Speech

Australian Minister for Trade, Mark Vaile

Canberra, 7 September 2000

QEAC and AQIS seminar

Australia's Science-Based Approach to Quarantine

Introduction

As a nation heavily reliant on trade, export growth is vitally important to Australia. After all, one in five Australian jobs depend on exports.

Quarantine policy is just one area where our government is taking action to boost Australia's economic and trade performance. We've made great strides since 1996 in improving the environment for exporters – our waterfront is more efficient, interest rates are at historically low levels, our national budget is in a healthy surplus, reforms to the tax system promise to save exporters $3.5 billon in indirect taxes and unemployment - at 6.6 per cent - is at its lowest in many years.

But while the Government has made big improvements on the domestic front, the international economic and trade environment is something over which we have less control. We are keen to do a lot more to remove the barriers to Australia's exporters - for example nowhere are the barriers to our exports more pronounced than in the agricultural sector. And the government will aggressively continue to pursue reductions in trade barriers faced by our agri-food products.

Perspectives of Australia's quarantine regime

When I left the agriculture portfolio to become trade minister just over a year ago, I also left behind ministerial responsibility for AQIS. But I must say I have been a little surprised at the extent to which I have had to remain closely involved in issues of quarantine policy.

This past year has left me in no doubt that quarantine is an absolutely central trade policy issue for Australia. I have found that whether I am travelling overseas, or at home, the issue of Australia's quarantine regime is invariably raised. As Trade Minister I have been particularly struck by how different the international and domestic perspectives are.
Many of Australia's trading partners are openly sceptical of our quarantine system. Our conservative level of quarantine protection, when combined with our comprehensive import risk analysis process, leads many countries to believe that we are using quarantine as a disguised barrier to trade.

The level of frustration some countries feel in relation to our quarantine regime is further compounded by the fact that we are often pushing for greater market access for our agricultural produce into their markets. And our stance on quarantine seems particularly harsh to developing countries that would like to gain better access to our affluent domestic market.
In short, it would be fair to say that a number of our trading partners believe that quarantine decisions in Australia are driven by domestic politics, rather than being based on science.
Domestically, the opposite view is often encountered. When AQIS approves the entry of a particular product – or in some cases when it merely announces it will undertake an import risk analysis – industry groups and media commentators often claim that the government has given in to international pressure and is carelessly endangering the animal and plant health of the domestic industry. In effect they argue that quarantine decisions in Australia are based on international politics, rather than science.

Quarantine firmly based on science

Obviously these diametrically opposed views can't both be correct – but both sides are absolutely sure and put their views with great conviction.

So who is right? Are quarantine decisions in Australia dictated by domestic political considerations or international pressure?

In fact, neither view is correct. Quarantine decisions in Australia are, and will continue to be, made by AQIS in an impartial and objective manner – based on science.
As you have heard in earlier sessions of this forum, as a nation that exports two-thirds of its agricultural produce, strong science-based international rules on quarantine - as exhibited in the WTO SPS Agreement - are very much in our national interest.

Our conservative quarantine measures are defensible

When discussing Australia's quarantine regime with our trading partners I make no apologies for our conservative level of protection. As an island continent we are free from many of the pest and diseases prevalent in other parts of the world and our quarantine regime is designed to ensure that we stay that way.

Our very conservative level of protection – while aimed at reducing risk to very low levels – is not a zero-risk approach. A zero risk approach is just not practical. It would, for example, exclude tourism.

In applying our conservative level of protection, we are well within our WTO rights. The SPS Agreement acts as both a shield and a sword for Australia. It affirms the right of Australia to set its own very conservative level of protection, and to take science-based quarantine measures to achieve this level. But it also ensures that the same science-based rules apply to other WTO Members and that quarantine measures are not maintained as disguised restrictions on Australian exports.

AQIS, in partnership with Australian industry, has used the scientific rules of the SPS Agreement to increase market access for Australian agricultural exports. These include apples and citrus to Japan and pork to Singapore. AQIS also succeeded in reducing Australia's risk rating for BSE beef exports to the EC to the lowest rating.

If we are to benefit from the SPS Agreement, we must also be seen to be playing by its rules. Following comprehensive scientific risk analyses, AQIS approved import access for products such as salmon and durian. This flows from the requirement that quarantine measures be based on a proper risk analysis and be scientifically justifiable.

As many of you would be aware, the Philippines recently asked for import access for their bananas. As the SPS Agreement requires we have agreed to undertake an appropriate IRA.
But I would emphasise that conducting an IRA is a matter of process. No amount of international pressure will force AQIS to compromise on the science.

Let me be very clear on this.

Quarantine barriers are not something that the government will trade-off for any reason – be it in response to political pressure or to gain better market access for some other commodity.
Conclusion: mounting pressure

Australia's quarantine regime is likely to come under mounting pressure as AQIS moves towards completing import risk analyses on high profile commodities. Regardless of the decision on commodities such as grapes and apples – whether entry is approved and, if so, under what conditions – AQIS will be in the firing line, either domestically or internationally.

Whatever the outcomes may be, we can be secure in the knowledge that they will be firmly based on science. And that is what will continue to justify our Government's upholding of Australia's conservative approach to quarantine issues.

That said, Australia's policy position on trade and quarantine is clear – we are a party to the WTO SPS Agreement. This Agreement is, on balance, in our national interest and we will abide by its rules. And what's more, we will do all we can to ensure that other nations also play by the rules.