Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
Thanks very much, Leigh, for the introduction.
And thank you also, Michael, for your presentation.
And thank you for the opportunity to
speak with you today.
As has been mentioned, I'm the Australian chief veterinary
officer, a position that I've held since the suspension of
live exports to Indonesia in June of 2011.
As the chief veterinary officer, I am responsible for
national animal health and welfare issues.
And I represent Australia internationally on veterinary
issues, including to the World Organisation for Animal
Health, the OIE.
While my talk will focus on international animal welfare
standards, I'd like to begin by talking about animal
welfare activities in Australia.
And Australia has been a leader in this area,
developing innovative approaches to animal welfare,
both domestically and internationally.
Public attitudes and scientific knowledge about
animal welfare have changed enormously in recent years.
But the Commonwealth Department of Agriculture,
Fisheries, and Forestry had the foresight to identify the
need for Australia to be ahead of the game and
well-coordinated, and so develop the Australian Animal
Welfare Strategy eight years ago.
Animal welfare is a complex public policy issue.
The term can mean different things to different people, as
evidenced by a discussion on the The Conversation website
today debating, what is the meaning of animal welfare?
Change is an incremental process, and improvements have
to be negotiated.
This was the approach taken in developing the AAWS--
lots of consultation with all the interested parties, and
the same approach is taken in implementation.
AAWS was established to create a more consistent and
effective animal welfare system involving both the
Australian state and territory governments,
industry, and community.
Australia has no national animal welfare legislation,
and the AAWS is Australia's key policy document for
improving animal welfare outcomes.
Under AAWS, the states and territories are working on
harmonising the key features of their legislation to ensure
consistent arrangements apply across Australia.
But AAWS is not about controlling activities.
It aims to build relationships and partnerships between
groups, leading to improved coordination across the
spectrum of activities, reduced duplication of effort,
and a more effective and consistent approach to
improving animal welfare.
It involves 140 participants from all interested sectors.
There are about 50 approved projects so far under the
AAWS, since 2009.
These projects provide great leverage.
Often the total value of the project, with in-kind
contributions taken into account, is two or three times
the value of the cash component from AAWS.
An example of concrete outcomes from the AAWS is the
Australia Animal Welfare Standards for the Land
Transport of Livestock, which were derived from seven model
codes of practise and other documents.
These were endorsed nationally in 2009, and states and
territories have been working cooperatively to implement
them and to develop consistent regulations for enforcement.
On this slide, you can see the AAWS goals, and you will see
that these include an international component.
Current priorities under AAWS include the OIE regional
animal welfare strategy.
In November last year, I attended the Global Conference
on Animal Welfare, held in Kuala Lumpur.
It was notable there the number of times the Australian
experience and the Australian approach was used as a
reference point in developing strategies and approaches in
other countries and other regions.
But why is Australia involved in animal welfare?
We're involved because we care.
We care about the welfare of animals.
We care about the long-term sustainability of our
livestock industries.
We care about retaining a vibrant and
viable rural sector.
We care about food security in our region.
There are many reasons for Australia to be involved in
and lead in the area of animal welfare.
Even where we provide direct assistance to developing
countries and neighbouring regions, this brings us direct
benefits through markets, credibility, opportunities for
engagement, and improved buyer security.
I would like to look, then, at what influence Australia is
having internationally.
Here is a list, which I will develop further in the
following slides.
DAFF, with the help of AusAID and the support of AusAID, has
been very active and influential in promoting
animal welfare through the OIE and with our trading partners.
The Regional Animal Welfare Strategy was innovative, the
first of its kind, and has been
well-received in the region.
DAFF has actively sought a place on the ISO working group
developing international standards for animal welfare,
operating under the premise that the only way to have
influence is to be involved.
The Collaborating Centre is a joint initiative driven by
Australia and New Zealand.
It is actively working with stakeholders to identify
high-priority research, development, and extension
opportunities to advance animal welfare in our region.
Various attempts have been made to develop guidelines,
codes of practise, and standards to improve animal
welfare and to underpin trade.
Australia has been a strong supporter of the OIE's work in
this area, and has encouraged the OIE to include animal
welfare in its mandate.
But why the OIE?
We support the OIE's approach because it was clear that
there was a need for guidance on animal welfare, because the
OIE develops its standards through a consultative process
using a science base, which private companies, lobby
groups, and even the FAO do not necessarily do.
It is an intergovernmental organisation, and therefore
likely to be heard.
The OIE's objective is to facilitate safe and animal
welfare-friendly trade.
FAO and companies that develop their own standards do not
have this same focus.
The OIE is recognised as an international
animal health authority.
And animal welfare was a natural
extension to that mandate.
However, there are numerous other standards out there.
The OIE is an intergovernmental
organisation.
It was formally called the Office International des
Epizooties.
It was formed in 1924 by a group of veterinary colleagues
working together to solve problems.
It was established in Paris due to the spread of
rinderpest into and through Europe, and it was recognised
that international cooperation and collaboration was required
to manage this issue.
And it works.
Rinderpest was declared eradicated from
the globe last year.
There is no policing role for OIE.
It's just mediation, negotiation,
and leading by example.
Governments which adopt OIE standards into their national
requirements for animal health benefit from the legal
presumption that they are complying with their World
Trade Organisation obligations.
The OIE standards are considered to be no more
trade-restrictive than necessary to ensure adequate
animal health protection.
But what happens in terms of animal welfare?
Although the SPS agreement does not cover animal welfare,
there are OIE processes for developing and adopting animal
welfare standards are the same as those that are used for
animal health.
They have been adopted by consensus after extensive
consultation.
Australia has played a role from the very beginning,
supplying experts on all the ad hoc groups that developed
the initial animal welfare standards under the guidance
of the Permanent Animal Welfare Working Group.
Here are a list of standards that have
been adopted to date.
A draft chapter on animal welfare and broiler production
systems has been released for comment and will be possibly
adopted and added to this list in May.
The OIE releases draft standards for member country
comment twice a year.
When this happens, my office actively seeks comments from
industry and welfare groups and other registered
stakeholders.
And the OIE itself receives comments from international
animal welfare and livestock industry organisations.
The member country comments are then submitted to the OIE,
who work through them and produce a revised draft, which
is again sent out for comment.
Then after at least two rounds of consultation--
but more usually, four--
the draft will be put to the world assembly of delegates at
the annual General Session in May.
Here, the draft is discussed, and although the OIE rules
provide for adoption by a majority vote, in practise,
this is rarely done.
The preferred approach is consensus.
The OIE process is truly consultative, using delegates
of the member countries as the conduits.
It is not done only by a group of academics, by an industry
lobby group, or by activists.
Everyone, including these groups, has an opportunity to
have an input.
There is inevitably tension between different interest
groups and between developed and developing countries.
This is where a science base becomes vital.
Australia has continued to seek outcome-focused
approaches to animal welfare rather than prescriptive ones,
so that the standards can be applicable to all countries
and all production systems.
Many developing countries comment that animal welfare
cannot be given priority where human welfare is still poor.
Despite this, Australia supports the OIE in its view
that the existence of international standards
provides a goal for developing countries to aim for and that
history has shown that improvements in human welfare
go hand in hand with
improvements in animal welfare.
Countries must be assisted and encouraged to make whatever
changes are possible and to move forward
one step at a time.
They cannot be forced.
The OIE could simply adopt an animal welfare chapter by
majority vote, but this would mean that those who voted
against it would never look at it, never use it, never
acknowledge its value.
Instead, the OIE gives member countries the time they need
to consider the proposals, pitches them at a level that's
practical in all or most situations, and waits to adopt
the standards until consensus is possible.
This is the collaborative approach that
underpins the OIE.
And while it's not perfect, and can be slow, it means that
reluctant countries can be brought along
rather than left behind.
The OIE Animal Welfare Standards are not enforceable
under international trade law, but countries can enforce them
domestically.
We help countries implement the standards domestically
through education and training, as part of
capacity-building activities in developing countries.
Some countries may use the OIE standards as a reference point
when developing their own legislation.
And codes of practise can become legislation, and so on.
It's a matter of incremental and sustainable change, one
step at a time.
Other areas of work, in terms of international standards,
are those that are being developed by the International
Standards Organisation, ISO.
ISO and OIE have signed a cooperation agreement wherein
ISO has begun the process of developing technical standards
for the welfare of animals intended for human
consumption.
Australia is participating in this group to ensure we have a
seat at the table in developing standards that may
impact on our business and our international trade.
The intent is to encourage and support conformity with the
OIE Animal Welfare Standards, to encourage adoption of the
OIE animal welfare approaches in international trade, to
promote international harmonisation, and to prevent
the multiplication of private schemes and certification
schemes which are only going to add costs
and restrict trade.
I would now like to turn to some specific examples of
Australia's work internationally on animal
welfare standards using the four examples shown here.
The Improved Animal Welfare Programme provides funding of
$10 million over four years to support improved animal
welfare outcomes in official development
assistance-eligible countries that import live animals for
feeder or slaughter purposes from Australia.
Indonesia is expected to be the main beneficiary from the
programme, as it is Australia's largest live
cattle market.
However, other ODA-eligible countries likely to receive
assistance include Vietnam, the Philippines, Jordan,
Turkey, Malaysia, Egypt, and Mauritius.
Under the programme, the OIE, the World Organisation for
Animal Health, has been engaged to develop and deliver
training on OIE animal welfare standards.
Secondly, the OIE Regional Animal Welfare Strategy, which
was established five years ago, through which the
Australian government funds activities in our region of
Asia, the Far East, and Oceania, works to improve
welfare of animals in that region.
Activities are funded to include education, improve
regulation, research and development.
Implementation of RAWS for Asia, the Far East, and
Oceania provides a model that has been adopted by a number
of other regions.
Australia was a pioneer in this area in
establishing RAWS.
The recognition by the OIE of the New Zealand/Australia OIE
Collaborating Centre on Animal Welfare Science and Bioethical
Analysis was important to assist AAWS' research and
development efforts.
AAWS funds some of the OIE animal welfare activities in
Asia, including this programme and another programme, which
is in cooperation with the University of Putra, Malaysia.
This project aims to increase animal welfare science
capacity in the region.
It will include a number of surveys and workshops,
training across four countries--
Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam, and the
People's Republic of China.
The Collaborating Centre is developing a residential
animal welfare training course for industry organisations,
veterinarians, and others in the diverse fields of animal
welfare regulation, law, national and local management,
science, practise, economics, and ethics.
It is also compiling an authoritative publication on
the future directions of animal welfare and is actively
working with stakeholders to identify high-priority
research, development, and extension opportunities to
advance animal welfare in our region.
Michael has already mentioned the Exporter Supply Chain
Assurance System, which was fully implemented on the 1st
of January this year.
The ESCAS regulatory framework requires evidence that feeder
and slaughter livestock will be handled and processed up to
and including the point of slaughter in accordance with
OIE welfare standards.
And it enables the continuation of a highly
valuable trade by placing it on a sustainable footing and
by ensuring the Australian live export industry meets
community expectations.
ESCAS brings additional transparency to the live
export industry and provides a process that allows the
department, as the regulator, to take appropriate action
when noncompliance is reported.
During the phased implementation of ESCAS across
2012, there was significant liaison with industry and
state governments and communication at international
government officials' level in order to work towards
resolution of any identified issues with ESCAS.
We will continue to work together to ensure acceptable
animal welfare standards are maintained under ESCAS.
All new markets for feeder and slaughter livestock will be
subject to ESCAS immediately upon their commencement.
In conclusion, then, Australia is alert to trends in the
animal welfare arena.
We are adapting to the changing forces at play and
positioning ourselves to make global demands.
Australia is a pragmatic leader in the
field of animal welfare.
Change is slow, but the successes are real and are of
benefit beyond our shores.
We remain committed to improving animal welfare
through all available means, including through the
development of international standards.
In closing, I would like to thank you for your attention.
I look forward to the presentations
from Lynne and Malcolm.
And I'd like to acknowledge the work of my staff in
preparing this presentation.
Thank you.
[APPLAUSE]