection procedures.

152. Some delegations were of the opinion that more time was needed for trust building measures, which were required prior to the establishment of principles related to the judgement of equivalence. Other delegations were of the opinion that such principles were urgently needed to prevent the imposition of trade barriers to trade by food importers. It was also suggested that the use of "performance" or food safety objectives regarding equivalence should be defined and specified.

Main Recommendations:

153. The Conference recommended that the Codex Alimentarius Commission and its subsidiary bodies continue to give high priority to enhancing the consensus basis of Codex norms to arrive at harmonized standards, and to ensure that such standards are acceptable to all countries.

154. The Conference recognized the importance and urgency of developing Codex guidance on the judgement of equivalence, initially in a generic sense and subsequently in relation to specific topics such as equivalence of inspection and certification systems, and measures to ensure food hygiene.

B. LABELLING AND NUTRITIONAL ASPECTS - HOW MUCH INFORMATION IS NECESSARY?22

155. The paper was presented by Dr. Christine J. Lewis who indicated that the paper outlined the rationale for food labelling and considered labelling within the context of how much information was necessary for consumer protection. The author stated that food labelling provided an interface between consumers and producers and that labelling assisted in marketing, helped to prevent consumer fraud, served as a public health tool and provided consumers with information to make informed choices. The current status of food labelling as related to product identification, nutritional information (nutrient values and presentation format, nutrition claims) and product processing and treatment were also included in the document.

156. Several delegations stressed the importance of the application of science in all decisions, including those decisions related to labelling. The consumer's right to know a product's nutritional characteristics and processes used in its manufacture were also highlighted by some delegations as important considerations in labelling. Several delegations noted that as recognized by the Codex Alimentarius Commission in its Medium-Term Plan, not all labelling was based on science.

157. Some delegations supported the consideration of the document by the Codex Committee on Food Labelling, with a view towards further work on aspects related to nutrition labelling as well as in the continued consideration of labelling questions related to genetically modified organisms.

Main Recommendations:

158. The Conference encouraged the Codex Alimentarius Commission to continue its efforts to specify general principles and guidelines for food labelling, to identify emerging issues so as to anticipate and provide for new labelling needs, and to promote a dialogue between all stakeholders on such issues.

159. The Conference supported efforts by FAO and WHO to explore strategies to collect information from all regions of the world about consumer requirements, perceptions, beliefs and motivations concerning food, nutrition and food safety so as to consider the role that labelling and other means of communication could play.

160. The Conference encouraged FAO and WHO to explore the scientific studies of consumer perceptions and reactions to food quality and safety issues, particularly in the area of consumer use, understanding and need for food labelling.

XI. Technical Assistance Needs of Developing Countries and Mechanisms to Provide Technical Assistance (Agenda Item 10) 23

161. The papers were presented by Ing. Gonzalo Ríos and Ms. K. Sinsakul, respectively. In their presentations the authors highlighted the types of problems faced by their local food industry and trade in trying to meet international quality and safety standards and access to international markets. They indicated that the causes of these problems were manifold and concerned all links in the food chain. They required vigorous and sustained actions at all levels to address the problems in a meaningful and effective way.

162. The Conference recognized the needs of developing countries for technical assistance in strengthening their food quality control systems and in the application of the SPS and TBT Agreements including risk analysis, harmonization of food quality and safety regulations, equivalence, the application of good hygienic and manufacturing practices and of food quality assurance systems such as HACCP. It emphasized the important role of training and technology transfer in enhancing developing countries' capacities in meeting these needs.

163. Several delegations stressed the need for international assistance to enhance the quality and frequency of their participation in Codex work, including the establishment and operation of national Codex committees or similar structures.

Main Recommendations:

164. The Conference recommended that FAO and WHO identify and establish Centres of Excellence in the developing regions of the world and to assist these Centres in enhancing their capabilities so that they can be used to meet the training and technology transfer needs of the neighbouring countries in the different food-related disciplines.

165. FAO, WHO, WTO and other concerned international organizations, in cooperation with funding agencies and other suitable donors, should continue to provide technical support to developing countries by:

166. FAO and WHO should also identify and utilize fully national and regional institutions in developing countries which have technical manpower and infrastructure for expert consultations and studies, collection of data from developing countries, providing extension services in quality systems under HACCP, risk assessment studies and training requirements and use of laboratory services.

XII. Conclusions and Recommendations of the Conference
(Agenda Item 11)

167. The Conference concluded that the matters discussed in Melbourne, and the recommendations arising from these discussions, should form the framework for international cooperation and consultation between governments and all interested parties for many years beyond the year 2000. The main recommendations of the Conference addressed to governments and international organizations are delineated under each specific agenda item.

168. The general recommendations of the Conference drawn from these specific recommendations and addressed to governments and international organizations are presented in Appendix I.

169. Many other recommendations and proposals were made during the course of the debates, some of which were considered matters of detail only or were addressed to limited audiences. The most significant recommendations in this category are compiled in Appendix II, presented under the principal themes of the Conference. The working papers prepared for the Conference also contain many additional proposals and ideas.

170. The Conference expressed its warm appreciation to the governments of the Commonwealth of Australia and the State of Victoria for their invitation to hold the Conference in Melbourne and for their excellent hospitality and organization in relation to the Conference.

APPENDIX I

THE MELBOURNE RECOMMENDATIONS

GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CONFERENCE

The FAO Conference on International Food Trade beyond 2000: Science-Based Decisions, Harmonization, Equivalence and Mutual Recognition, meeting in Melbourne, Australia from 11 to 15 October 1999, drew the attention of the Member governments of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, the World Health Organization and the World Trade Organization to the following general recommendations:

1. The Conference expressed its appreciation for the work of the Codex Alimentarius Commission and its fullest support to the current direction of the Commission's work. The Conference stressed in particular the importance of the work of the Commission in providing standards, guidelines and other recommendations on consumer health protection and the facilitation of trade and called upon Member governments to strengthen their contributions and participation in its work.

2. Stressing the importance of consumer health protection in the work of the Codex Alimentarius Commission, the Conference called upon the WHO to give greater emphasis to its work and strengthen its involvement in relation to the Codex Alimentarius Commission. The Conference also called upon FAO and WHO to review their current relationship under the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme with a view to establishing a more equitable arrangement.

3. The Conference called upon countries to adhere to the Codex Code of Ethics for International Trade in Food in order to ensure that food products exported to developing countries met national or international requirements.

4. The Conference reaffirmed its commitment to the Statements of Principle Concerning the Role of Science in the Codex Decision-Making Process and the Extent to Which Other Factors are Taken into Account and to the Statements of Principle Relating to the Role of Food Safety Risk Assessment.

5. The Conference called upon all parties to recognize that precaution has been and should remain an essential element of risk analysis in the formulation of national and international standards, and agreed that the Codex Alimentarius Commission was the most appropriate forum to discuss this issue.

6. Governments should clearly acknowledge the role of consumers, producers and their representative bodies in the development of national and international food standards to improve transparency and engender commitment. Similarly, efforts should be made to establish national consultative structures for Codex Alimentarius that included the participation of all interested parties.

7. To ensure that adequate resources become available for implementing effective food control systems, there is an urgent need for developing countries to become aware of the economic and health benefits of such systems at the highest political and policy levels in the country. In implementing Codex work, FAO, WHO and funding agencies should give priority consideration to the special needs of developing countries, including infrastructure, resources and technical and legal capabilities, when considering and elaborating Codex texts.

8. Countries should accept the challenge of strengthening the capacities and capabilities of their national food regulatory systems by devoting increased resources, improving information technology systems, and participating more actively in meetings of relevant technical committees and commissions dealing with food regulatory matters.

9. Governments of Member countries should take all necessary steps to apply Codex standards to all imported, exported and domestically produced and traded foods.

10. FAO, WHO, government agencies, and industry should make greater efforts to learn and respond to consumers' legitimate concerns about food safety and quality and to ensure that food-related communication is a two-way, respectful, interactive process.

11. The Conference recommended that Member Governments should support relevant food safety research; enhance surveillance systems for, and reporting of, foodborne diseases; increase research coordination and cooperation so that risk analysis data will be more universally accepted; and contribute national data to international database systems. Competent research institutes from developing countries should be supported to contribute to this effort.

12. Member Governments, FAO and WHO should adopt policies wholly consistent with the need for an independent and transparent risk assessment processes in particular in relation to the selection of the scientific experts, the working procedures and the tightening of the conflict of interest requirements. FAO and WHO should also provide adequate resources to the expert bodies for risk assessment to continue to ensure confidence and competence in expert evaluations.

13. WHO and FAO should establish an international expert advisory body similar to JECFA and JMPR to provide microbiological risk assessment support to FAO, WHO and other bodies.

14. The Conference supported efforts by FAO and WHO to explore strategies to collect information from all regions of the world about consumer requirements, perceptions, beliefs and motivations concerning food, nutrition and food safety so as to consider the role that food labelling and other means of communication can play.

15. FAO, WHO, WTO and other concerned international organizations, in cooperation with funding agencies and other suitable donors, should increase their technical support to developing countries to strengthen their food quality and safety assurance and control systems in order to allow them to participate actively in international food trade beyond the year 2000.

APPENDIX II

OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CONFERENCE

A. FOOD TRADE AND IMPLEMENTATION OF WTO AGREEMENTS

EQUIVALENCE, HARMONIZATION

1. The Conference recognised the urgency and importance of development of Codex guidance on the judgement of equivalence, initially in a generic sense and subsequently in relation to specific topics such as equivalence of inspection and certification systems, and measures to ensure food hygiene.

2. WHO and FAO should jointly establish a linkage between their food safety training and technical assistance programmes and the process of undertaking equivalence determinations, to both allow countries to be better able to undertake equivalence determinations while at the same time enhancing their food safety and food processing infrastructure. Components of this programme would include training on the process of undertaking the judgement of equivalence, assessment of needs in regards to obtaining equivalence, and assistance in establishing enhanced capabilities in areas required for undertaking equivalence determinations.

OTHER ISSUES

3. With the aim of more intensively pursuing the objectives of protecting the health of consumers, ensuring fair practices in the food trade and facilitating the international trade in food, the Codex Alimentarius Commission should continue to elaborate food standards providing for compositional, sensory and safety criteria, and examine and recommend ways to reduce problems of food quality and safety, reduce levels of detentions and rejections of food moving in international trade, and reduce levels of food adulteration.

4. Member countries of the Codex Alimentarius Commission and the WTO should be encouraged to strengthen their efforts to monitor the use of Codex standards, in particular to identify barriers or disincentives to their wider adoption.

5. The Conference stressed that Codex standards for food quality and safety, including labelling aspects, should be carefully prepared to ensure that they were not over-prescriptive and not more restrictive than necessary to meet the objectives of the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme.

B. THE ROLE OF SCIENCE AND OTHER LEGITIMATE FACTORS

RISK ANALYSIS

6. The Conference recommended that to enhance the credibility and acceptability of the standards proposed for adoption, excellence, independence and transparency should be the criteria by which scientists carry out risk assessment.

7. Relevant expert and Codex Committees should develop quality criteria for data used for risk assessment. FAO/WHO should develop guidelines on the identification and documentation of uncertainty and variability in risk assessment.

8. It recommended that capacities for risk assessment be strengthened both at the national and international levels and that developing countries should be assisted in developing or improving their capabilities in this field.

9. Codex committees, when referring chemical or biological agents to scientific committees for assessment, should clearly indicate what they want. Particularly for controversial agents, guidance should be provided to the scientific committee on the risk assessment policy that should be applied. Scientific committees have the responsibility to explain clearly the basis for their assessments.

10. FAO and WHO should find ways to increase resources for risk assessments of chemical and microbiological agents in food.

11. Efforts should be made between international organizations to harmonize risk analysis terms related to food safety.

12. WHO should consider updating and harmonizing between JECFA and JMPR all the common principles of the toxicological evaluation of food chemicals (e.g., natural constituents, additives, contaminants, residues of pesticides and residues of veterinary drugs) and publish this information in a single consolidated document.

13. Expertise is needed to establish government risk analysis units, involving the universities in risk assessment and in establishing formal communication and coordination links between the different services responsible for coherence in the formulation of a country's sanitary and phytosanitary measures.

14. The Codex Secretariat should conduct a review to determine areas where the possible submission of additional dietary intake data from developing countries might result in a change of already established limits. In addition, FAO and WHO should consider the provision of technical assistance to developing countries to aid in the collection of dietary intake data which would not only benefit the Codex process but could also benefit national governments in making risk analysis decisions as well in the area of improving nutritional status.

15. Member states that contribute scientists to FAO and WHO scientific committees should look at this as a national contribution and should facilitate their release for this work by, for example, compensating the contributing agency for it.

16. Member states are encouraged to make use of advice offered by FAO and WHO scientific committees and to provide feedback as to how the evaluations could be more useful to them.

C. FOOD SAFETY AND QUALITY REGULATION AND ENFORCEMENT

REGULATION

17. The national and international food regulatory frameworks should acknowledge the prime responsibility of the whole food chain for the production of safe food by setting objectives. Operators have a major responsibility in developing appropriate means to achieve these objectives.

18. The application of Good Agricultural Practice (GAP) (integrated crop/pest management) and Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) is strongly recommended by international organizations as a way to produce safe foods.

19. Codex Alimentarius should continue to work along these principles and promote the application of HACCP principles as laid down in the Codex General Principles of Food Hygiene. These principles should be applied to all foodstuffs, throughout the whole food chain and include feedingstuffs.

TRANSPARENCY AND PARTICIPATION

20. Appropriate national government bodies should prepare educational and informational material to describe and explain important food safety and nutrition issues to producers, processors and consumers.

21. Governments should clearly acknowledge the role of consumers and consumer bodies in the development of national and international food policies to improve transparency and engender commitment. Similarly, efforts should be made to establish national consultative structures for Codex Alimentarius that included the participation of all interested parties including consumers.

OTHER EMERGING FOOD SAFETY ISSUES AND NUTRITION ISSUES

22. The Conference recommended that international research into emerging foodborne problems be promoted and coordinated and that the application of General Principles of Hygiene as well as of the Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) system be promoted as a key element to enhance the control of emerging foodborne problems.

23. That the use of information, education and communication be encouraged as a tool for the control of emerging problems.

24. FAO and WHO should gather and collate information from member countries to evaluate the true status and extent of food quality and safety problems on a global basis. They should consider the potential for setting up a worldwide register of incidents of food-related illnesses, identifying the reasons for them and any associated food control deficiencies.

25. FAO and WHO should continue to work with governments and academic institutions to develop and provide advice on scientific food-based dietary guidelines for use by medical and public health professionals, nutritionists and the public in general.

D. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE, EDUCATION AND RESEARCH

MEETING NEEDS OF DEVELOPING COUNTRIES

26. The assistance by governments of developed countries should be on the basis of time-sequenced programmes in which the results of assistance should be evaluated over a time period, and success or failure assessed to provide guidance on whether assistance should be continued or discontinued.

27. Technical assistance should be based on country analysis to determine its capabilities and needs. The programmes should then be prioritized and national programmes must have a monitoring component and provide for progress assessments and a final evaluation.

28. Expertise is required to establish or reinforce the services for notifying sanitary and phytosanitary measures, to establish procedures for the receipt and distribution of notifications from other countries, to facilitate and encourage comments from national sectors, to issue and promote notifications from countries and encourage comments in domestic and international circles.

29. Developing countries should have a mechanism whereby they negotiate mutual recognition agreements with potential partners interested in their products. The mechanism should involve a central authority which provides information about requirements sought by importing countries, and which would make the initial approach to the importing country on behalf of the exporting country and subsequently assist with the negotiation of the Agreement.

30. FAO, WTO and WHO should continue to support the developing countries through direct regional and national training, for example in the form of workshops and seminars, or by electronic means, focusing on appropriate levels of protection, risk analysis, improved sanitary conditions and the development of equivalence as their principal lines of action for the year 2000 and beyond.

31. To reduce and minimize quality problems hampering the international food trade and thereby lower the level of detentions and rejections, and combat the level of foodborne hazards and resultant illness, FAO, with the support of other international organizations and industrialized countries, as reflected in the spirit of and declarations in the Uruguay Round Agreements, should:

32. FAO, WHO, WTO and developed countries consider funding activities that could lead to the provision of increased technical assistance and guidance to developing countries to establish/strengthen their national systems of control of food safety and quality, including the provision of training personnel in all aspects of food control, beginning with basic food hygiene. Wherever possible training programmes should best be carried out in the language of the country.

E. PARTICIPATION IN CODEX PROCESSES

33. FAO/WHO/Codex should consider providing more support, including where possible financial support, for developing countries to participate more fully in the work of Codex.

34. Consideration should be given to holding more Codex Committee sessions in developing countries and to holding the Codex Commission in all regions of the world so as to give more opportunity to these regions to participate. Consideration should also be given to not holding concurrent working group meetings in Codex Committees.

F. GENERAL TRAINING AND EXTENSION

35. Governments, industry, farmers, consumers should be associated with developing appropriate training packages for the safe production and handling of food, particularly for the application of HACCP or similar systems.

36. International organizations and governments should, in close contact with industry and consumer associations, develop education and training programmes to explain the importance of safe application of new technologies. Emphasis should be placed on the infrastructure required for an effective food safety programme including trained inspectors, technically competent analysts, skilled public information officers and competent administrative staff.

37. Financial input is also required from outside sources to ensure that both the quality and quantity of training is adequate and sufficient to meet requirements.

INFORMATION EXCHANGE

38. FAO and WHO should explore, within budgetary constraints, the feasibility of establishing Regional Centres that would provide support for such areas as: food safety training programmes including those in HACCP and risk analysis and complex technical activities, such as risk assessment and expert assistance to countries in carrying out epidemiological surveillance. The Centres could maintain food safety/quality databases focused on national requirements of countries within the region.

39. In view of the fact that developing countries often lack up to date information on various aspects of food quality and safety control, strong consideration should be given to establishing food quality and safety information centres of excellence in each of the world's regions that would be responsible for designing and operating web sites to provide the latest scientific information and advice on matters relating to control of food quality and safety, including such matters as risk assessment, GMPs, safety data on GMOs, food additive use, HACCP, etc.

G. CODEX PROCESSES

40. The Codex Alimentarius Commission should consider reaffirming the effectiveness of written comments, which should be fully discussed at Codex meetings, especially written comments from countries not able to be represented at meetings. Chairpersons should ensure that all written comments received before the meeting are systematically tabled for discussion at Codex meetings and decisions made should be recorded in the report accordingly.

H. COORDINATION

41. National committees need to be established or developed with broad sectoral representation, including the public sector, academia, producers, exporters, industry and consumers. They should have annual programmes of work with planning, monitoring and evaluation components.

42. Efforts should be made to raise the profile of each committee and highlight its achievements so that its important role may be known to the general public. This will also help it attract national funding.

APPENDIX III

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
LISTE DES PARTICIPANTS
LISTA DE PARTICIPANTES

CHAIRPERSON/PRESIDENT/PRESIDENTE

The Hon. Michael MacKellar
Chairman
Australia New Zealand Food Authority
55 Blackall Street
Barton ACT 2600
Australia
Phone: +61 3 9522 4302
Fax: +61 3 9521 1362

Heads of Delegation are listed first
Les chefs de délégation figurent en tête
Figuran en primar lugar los Jefes de las delegaciones

MEMBER COUNTRIES
PAYS MEMBRES
PAISES MIEMBROS

albania
albanie
albania

Mr H.E Lufter Xhuveli
Minister of Agriculture and Food
Ministry of Agriculture and Food of Albania
Skanderbag Square No. 2
Tirana

australia
australie

Mr Ken Matthews
Secretary
Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry - Australia
GPO Box 858
Canberra ACT 2601
Phone: +61 2 6272 4180
Fax: +61 2 6272 4906
Email: ken.matthews@affa.gov.au

Dr Robert Biddle
Assistant Director
Food Policy Branch
Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry - Australia
GPO Box 858
Canberra ACT 2601
Phone: +61 2 6272 5364
Fax: +61 2 6271 6522
Email: bob.biddle@aqis.gov.au

Ms Claire Caesar
Assistant Secretary
Communicable Diseases and Surveillance Branch
Department of Health and Aged Care
GPO Box 9848
Canberra ACT 2601
Phone: +61 2 6289 7011
Fax: +61 2 6289 8098
Email: claire.ceasar@health.gov.au

Professor John Catford
Director Public Health Division
Department of Human Services
Level 18
120 Spencer St
Melbourne VIC 3000
Phone: +61 3 9637 4200
Fax: +61 3 9637 4250
Email: john.catford@dhs.vic.gov,au

Mr Stephen Crossley
Director
Monitoring and Surveillance Program
Australia New Zealand Food Authority
GPO Box 7186
Canberra MC ACT 2610
Phone: +61 2 6271 2624
Fax: +61 2 6271 2278
Email: steve.crossley@anzfa.gov.au

Mr Digby Gascoine
Director
Policy and International Division
Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service
Agriculture, Fisheries & Forestry - Australia
GPO Box 858
Canberra ACT 2601
Phone: +61 2 6272 5584
Fax: +61 2 6272 3307
Email: digby.gascoine@aqis.gov.au

Mr Geoff Gorrie
Executive Director
Industries Development Group/Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry - Australia
GPO Box 858
Canberra ACT 2601
Phone: +61 2 6272 4186
Fax: +61 2 6272 3112
Email: geoff.gorrie@affa.gov.au

Mr Rik Hart
Chief Executive Officer
Department of State Development
Level 15
55 Collins St
Melbourne VIC 3000
Phone: +61 396519196
Fax: +61 3 9651 9457
Email: rik.hart@dsd.vic.gov.au

Dr Marion Healy
Chief Scientist
Australia New Zealand Food Authority
GPO Box 7186
Canberra MC ACT 2610
Phone: +61 2 6271 2215
Fax: +61 2 6271 2278
Email: marion.healy@anzfa.gov.au

Dr Catherine Hollywell
Manager
Chemical Standards Branch
Department of Natural Resources and Environment
475 Wickelham Road
Attwood VIC 3049
Phone: +61 3 9217 4175
Fax: +61 3 9217 4225

Dr Andrea Huggins
Project Officer
Food & Related Industries Group Department of State Development
11th Floor
55 Collins St
Melbourne VIC 3000

Mr Terry Keeling
Special Adviser
Regional Industry Development
Department of State Development
13th Floor 55 Collins St
Melbourne VIC 3000

Ms Christine Kershaw
Manager
SQF Australia Agriculture WA
3 Baron Hay Court
South Perth WA 6151
Phone: +61 8 9368 3202
Fax: +61 8 9367 7389
Email: ckershaw@agric

Dr Ian Lindenmayer
Managing Director
Australia New Zealand Food Authority
PO Box 7186
Canberra MC ACT 2610
Phone: +61 2 6271 2200
Fax: +61 2 6271 2278
Email: ian.lindenmayer@anzfa.gov.au
Mr Ian Longson
Executive Director
Industry Programme Agriculture WA
3 Baron Hay Court
South Perth WA 6151
Phone: +61 8 9368 3494
Fax: +61 8 9368 1205
Email: ilongson@agric.wa.gov.au

Mr Kevin Love
Assistant Secretary
Dept of Premier and Cabinet
Level 2
1 Treasury Place
Melbourne VIC 3002
Phone: +61 3 9651 5190
Fax: +61 3 9651 0877
Email: kevin.love@dpc.biv.gov.au

Ms Ruth Lovisolo
Manager Codex Australia
National Office of Food Safety
Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry - Australia
GPO Box 858
Canberra ACT 2601
Phone: +61 2 6272 5112
Fax: +61 2 6272 3103
Email: ruth.lovisolo@affa.gov.au

Dr Patricia Ludowyk
Senior Policy Advisor
Australian Agency for International Development
GPO Box 887
Canberra ACT
Phone: +61 2 6206 4807
Fax: +61 2 6206 4870
Email: patricia_ludowyk@ausaid.gov.au

Ms Sue May
Manager, Regional Projects Unit
Australia New Zealand Food Authority
GPO Box 7186
Canberra MC ACT 2610
Phone: +61 2 6232 8507
Fax: +61 2 9391 9288
Email: sue.may@health.gov.au

Mr Gardner Murray
Managing Director/Chief Veterinary Officer
National Offices Animal and Plant Health
and Food Safety
Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry - Australia
GPO Box 858
Canberra ACT 2601
Phone: +61 2 6272 5848
Fax: +61 2 6272 5697
Email: gardner.murray@affa.gov.au

Mr Ross O'Donoughue
Director Health Protection
NSW Department of Health
LMB 961
North Sydney NSW 2059
Phone: +61 2 9391 9298
Fax: +61 2 9391 9288
Email: rodon@doh.health.nsw.gov.au

Dr Melanie O'Flynn
Director
Residues and Standards Branch
Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry - Australia
GPO Box 858
Canberra ACT 2601
Phone: +61 2 6272 4549
Fax: +61 2 6272 4023
Email: melanie.oflynn@affa.gov.au

Mr Hans Saxinger
Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade
RG Casey Building
John McEwen Cresent
Barton ACT 221
Phone: +61 2 6261 2609
Fax: +61 2 6261 1858
Email: hans.saxinger@dfat.gov.au

Dr Terry Spencer
Deputy Australian Government Analyst
Australian Government Analytical Laboratories
GPO Box 1844
Canberra ACT 2601
Phone: +61 2 6213 6102
Fax: +61 2 6213 6815
Email: terry.spencer@agal.gov.au

Mr Barry Steggall MLA
Member for Swan Hill
Victorian Parliament
274 Campbell St
Swan Hill VIC 3585
Phone: +61 3 5032 3154
Fax: +61 3 5032 9483
Email: barry.steggall@parliament.vic.gov.au

Mr Michael Taylor
Secretary
Department of Natural Resources and Environment
PO Box 500
East Melbourne VIC 3002
Phone: +61 3 9637 8041
Fax: +61 3 9637 8126
Email: michael.taylor@nre.vic.gov.au

Mr Graeme Thomson
Principal Advisor
Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade
RG Casey Building
John McEwen Crescent
Barton ACT 221
Phone: +61 2 6261 2545
Fax: +61 2 6261 2927
Email: graeme.thomson@dfat.gov.au

Dr Luba Tomaska
Assistant Director
Food Product Standards Program
Australia New Zealand Food Authority
GPO Box 7186
Canberra MC ACT 2610
Phone: +61 2 6271 2259
Fax: +61 2 6271 2278
Email: luba.tomaska.anzfa.gov.au

Dr Andrew Turner
Chief Veterinary Officer
Department of Natural Resources and Environment
475/485 Mickleham Road
Attwood VIC 3049
Phone: +61 3 9217 4247
Fax: +61 3 9217 4322
Email: Andrew.Turner@nre.vic.gov.au

Mr