food · public health and food safety standards 41 ... it also refers to our key outcomes and...

Australia

PO Box 7186 Canberra BCACT 2610Australia

Tel: +61 2 6271 2241 Fax: +61 2 6271 2278

[email protected]

New Zealand

PO Box 10559 The TerraceWellington 6036 New Zealand

Tel: +64 4 978 5630 Fax: +64 4 473 [email protected]

FOODSTANDARDSAustralia New Zealand

Annual Report2008-2009

An

nu

al Rep

ort 2008 - 2009

Foo

d S

tandard

s Australia N

ew Z

ealand


Annual Report 2008-2009

© Food Standards Australia New Zealand 2009 ISSN 1329-3850

This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission from Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ). Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to the Information Officer, FSANZ, PO Box 7186, Canberra BC, ACT 2610.

An electronic version of this work is available on the Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) website at http://www.foodstandards.gov.au. This electronic version may be downloaded, displayed, printed and reproduced in unaltered form only for your personal, non-commercial use or use within your organisation.

Food Standards Australia New ZealandAustralia New Zealand PO Box 7186 PO Box 10559 Canberra BC The Terrace ACT 2610 Wellington 6036 Australia New Zealand Tel: 61 2 6271 2241 Tel: 64 4 473 9942 Fax: 61 2 6271 2278 Fax: 64 4 473 9855 [email protected] [email protected]

iL E T T E R O F T R A N S M I T T A L

ANNUAL REPORT 2008-2009

Letter of Transmittal

The Hon Mark Butler, MP

Parliamentary Secretary for Health

Parliament House

Canberra ACT 2600

Annual Report of Food Standards Australia New Zealand for the year ended 30 June 2009

I am pleased to present to you the Annual Report of Food Standards Australia New Zealand.

This report fulfils the reporting requirements of The Commonwealth Authorities and Companies

Act 1997, including the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies orders for report of

operations.

The report also fulfils the reporting requirements of Section 69 of the Food Standards Australia

New Zealand Act 1991.

The Annual Report is made in accordance with a resolution of FSANZ Board Members

(Directors). They are responsible for the preparation and content of the report of operations in

accordance with the Finance Minister’s Orders.

Yours sincerely

Philippa Smith AM

Food Standards Australia New Zealand

September 2009

ii L E T T E R O F T R A N S M I T T A L

FOOD STANDARDS AUSTRALIA NEW ZEALAND

iiiC O N T E N T S


Contents

Letter of Transmittal i

Guide to the Report 1

Additional information 2

Compliance index 3

Chief Executive Officer’s Review 5

Agency developments 7

Regulatory highlights 8

Corporate Overview 10

Highlights 2008-09 10

FSANZ – roles and responsibilities 10

Structure and processes 12

Summary of financial performance 16

Priorities and Performance 2008-09 18

Outcomes and outputs 18

Performance measures 19

Our Regulatory Measures 22

Objectives 22

Performance 22

Highlights 22

Overview 23

Applications and Proposals gazetted 1 July 2008-30 June 2009 25

iv C O N T E N T S


Food standards development 25

Ministerial Council Policy Guidelines 25

Ministerial Policy Guidelines notified to FSANZ in 2008-09 26

Standards Development Work Plan 26

Ministerial Council Reviews 28

Additional work requested by the Ministerial Council 30

FSANZ reviews of food standards 30

Foods and food ingredients requiring pre-market approval 31

Fortified foods 34

Food labelling 36

Food standards for the primary industries 38

Public health and food safety standards 41

Improving our standards development outcomes 41

Public health issues 43

Emerging issues 46

Food incidents and food recalls 47

Monitoring and evaluating hazards 50

Strengthening our evidence base 51

Science evidence base 52

Accessing external expertise 53

Consumer and social sciences 54

Regulatory analysis 56

Evaluating our food regulatory measures 57

International networks 59

Student projects 61

Our Stakeholders 64

Objectives 64

Performance 64

Highlights 64

vC O N T E N T S


Overview 65

Community involvement 67

Stakeholders and regulatory partners 71

Partnerships with other national agencies 73

Relationships in the Asia-Pacific Region 75

Communication 76

Media and information services 76

Website and new media 78

Education and information campaigns 79

Our People and Organisational Capability 82

Objectives 82

Performance 82

Highlights 82

Overview 83

Staff Forum 84

Organisational capability and capacity 85

Attraction, development and retention of a skilled workforce 86

Encouraging a rewarding environment 91

Conditions of employment 91

Rewards and recognition 93

Organisational structure 94

Our Accountability 98

Objectives 98

Performance 98

Highlights 98

Overview 99

vi C O N T E N T S


Our roles and priorities 100

Stakeholders and regulatory partners 101

Corporate governance arrangements 103

Government and Parliament 103

Senate Estimates 104

FSANZ Board 105

Finance, Audit and Risk Management Committee 105

Business planning and management 106

Corporate planning 109

Appendices 111

Appendix 1 – Finalised projects 1 July 2008 to 30 June 2009 111

Appendix 2 – Applications received and Proposals prepared 116

Appendix 3 – FSANZ processes for assessing Applications 126

Appendix 4. External FSANZ committee members 132

Appendix 5 - Financial Statements 143

Appendix 6 – Functions and powers 174

Appendix 7 – Current publications 177

Appendix 8 – Categories of documents held 191

Appendix 9 – Consultants and contractors 194

Appendix 10: FSANZ representation 198

Appendix 11 – FSANZ Board members, attendance, qualifications and experience 205

Acronyms and Abbreviations 211

Index 214

1G U I D E T O T H E R E P O R T


Guide to the Report

In preparing this report, we have followed the requirements laid down in the Commonwealth

Authorities and Companies Act 1997 and in Section 152 of the Food Standards Australia New

Zealand Act 1991.

The Chief Executive Officer’s Review provides a perspective on the past year and an

outlook for the year ahead.

The Corporate Overview provides a snapshot of our role and functions, how we are

organised and the processes involved in our decision-making. It also refers to our key

outcomes and provides a summary of our financial performance.

Under Priorities and Performance, we summarise the year’s activities against the key

strategic directions and performance measures identified in the 2008-09 FSANZ Budget

Statement.

The main text of the report details outputs and outcomes in 2008-09 under the four key result

areas of our Corporate Plan: Our Regulatory Measures, Our Stakeholders, Our People and

Organisational Capability, and Our Accountability.

Our Regulatory Measures describes the outputs associated with the development of new,

or variations to existing, food standards. It also provides details of other activities that support

regulatory measures that apply to the sale of food in Australia and New Zealand.

Our Stakeholders documents our community consultation and communication processes,

including our engagement with stakeholders.

Our People and Organisational Capability reports on the ability of the agency to meet

stakeholder expectations and on initiatives for fostering and encouraging a rewarding work

environment.

Our Accountability refers to our corporate governance arrangements and initiatives.

Appendices to the report contain detailed information on the processing of Applications and

Proposals to amend the Food Standards Code, consistent with the reporting requirements

of the FSANZ Act (Appendix 1 and 2); the process for assessing Applications and Proposals

(Appendix 3); external FSANZ committee members (Appendix 4); our audited financial

statements (Appendix 5); FSANZ’s functions and powers (Appendix 6); current publications

(Appendix 7); categories of documents held by the agency (Appendix 8); a list of the

2 G U I D E T O T H E R E P O R T


consultants used this year (Appendix 9); FSANZ representation, including contributions to

international forums and speaking engagements (Appendix 10); and a record of FSANZ Board

members’ qualifications, experience and attendance at Board meetings and Finance, Audit

and Risk Management Committee meetings (Appendix 11).

Additional information

You can obtain information on the projects and activities described in this report from the

Communication Manager, Lydia Buchtmann, on +61 2 6271 2620 or lydia.buchtmann@

foodstandards.gov.au. For information on the FSANZ Annual Report 2007-08, contact

the project manager and editor, Dr Michael Dack, on +61 2 6271 2239 or michael.dack@

foodstandards.gov.au. An electronic version of this report and other FSANZ publications can

be accessed from the FSANZ website at www.foodstandards.gov.au.

3G U I D E T O T H E R E P O R T


Compliance index

The checklist below, prepared by the Institute of Public Administration Australia, summarises

FSANZ’s compliance with essential reporting requirements in this annual report:

Topic Requirement met

Comment

Preliminaries

Director’s sign-off Yes Letter of Transmittal

Subsidiaries included n/a

Operations

Legislation/objectives/functions Yes Corporate Overview; Our roles and priorities (p100); Appendix 3 & 6

Name of Minister in financial year Yes Corporate Overview

Organisational structure and locations

Yes Corporate Overview; Organisational structure (p14)

Review of Operations and Future Prospects

Performance against targets in Corporate Plan

Yes Priorities and Performance; Standards Development Work Plan (p26); Appendix 1&2

Risks, opportunities and strategies Yes Our Stakeholders (Overview); Community involvement (p67); Our People and Organisational Capability (Overview)

Significant changes in financial year Yes Our Regulatory Measures

Financial results Yes Corporate Overview; Appendix 5

Developments since end of financial year

Yes Throughout this annual report

Reviews

Judicial decisions and administrative tribunals

Nil

Reports: Auditor-General; Parliamentary Committee; Ombudsman

Yes Australian National Audit Office (Appendix 5)

Ministerial directions Yes Ministerial Council Reviews (p28); Work requested by the Ministerial Council (p30)

4 G U I D E T O T H E R E P O R T


Topic Requirement met

Comment

Government policies Yes Reporting (Performance measures, p19); Regulation practice (Our Regulatory Measures – Overview); COAG alcohol strategies (p37); National Nanotechnology Strategy (p46); APEC Food Safety Forum (p75)

Corporate Governance

Directors: names/meetings/attendances

Yes Appendix 11

Corporate governance practices Yes Corporate governance arrangements (p103)

Board committees (including Audit) and attendance

Yes Finance, Audit and Risk Management Committee (p105); Appendix 11

Indemnities and insurances Yes Occupational Health and Safety (p91)

Financial Statements Yes Appendix 5

Miscellaneous

Other matters in legislation Yes Reporting requirements of FSANZ Act and CAC Act (Guide to the Report; Appendix 9)

Implementing Disability Strategy Yes Commonwealth Disability Strategy (p92)


5C H I E F E X E C U T I V E O F F I C E R ’ S R E V I E W

Chief Executive Officer’s Review

The effects of the current global economic downturn have been many and varied, touching

individuals and organisations across the country.

In common with other government agencies, Food Standards Australia New Zealand

(FSANZ) has had to adjust to the tough economic times. Prioritisation of projects has

assumed a greater importance. The attraction and retention of skilled staff has become

increasingly vital. The ability to meet rising stakeholder expectations has continued to be a

major goal.

Being asked to do more with less is not an uncommon challenge for us and we have a

strong track record of adapting our processes and practices to align with the resources

at hand. This will be an ongoing challenge for FSANZ because there will be no let-up in

industry’s desire to be innovative and efficient, and in consumers’ expectations for a safe

food supply.

There are two aspects to our work: outputs and outcomes. We can measure our outputs in

terms of numbers of food standards finalised or food emergencies handled. Outcomes relate

to the effect of the outputs on the problems of the day. They can be regarded as measures

of ‘quality’ – for example, their impact on public health and safety, or on consumers’ ability

to make wise buying decisions.

To achieve quality outcomes, FSANZ cannot afford to take short cuts that compromise

the quality of its risk assessments and decision making. This focus on quality, in the face

of limited resources, became harder to achieve in the past year but will continue to be the

agency’s overriding work principle.

Our commitment to quality outcomes has meant that we must continually examine, in a

careful and critical way, the various contributory factors to the quality of our performance.

These include scientific excellence (staff and knowledge), comprehensive evidence bases,

efficient and effective internal practices and an understanding of the external environment in

which we are operating.

By way of an example, we are working closely with the Office of Best Practice Regulation

to ensure that we not only put in place minimum effective regulation, but also, through a

thorough understanding of the underlying problem that we may be trying to address, to

focus our food standards more accurately . We need to find an appropriate balance to

regulation that does not impact adversely on the economy or quality of life of citizens.


6 C H I E F E X E C U T I V E O F F I C E R ’ S R E V I E W

We continue to participate in the work of the Codex Alimentarius Commission and its

committees and maintain bilateral relationships with many important national food regulators

around the world to fulfil our international obligations. We also provide a coordinating role

for State and Territory jurisdictions in the management of national food emergencies.

This latter role was exercised during the melamine-in-food incident in 2008, where

government regulators in Australia and New Zealand, within an international context of

activity, successfully prevented a risk to consumer safety and potential loss of consumer

confidence in imported foods.

The event not only placed a considerable demand on FSANZ’s resources over a number of

months, but also on the resources of our regulatory partners in the jurisdictions and other

Australian Government agencies.

Unexpected events of this type can be expected to occur from time to time. They divert

staff from scheduled activities and sometimes incur direct financial costs. But, by achieving

the outcome of maintaining public confidence in the safety of food, these expenditures

represent money well spent.

FSANZ must continue to fulfil all of its statutory obligations, and more, despite the

consequences of the global economic downturn.

Citizens and industry can rely on FSANZ to place the protection of public health and safety

as its prime objective – everything else is secondary. Our conservative approach to this

means that every food or food ingredient approved by FSANZ for sale in Australia and New

Zealand will continue to be subjected to appropriate safety evaluations. Where there is

doubt, a food will not be approved.

Food businesses have never been as innovative as they are now. Industry should have

every confidence in our ability to assess applications to amend the Food Standards Code in

a timely, objective and expert manner.

This is how FSANZ has always operated. This is how we intend to conduct ourselves in

2009-10 and beyond.



Agency developments

As implied above, FSANZ’s Board and its senior management team have worked hard to

respond to these challenging times in an equitable and proactive way.

We have been able to maintain our scientific expertise in key areas, as well as our

capabilities in the social sciences, economic analysis, legal drafting, communication and

administrative areas, despite the need to reduce staffing levels to live within our allocated

resources. This has been achieved by not renewing a number of temporary positions and

critically evaluating permanent positions when vacancies arise with targeted recruitment or

internal staff movements to ensure key skills are maintained in critical areas.

The Executive team, announced in last year’s report, has settled into position and is showing

positive results from a fresh collegiate approach to work in the agency. Two new projects,

overseen directly by Executive members, are the development of a Stakeholder Engagement

Strategy for FSANZ and, more recently, with the assistance of two Board members, of a

Reputation Management Strategy linked into existing planning tools, such as the

Corporate Plan.

These initiatives are a signal that FSANZ is placing an even greater emphasis on seeking the

views and opinions of stakeholder groups, including our regulatory partners. Differences

in approaches between FSANZ and its partners can dramatically slow down the standards

setting process, thereby leading to a less than optimal service to the community. By

understanding more fully the positions of jurisdictions, we hope that a whole-of-government

consensus can be reached earlier in the process.

One area where it has been necessary to maintain expenditure is our information and

communication technology systems. Like most organisations, FSANZ is dependent on its

ICT hardware and support to a significant degree.

In early 2009, we rolled out new servers and computers in Canberra and Wellington,

and upgraded our key applications software to Microsoft Office 2007. We expect such

improvements to the ICT system to bring productivity gains in the preparation of documents

and in online literature searching capabilities.


8 C H I E F E X E C U T I V E O F F I C E R ’ S R E V I E W

We also continued to carry out our monitoring responsibilities, publishing results for the

National Food Handling Survey, the Ongoing Food Label Monitoring Survey in Australia

and New Zealand and the Consumer Attitudes Survey. These surveys provide essential

feedback on the effectiveness of FSANZ’s regulatory work and are, in part, a measure of the

quality of our outcomes.

Regulatory highlights

FSANZ’s achievements in 2008-09 are covered in other sections of this report. These

achievements illustrate the successful implementation of new assessment procedures to

amend the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code flowing from the amended FSANZ

Act in 2007.

As usual, the year tended to be dominated by a small number of high-profile projects,

requiring extensive consultation with stakeholders and policy guidance from the Ministerial

Council.

A case in point is the proposed food standard for nutrition and health claims, which the

Ministerial Council sent back to FSANZ in June 2008 for review. The Council subsequently

decided to defer a decision on the results of FSANZ’s review until March 2010 to allow the

completion of an independent ministerial review of labelling law and policy. In response

to the review request, we have proposed substantial changes to the layout of the draft

standard and amendments to the approach used for the regulation of general level health

claims. Because of the significance of the proposed changes, we released an additional

consultation paper in March 2009 to seek comment on our approach to addressing these

two issues.

We continued to progress a range of activities to assist in the implementation of mandatory

fortification requirements for folic acid and iodine, which come into effect in September

– October 2009. While outside the scope of FSANZ’s usual role, we assisted the

Implementation Sub Committee (ISC) to develop a Compliance and Enforcement Model

for Mandatory Fortification. The purpose of the model is to outline industry’s compliance

requirements and to develop an agreed national approach for enforcing mandatory

fortification requirements.

During the year, we commissioned the National Drug Research Institute at Curtin University

to review the available evidence on the effectiveness of advisory statements on labels of

packaged alcohol. This analysis was requested by the Ministerial Council for FSANZ to



evaluate this policy option to curb high risk drinking. We provided the Council with the

conclusions of the commissioned report in May.

Work on food safety standards for the primary industries continued on a broad front, with

projects at various stages of completion for the poultry meat, seed sprout, egg, raw milk and

meat sectors. Using the development of a standard for eggs and egg products as a pilot,

FSANZ and ISC have been coordinating their activities to ensure that standard development

and implementation planning proceed simultaneously.

As mentioned earlier, we devoted significant resources to a food emergency involving the

melamine adulteration of infant formula and other dairy products in China in late 2008.

This involved conducting a series of risk assessments and coordinating a national testing

program for imported products. As a result, eleven products were voluntarily removed from

sale by Australian importers or the manufacturer, as a cautionary measure.

These tips of the regulatory iceberg illustrate the scope and depth of FSANZ’s contribution

to Australia’s and New Zealand’s food regulatory system.

FSANZ suffers to some extent from the small agency syndrome: limited career opportunities

for staff. However, our retention rate is good and our levels of staff satisfaction are high.

The volume and quality of work progressed during the year is due in no small part to this

commitment by staff, for which I thank every person.

I am also grateful to the Board and its Chair, Philippa Smith, for its continued support and

guidance in 2008-09. The tone and culture of an organisation is set at the top – the Board –

and Board members have set a high bar for us.

Four members of the Board came to the end of their terms of appointment on 30 June

2009: Mrs Hikihiki Pihema (2 terms), Dr John Craven (2 terms), Mr Peter Milne (2 terms) and

Dr Pamela Williams (1 term). All contributed significantly to Board outcomes; all established

productive working relationships with staff. I thank them for their valuable contribution to

food regulation.

STEVE MCCUTCHEON

Chief Executive Officer

10 C O R P O R A T E O V E R V I E W


Corporate Overview

Highlights 2008-09

Gazetted 18 amendments to the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code arising from Applications and 9 from Proposals, including mandatory fortification of food with iodine, new levels for cadmium in peanuts and food derived from three genetically modified commodities.

Collaborated with the Office of Best Practice Regulation to better identify the underlying problem behind each Application and Proposal and facilitate approval of proposed standards.

Completed a chemical and microbiological risk assessment for eggs, and received majority submitter support for a proposed approach for assessing raw (unpasteurised) milk products, such as raw milk cheese.

Coordinated the response of Australian food regulators to a food incident involving dairy-based products adulterated with melamine.

As ‘sponsor’ of a program under the Coordinated Food Survey Plan of the Implementation Sub-Committee, coordinated 6 surveys on the Plan, added 2 new surveys and administered 2 on-going surveys with jurisdictional agencies.

Reviewed the use of food colours in Australia and New Zealand in relation to children’s behaviour and reported safe levels.

Upgraded FSANZ’s dietary modelling software DIAMOND, incorporating information from Australian and New Zealand surveys about children’s nutrition and physical activity.

Provided the Ministerial Council with an assessment of the effectiveness of health advisory labelling statements on alcohol products.

FSANZ – roles and responsibilities

Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) is a statutory authority established by the

Australian Government under the Food Standards Australia New Zealand Act 1991. Our goal

is to achieve ‘a safe food supply and well-informed consumers’.

The Australian Government minister, with oversight for FSANZ and for chairing the Ministerial

Council, is the Parliamentary Secretary for Health, the Hon. Mark Butler, MP. Senator the Hon.

Jan McLucas was Parliamentary Secretary until 9 June 2009.

FSANZ is responsible for developing food standards (regulations) for Australia and New

Zealand, as well as a number of other activities specific to Australia only. We work within

the provisions of the FSANZ Act, in particular three main objectives for our activities: the

11C O R P O R A T E O V E R V I E W


protection of public health and safety; the provision of adequate information for consumers;

and the prevention of misleading or deceptive conduct.

In carrying out our work, we also have regard to the need for food standards to be based on

risk analysis using the best available science, and the desirability of encouraging an innovative

and competitive food industry.

We receive policy advice and guidelines from the Australia and New Zealand Food Regulation

Ministerial Council, which has oversight of food standards put forward by FSANZ. We

also work within broader government policies, including those of the Council of Australian

Governments, such as the requirement to apply the minimum regulation necessary to meet

our objectives. In this regard, we liaise with the Office of Best Practice Regulation to ensure

that our regulatory impact statements justify any costs associated with new or amended food

standards.

Food standards approved by the FSANZ Board and endorsed by the Ministerial Council are

gazetted (published) and appear in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code. The

standards cover the composition, labelling and handling of food. Food businesses in Australia,

and to a large extent New Zealand, must comply with the requirements of the Code, which

have the force of law.

Policy guidelines that we receive through the Ministerial Council are generated by the Food

Regulation Standing Committee, the latter comprising representatives of State and Territory

governments and the Australian and New Zealand Governments. These governments are

responsible for the broader food regulatory system, within which FSANZ plays a key role:

Standard settingFSANZ

PolicyMinisterial Council

States/Territories/Aust/NZ

(Health/agriculture portfolios)

FSANZ Act

EnforcementStates/Territories/

NZFSA/AQIS

Implementation Sub-Committee

Local Government



The other key element of the food regulatory system is the enforcement of food standards.

This role is probably the most visible part of the system to the public. Each jurisdiction in

Australia and New Zealand is responsible for ensuring industry compliance with the national

food standards or for taking necessary action in the event of food emergencies.

Historically, each jurisdiction has made its own arrangements to enforce compliance with the

Code. More recently, the Implementation Sub-Committee has taken steps towards a more

national approach to enforcement. FSANZ has responded to this approach by coordinating its

standard-development activities more closely with those of the sub-committee.

This has been necessary because FSANZ generally produces ‘outcomes-based’ food

standards, rather than prescriptive standards. Such standards do not readily provide

enforcement agencies with targets against which to measure compliance. We are continuing

to work with our regulatory colleagues to provide standards that are capable of appropriate

enforcement.

New Zealand has its own arrangements for addressing hygiene and food handling issues,

including food safety regulations for the primary industries. FSANZ develops standards in

these areas for Australia, as well as coordinating national surveillance activities and a national

food recall scheme.

Structure and processes

FSANZ maintains offices in Canberra and Wellington, with staff drawn from a wide range of

disciplines. When necessary, we augment this expertise by commissioning consultancies and

by drawing on the skills and knowledge of our stakeholders and regulatory partners.

Scientific expertise:microbiology, food, technology,

toxicology, gene technology, nutrition,

dietary modelling, social sciences.

Other expertise:legal drafting, economic analysis,

communication, stakeholder,

management, regulatory practices,

training, international affairs,

administration.

Canberra Office120 staff

Wellington Office15 staff



Figure 1 depicts the organisational structure for the agency. We use an established risk

analysis process to develop food standards, represented by the three central columns in

the chart – that is, two risk management Branches (Canberra and Wellington) and a risk

assessment Branch, each under a General Manager. Our Chief Scientist ensures the quality of

our scientific outputs, while a fifth General Manager has oversight of legal aspects of our work

and provides high-level regulatory advice.

The purpose of risk analysis is to identify any potential risks to introducing new food standards

or amending existing ones. For example, certain foods or food technologies cannot be

introduced into the marketplace unless FSANZ has evaluated their safety and their possible

impact on health, especially the health of vulnerable populations.

Once the risks are understood, risk managers – in consultation with consumers, regulatory

partners, public health professionals and industry – develop management options for

controlling or minimising those risks. These options can range from rejecting an Application

to change the Code, to full approval. Specific labelling statements are required to ensure

consumers know what is in a food product and its possible effect on human health.

Our Chief Executive Officer reports directly to the FSANZ Board, comprising twelve people

from Australia and New Zealand. The Board sets the strategic directions for the agency

and is responsible for approving or amending recommendations to change the Australia

New Zealand Food Standards Code put forward by staff. In turn, the Ministerial Council can

request reviews of the Board decisions.

Anyone can apply to FSANZ to amend the Food Standards Code. FSANZ processes for

assessing Applications appear in Appendix 3 and in the Application Handbook.



Chief Executive Officer

Steve McCutcheon

Corporate Executive Assistant

Kerry Messner

Chief ScientistPaul Brent

Executive AssistantLucinda Stewart

Executive AssistantShelley Corkery

Executive AssistantKim Roper

Risk Assessment – ChemicalUtz Mueller

Risk Assessment – Microbiology

Duncan Craig A/g

Risk Assessment – Public Health

NutritionJanine Lewis

Food Composition, Evaluation &

ModellingJanis Baines

Public Health Nutrition

StandardsJenny Hazelton

Consumer & Social Science

Trevor Webb

Regulatory Analysis(Vacant)

Chief Finance Officer

Audrey Gormley

OperationsTony Singer

Chief Information Officer

John Astridge

Executive AssistantMaureen Wempe

Product Safety Standards

Leigh Henderson

Office of Legal Counsel

Cain Sibley

Planning & Capability

Jennifer Schneider

Code Inquiry UnitPeter Keegan

Special ProjectsKent Brown

Standards Management Secretariats

Cathie Humphries

Food SafetyAmanda Hill

CommunicationLydia Buchtmann

Executive AssistantDebra Fletcher A/g

Labelling and Information StandardsJane Allen

Risk Assessment General Manager

Andrew Bartholomaeus

Scientific Strategy, International

and SurveilanceLeanne Laajoki

Chief Public Health Nutrition AdvisorDorothy Mackerras

Food Standards (Canberra)

General ManagerMelanie Fisher

Food Standards (Wellington)

General ManagerDean Stockwell

Legal and Regulatory Affairs General Manager

John Fladun

Executive Assistant to Chief Executive OfficerTreza Jensen A/g

Figure 1. FSANZ organisation chart as at 30 June 2009



Evidence-based food standards

The Australian Government has highlighted the need for regulation to be evidence based.

The need for such an approach is identified in the FSANZ Act. Objective regulation can

only be developed when the underlying facts and assumptions are transparent, and when

regulatory decisions are made solely on this evidence base. Where the evidence is equivocal

or unable to suggest a risk management approach, FSANZ will acknowledge that position.

Before FSANZ can consider changes to the Food Standards Code, we must gather as much

information as possible about the nature of the risk and the likely impact of new or amended

food standards on the community. This body of evidence – known as the evidence base –

needs to contain the best available information at the time of an assessment.

We obtain much of the scientific information from the company requesting an amendment to

the Code. The Application Handbook provides details of the data we require for particular

situations. If a company is unable to supply the data, we can reject an Application at an early

stage. The onus is on the applicant to provide the evidence that their proposed food or food

ingredient is safe.

Specialist staff at FSANZ verify the company’s evidence with information obtained from their

own scientific sources, including that obtained from overseas national regulators. FSANZ

analyses raw scientific data and other information, and reaches conclusions which inform

regulatory decisions. We sometimes generate our own databases and data systems to assist

decision making – for example, DIAMOND for dietary modelling data and NUTTAB for statistics

on nutrients in foods.

The evidence base may contain social sciences information, such as studies into consumer

attitudes and behaviour, which we commission. It also includes cost-benefit analyses in the

form of regulation impact statements.

We base our scientific risk assessments on the best available evidence and do not usually

commission laboratory studies. Such studies are generally unnecessary for the majority of

the agency’s work. Where they are required, we commission analytical work to inform the

regulatory process.

At various stages of standards development, we release reports for public comment that

summarise our evidence base. This is to ensure that all issues have been addressed and our

evidence base is as accurate and as comprehensive as possible.



Reporting our performance

FSANZ’s formal reporting mechanism is tied to the agency Outputs and Outcomes contained

in the Portfolio Budget Statements 2008-09. Our agency Outcome is ‘a safe food supply and

well-informed consumers’. The Outputs of all our activities have that Outcome as an objective.

This annual report lists performance targets for main groups of activities, along with

quantitative or qualitative measures of success in meeting those targets (see Priorities and

Performance 2008-09). As indicated below, FSANZ will report against a new Program in

2009-10 instead of the Outputs and Outcomes structure.

While this fulfils our reporting obligations under the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies

Act, we also brief the Parliamentary Secretary for Health and the New Zealand Minister for

Food Safety on specific issues during the year, and the FSANZ Chair provides a report of

activities and issues to the Australia and New Zealand Food Regulation Ministerial Council at

its biannual meetings.

In addition, as far as is practicable, we publish our regulatory intentions and supporting

reasons on our website, and work closely with our regulatory partners to achieve the best

outcomes for all stakeholders in the regulatory process.

Ultimately, however, our performance can be judged by the agency Outcome of ‘a safe

food supply and well-informed consumers’. In achieving this Outcome, FSANZ is but one

element of a food regulatory system. Our agency Outcome is dependent on the policy and

enforcement arms of the system, as well as our own endeavours.

Public confidence in food remained high in 2008-09. We interpret this successful Outcome as

being due, in no small part, to our performance within an integrated regulatory system.

Summary of financial performance

In 2008-09, we received $17.185 million appropriation funding from the Australian Government

and a further $0.012 million capital injection. As part of the bilateral partnership agreement

with New Zealand, the New Zealand Government contributed a further $1.545 million towards

the cost of joint activities we undertake for both countries. We also received $0.290 million

from the Department of Health and Ageing to fund nanotechnology activities and limited

revenues for fee-for-service activities and royalties on publications. In managing FSANZ’s

finances, the Board, through its Finance, Audit and Risk Management Committee, works to a

four-year financial plan.



Financial outcomes

During the year, operating revenue – including revenue from the Australian and New Zealand

Governments – was $20.630 million and operating expenses were $20.772 million, resulting in

an operating deficit of $0.142 million.

Four-year financial plan

The four-year plan has a number of assumptions relating to future income, changes in

expenditure and the accrual of liabilities. We have assumed revenue from the Australian

Government is known from the Portfolio Budget Statements 2009-10. The New Zealand

Government has made a proportional contribution.

The four-year plan for 2009-10, and the forward years, assumes that FSANZ will operate a

balanced budget over that period. We expect inevitable changes to both revenue and the

level of expenditure as new priorities emerge and workloads change. The Finance and Audit

Risk Management Committee and the Board regularly review the four-year plan to ensure our

future financial position remains sound.

Certificate of Compliance

The 2008-09 Certificate of Compliance was sent to the Department of Finance and

Deregulation before October 15th, as required.

18 P R I O R I T I E S A N D P E R F O R M A N C E 2 0 0 8 - 0 9


Priorities and Performance 2008-09

We have summarised our activities against the performance information for FSANZ contained

in the Portfolio Budget Statements 2008-2009: Health and Ageing Portfolio. More detailed

accounts of projects and services appear later in this report (see page references).

Outcomes and outputs

FSANZ’s reporting outcomes are linked with those of the Department of Health and Ageing, in

particular, the Department’s Outcome 1 – Population Health. Our reporting structure can be

summarised as:

Group 1 Outputs are reflected in the four Key Result Areas of the FSANZ Corporate Plan

2006-2009: Our Regulatory Measures, Our Stakeholders, Our People and Organisational

Capability, and Our Accountability. It is under these headings that we have described the work

of the agency in this annual report.

FSANZ OutcomeA safe food supply andwell-informed consumers

Output Group 1 – Regulatory Activity1.1 Effective and appropriate food standards

and regulatory measures underpinned by rigorous evidence-based risk assessments.

1.2 Informed stakeholders who engage in, and contribute to, the standards setting process.

1.3 Enhanced organisational capability and capacity to support the timeliness and rigour of FSANZ’s standards setting process.

1.4 Improved, relevant and compliant better practice corporate governance arrangements in place, reflected in the FSANZ Corporate Governance Strategy.

Output Group 2 – Services to the Minister and Parliament2.1 Timely, accurate and relevant ministerial and

parliamentary briefings measured by Parliamentary Secretary satisfaction.

19P R I O R I T I E S A N D P E R F O R M A N C E 2 0 0 8 - 0 9


Performance measures

The Portfolio Budget Statements 2008-09 set out reference points or targets associated with

FSANZ’s performance in achieving Group 1 and Group 2 outputs. Activities associated with

these targets are adjusted from year to year to address prevailing strategic directions and work

of high priority.

Performance reference point or target

Activities contributing to meeting targets Page(s)

Output 1.1 All standards to be developed within designated timeframes and supported by evidence-based risk assessments.

• 100% with science-based assessments.

• 100% with regulatory impact statements

30 — 62

30 — 62

Output 1.2 High level of engagement by, and satisfaction of, stakeholders with the performance of FSANZ.

• Commitment by stakeholders and regulatory partners to FSANZ’s system of scientific and advisory committees

• Level of consultation on specific standards

67 — 74

30 — 62

Output 1.3 All Applications managed within statutory timeframes.

• Applications finalised during 2008-09 met statutory timeframes, from start of processing Application to approval by the Board

25 Appendix 1

Output 1.4 Total compliance with statutory and other external reporting requirements.

• Introduced reporting against Institute of Public Administration Australia compliance index

• Complied with requirements of FSANZ Act and CAC Act

3

1, 17

Output 2.1 Satisfaction of Parliamentary Secretary with quality and timeliness of advice provided.

• Parliamentary Secretary expressed ‘satisfied’ with level and quality of advice provided.

104

It should be noted that 2008-09 is the final year in which FSANZ will report its performance

against outputs. From 2009-10, all General Government Sector entities will report on a

Program basis.

In summary, FSANZ will no longer report against Output Group 1 (Regulatory Activity) and

Output Group 2 (Services to the Minister and Parliament), rather against Program 1.1: Food

Regulatory Activity and Services to the Minister and Parliament.

20 P R I O R I T I E S A N D P E R F O R M A N C E 2 0 0 8 - 0 9


FSANZ will report on the ‘deliverables’ that contribute to the Program and on the ‘key

performance indicators’ that measure the impact of the Program. Our reporting will address

the ‘major activities’ that support the Program, identified for 2009-10 as:

Effective evidence-based food standards

Collaborating effectively with regulatory partners

Consumers and other stakeholders

Governance arrangements

Our Regulatory Measures



22 O U R R E G U L A T O R Y M E A S U R E S


Objectives

• Continue to work with our government partners to develop food standards through the

bi-national regulatory arrangements.

• Use best regulatory practice in the delivery of food regulatory outcomes.

• Anticipate and work proactively to address new food regulatory challenges.

Performance

• Number of Applications and Proposals finalised within statutory timeframes and

consistent with Ministerial policy guidelines.

• Timeliness of our management of food emergencies and public health issues arising

from food.

• Ability to maintain the integrity and currency of the agency’s scientific evidence base

and to augment this evidence base with consumer research and regulatory analysis.

Highlights

• 18 Applications and 9 Proposals gazetted (published).

• Amendments to the Food Standards Code included mandatory fortification of food

with iodine, new levels for cadmium in peanuts and hydrocyanic acid in ready-to-

eat cassava chips, and approval for food derived from three genetically modified

commodities.

• Collaborated with the Office of Best Practice Regulation to identify more effectively the

underlying problem behind each Application and Proposal.

• Reviewed the use of food colours in Australian and New Zealand foods in relation to

children’s behaviour and reported safe levels.

• Provided the Ministerial Council with an assessment of the effectiveness of health

advisory labelling on alcohol products.

• Coordinated the response of Australian food regulators to a food incident involving

dairy-based products adulterated with melamine.


23O U R R E G U L A T O R Y M E A S U R E S

• Completed a chemical and microbiological risk assessment for eggs, and received

submitter support for a proposed approach for assessing raw (unpasteurised) milk

products, such as cheese.

Overview

FSANZ develops regulatory measures in the form of food standards, which appear in the

Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code. This Code has existed in its present form since

December 2000. The food standards contain requirements for the content, labelling and

handling of food for sale in Australia and New Zealand – requirements that apply to imported

foods as well as to domestically produced products.

Food standards normally address market failure or a potential market failure. A market failure

could be the emergence of new knowledge about the adverse effects of a contaminant or

chemical residue on human health or the consumer not being provided with the information

required to make wise buying decisions. Potential market failure could include the addition of

substances to foods for which there is no history of safe use, or the introduction of new food

production technologies.

FSANZ has to ensure that the regulatory burden on the food industry is no greater than that

considered necessary for effective public health and safety and is commensurate with the risk.

This is minimum effective regulation.

The ultimate minimum regulation, of course, is no regulation. However, food is unlike

other traded commodities. People have to consume food to exist – they cannot opt out.

Chapter 2.Food Product

Standards

Chapter 1.General Food

Standards

Chapter 3.Food Safety Standards

(Australia only)

Chapter 4.Primary Production

and Processing Standards

(Australia only)

Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code



Government therefore has assumed a responsibility, through the provisions of the Code, for

ensuring that food products do not compromise public health and safety.

This leaves FSANZ with the task of determining what is meant by ‘minimum’ and what is

meant by ‘effective’. Both are tied to the underlying problem being addressed by a new or

amended food standard.

For example, we received an Application to require pregnancy advisory statements on alcohol

products. Was the underlying problem one of lack of information in the marketplace about

the adverse effects of alcohol or the potential effects of alcohol on the foetus? We decided

that ‘minimum’ and ‘effective’ should be applied to the latter. Thus, we are focusing on the

likely effectiveness of a labelling measure to reduce foetal alcohol syndrome, rather than on

increasing the level of awareness of foetal alcohol syndrome in the community as an end in itself.

During the year, we paid greater attention to identifying the problems being addressed by

Applications and Proposals in an attempt to target our outcomes more accurately.

We collaborated with the Office of Best Practice Regulation on a number of major projects

– e.g. food safety standards for the primary industries – to ensure that we could justify the

costs to the community of our regulatory measures. These costs are borne by industry and

government enforcement agencies. We have to demonstrate that benefits outweigh the costs.

FSANZ has always had regard to cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analyses through the

production of regulatory impact statements. We extended that work in 2008-09 by integrating

regulatory impact analysis more thoroughly into our decision making, earlier in the process, as

a means of achieving relevant outcomes.

While the above considerations impose a discipline on our regulatory decision making,

and contribute valuable information to the evidence base, the quality of our food standards

depends largely on the robustness of FSANZ’s regulatory science. Science provides the

cornerstone of standards development in FSANZ

Our risk assessors use an internationally recommended process (Codex) to evaluate the

safety of foods. They determine whether a food poses a threat to human health, the likelihood

of a consumer being adversely affected and the severity of any food-borne illness. A risk

assessment could examine the consequences of a lack of information being provided to

consumers – especially vulnerable groups – about a food product. It could also assess the

potential benefits of a mandatory fortification measure.

Risk managers develop regulatory options based on the scientific risk assessments, within

the context of minimum effective regulation and relevant policy guidelines. This requires a



thorough understanding of the problem being addressed, the scientific evidence of risk and

the current relevant regulatory environment, in Australia, New Zealand and overseas.

The resulting food standards are the minimum measures necessary to maintain public safety –

measures that need to be reviewed from time to time.

A case in point is the existing prohibition in the Food Standards Code of the sale of food

products made from milk that has not been heat treated (i.e. unpasteurised milk). FSANZ is

in the process of examining whether it is possible to produce safe ‘raw milk’ products (e.g.

cheese) without the mandatory requirement that the milk should have been heat treated. In

other words, we are looking at whether it is feasible to pull back from the current prohibition

and case-by-case approval process.

Applications and Proposals gazetted 1 July 2008-30 June 2009

We gazetted 18 variations to food standards arising from Applications (17 in 2007-08) and 9

variations to standards arising from Proposals (7 in 2007-08). Please consult Appendix 1 for

more detail.

Food standards development

Detailed information on Applications and Proposals processed in 2008-09 is contained

in Appendices 1 and 2. Information on FSANZ’s process for assessing Applications and

Proposals can be found at Appendix 3.

Ministerial Council Policy Guidelines

The Australian Government, States, Territories and the New Zealand Government are

represented by their Health or Food Ministers (as Lead Ministers) on the Australia and New

Zealand Food Regulation Ministerial Council. Other Ministers from relevant portfolios such as

agriculture, industry, or consumer affairs also participate on the Ministerial Council to ensure a

whole-of-Government approach to food regulation.

The Ministerial Council is responsible for the development of food regulatory policy for

domestic and imported foods and the development of policy guidelines for setting food

standards for domestic and imported foods. In developing or reviewing food regulatory

measures and variations to food regulatory measures, FSANZ must have regard to any

written policy guidelines formulated by the Ministerial Council and notified to FSANZ for

these purposes.



Ministerial Policy Guidelines notified to FSANZ in 2008-09

No Guidelines were notified to FSANZ in 2008-09.

Standards Development Work Plan

New assessment procedures for Applications and Proposals took effect on 1 October 2007,

with the requirements outlined in Part 3 of the Application Handbook.

We continue to assess Applications received, or Proposals prepared, before 1 October 2007

under the procedures in place at that time. Tables 1 and 2 reflect the two types of procedures.

While the number of Applications and Proposals dealt with decreased compared to last year,

our workload continued to be characterised by increased demands and complexities. Table

1 shows the number of Applications, Proposals and Potential Proposals on the Work Plan

(received or prepared prior to 1 October 2007) as at 30 June 2009, in all Work Plan Groups.

Table 2 shows the number of Applications and Proposals received or prepared from 1 October

2007 onwards on the Work Plan as at 30 June 2009.

Table 1: Applications and Proposals on the Work Plan (received or prepared before

1 October 2007)

As at 30 June 2006 30 June 2007 30 June 2008 30 June 2009

Group 1 19 16 9 8

Group 2 30 34 19 9

Group 3 13 14 8 1

Under review 4 1 2 1

Total 66 65 38 19

With the Ministerial Council or awaiting notification to the Ministerial Council

7 6 10 3

Estimated waiting time Group 2

12 months 12 months 12 months 12 months

Group 1 is for Applications or Proposals raising health and safety issues being progressed as a priority or identified by jurisdictions as warranting priority.

Group 2 is for unpaid Applications or Proposals placed on a 3-year rolling Work Plan scheduled for commencement in order of receipt.

Group 3 is for paid applications, on which work commences on receipt of an Initial Assessment fee.



Table 2: Applications and Proposals on the Work Plan (received or prepared from

1 October 2007 onwards)*

As at 30 June 2008 30 June 2009

General Procedure 8 (4 paid) 15 (8 paid)

Minor Procedure 0 0

Major Procedure 1 (1 paid) 5 (2 paid)

Urgent Applications or Proposals 1 0

Under review 0 0

Total 10 20

With the Ministerial Council or awaiting notification to the Ministerial Council

1 2

Estimated waiting time for unpaid Applications 12 months

9 months

24 months for labelling applications

*This does not include potential Applications and Proposals for which an Administrative Assessment has commenced, but not yet completed, as these have not yet been placed on the Work Plan.

General Procedure – This Procedure applies to all Applications or Proposals, unless they are

being considered under either the Minor or Major Procedures or are considered ‘urgent’ under

Division 4 of the FSANZ Act.

Minor Procedure – This Procedure applies to Applications or Proposals for the variation of a

food regulatory measure that, if made, would not directly or indirectly impose, vary or remove

an obligation on any person; or create, vary or remove a right of any person; or otherwise alter

the legal effect of the measure.

Major Procedure – This Procedure applies to Applications or Proposals that involves such

scientific or technical complexity that it is necessary to adopt this Procedure in considering

it; or involves such a significant change to the scope of the food regulatory measure that it is

necessary to adopt this Procedure in considering it.

Urgent Applications or Proposals – These Applications and Proposals are considered urgent

under Division 4 of the FSANZ Act. Under these provisions, FSANZ is required to assess the

variation to the Code within 12 months of the date of effect of the gazetted variation. FSANZ

may then either re-affirm its original decision or prepare a proposal for a further variation or

replacement variation.



Table 3: Total Applications received and accepted onto the Work Plan and

Proposals prepared

2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09

Applications 20 24 16 14

Proposals 2 1 9 4

Total 22 25 25 18

Table 4: Applications and Proposals finalised

2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09

Final Assessments made by the FSANZ Board

26 19 29 10

Approvals made by the FSANZ Board

n/a n/a 2 8

Applications withdrawn or rejected* or removed from the Work Plan Proposals abandoned

3 5 9 16

Total completed 29 24 40 34

Applications or Proposals gazetted

26 25 24 25

*This includes Applications rejected at Administrative Assessment.

Tables 3 and 4 demonstrate, respectively, the trends in projects being accepted onto the Work

Plan since 2005 and Board decisions over the same time period. Further information on the

above can be obtained from Appendix 2.

Ministerial Council Reviews

The number of 1st Reviews requested by the Ministerial Council continues to fluctuate, but

there was a large percentage increase in 2008-09 over previous years.



Table 5: Notification outcomes

2005-06 2006-07 2007-08* 2008-09

Final Assessment decisions notified

27 19 22 10

Approval decisions notified

n/a n/a 1 8

Requests for 1st Review 7 (27%) 3 (16%) 6 (26%) 8 (44%)

1st Review decisions notified

11 5 4 7

Requests for 2nd Review 3 (27%) 0 1 (25%) 0

*The figures in this column may differ from those provided in the 2007-08 Annual Report as Review requests for matters notified in 2007-08 may have been received by FSANZ after the deadline for publication.

Under the 2008 Inter-Governmental Food Regulation Agreement, Ministers can only request

reviews of FSANZ decisions based on one or more of the following criteria:

(i) it is not consistent with existing policy guidelines set by the Ministerial Council; or

(ii) it is not consistent with the objectives of the legislation which establishes FSANZ; or

(iii) it does not protect public health and safety; or

(iv) it does not promote consistency between domestic and international food standards

where these are at variance; or

(v) it does not provide adequate information to enable informed choice; or

(vi) it is difficult to enforce or comply with in both practical or resource terms; or

(vii) it places an unreasonable cost burden on industry or consumers.

We received eight Review requests during the year. Three requests for a 1st Review were

for genetically modified commodities based on criterion (iii). The Ministerial Council also

requested 1st Reviews of an Application increasing the maximum level of cadmium in peanuts

and an Application relating to lutein being added to infant formula. Both of these review

requests were based on criteria (ii), (iii) and (vii). A further 1st Review request on an Application

proposing to add calcium to chewing gum was based on criteria (i), (ii), (v) and (vi).



In addition, a review was requested on a Proposal which sought to permit and regulate the

composition of added inulin / fructo-oligosaccharides and galacto-oligosaccharides to food

based on criteria (i), (ii), (iv) and (vi). Finally, a 1st Review request on a Proposal relating to

hydrocyanic acid in ready-to-eat cassava chips was based on criteria (vi) and (vii).

Additional work requested by the Ministerial Council

The Ministerial Council notified FSANZ of the following matters on 16 December 2008:

1. FSANZ to provide an assessment of the Southampton Study (UK) of food colours and

children’s behaviour to Ministerial Council members.

2. FSANZ to provide further information regarding the risk assessment of Application

A588 – Voluntary Addition of Fluoride to Packaged Water to the Ministerial Council.

3. FSANZ to assess the difference between consumption data used to prepare its 2007

report on trans fatty acids in the Australian and New Zealand food supply and new data

generated by the National Children’s Nutrition and Physical Activity Survey Program

and advise the Ministerial Council as to whether this would change the conclusions of

the 2007 Report.

FSANZ reviews of food standards

To maintain the currency of provisions in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code,

FSANZ reviews food standards on a regular basis, as resources become available. We have

identified a number of standards warranting a review – for example, a general labelling review

— but have delayed implementation because of the demands of routine standards-setting

activities on our resources. This resource constraint has also led to timelines for reviews

already in progress being extended.

Review of food additives – benzoates and sulphites

The 21st Australian Total Diet Study in 2005 raised questions about the consumption of the

food preservatives benzoates and sulphites in the population, especially by young children.

We have since held discussions with industries about the dietary exposure of children to three

categories of food – drinks, dried fruit and raw meat sausages.

In 2008-09, we established that industry has significantly reduced the use of these

preservatives in drinks and dried fruit since 2003. Discussions are continuing with

manufacturers of raw meat sausages to identify industry use of preservatives in raw meat



sausages. We will then incorporate the 2007 Australian Children’s Nutrition and Physical

Activity Survey data into our dietary modelling.

Information from this work will allow us to decide whether children’s eating habits have

changed in the last decade and whether they are consuming too high a level of these

preservatives. We should be in a position to recommend changes to the Code, if any,

by late 2009.

Review of hydrocyanic acid in ready-to-eat cassava chips

We established that a maximum level of 10 mg/kg for total hydrocyanic acid in ready-to-eat

cassava chips was necessary to adequately protect public health and safety. Changes to the

Food Standards Code giving effect to this requirement were gazetted during the year.

Review of food allergens

Food allergy is an adverse reaction to food involving the immune system. Approximately 1-2%

of adults and 5-8% of children have food allergy. The clinical symptoms of food allergies range

from mild to severe and life-threatening reactions. The majority of food allergies are caused

by egg, milk, fish, crustacea, peanuts, soybeans, tree nuts and sesame seeds, and their

products. The only way for the allergic individual to avoid a reaction is to not eat the food that

causes the allergic reaction.

Since 2002, Australia and New Zealand have specific requirements for the declaration of

food allergens to consumers on the food label, for packaged products; or at the request of

consumers for food sold unpackaged.

FSANZ is in the process of reviewing the allergen regulations, as requested by the Ministerial

Council. The review will ensure the regulatory requirements reflect the current scientific

knowledge in this field. We are consulting with allergy experts to establish the evidence

required to progress the review. As part of the review, we are assessing the significance of

lupin as an emerging food allergen. Lupin — a legume related to pea, peanut and soy — has

been recently recognised in Europe as a cause of allergic reactions and anaphylaxis.

Foods and food ingredients requiring pre-market approval

To protect consumers from unsafe food, FSANZ carries out safety assessments on certain

categories of food and food ingredients before they are approved for sale in Australia and New

Zealand. We take a conservative approach to these and other safety assessments. We will

not approve a food for sale if there are any doubts about its safety.



Novel foods

Through the Advisory Committee on Novel Foods, FSANZ and its jurisdictional partners

provide advice to industry on whether a substance requires pre-approval before its use in

Australian and New Zealand foods. We publish the decisions of this advisory committee on

our website.

We are examining a request from two manufacturers for the exclusive use of a chemically

defined mixture of conjugated linoleic acid triglycerides derived from food-grade safflower oil

as novel foods. If the permissions are granted, manufacturers intend to add the mixtures to a

range of foods to assist consumers to manage their weight.

We also commenced assessments of three Applications associated with the use of

phytosterols in food. The use of phytosterols is already approved for certain products,

including table spreads, to assist in lowering cholesterol absorption.

Manufacturers are seeking approval for the use of phytosterols derived from vegetable oils

as a novel food ingredient in fruit juice and fruit juice drinks with a minimum 25% juice and

tall-oil phytosterol esters in reduced-fat cheeses. Another manufacturer is also requesting a

consolidation of the current permissions for phytosterols and their esters within the Code to

reflect equivalence of safety and efficacy of the various forms of phytosterols.

In order to assess the merits of these Applications, FSANZ will analyse data on the cholesterol-

lowering effects, nutritional effects and safety of phytosterols when added to the respective

food vehicles.

We are particularly interested in the cumulative consumption of phytosterols (including current

permissions for tall oil phytosterols and phytosterol esters), especially among children, if

they are permitted in a broader range of foods. Another area of concern is the potential for

altered patterns of consumption of the food vehicle (juice, juice drink and low-fat cheese) by

consumers to affect public health.

Genetically modified foods

In 2000, we approved our first genetically modified (GM) food, a herbicide-tolerant soybean.

Since then, we have approved a total of 38 GM foods from a variety of crops – cotton, corn,

canola, sugar beet, potato, lucerne and rice – as well as soybean. We approved six GM foods

during the year, two of which are currently the subject of review by the Ministerial Council. A

further five applications are currently under assessment.



The majority of GM food Applications have been concerned with plant commodities

possessing ‘first generation’ traits, such as herbicide tolerance and insect protection. We

anticipate receiving Applications for commodities possessing ‘second generation’ traits, such

as altered compositional content.

As foreshadowed in last year’s report, we arranged for an external peer review of FSANZ’s

GM food safety assessment procedures. The purpose of this review was to benchmark our

performance in GM food safety assessment against international best practice and to identify

areas for enhancement of our scientific capability in this area. The review was undertaken by

Dr William Yan from Health Canada.

Dr Yan concluded that the current process used by FSANZ to assess GM food is scientifically

rigorous and consistent with international principles on GM food safety assessment. His report

noted the expertise and skills of staff in assessing foods derived from gene technology and

FSANZ’s lead role in international considerations of GM food safety.

FSANZ has accepted Dr Yan’s recommendations for maintaining its competence and

international standing in GM matters and is implementing his suggested improvements to

practices.

Processing aids

A processing aid is a substance used in the processing of raw materials, foods or ingredients,

to fulfil a technological purpose relating to treatment or processing, but does not perform

a technological function in the final food. In 2008-09, we gazetted amendments to the

Code for two asparaginase enzymes from different sources, which have been developed to

reduce acrylamide formation in processed foods. We also approved two other enzymes,

phospholipase A2 and cellulase.

Food additives

A food additive is a substance that performs a technological function in the final food. In

2008-09 we approved the use of steviol glycosides as an intense sweetener and are currently

considering the use of ethyl lauroyl arginate as an anti-microbial food additive.

Maximum residue limits (MRLs)

Maximum residue limits in the Code restrict the level of agricultural and veterinary chemical

residues in food, while maintaining the effective control of pests and diseases in plants and

animals. Regulatory authorities assess the residues associated with proposed MRLs and only

permit residues that do not present public health or safety concerns.



During the year, we assessed three Applications and two Proposals to change MRL values

and gazetted subsequent amendments to the Code.

Contaminants in the food supply

In 2008-09, we increased the maximum permissible level for cadmium in peanuts. Peanuts

are a minor contributor to overall dietary exposure to cadmium for Australian and New Zealand

consumers. Following an extensive risk assessment, we concluded that the increase to the

maximum level is safe for consumers. It will alleviate any shortfall between domestic and

imported supplies of peanuts and still ensure that adequate measures are in place to keep

cadmium in the food supply to as low as reasonably achievable.

Fortified foods

Mandatory fortification with folic acid and with iodine

In July 2008, FSANZ approved extending the New Zealand-only standard for mandatory

iodine fortification to become a joint standard for both Australia and New Zealand. During

this year, therefore, we undertook activities to support the effective implementation of the new

requirements for industry, as well as those for the mandatory fortification with folic acid.

Folic acid is being added to bread-making flour in Australia and, at the time of preparing this

report, to bread in New Zealand to further reduce the incidence of neural tube defect (NTD)

affected pregnancies. At the same time, salt added to bread during bread-making is being

replaced with iodised salt in Australia and New Zealand to address the re-emergence of iodine

deficiency in the population.

In Australia, approximately 300-350 pregnancies are affected by a NTD, like spina bifida,

each year. We estimate that folic acid fortification will result in the number of NTD-affected

pregnancies per year being reduced by 14-49 in Australia.

Iodine deficiency has recently re-emerged as a public health concern, with 43% of Australians

aged two years and older estimated to be consuming inadequate amounts of iodine. We

anticipate that mandatory iodine fortification will reduce inadequate iodine intakes to less than

5% in Australia, with similar results expected in New Zealand.

In Australia, the mandatory requirements for folic acid fortification came into effect in

September 2009 and for iodine in October 2009. For New Zealand, iodine mandatory

fortification became law in September 2009. The New Zealand Government has deferred

manditory folic acid fortification until 2012.



In the lead up to the commencement dates, we have been involved in a number of key

activities to help ensure the effective implementation of the new regulations. For example, we

have developed User Guides, in consultation with government and industry representatives,

to help manufacturers, retailers and food enforcement officers interpret and apply the new

requirements in Australia.

To assist in informing the general public, we prepared advice to specific population groups

which will assist other organisations to develop their own communication and education

materials for mandatory fortification. We developed a series of published articles in special

interest group newsletters to ensure targeted messages are being provided to specific

population groups. Our website also contains information suitable for consumers, health

professionals and industry to assist in answering questions and explaining issues relating to

mandatory fortification.

The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare has the overall coordinating role for monitoring

activities for mandatory fortification. We are assisting this monitoring program by tracking key

changes in the food supply and by monitoring food consumption patterns and consumer

attitudes towards fortified foods.

Voluntary fortification with calcium and with fluoride

FSANZ completed assessments of two Applications seeking permission to add specific

vitamins and minerals to new food categories.

The first related to the addition of calcium to chewing gum (containing no more than 0.2%

residual sugars). The manufacturer sought permission for this fortified product to provide

consumer choice and as an additional dietary source of calcium, given many Australians and

New Zealanders do not consume enough calcium to meet their nutritional needs.

We approved the addition of calcium to chewing gum (containing no more than 0.2%

residual sugars – commonly referred to as ‘sugar-free’ chewing gum) on the basis that it did

not raise any safety concerns, had the potential to assist in addressing inadequate calcium

intakes of consumers who chew gum, and may also provide short-term dental benefits. We

recommended that no health claims should be allowed.

The Food Regulation Ministerial Council asked us to review our decision to approve this

Application, which we did, without change, but with the recommendation that the Ministerial

Council may wish to review the policy guidelines relating to the fortification of food. Ministers

did not seek a further review in relation to this Application.



The second Application for voluntary fortification involves the addition of fluoride to packaged

(bottled) water. The applicant wished to provide a fluoridated bottled water so that people

without access to fluoridated water or who preferred to drink fluoridated water would have this

choice available to them, while those who preferred unfluoridated bottled water would still have

access to unfluoridated products.

Water fluoridation is a contentious issue for some sub-sectors of the community. For this

reason, we undertook a comprehensive and robust risk assessment which found that there are

no public health and safety concerns for fluoridated packaged water. We also worked closely

with government agencies, water experts and dental professionals in Australia and New

Zealand who supported our conclusions.

We assessed this Application on the basis of ‘nutritional equivalence’ because fluoridated

packaged water is a substitute beverage for fluoridated tap water in terms of its appearance,

use and nutritional profile.

On the basis of this assessment, FSANZ approved the voluntary fortification of packaged

water with fluoride. This decision enables bottlers to offer fluoridated packaged water to

consumers as an alternative to fluoridated tap water or as a source of fluoride for those who

do not have access to fluoridated tap water. To provide for informed consumer choice,

packaged water with added fluoride will be required to be labelled to clearly indicate that a

product ‘contains added fluoride’.

Food labelling

We develop and amend labelling standards within the context of our statutory objectives.

Increasingly, we are asked to assess Applications which seek to provide consumers with

information on food labels for reasons of personal choice, rather than addressing particular

public health or safety issues.

Applications about labelling for vegetarians, for food produced using gene technology by

method of production, and for animal-derived products that refer to their methods of

production and rearing, are examples of such matters that we considered this year. All

required careful consideration. However, none of these Applications were successful since

they were outside the scope of FSANZ’s mandate for standards development.



Nutrition and health claims

In response to the Ministerial Council’s request received in June 2008, we have proceeded

with the analysis of issues raised for a First Review of the draft standard for nutrition, health

and related claims.

However, the Ministerial Council has since requested that a decision on our review response

be deferred so that it can be considered concurrently with the outcomes of an independent

ministerial review of labelling law and policy being conducted in 2009.

We released a paper for consultation which addressed proposed changes to the draft health

claims standard arising from the Ministerial Council’s review request. These changes relate to

the approach used for the regulation of general level health claims and the text and structure of

the draft food standard. We are continuing with the preparation of our response to the review

request during the rest of 2009.

Health advisory labels on packaged alcohol

FSANZ is currently undertaking two pieces of work aimed at assessing the suitability and

effectiveness of health advisory statements on alcoholic beverage containers.

The first project is an Application to require health advisory statements on the labels of

packaged alcoholic beverages advising of the risks of consuming alcohol when planning to

become pregnant and during pregnancy. The second was a request from the Ministerial

Council for us to consider mandatory health advisory statements on packaged alcohol in

relation to high-risk drinking.

In response, we commissioned the National Drug Research Institute at Curtin University

to conduct two reviews on the effectiveness of labelling, the first with a focus on high-risk

drinking and the second on pregnancy.

We presented the Ministerial Council with the review report on the effectiveness of labelling in

relation to high-risk drinking in May 2009. The Ministerial Council intends to forward this report

to the Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy for consolidated consideration by the Council of

Australian Governments of broader measures aimed at reducing alcohol-related harm.

In relation to the Application seeking health advisory statements about pregnancy, we are

currently analysing the regulatory options, taking into account all relevant evidence and

information provided by the commissioned review. FSANZ is cognisant of a number of other

activities and initiatives underway in Australia and New Zealand which aim to reduce alcohol-

related harm to the foetus.



Exemption of allergen declaration for isinglass

The Beer, Wine and Spirits Council of New Zealand applied for an exemption from the

requirement to declare isinglass on the label, when present in beer and wine as a result of

its use as a clarifying agent. Isinglass is a processing aid commonly derived from dried swim

bladders of certain tropical and subtropical fish.

We concluded that consumption of isinglass-fined beer and wine was not likely to present

a risk of allergic reactions in fish-allergic consumers. Following approval by the Ministerial

Council, the draft variation of the Code was gazetted in May 2009, thereby giving effect to

the exemption.

Food standards for the primary industries

FSANZ has the responsibility for the development of food safety standards for the primary

industries to be included in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code. The objective

is to ensure that food safety is addressed through nationally consistent measures across the

entire food chain. We are progressively addressing all primary industry sectors.

These standards – known as primary production and processing standards – apply in Australia

only. New Zealand has its own arrangements for primary production.

Following a number of consultations with State and Territory regulators about the

implementation of these standards, FSANZ and its jurisdictional partners have developed an

integrated model for the development of food standards and consistent implementation. The

model envisages a food standard being presented to the Australia and New Zealand Food

Regulation Ministerial Council for consideration along with the associated implementation plan

and regulatory impact statement.

The model was endorsed by the Food Regulation Standing Committee (FRSC) in August

2008. FRSC agreed that the model would be limited to primary production and processing

standards and that the standard for eggs and egg products would provide a pilot.

Eggs and egg products

FSANZ has completed a chemical and microbiological risk assessment which confirmed that

use of cracked or dirty eggs and unpasteurised pulp poses the greatest food safety risk to

consumers. Outbreaks of food-borne illness attributed to eggs indicate that current measures

in the Code to limit the sale of cracked and dirty eggs and to require pasteurisation of all pulp

are inadequate.



The draft standard addresses these issues and enables the Egg Implementation Plan Working

Group to progress their work. This group has developed a succinct Compliance Plan which

will enable the egg industry to understand how they can meet the minimum requirements for

compliance with the new egg standard, and how the jurisdictions will implement the standard.

We intend to release the draft standard for public consultation in September 2009 and

anticipate that the standard will be completed by mid-2010.

Poultry meat

FSANZ is continuing to work with the chicken industry and the jurisdictions to resolve

remaining issues around this project. We anticipate that the standard will be finalised in

late 2009.

We completed a nationwide baseline survey to determine the extent of Salmonella and

Campylobacter contamination on poultry and poultry meat. The survey, coordinated by

FSANZ with the participation of five States and the Department of Health and Ageing, started

in mid-2006. The data generated from this survey will assist us to evaluate the effectiveness of

risk mitigation control measures proposed for the poultry meat standard.

We presented the results of the survey to the Implementation Sub-Committee in July 2009.

Raw milk products

FSANZ is reviewing requirements in the Code for raw (unpasteurised) milk products, including

raw goat and cow milk and some raw milk cheeses. The Code currently requires milk and milk

products to be made from heat-treated (pasteurised) milk. This is regarded as an important

public health measure to destroy bacterial pathogens that may be present in raw milk.

We are examining whether these restrictions are still required – and to what degree – to

protect public health and safety.

In August 2008, FSANZ released a Discussion Paper for public consultation which outlined

our approach to look at the range of products collectively rather than individual cheeses

or product. This ‘category approach’ is based on intrinsic properties of products and the

processing they receive to prevent survival or growth of pathogens that may have been

present in raw milk, in the final product.

We received more than 900 submissions in response to the Discussion Paper. The majority

of submitters supported the review because they want greater access to raw milk products.

Of the submitters who commented on the ‘category approach’, the majority supported it as

a sound and systematic way of assessing raw milk products. However, the pasteurised dairy



industry, in supporting the approach, urged caution in permitting raw milk products because of

the potential of a food safety problem to damage the reputation of the dairy industry as

a whole.

Our microbiological risk assessments on raw milk cheeses, raw goat’s milk and raw cow’s milk

will be included in a report planned for public release and comment later in 2009. We expect

to finalise the project in 2011.

Seed sprouts

Food-borne illnesses caused by seed sprouts (alfalfa) contaminated by Salmonella

Oranienburg occurred in Western Australia, Victoria and Tasmania in 2005-2006. Australian

and New Zealand sprout producers subsequently formed an association and developed draft

guidelines for the safe production of seed sprouts. There are, however, currently no national

and enforceable regulatory food safety measures for the production of seed sprouts.

During the year, we began an assessment of food safety in the seed sprouts industry

(e.g. mung beans, alfalfa, mustard seed, onion, radish, soy bean) as the first step towards

the development of a primary production and processing standard for plants and plant

products. Future work will focus on other plant products. With the assistance of a Standard

Development Committee, we developed an assessment report for public comment, which was

approved by the FSANZ Board for release in July 2009.

Meat and meat products

Currently, meat safety is managed through a number of meat safety systems implemented by

industry and through differing State and Territory regulatory systems for the processing stage.

We propose to consolidate existing measures into a single set of national requirements to

support the production of safe meat products.

We intend to include meat and meat products from farmed cattle, pigs, sheep and goats

using extensive and intensive farming, and harvested goats and rendered products for human

consumption. We will address meat and meat products from farmed minor meat species,

ratite meat and wild-game animals at a later stage.

A Standard Development Committee with representatives from major meat industry

associations, government and consumers is assisting us to identify the scope of, and options

for, any regulatory measures. Our analysis of hazards and current control measures to date

indicates that the current regulatory (State and Territory) and non-regulatory (industry schemes)

measures provide for a safe meat supply.



We expect to release an assessment report for a first round of public consultations in

September 2009, with a standard for the major meat species being completed by

December 2010.

Public health and food safety standards

Catering standard

We continued to implement policy guidelines from the Ministerial Council to apply food safety

programs to the catering sector. However, in May 2009, the Ministerial Council made an in-

principle decision to review the policy guideline in relation to the food service sector (excluding

existing requirements applying to food service to vulnerable populations). This has resulted

in the work being placed on hold pending a final decision by the Ministerial Council on the

proposed policy guideline review.

Improving our standards development outcomes

The cornerstone of FSANZ’s standards development process is the generation of an evidence

base to support decision making. In turn, the quality of this evidence base depends heavily

on our regulatory science. Improvements in regulatory science capability, therefore, have

the potential to contribute significantly to agency outcomes aimed at meeting stakeholder

expectations.

Our scientific capability

We developed a Science Strategy 2006-09 to assist us to enhance our scientific capabilities

to meet future food regulatory challenges. The strategy focused on specific components of

our scientific work, including our scientific expertise, external engagement of stakeholders,

enhancing our evidence base, tools used in our assessments, responding to emerging

scientific issues, systems to measure performance and transparency and risk communication.

In November 2008, we undertook an evaluation to determine the effectiveness of the strategy

in meeting its objectives. The evaluation targeted both external and internal stakeholders of

the strategy.

Feedback from external stakeholders showed that most were satisfied with FSANZ current

scientific expertise/skill-base, credibility, transparency and the relevance of evidence used

in risk assessments. Stakeholders also appeared satisfied with our use of the peer review

process, our development of the evidence base and the skills of our scientific workforce.



The outcomes of this evaluation are being utilised in the development of a Science Strategy

2010-15, which we commenced during the year.

The Science Strategy has close links to all Application, Proposal and review work conducted

by the agency, as well as most of our non-standards work. We intend to consult with external

stakeholders during the development of the new strategy and expect to finalise it in

September 2009.

Readability of FSANZ’s scientific reports

When FSANZ considers changes to the Food Standards Code, we must base food standards

on risk analysis, using the best available scientific evidence.

FSANZ scientists with a diverse range of expertise across key disciplines including toxicology,

genetics, social science, nutrition, public health, microbiology, and food science perform this

task. They review and critically evaluate literature relevant to our work, carry out complex

mathematical modelling and, in some cases, commission external individuals or groups to do

specific research.

Historically, we publish the scientific reports as individual reports for each discipline – for

example, assessment reports on food safety, nutrition, dietary exposure and food technology.

This results in a degree of duplication, a lot of reading and, potentially, some difficulty for the

reader in seeing how all this work fits together to inform the decisions we make.

In 2008-09, we explored ways to better communicate the extensive scientific studies that

inform so much of what we do. As a result, we decided to conduct a trial of integrating the

diverse scientific work relevant to a project into one report to show more readily how the whole

of the scientific analysis fits together.

The approach should mean readers will have less to read, while finding it easier to understand,

and hence to comment on, when we ask for public submissions.

In-house professional development

The Science Strategy has identified considerable expertise within FSANZ in a range of

scientific disciplines. We have therefore made use of this capability to assist the professional

development of scientific staff.



For example, FSANZ’s Chief Public Health Nutrition Advisor, a nutritional epidemiologist, has

previously taught in the Master of Public Health degrees at the Universities of Sydney and

Queensland and at the Charles Darwin University. She developed and conducted a series of

epidemiology lectures and associated practical exercises for staff during the year.

To date, the series has covered introductory topics in study design and common calculations

reported in epidemiological studies, illustrating epidemiological principles with practical

application to FSANZ work. Scientists from the New Zealand Food Safety Authority have also

attended the lectures. We plan to continue this series on epidemiology.

Public health issues

Food additives and children’s behaviour

Recently, consumer groups have raised concerns that food colours may cause learning and

behavioural difficulties in some children. However, research undertaken in the last three

decades on the effect of food additives on children’s behaviour has been unable to establish a

causal relationship between these adverse outcomes and particular additives.

In September 2007, a study commissioned by the United Kingdom Food Standards Agency

(UKFSA) (the Southampton Study) found possible effects on children’s behaviour from

consuming mixtures of six artificial food colours and a preservative.

An expert panel at the European Food Safety Authority reviewed this study and concluded

that, while it provides limited evidence of small effects on children’s behaviour, these effects

were not consistent and that the study did not give cause to amend current safety limits for

these food additives. The UKFSA is encouraging the food industry to voluntarily withdraw use

of these colours by the end of 2009.

FSANZ has also reviewed the study and has concluded that there are no public health and

safety concerns necessitating a change to our current regulatory approach to these colours.

This survey should provide significant reassurances that there is no public health and safety

risk from the consumption of foods containing added colours as part of a balanced diet. We

will continue to monitor developments in relation to potential adverse effects associated with

food additives.

Given community concerns, we will continue our dialogue with the food industry about their

planned use of such colours and possible alternatives. Replacement with some ‘natural’

colours will also require an assessment of safety.



Bisphenol A

Bisphenol A (BPA) is a chemical found in polycarbonate plastic items or containers, such as

drink bottles, that may come into contact with foodstuffs. The European Food Safety Authority

(EFSA) and United States Food and Drug Administration (USFDA) have determined that

intakes of BPA for the most vulnerable segments of the population were well within safe levels.

However, a recent study has shown statistically significant correlations between Bisphenol A

levels in urine and the incidence of diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and elevated liver enzyme

levels. In addition, in October 2008, a USFDA Advisory Committee recommended that the

agency reconsider its recent risk assessment of BPA, especially in relation to the safety of

polycarbonate infant feeding bottles. The Canadian Government has adopted a precautionary

approach and prohibited the importation, sale and advertising of polycarbonate baby bottles.

In 2008-09, we assessed the risk from exposure to BPA and concluded that levels of exposure

are very low and do not pose a significant risk to public health. If new evidence were to

emerge to the contrary, we would take appropriate measures to protect the community.

Caffeine in pregnancy

Caffeine occurs naturally in a range of foods, such as coffee, tea and chocolate. The Food

Standards Code does not prescribe limits for naturally occurring caffeine in these foods.

The amount of caffeine in food varies. As a guide, tea contains 40 mg/cup, instant coffee 60

mg/cup, cola soft drinks 40 mg/can (375 mL), filtered coffee 140 mg/cup and chocolate 10

mg/50g bar of milk chocolate.

Caffeine is also added to some soft drinks and beverages such as formulated caffeinated

beverages, more commonly known as ‘energy drinks’. The Code currently permits the addition

of caffeine to ‘kola-type’ soft drinks and formulated caffeinated beverages up to specific

maximum limits.

A recent study published in the British Medical Journal has raised concerns over the

consumption of caffeine during pregnancy at levels greater than 200 mg/day. These concerns

relate to the possibility of babies with lower birth weights, increased risk of some health

conditions in later life and, at higher maternal consumption levels, an increased risk of

miscarriage.

This has led UKFSA to advise pregnant women to limit consumption of caffeine to 200 mg/day

– about two mugs of instant coffee a day – a reduction from their earlier advice of 300 mg/day.



FSANZ, the Department of Health and Ageing, the New Zealand Ministry of Health and the

New Zealand Food Safety Authority formed a working group during the year to examine this

new research with a view to developing key messages on caffeine consumption that could be

provided to women planning pregnancy.

Trans fatty acids

In 2006, FSANZ found that the contribution of trans fatty acids (TFA) to the total energy

intake of Australians and New Zealanders was below the goal of 1% proposed by the World

Health Organization and comparable to, or lower than, levels reported in other developed

countries. As a result, FSANZ and partner agencies decided that regulatory intervention for the

management of TFA was not required, but that the situation should be reviewed in 2009.

We are now reconsidering the status of TFA in our food supply as we review changes in TFA

intakes in the Australian and New Zealand populations over the last two years and consider

recent information in the scientific literature regarding the link between dietary intake of TFA

and adverse health outcomes.

In conjunction with the Department of Health and Ageing, we are also assessing the outcomes

of voluntary industry initiatives to reduce TFA in the Australian and New Zealand food supplies.

We intend to provide a report of this review to the Ministerial Council in late 2009.

Food-medicine interface

Foods and medicines (therapeutic goods) are regulated separately in Australia. FSANZ is part

of an Australian inter-agency group, including representatives from the Therapeutic Goods

Administration and the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service, which has met for the

past decade on an ‘as needs’ basis to discuss the appropriate status of products that are

difficult to categorise as a food or therapeutic good in Australia.

This group did not meet in the last financial year due to the ongoing development of a trans-

Tasman approach to considering the appropriate regulatory status of products at the food-

medicine interface in both Australia and New Zealand.

We are a member of the Implementation Sub Committee working group (including

representatives from the New Zealand Food Safety Authority and other Australian government

agencies) that is developing this trans-Tasman approach.



Emerging issues

Nanotechnology

In 2008, with funding provided by the Australian Government through the National

Nanotechnology Strategy, FSANZ appointed a project manager to lead work aimed at

examining whether our current risk assessment processes and regulatory arrangements are

adequate for ensuring the safety of foods potentially using nanotechnology.

We continued to actively monitor developments and gather information from all relevant

sources including scientific literature, research institutions, Australian and New Zealand

Government agencies, industry, non-government organisations, and our regulatory partner

agencies around the world.

We have made preparations for the possibility of receiving an application from industry seeking

the approval of a new food involving nanotechnology, despite not yet being approached by

industry. In December, we registered amendments to the FSANZ Application Handbook

to mandate the requirements for appropriate particle-related data to intending applicants.

All Applications for food additives, processing aids, novel foods, nutritive substances

and contaminants must now include information about particle size, size distribution and

morphology where the substance is particulate in nature and will remain so in the final food.

In early 2009, FSANZ engaged a toxicologist specifically to review the scientific literature,

investigate toxicological risk assessment of nanometre-scale particulates in food and

recommend any adjustments to our risk assessment practices for potential nanotechnology-

related applications.

The issues associated with nanotechnology are faced by most nations with developed food

regulatory systems. Accordingly, we attended, and chaired, a FAO/WHO expert meeting on

‘Food safety implications of nanotechnology applications to food and agriculture’ which was

held in Rome in June. We also participated in the work of the Australian Government Health

Safety and Environment Working Group and that of the New Zealand Government regulator’s

nanotechnology working group.

We have advised the food and food packaging industries about the regulatory requirements for

the use of nanotechnology in food.



Food incidents and food recalls

The National Food Incident Response Protocol outlines arrangements for consistent and

collaborative responses across jurisdictions to food incidents that involve a potential or actual

problem with a food sold within two or more Australian States or Territories. The current

Protocol was endorsed by the Australia and New Zealand Food Regulation Ministerial Council

in October 2008.

Under the Protocol, FSANZ provides the central notification point. If an incident escalates,

specific roles and responsibilities (e.g. lead agency, risk assessor, risk communicator) are

assigned to the appropriate officers and agencies. A complex food contamination issue may

require the commissioning and peer review of a risk assessment, the development of national

communication messages, consideration of risk management options and consultation with

affected members of the food industry.

Once a food incident has been resolved, it is formally stood down and a debrief is conducted

among government agencies involved to discuss what worked well, and what could be

improved in future.

Since late 2006, 14 incidents have been coordinated under the Protocol, with three incidents

occurring in 2008-09 (melamine in dairy products from China, contaminated pork from Ireland

and Hepatitis A linked to the consumption of semi-dried tomatoes). The Protocol is reviewed

after each incident, and is currently being revised to clarify more fully the roles of government

agencies and to provide improved guidance in relation to the development of risk assessments

during the response to food incidents.

Melamine survey

The adulteration of milk and milk products in China with melamine emerged as a significant

health and safety issue for the Chinese population in 2008. This incident prompted

investigation both in Australia and overseas of products manufactured in China or containing

ingredients sourced from China.

In Australia, the issue was managed under the National Food Incident Response Protocol.

Australian food regulators agreed that a national survey of melamine in foods available in

Australia should be undertaken and coordinated through the Food Surveillance Network of

jurisdictions and agencies, with funding contributed by the Australian Government.

A two-tiered approach was adopted for the survey, with high priority foods (dairy-based and

dairy-containing foods) to be sampled and analysed immediately and the second tier including



lower-priority foods (mixed foods containing soy, gluten or egg ingredients). The samples for

both tiers were collected for analysis by the State and Territory food regulatory agencies.

Analysis of the first tier revealed eight products out of a total of 153 testing positive for

melamine, with seven products (one of which was manufactured in Malaysia) having levels

above the 2.5 mg/kg referral level established for dairy-based foods and foods containing

dairy-based ingredients. These findings prompted the withdrawal of these products from sale

by Australian importers and wholesalers to reduce the risks to public health and safety. For the

second tier, an analysis of 124 samples did not reveal any detections of melamine.

Case study: national approach to melamine adulteration of dairy products

from China

In early September 2008, Australian government authorities became aware of the

possible adulteration of dairy-based infant formula from China, leading to kidney stone

illnesses and deaths in infants. FSANZ activated the National Food Incident Response

Protocol on 12 September to inform jurisdictions of these international events and to

begin national coordination of the incident.

Other dairy products and foods containing dairy ingredients from China were

subsequently implicated in the melamine adulteration incident. At this time, the

national Food Surveillance Network became involved in discussing options for testing

food in Australia.

We coordinated national teleconferences with jurisdictional agencies between 24

September and 12 November to share information on test results and to decide risk

management options and communication messages. We also consulted widely with

our international counterparts. During this period, eight products were withdrawn,

based on test results, and one product recalled. Two additional products were also

withdrawn by industry as a precaution.

On 12 November 2008, Australian food regulators agreed that the melamine incident

should proceed to the ‘stand down’ phase, with ongoing monitoring and testing of

food products as required. A national debrief was conducted on 24 February 2009

to discuss issues arising from the melamine incident and identify improvements for

future incidents.



Food recalls

FSANZ also coordinates food recalls across all Australian States and Territories. In 2008, we

completed a review of our food recall coordination process and revised the government and

industry recall protocols as a result.

Table 6. Annual food-recall statistics 2008-09.

2003- 04 2004- 05 2005- 06 2006- 07 2007-08 2008-09 Reason for recall

34 27 24 15 12 16Labelling errors (e.g. undeclared allergens)

26 13 18 21 17 21Micro-contamination (e.g. Listeria)

8 17 11 14 17 13Inclusion of foreign matter (e.g. glass)

4 3 5 3 1 2Processing faults (e.g. insufficient thermal processing)

3 nil 4 3 4 1Chemical contamination (e.g. from lubricant)

2 5 2 1 nil 1Other (e.g. unapproved additive)

nil nil nil nil nil nil Product deterioration

nil 1 2 1 1 nil Biotoxin contamination

77 66 66 58 52 54 Total

Table 6 shows a stabilisation of food recall numbers in the past few years. We ascribe much

of the decrease in labelling errors to food manufacturers becoming familiar with the provisions

in the Food Standards Code.

It is important to record that the vast majority of the recalls were initiated by food

manufacturers, who liaised very effectively with FSANZ and State and Territory agencies by

providing product information and quickly removing products from supermarket shelves.



Monitoring and evaluating hazards

FSANZ’s surveillance capability provides an essential scientific foundation that is critical

for sound risk assessment and subsequent risk management. Information obtained from

surveillance activities is fundamental in identifying chemical, microbiological or other hazards in

foods which may present a risk to health or safety.

Surveillance activities can also provide important information on nutrients, food composition

and consumption information that can be used to assess nutritional status and inform

nutrition-related risk assessments and risk management strategies. FSANZ coordinates

national surveillance activities and external jurisdictional networks, such as the Food

Surveillance Network.

We are also the sponsor for Component 1 of the Implementation Sub-Committee’s

Coordinated Food Survey Plan, ‘Surveillance and Monitoring’. In 2008-09, we completed and

published the 22nd Australian Total Diet Study and a report on food handling practices and

microbiological quality of sushi in Australia.

23rd and 24th Australian Total Diet Study

The Australian Total Diet Study (ATDS) provides a comprehensive assessment of the Australian

population’s dietary exposure to a range of food chemicals. While the ATDS traditionally

monitors pesticide residues in the food supply, the scope of recent studies has been

broadened to examine other chemicals found in food, including additives and nutrients.

The 23rd ATDS is the first study to return to the more traditional focus on residues of

agricultural and veterinary medicines and metal contaminants since the 20th ATDS.

Mycotoxins and fluoride have also been included. We have completed the sampling and

analysis phases of the 23rd ATDS and expect to publish a final report in 2010.

We have started planning for the 24th ATDS, with sampling and analysis phases expected to

commence in 2010-11. The priority substances for this study are currently being considered,

taking into consideration likely food regulatory priorities, and we are developing a list of

potential substances of interest in consultation with the States and Territories.

Survey of added colours in food available in Australia

To determine an accurate estimate of dietary exposure of the population to food colours in

2006, FSANZ commissioned an analytical survey of 651 samples of foods and beverages to

quantify actual levels of all permitted synthetic colours and two natural colours.



The survey was specifically designed to target a wide range of foods and beverages which

contained added colours approved in the Food Standards Code, as well as a small number of

products which claimed to contain ‘no added colours’ or ‘no artificial colour.’

We found that concentrations of added colours in foods were very low and, in almost all foods

tested, were significantly below the maximum permitted level in the Code. We also found that,

in most cases, the colours detected in the foods by the analyses had been included in the

ingredients list on the food labels by manufacturers. The survey revealed that dietary exposure

to all synthetic and natural colours analysed for all population sub-groups were below the

respective acceptable daily intake for average and high consumers.

Overall, the survey provided significant reassurance that, compared to internationally accepted

reference health standards, the current dietary exposures to added colours in food and

beverages do not pose a public health and safety concern for Australians.

We published the full report ‘Survey of added colours in food available in Australia; study of

concentrations in foods including dietary exposure assessment and risk characterisation’ on

our website in December 2008.

Strengthening our evidence base

We finalised ‘The Analysis of Food-Related Health Risks’, a document which outlines the way

we undertake our scientific work. The document provides information on the risk analysis

process used by FSANZ to identify, assess and manage food-related health risks within a

structured framework. It also provides a broad overview of our approach to assessing food-

related health risks.

In 2008, legislative changes were made to the FSANZ Act requiring all Applications to amend

the Code to include sufficient information and data for us to conduct an assessment. To

support these changes, FSANZ developed the Application Handbook, which specified all

information and data requirements to amend various aspects of the Code. We recognised that

guidance on how we use the data collected in the Application Handbook to undertake analysis

would be useful for those submitting the information.

During the year, we completed five guidance documents intended to underpin the Application

Handbook. These guidance documents cover Food Additives; Processing Aids; Contaminants

and Natural Toxicants; Novel Foods; and Estimating Dietary Exposure to Food Chemicals for

Food Regulatory Purposes. These guidance documents build on existing guidance documents

relating to genetically modified food safety assessments, determining equivalence, energy

factors and microbiological risk assessments.



Science evidence base

Food composition program review

We invited Dr Isabel Castanheira from the Instituto Nacional de Saude in Portugal to review

our food composition program. Dr Castanheira is an expert in the area of food chemistry

and quality management systems. She evaluated our processes for assessing data quality,

accepting and rejecting data, compiling and publishing nutrient databases and documenting

procedures in relation to international best practice.

Dr Castanheira commented favourably on FSANZ’s capability, including the expertise of staff,

and made recommendations for enhancing our food composition systems. The review findings

were considered by the external Advisory Group on Food Composition during the year.

Implementation of the recommendations will continue into 2009-10.

National Children’s Nutrition and Physical Activity Survey (Kids Eat Kids Play)

FSANZ published a survey-specific nutrient database called AUSNUT 2007 for estimating

nutrient intakes from food, beverages and dietary supplements consumed as part of the 2007

Australian National Children’s Nutrition and Physical Activity Survey. AUSNUT 2007 is a valuable

resource for public health professionals, academia and consumers, as well as an important input

to FSANZ’s standards-development activities (available free of charge on our website).

Sodium and iodine analysis

FSANZ commissioned sodium and iodine analysis on 277 processed and ‘quick service

restaurant’ food products collected as part of the New South Wales Food Authority’s trans

fatty acid survey. Additional samples collected in Western Australia as part of the same survey

were also analysed for sodium.

The results will be used to provide baseline data for monitoring the implementation of

mandatory iodine fortification and to track changes in sodium content of these foods over

time. They will also feed into future releases of the FSANZ reference database NUTTAB and

survey databases used to estimate nutrient intakes as part of National Nutrition Surveys.

Dietary exposure assessments

We upgraded our dietary modelling software, DIAMOND, during the year, incorporating

information from the 2002 New Zealand Children’s Nutrition Survey and the 2007 Australian

Children’s Nutrition and Physical Activity Survey. This enhancement of DIAMOND will provide

more recent information on children’s consumption patterns for use in our risk assessment work.



Dr Philippe Verger, from the National Institute for Agricultural Research in France, assisted us

to enhance our dietary exposure assessment capabilities by developing specific areas, such

as probabilistic modelling, the interpretation of analytical data and dealing with uncertainty in

risk assessments. FSANZ’s Dietary Modelling Stakeholder Advisory Group also provided input

into development activities undertaken in the area of dietary exposure assessments and the

FSANZ dietary modelling computer program, DIAMOND.

We provided access to the DIAMOND computer program to the New Zealand Food Safety

Authority in their office to allow them to use the New Zealand national nutrition survey data for

their purposes. This was made possible through the development by FSANZ of a secure web-

link for DIAMOND.

Accessing external expertise

FSANZ Fellows

We established the FSANZ Fellows program in 2000 to build a network of respected and

distinguished experts in areas relevant to food regulation. The Fellows provide a wealth of

knowledge and independent advice to the agency across a wide range of scientific and

professional fields including nutrition, economics, project management, social sciences, food

science and data evaluation.

During the year, FSANZ appointed three new Fellows and reappointed two Fellows for a three-

year period (Table 7).

Table 7. FSANZ Fellows in 2008-09

Fellow Expertise Organisation

Continuing Fellows

Professor Julie Byles Clinical Epidemiology University of Newcastle

Professor John Cary Social Science Victoria University

Professor Lyn Cobiac Nutrition & Dietetics Flinders University

Professor Mike Gidley Food Structure / Nutritive Value University of Queensland

Professor Graham Giles Cancer Epidemiology Cancer Council / University of Melbourne

Dr John Huckerby Project management of technically-based projects

Power Project Limited



Fellow Expertise Organisation

Professor Peter Langridge Genomics University of Adelaide

Dr Rob Loblay Immunologist Royal Prince Alfred Hospital / University of Sydney

Professor Brian Priestly Health Risk Assessment Monash University

Professor Richard Shepherd Consumer Behaviour University of Surrey, Guildford, UK

Professor Murray Skeaff Nutrition University of Otago, NZ

Professor Anthony Smith Complementary Medicines Newcastle Mater Hospital / University of Newcastle

Professor Mark Tamplin Microbiology & Food Safety University of Tasmania

Reappointed Fellows

Professor Ken Buckle Food Science, Processing & Microbiology

University of New South Wales

Professor John McNeil Epidemiology & Cardiovascular Health

Monash University

New Fellows

Professor Nigel French Molecular Epidemiology & Risk Research

Massey University, NZ

Dr Stephen Goodall Health Economist University of Technology Sydney

Professor Seppo Salminen Intestinal Microbiota and Health, Probiotics and Prebiotics & Health Claims

University of Turku, Finland

FSANZ Fellows participated in a number of our projects, including nanotechnology,

development of the FSANZ 2009-2013 Evaluation Strategy, redevelopment of FSANZ’s

DIAMOND and ANDB programs, and student projects.

A number of FSANZ Fellows also provided presentations to Science Network Forum

Workshops, the FSANZ Board and staff relating to their area of expertise or current research.

Fellows also contributed to a range of FSANZ projects and papers by providing technical,

scientific and clinical advice.

Consumer and social sciences

FSANZ continued to build its capability in consumer and social sciences. A designated

unit provides specialised advice on consumer and social science issues to a range of major



standard-development projects. This advice is derived from commissioned studies into

consumer behaviour and/or from critical analysis of available information.

A major activity in 2008-09 involved examining consumers’ use of nutrition content claims.

This work was necessary for FSANZ’s response to the Ministerial Council’s request for review

of the draft standard on nutrition, health and related claims. The study took the form of an

online survey investigating a range of nutrition content claims about various micronutrients

across four different food products.

We commissioned two studies to assist the development of food safety standards for the

primary industries. One study explored the motivations, risk perceptions and food safety

behaviours of individuals who consume unpasteurised milk. The findings from this will feed

into the approach for risk assessment of raw milk products.

The other study used an online consumption diary to collect quantitative data on egg

consumption and information on how Australian households handle and store eggs. Results

will allow FSANZ to estimate the proportion of eggs which are consumed raw and lightly

cooked in Australia. We are using the findings to inform the risk assessment and risk

management strategy for the primary production and processing standard for eggs

and egg products.

Case study: consumer attitudes and behaviour in response to nutrition claims

In 2008, FSANZ conducted consumer research into the impacts of nutrition content

claims (e.g. ‘97% fat free’, ‘good source of fibre’, ‘reduced sugar’), particularly

consumers’ perceptions of nutritiousness and purchasing intent. This study contributed

to the evidence base for our development of a new nutrition and health claims regime

for Australia and New Zealand.

We commissioned an experimental quantitative study and a qualitative in-store

observation and interview study to address this issue. The quantitative study used

realistic mock-packages of a breakfast cereal and a sweet biscuit to isolate the

effect of nutrition content claims on consumer responses. Respondents were asked

to evaluate the products in terms of healthiness and to report their likelihood of

purchasing the products. The qualitative investigated which label elements were used

by consumers in making food purchase decisions.

We found that the presence of a nutrition content claim on the products tested did not

significantly increase the probability of a consumer buying the product. Results also

showed that nutrition content claims did not enhance consumers’ attitudes about the

nutritional quality of a product, regardless of their education, income or indigenous status.



The Social Science Expert Advisory Group (SSEAG), established last year, continued to

provide expert advice and input into our work. SSEAG provides advice on the design

and methodological approach of specific social science and consumer research studies,

approaches to statistical analysis, and peer review of final reports to ensure high quality and

robustness of evidence used in the development of standards.

Since its establishment, advice from SSEAG has benefitted the study design, methodology

and statistical analyses for the recent nutrition content claims research; the sampling and

research materials in the qualitative research into consumer attitudes towards and awareness

of food fortification; and the application of social science methods and techniques.

FSANZ continued to chair the Quadrilateral Social Research Coordination Group, which

comprises officers responsible for the application of social sciences research relating to food

regulation in each of the four Quadrilateral member nations (Australia, New Zealand, Canada,

United States).

The Group held its 1st Technical Workshop for the use of social sciences in food regulation

in October 2008. Approximately thirty social and consumer scientists and policy officers

attended the workshop from the relevant Quadrilateral countries’ organisations. Some 32

papers across six topic areas were presented, detailing recent consumer and social sciences

research, and discussion of the implications of the research for Quadrilateral countries.

Outcomes from the workshop have led to new collaborative options work between the

Quadrilateral countries regarding consumer and social sciences, new sources of data and

information of particular relevance to FSANZ, and enhanced use of consumer and social

sciences evidence for food regulation.

Regulatory analysis

Regulatory analysis includes economic analysis and the preparation of regulatory impact

statements for standards-development projects. It is important that any regulatory

interventions are appropriate to the regulatory problem and that the cost of regulation

developed by FSANZ does not outweigh the benefits to the community. Costs and benefits

are normally expressed in monetary terms or, if this is not practical or appropriate, in

qualitative terms.

As some of the issues we deal with are complex and difficult to attach monetary values to,

we have increased our efforts to broaden our expertise in and use of a range of economic

analytical techniques. We appointed a new FSANZ Fellow, Dr Stephen Goodall, who has



expertise in public health economics and the use of cost-effectiveness analysis in a public

health context.

We submit our regulatory impact statements for major projects for assessment by the Office of

Best Practice Regulation (OBPR) and to the New Zealand Ministry of Economic Development.

OBPR is now part of the Australian Government’s finance and deregulation portfolio. This new

emphasis on deregulation is consistent with efforts throughout OECD countries to minimise

regulation and to justify it.

FSANZ now operates in an environment that demands increased scrutiny of any additional

financial burden to consumers and business as a consequence of complying with new

regulations. We must therefore not only demonstrate the food-safety benefits of new

standards, but also draw attention to the overall net economic benefits to society. By

employing health economic measures such as Quality Adjusted Life Days, it is possible to

assess the extent to which new regulations can reduce the burden of disease.

These results are monetised to enable stakeholders to make the comparison between the

benefits and the costs.

During the year, discussions with OBPR highlighted the importance of FSANZ accurately

defining the problem that each project seeks to address, thereby improving the relevance and

appropriateness of the regulatory solution.

This has become particularly relevant to the development of primary production and

processing standards for several industries, where some states or industries already have

standards and regulations, and where industries already conform to international requirements

to ensure their export markets. In such cases, FSANZ must be especially mindful of the

benefits that any new regulation would bestow.

Evaluating our food regulatory measures

FSANZ’s evaluation activities identify and assess the impact of key changes to food regulations

on our stakeholders. To ensure that we undertake this work in a strategic and systematic way,

we continually update the agency’s evaluation strategy. We are currently developing Evaluation

Strategy 2009-2013.

For this period, we will require a more integrated approach with the jurisdictions and other food

regulatory partners than at present. We participated in the strategic planning processes of

the Food Regulation Standing Committee and the Implementation Sub-Committee in 2008-09

to help us identify our responsibilities for evaluation within the whole food regulatory system.



This should enable us to develop appropriate mechanisms to collaborate on food regulatory

evaluation and review activities with other partners.

We completed phase 2 of our ongoing food label monitoring survey, which looked at the

consistency of information provided on food labels in 2005 and 2006, against that required by

the Food Standards Code since December 2002. The study revealed no particular areas of

concern. We published two reports on phase 2 of the monitoring survey in 2008.

We published a final report on the 2007 National Food Handling Survey – a national survey of

food business knowledge, attitudes and practices related to safe food handling. Outcomes

showed that there have been many positive changes in key food handling knowledge and

practices since 2001, when current food handling requirements were included in the Code.

We are working with our regulatory partners to design education initiatives and enforcement

strategies and activities that improve the food industry’s knowledge and performance in safe

food handling.

In 2008, we commenced a quantitative consumer survey on food allergen labelling. This

follow-up survey largely replicated a benchmark survey that we conducted in early 2003,

examining the knowledge and awareness of allergen labelling provisions by those at risk

of allergic reactions to foods, and their current behaviours in food selection. We expect to

complete the survey in late-2009.

In collaboration with relevant Australian, State and New Zealand Government agencies,

FSANZ continued to develop programs for monitoring the impact of mandatory fortification

permissions for folic acid and iodine, which come into effect in September 2009. We

contributed to the two major reports prepared by the Australian Institute of Health and

Welfare on mandatory fortification monitoring for the Department of Health and Ageing. These

documents established appropriate monitoring indicators, identified critical data gaps in the

current sources of baseline data for folic acid and iodine and recommended approaches to

filling the identified data gaps.

We also collaborated with the National Measurement Institute to develop a program that

ensures the food industry and enforcers of mandatory folic acid fortification requirements in the

Code use analytical methods that make results comparable across jurisdictions.

FSANZ continued to develop approaches for its own monitoring of mandatory and voluntary

fortification to track key indicators of changes to the food supply, consumer food consumption

patterns and attitudes and behaviour towards fortified food products. We commenced a

qualitative consumer study to assess the level of public awareness of fortified foods, which

should be completed by October 2009.



International networks

Codex Alimentarius Commission

The Codex Alimentarius is a collection of international standards, recommended codes of

practice and guidelines related to food or the operation and management of food production

processes. The Codex Alimentarius Commission, based in Rome, has a mandate to protect

the health of consumers and ensure fair practices in the international food trade.

Australia provides experts from a number of government agencies to attend meetings of

Codex committees and working groups. FSANZ plays an active role on many of the Codex

committees. We attempt to ensure that international standards are based on sound

scientific principles.

FSANZ led the Australian delegation to the 41st Session of the Codex Committee on Food

Additives (CCFA) meeting in Shanghai, China. The main work of CCFA was the development

of the General Standard for Food Additives, an area where we were most active. CCFA also

endorsed a number of food additive provisions for Codex standards developed by commodity

committees and a regional coordinating committee and developed a priority list of food

additives for evaluation by the joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA).

We led the Australian delegation to the 40th Session of the Codex Committee on Food

Hygiene (CCFH) meeting in Guatemala City. Australia has an active role in ensuring that input

and views on food hygiene matters are understood and that decisions of the Committee align

as much as possible with Australia’s domestic food policy. The Australian delegation focused

on achieving agreed outcomes for the work on infant formula and a clear direction for the

progression of the Proposed Draft Guidelines for the Control of Campylobacter and Salmonella

spp. in chicken meat.

We also led the Australian delegation to the 30th Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods

for Special Dietary Uses (CCNFSDU) meeting in Cape Town. This committee is responsible for

establishing international codes and standards for foods for special dietary uses and nutritional

aspects of all foods. With a major contribution from FSANZ, the Nutritional Risk Analysis

Principles document progressed to step eight for adoption by the Commission later in 2009.

FSANZ participated as a member of the Australian delegation to the 37th Session of the

Codex Committee on Food Labelling (CCFL) in Calgary, Canada. We were instrumental in the

development of a paper considering the implications for mandatory nutrition labelling, which

was well received and is being considered for publication as part of the CCFL report in 2010.



The 17th Session of the Codex Committee on Food Import and Export Inspection and

Certification Systems (CCFICS) met in Cebu, Philippines, where Australia is the host

Government. While FSANZ was not represented at this meeting, the work of the Committee

is particularly relevant to FSANZ’s role in the Imported Food Inspection Scheme. Issues of

interest to Australia and FSANZ included guidance on national food control systems and on-

site audits and inspections. CCFICS agreed to start work on national food control systems,

following the proposal put forward from the Australian delegation.

FSANZ is the alternate delegation leader to the Codex Committee on Contaminants in Food

(CCCF) and led the working group on the presence of cyanogenic glycosides in food. FSANZ

staff contributed to the work of other Codex committees, including the Codex Alimentarius

Commission, Codex Committee on General Principles (CCGP) and Codex Committee on

Pesticide Residues (CCPR).

World Health Organization (WHO)/Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO)

This year, we continued to support WHO/FAO deliberations participating in a number of

meetings and expert consultations and through the submission of data. Senior scientific

staff members attended a meeting of the FAO/WHO Joint Expert Committee on Food

Additives (JECFA). At this meeting, participants reviewed the available safety data and, where

appropriate, established reference health standards for additives and contaminants and for a

small number of food macrocomponents.

In December, FSANZ was invited to present expert evidence at the WHO Expert Consultation

to Review the Toxicological Aspects of Melamine and Cyanuric Acid. The aim of this

consultation was to provide guidance in response to the incident involving melamine-

adulterated dairy products – primarily infant formula – in China.

We also supported the planning of a Joint FAO/WHO Expert Meeting on the Application of

Nanotechnologies in the Food and Agricultural Sectors.

Quadrilateral Group

The Food Safety Quadrilateral Group meets annually to discuss issues relating to food safety.

The group comprises senior officials from Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United

States. This year Australia hosted the meeting, which was held in Sydney.

This year’s meeting had a focus on high level strategic discussions relating to environmental

scanning, emerging issues and proposed new work. Issues discussed at this meeting included

the potential impact of the global financial downturn on food safety; food safety incident



management; laboratory capacity/accreditation; maximum residue limits for agricultural and

veterinary chemicals; and raw milk.

We also continued to participate in ongoing Quadrilateral Working Groups, including leading

the work on social science and consumer behaviour research and actively participating in the

produce safety and chemicals working groups.

International Food Chemical Safety Liaison Group

FSANZ played a key role in the formation of the International Food Chemical Safety Liaison

Group in 2006. The group was formed to provide a platform for food regulators in different

countries to exchange information on chemical risk assessment work, emerging issues and

food surveillance.

The original group has now expanded to include representatives from Health Canada, the

Canadian Food Inspection Agency, the European Food Safety Authority, the European

Commission, the United States Food and Drug Administration, the Japan Food Safety

Commission, the United Kingdom Food Standards Agency, the New Zealand Food Safety

Authority, the French Food Safety Agency and FSANZ.

The group was especially active in 2008-09, primarily in response to the detection of melamine

in dairy products originating from China. The liaison group demonstrated international

leadership by developing a consistent threshold or reference level for risk management

purposes and making this information publicly available almost simultaneously.

A member of the World Health Organization participated in teleconferences organised by the

group to discuss the melamine incident, thereby giving ‘official’ recognition to the value of the

group as a forum for rapid information exchange.

Student projects

FSANZ established a program in 2003 to encourage students at the undergraduate and

postgraduate level to undertake a project of relevance to the agency or food regulation. In

addition, the program aims to promote linkages and collaboration with academia, and raise

the awareness of FSANZ and its work in the minds of academics and students.

In 2008-09, students at two Australian universities took up four projects. Each student

provided us with a detailed report of their research, as well as presenting their research results

to FSANZ staff at a seminar. The project titles and participating universities are listed in Table 8.



Table 8. FSANZ student projects for 2008-09

Project title University

Analysis of long chain omega-3 levels in common dietary supplements University of the Sunshine Coast

Temperature of foods between retail sale and domestic refrigerator University of New South Wales

Lupin products in supermarket foods – potential for allergenic reactions University of New South Wales

Survey of university students regarding beliefs about high-risk Listeria foods University of New South Wales

Our Stakeholders


64 O U R S T A K E H O L D E R S

Our Stakeholders

Objectives

• Strengthen the levels of engagement and productive working relationships with our

external interest groups and government partners.

Performance

• Level and nature of stakeholder feedback, both formal and informal, provided through

surveys, the media and participation in advisory committees.

• Level of awareness in the community of FSANZ’s roles and responsibilities.

• Extent and effectiveness of collaboration with our regulatory partners.

Highlights

• Completed a comprehensive review of stakeholder relations, with the assistance of

other government agencies.

• Identified the importance of ‘reputation’ to the agency, and the link with communication

and stakeholder engagement strategies and with our scientific capability.

• Utilised our international networks to assist with major projects, such as the melamine

food incident and fortification of flour with folic acid.

• Continued our capacity building initiatives in the Asia-Pacific region and actively

implemented our role as Co-Chair of the APEC Food Safety Cooperation Forum

• Strengthened our scientific capacity by establishing a Scientific Advisory Group for

Epidemiology.

• As ‘sponsor’ of a program under the Coordinated Food Survey Plan of the

Implementation Sub-Committee, coordinated six surveys on the Plan, added two new

surveys and administered two on-going surveys with jurisdictional agencies.


65O U R S T A K E H O L D E R S

Overview

FSANZ does not operate in isolation. In common with other government enterprises, we have

a range of stakeholders with an interest in the services we provide. These stakeholders have

expectations about the scope and delivery of those services.

As shown in Table 9, stakeholder expectations depend on the stakeholder group to which a

person belongs, but they are not exclusive to a particular group, nor are the expectations in

the table necessarily complete. However, they serve to illustrate the challenge of providing

services to diverse groups in the community and ensuring that expectations are founded on

accurate information.

Because FSANZ has a relatively high profile within the food regulatory system, some people

believe that we have roles and responsibilities beyond our remit. This was confirmed by our

survey of stakeholder perceptions, reported in last year’s annual report. If expectations are

based on inaccurate perceptions, it is unlikely that they will be met.

The onus is clearly on the agency to ensure that information in the community about its role

in the food regulatory system is easily accessible and in a form that is appropriate to each

stakeholder group. Over the years, we have developed our communication capacity to

convey such corporate messages in our publications and online communication channels.

It has also become clear that we will only fully meet stakeholder expectations when we

understand the perceptions of stakeholders and the drivers of those perceptions.

Of course, every organisation wants to be highly regarded. However, for a government

regulator, reputation goes to the heart of public confidence in its sphere of regulatory activity –

in FSANZ’s case, food. Without the trust and confidence of its stakeholders, FSANZ would be

unable to discharge its responsibilities effectively.

During the year, we undertook a comprehensive analysis of our stakeholder relations, enlisting

the assistance of other Australian Government agencies and the United Kingdom Food

Standards Agency.

The FSANZ Board has identified ‘Reputation’ as one of our corporate risk areas and it is in

this planning context that we intend to develop an overarching strategy for the agency that will

influence much of its work.

Reputation is not about public relations spin. It is about the effectiveness and efficiency of our

processes, the empathetic way in which we interact with our stakeholders, our skilful use of

scientific and other information to build evidence bases, the care that we show our staff, and

our ability to work in partnership with others.



In early 2009-10, our Executive and Board will identify the elements of reputation that are

relevant to FSANZ – for example, trust, professionalism and authority – and determine whether

we fall short in any element, based on the feedback from in-depth interviews with a small

number of key influencers among our stakeholders.

This gap analysis will form the basis of a FSANZ reputation strategy which, in turn, will provide

a framework for our future interactions with stakeholders.

Table 9. FSANZ services and responsibilities, by stakeholder group.

Stakeholder groups What stakeholders can expect from FSANZ

Consumers • Protection against unsafe food.

• Professional and timely responses to emerging food issues.

• Appropriate opportunities to comment on regulatory proposals.

Public health professionals • Consistency of food standards with existing government public health guidelines.

Media • Authoritative source of information on food matters.

Food industry • Progressive and evidence-based regulatory environment in which to do business.

• Minimum regulatory burden on industry.

• Certainty of process to amend food standards.

• High levels of regulatory competence in food matters.

Regulatory partners • Production of food standards that can be readily enforced.

• Source of expert advice on scientific risk.

• National coordination of food surveillance and food recall systems and support in the control of imported food.

• Monitoring and evaluation of effectiveness of food standards.

Food Ministers • Implementation of food policy.

• Compliance with the FSANZ Act and other relevant legislation.



According to the Australian Public Service Commissioner, damage to reputation through a

high-profile failure in an organisation ‘can fundamentally destabilise agency culture and the

ability to achieve business objectives’ (see APSC website).

Reputation is one of FSANZ’s most valuable assets. It is therefore prudent for us to

apply asset management principles, even though reputation is an intangible asset. The

best management of risks to reputation is sound enterprise-wide risk management and

governance, where all insiders are involved and outsiders’ interests are taken into account.

Our aim is to develop efficient communication and long-term solid relationships with all our

stakeholders.

Community involvement

There are many ways in which the community – especially consumers – can make a

contribution to FSANZ’s standards-setting processes, ranging from one-way communication

from the agency to various forms of participation (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Ladder of citizen participation in food regulation.

Media, education campaigns, website, email lists, information service

By law, FSANZ makes regulatory decisions after community engagement

Discussions with peak consumer bodies

Consumer representation on advisory committees

Consumer research into attitudes and behaviour

Formal process of seeking views and comments (submissions)

6 Joint decision making

5 Partnerships in shaping decisions

4 Participation

3 Consumer research

2 Consultation

1 Information sharing

Incr

easi

ng c

omm

unity

par

ticip

atio

n



The question facing FSANZ is: what is an appropriate level of community participation for

individual elements of the process?

For example, the critical analysis of raw scientific data requires a scientific knowledge and

understanding of scientific methodologies that most lay people do not possess.

Our job is to conduct an impartial, objective assessment of the available information and to

present conclusions in an easy-to-read format. It is unlikely, therefore, that citizen participation

would go beyond ‘ consultation’ for the greater population, although some well-informed

consumers may be involved on regulatory advisory committees.

On the other hand, consumers are the ultimate beneficiaries of our work. The views and

opinions of individuals and interest groups within the community on food matters is a

component of the evidence base used for making regulatory decisions.

Clearly, FSANZ cannot respond favourably to every view expressed by every individual. Or

take action where the scientific evidence shows that no benefit to the community would arise

from that action.

But we sometimes elevate our community engagement to level 5 on the participation ladder

for projects that have a major public health objective and actively seek the views of consumer

groups and health non-government organisations. These consultations have the potential to

shape our decisions.

We are prevented by the FSANZ Act to share or devolve the responsibility of making regulatory

decisions to any other organisation or individual. As a national regulator established by the

Australian Government, the task of making recommendations to amend the Australia New

Zealand Food Standards Code rests solely with us.

Within that constraint, however, we seek every opportunity to involve the community in our

work. We are looking for ways to make that interaction a rewarding experience for individuals

and the agency.

Advisory and liaison committees

Level 4/5 participation in standards development by the community includes membership of

FSANZ advisory committees. These committees usually comprise a broad membership from

consumers, government and the food industry.



Table 10. FSANZ advisory and liaison committees for 2008-09.

Advisory CommitteeNumber of meetings

Advisory Group for Catering Operations 0

Advisory Group for Dietary Exposure Assessment 2

Advisory Group for Food Composition 2

Consumer Liaison Committee 3

Jurisdictional Forum 4

Nga Kaitohutohu Kounga Kai 2

Retailers and Manufacturers Liaison Committee 3

Science Network Forum 6

Scientific Advisory Group for Epidemiology 0

Scientific Advisory Group for Folate 0

Scientific Advisory Group for Infant and Child Health 1

Scientific Advisory Group for Iodine 0

Scientific Advisory Panel for Dairy 1

Scientific Advisory Panel for Eggs 0

Social Sciences Expert Advisory Group 1

Stakeholder Advisory Group on Evaluation 2

Standard Development Advisory Committee for Health Claims 0

Standard Development Committee for Dairy (Raw Milk Products) 0

Standard Development Committee for Eggs and Egg Products 2

Standard Development Committee for Meat and Meat Products 2

Standard Development Committee for Poultry Meat 0

Standard Development Committee for Seed Sprouts 1

We also set up expert scientific committees to assist us with our risk assessments.

In 2008-09, FSANZ established a Scientific Advisory Group for Epidemiology to provide

scientific advice in relation to epidemiology studies and methodology. The intention of this

group is to advise on approaches to the identification and interpretation of epidemiological

studies and controlled clinical trials that are relevant to Applications and Proposals. The group



may also be asked to provide peer commentary on FSANZ reviews of epidemiological or

clinical trials.

Table 10 shows the advisory groups maintained by FSANZ during the year. A full listing of the

people serving on these committees is at Appendix 4.

Consumer Liaison Committee

Following the completion of appointments to the committee of the original members, we

invited applications to fill the positions and implemented a selection process. Of the nine

original members, five submitted an application for reappointment. Two of the original

members were reappointed and four new members appointed. At 30 June 2009, the

committee comprised twelve members.

We sought feedback from the members on a number of communication materials during the

year, including fact sheets on folic acid fortification and nanotechnology, an information video

about food safety during pregnancy and the new website contact template. The Committee

continued to provide a consumer perspective to our standard development activities through

the Catering Advisory Group and the Standards Development Committee for Primary

Production and Processing Standard for Seed Sprouts.

Top: Libby Manley, Heather Tate, Jenni Butterworth, Mark Robinson, Clare Hughes, Eileen Clark. Bottom: George Seymour-Dearness, Hayden Potaka, Sharon Thorpe, Hean Bee Wee.



Consultation with Maori

FSANZ established a new reference group in August 2008, the Ngã Kaitohutohu Kounga Kai,

to support our standards development activities, comprising three Maori experts drawn from

consumer, public health and nutrition interests. The name of the group means ‘people able

to guide others in food and nutrition from a Maori world view’. The reference group provides

advice to FSANZ on Tikanga Maori (customary practices) and community processes in:

• identifying food standards issues of significance to Maori;

• evaluating strategies used to involve Maori in food standards issues;

• developing strategies for effective communication with Maori; and

• undertaking relevant consultation activities.

During the year, the reference group considered Applications on the FSANZ work plan

and discussed the issue of Maori Cultural Awareness Training for FSANZ staff. In March,

Ngã Kaitohutohu members met with the FSANZ Board. The first two issues of a quarterly

newsletter have been circulated to the Maori Network.

Public register

Applications, assessment reports, submissions and other information relating to an Application

or Proposal to vary the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code are placed on our Public

Register files, unless we have agreed they are commercial-in-confidence.

In the past year, eight formal requests to examine public register files were made, dealing

with eight Applications and Proposals. The requests were made by industry (1); government

agencies (2); community, consumer or non-profit organisations (3); and consultants and legal (2).

Stakeholders and regulatory partners

Everyone living in Australia and New Zealand has a stake in our work. All stakeholders have

expectations of the way that we carry out our responsibilities. Because we want to provide

the best possible service to the greatest number of people, and because we need the most

comprehensive evidence base possible, stakeholder interaction is one of our agency priorities

An important stakeholder group for us is our regulatory partners – government agencies and

departments, domestic and international. Food standards in the Code must be enforceable by

the jurisdictions and, as far as is practicable, be consistent with approaches adopted by other

countries with well-developed food regulatory systems.



This requires us to have a good knowledge of the way our partners operate. We also benefit

from their experiences and this informs our decision making.

During the year, we exchanged staff with the United Kingdom Food Standards Agency and

seconded senior risk assessment specialists from the Therapeutic Goods Administration to

the agency. Our Wellington office ensured that FSANZ and the New Zealand Food Safety

Authority are kept fully informed of each other’s activities. And, through the Implementation

Sub-Committee (ISC), all partners in the food regulatory system worked to make the whole

greater than the sum of the parts.

For example, FSANZ is the ‘sponsor’ of Component 1 of the ISC work program –

surveillance and monitoring. The primary activity of this component is the development and

implementation of the Coordinated Food Survey Plan, a three-year rolling plan of coordinated

survey activities. During the year, six coordinated surveys on the Plan were completed, two

new surveys were added, and two surveys were ongoing.

Other collaborative ventures with jurisdictions occurred through the Food Surveillance Network

a forum of representatives from FSANZ, the States and Territories, New Zealand and the

Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service, which share information relating to monitoring

and surveillance activities within Australia and New Zealand.

Case study: addition of folic acid to flour

From September 2009, wheat flour for making bread must contain added folic acid

as well as thiamin. FSANZ has undertaken a number of activities designed to assist

industry and regulators with the implementation of the new requirement in the Code.

This included the establishment of an expert technical advisory group, comprising

members with compliance, industry and analytical backgrounds, and the facilitation

of a laboratory proficiency testing program to enable greater confidence in analytical

results by industry, regulators and for monitoring the addition of folic acid to flour.

FSANZ’s Principal Food Technologist visited industry, regulators, academics and

vitamin pre-mix suppliers in North America. The purpose was to understand the

milling procedures and equipment used to meet the fortification requirements of those

countries, the laboratory tests that are conducted, the variability of the processes, and

the Canadian enforcement protocols.



Partnerships with other national agencies

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC)

Under a Memorandum of Understanding, we cooperate with ACCC on areas of the Food

Standards Code dealing with misleading or deceptive conduct to ensure a consistency

between the Code and trade practices legislation.

Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service (AQIS)

AQIS administers the Imported Food Inspection Scheme for Australia. We continued to

provide advice to AQIS on risk levels for imported food, which determine the level at which

they are tested at the border. Because AQIS enforces food standards, representatives from

the agency participate on many of our advisory committees.

Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA)

We continue to work with APVMA to improve processes for maintaining limits in the Food

Standards Code that reflect legitimate residues in food and liaised on issues concerning

agricultural and veterinary chemical residues in food.

Ministry of Health (New Zealand) (MoH)

We provided advice to MoH on the potential application of the nutrient profiling scoring criteria

model, developed by FSANZ within the content of the health claims project, to assist in its

considerations of food classification systems associated with television advertising to children.

National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC)

We collaborated with NHMRC during the year, particularly on its proposed alcohol

consumption guidelines and their direct relevance to our work on advisory health labels on

alcohol in relation to pregnancy. We are also incorporating elements of the respective NHMRC

risk assessment to underpin our evidence base.

National Industrial Chemicals Notification and Assessment Scheme (NICNAS)

Increasing engagement with NICNAS during the year provided benefits to both FSANZ and

NICNAS. We developed a draft Memorandum of Understanding to facilitate the exchange of

information related to evaluations, assessments, reviews and emerging issues, which is under

consideration.



National Measurement Institute (NMI)

FSANZ has a Memorandum of Understanding with NMI which facilitates the sharing of

information on emerging food issues and developments in methodologies for food analysis.

During this year, FSANZ and NMI discussed issues associated with international capacity

building activities. We held regular liaison meetings with NMI and provided speakers and

participated in a conference and workshops hosted by NMI.

New Zealand Food Safety Authority (NZFSA)

NZFSA is the national food regulator for New Zealand. It also has responsibility for compliance

and enforcement activities associated with the Food Standards Code. Our joint activities with

NZFSA included implementation arrangements associated with the mandatory fortification

of foods with folic acid and with iodine and the sharing of technical information and risk

management approaches relating to the parallel development of standards for raw milk cheese

in each country.

Office of Best Practice Regulation (OBPR)

OBPR promotes effective and efficient regulation, from a broad economy-wide perspective.

Under Council of Australian Governments arrangements, OBPR assists agencies to develop

regulatory impact statements and to provide guidance on the adequacy of the analysis. We

received valuable assistance and advice from with OBPR during the year on a number of major

projects.

Office of the Gene Technology Regulator (OGTR)

OGTR assesses the suitability of releasing genetically modified crops into the environment.

We continued to share information on biotechnology matters with OGTR during the year.

Standards Australia

Under a Memorandum of Understanding with Standards Australia, we collaborate on standard

setting and other joint activities, provide expertise on technical committees, take steps to

reduce overlap and share information on food industry and consumer needs.

Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA)

We continued to consult with TGA over the designation of products as foods or medicines.

FSANZ is also a member (as is the TGA) of an Implementation Sub Committee working group



set up to develop a trans-Tasman process to assist in determining the appropriate regulatory

status of products at the food-medicine interface

Relationships in the Asia-Pacific Region

In 2008-09, FSANZ continued to take a leadership role in progressing the work of the APEC

Food Safety Cooperation Forum, in establishing new international collaborative relationships in

food safety capacity building, in undertaking a range of capacity building activities in the region

and in providing training to visiting food safety officials.

APEC Food Safety Cooperation Forum

FSANZ continued to provide strong leadership to the Forum in its role as Co-Chair, with China

and made arrangements for the Forum’s second meeting in July 2009, in Singapore.

FSANZ, in partnership with China, provided comprehensive reports to the APEC

Sub-Committee for Standards and Conformance (SCSC) about progress made by the Forum.

We reported significant progress in the areas of strengthening food safety networks within

APEC; improving information sharing; and prioritising and implementing food safety capacity

building activities.

A significant achievement in 2008 was the establishment of the APEC Food Safety

Cooperation Forum Partnership Training Institute Network. The primary purpose of this

Network was to enlist leadership from the private sector and academia in the work of the

Forum and to create a network of food safety institutes and trainers in the APEC region.

We played a significant role, with the United States and China, in establishing the Network and

managing the process of consultation and approval with APEC economies and relevant APEC

committees.

Our growing relationship with China, through our Co-Chair roles, led to Ms Zhang Rong

(General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine, China) spending

four weeks at FSANZ This placement enabled Ms Zhang to work with our international team

in preparing for upcoming meetings and capacity building activities.

Capacity building activities in the region

FSANZ implemented a number of food safety capacity building activities as part of the work of

the Forum. An example was the activity Developing Food Laws, Standards and Enforcement

Systems.

This AusAID-funded capacity building activity involved participants from Viet Nam, China,

Philippines, Papua New Guinea and Indonesia. Its objective was to develop participants’



skills and knowledge among selected APEC Member Economies by developing a more robust

approach to strengthening food safety standards and practices in the region.

The first phase of the training program involved an intensive five-day training workshop held

in Hanoi in September 2008. The workshop covered a range of material in relation to the

development, implementation and enforcement of food standards. The second phase of the

training program required participants to undertake a four-six month practical, in-country

project that encouraged direct application of material covered in the workshop.

A third and final phase of the activity took the form of a three-day follow-up workshop, where

the participants undertook an analysis and provided feedback on their project. The workshop

was held in Ho Chi Minh City in February.

At the completion of this activity, participants were able to undertake the development of food

laws and regulations for their respective countries; review and develop more effective food

standards in line with international standards; and have the skills and knowledge to develop

import and export food regulations and enforcement systems.

FSANZ and AQIS also presented a four-day FAO/IAEA Regional Training Workshop on

irradiated food in the Philippines in December.

Communication

FSANZ prides itself on the inclusiveness and transparency of its operations. For this to occur,

communication messages and products must be effective in terms of being suited to particular

audiences.

Our website is the primary source of information for stakeholders. But we also rely heavily on

the mass media to join public debates on food matters and on electronic newsletters to keep

our stakeholders and regulatory partners informed of developments in the agency. In addition,

to the extent resources allow, we maintain an active print publications program.

Media and information services

Media relations

We continued to issue media releases and to correct errors of fact in the print and electronic

media during the year. In this period, the space available for news in the print media shrank by

11-12% due to a severe reduction in advertising revenue. This made the task of maintaining

an appropriate profile more difficult.



However, the use of the conventional media continues to be a cost-effective communication

tool for FSANZ. It is especially important during food emergencies and food incidents, where

we need to communicate quickly to the population as a whole. Such was the case with the

melamine adulteration incident in 2008.

We responded to 632 media enquiries on a wide range of food issues, compared with 503 in

2007-08 (Figure 3). Media issues included food colours, H1N1 influenza and food, mandatory

fortification of food with iodine and folic acid, genetically modified food, nanotechnology,

allergens, energy drinks, irradiation, and bisphenol A in baby bottles and packaging. We

also addressed salt, food safety after floods and fires, hepatitis A in tomatoes, front-of-pack

labelling, country of origin labelling, imported nuts, health claims, alcohol labelling, raw milk, A2

milk, food safety and lunchboxes, fluoride, intense sweeteners, erythrosine food colour, listeria

and trans fats.

Figure 3. Annual pattern of media enquiries 2008-09

Publications

With more than 6,000 people on the mailing list, Food Standards News continued to provide

interested parties with information on the development of food standards and issues related

to food each quarter. We surveyed the readership during the year and are implementing

suggestions for improvement.

We continued to publish Food Surveillance News as a quarterly newsletter, in collaboration

with our regulatory partners, to provide results of nationally coordinated food surveys,

Nu

mb

er o

f en

qu

irie

s

120

100

80

60

40

20

0Jul-08 Aug-08 Sep-08 Oct-08 Nov-08 Dec-08 Jan-09 Feb-09 Mar-09 Apr-09 May-09 Jun-09



background information on food recalls, imported foods, the Australian Total Diet Study and

other monitoring and surveillance activities.

We also published Monitoring of Emerging Issues – a fortnightly newsletter distributed to

various stakeholders, industry and government organisations. This newsletter provides a global

snapshot of recent food safety issues. It captures emerging issues in relation to food-borne

disease outbreaks, labelling and packaging, food safety policy, surveillance and monitoring

activities, scientific and technical activities and food product recalls.

Industry and consumer advice

FSANZ assists food businesses, government agencies and other stakeholders to navigate

their way around the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code and also responds to

consumer enquiries.

This year, the Code Inquiry Unit answered 5,034 inquiries (about 25% less than in 2007-08).

The reduction may be the result of installing a telephone response system that identifies

the areas covered by FSANZ and redirects other enquiries, such as enforcement, to other

food regulatory agencies. The majority of enquiries came from industry (50%), followed by

government agencies (20%), lawyers and consultants (17%) consumers (9%) and community

groups (4%). These figures are similar to the breakdown for 2007-08.

In addition, the general enquiry line received 1806 enquiries. To assist enquirers, and to

help FSANZ staff respond, we introduced a web-based enquiry form that automatically

directs the enquirer to the correct area of the organisation. Our receptionists in Wellington

or Canberra can enter the information on the form for people without access to the internet.

This new system has been tested with our Consumer Liaison Committee and Retailers and

Manufacturers Liaison Committee and has been in operation since June 2009.

Staff from the Code Inquiry Unit answered questions on the Code from industry

representatives and environmental health officers at conferences. Events included the

Australian Institute of Food Technology Convention (Sydney), the New Zealand Institute of

Food Technology Convention (Christchurch) and Fine Foods (Melbourne). Staff from the unit

also conducted seminars in Melbourne and at an APEC-sponsored training course in Vietnam.

Website and new media

Users of websites and social networking sites are currently growing at a rate of 60% a year.

This illustrates the increasing dependence of people on these relatively new forms of media.

Our website is our primary communication vehicle and source of information and so we



continually survey the use being made of the site so that we can maintain its currency and

relevance.

In 2008, we had 988,182 unique visits or approximately 19,000 people a week. The average

visitor spent 4.38 minutes on the site and viewed an average of 6.39 pages, which indicates

that they are finding the specific information they are searching for. Most users came from

Australia and New Zealand, followed by the United States, the United Kingdom and Canada,

plus growing interest from China, Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore and India.

We commenced a review of the front page and second-level pages of the website. Due to be

launched in late 2009, the front page has been redesigned to make it easier for search engines

to find key words and find material. The new page will have three main tabs for information:

Food Standards Code: includes the Code itself, plus user guides, how to change food

standards and the nutrition panel calculator.

Consumer information: includes labelling; advice for pregnant women, the elderly and

immuno-compromised; new foods and technologies; and additives and ingredients.

Science and education: includes media releases, fact sheets and publications, videos and

web seminars, and the science behind our work.

We have now published six web seminars on the site discussing food additives, intense

sweeteners, understanding food labels, how food labelling is developed, the FSANZ Act

changes and food safety tips for consumers. We plan to publish additional seminars in

2009-10, including an overview of FSANZ, food advice for women contemplating pregnancy,

mandatory fortification advice for health professionals, food recalls, imported food,

nanotechnology and overview of the Food Standards Code.

Education and information campaigns

While FSANZ does not have funding for major education initiatives, we continued to work

closely with our regulatory and non-regulatory partners. One of these partners, Video

Education Australasia, develops audio-visual material for high schools and tertiary education

institutions. We contributed to their videos on ‘Food labelling’ and ‘Understanding Food

Standards Australia New Zealand’ and these will be offered to schools in Australia and New

Zealand from July 2009. We also provided articles on understanding food labels to the

Nutridate schools subscription service.



Food Safety Week

FSANZ is a founding member of the Food Safety Information Council. The theme for Food

Safety Week in November 2008 was ‘Food Adventures – new foods, new techniques’. The

focus was on food safety when using new cooking techniques. Two new community service

announcements reached an audience of over 26 million and the value of the free media was

estimated as $849,082, if purchased. The campaign has been shortlisted as a finalist for

the Public Relations Institute Golden Target awards. The Food Safety Information Council

works closely with the New Zealand Food Safe Partnership, using shared themes for their

campaigns.

Mandatory fortification awareness campaigns

We intensified our communication activities associated with the mandatory fortification of

bread with folic acid and iodised salt, which comes into force in September and October

2009. Activities involved collaborating with other government agencies, health professional

groups and non-government organisation to raise awareness of mandatory fortification and to

disseminate consistent messages.

A key target audience for mandatory fortification is pregnant women and women planning

pregnancy. We revised and combined all of our pregnancy advice into a specific webpage and

brochure. This information was developed jointly with the Department of Health and Ageing

and the New Zealand Food Safety Authority. It covers healthy eating in pregnancy; the need

to take folic acid and iodine supplements; listeria and mercury in fish advice; and alcohol and

caffeine guidelines. We intend to launch a consumer education package in November 2009.

We issued industry user guides in May to ensure that flour millers, salt manufacturers and

bakers are prepared for the new mandatory fortification requirements. In particular, we targeted

industry associations to ensure that small bakeries are aware of the changes.

We prepared a series of short videos for our website on these issues. They have been

translated into a number of languages, with priority given to Asian languages such as

Mandarin, Cantonese, Thai, Vietnamese, Lao and Khmer cultures where people are less likely

to eat bread.

Our People and Organisational Capability

82 O U R P E O P L E A N D O R G A N I S A T I O N A L C A P A B I L I T Y


Our People and Organisational Capability

Objectives

• Foster a safe, rewarding and productive working environment.

• Enhance our agency capability and capacity.

• Increase the effectiveness of our organisational processes.

Performance

• Extent to which learning and development strategies facilitate the achievement of

corporate objectives.

• Extent of uptake and the nature of professional development opportunities given to

staff as identified in staff development plans.

• Effect of prioritisation and enhanced project management capabilities on the

implementation of the FSANZ work plan.

Highlights

• Upgraded our prioritisation processes and applied them to a range of standards-

development and non-standards projects.

• Applied and received additional funding from the Australian Government to enhance

the capability of two key FSANZ databases.

• Introduced in-house professional development for staff by the Chief Public Health

Nutrition Advisor.

• Continued to support the Staff Forum as a consultative mechanism between staff and

management.

• Reduced average unscheduled employee absences from 6.7 days in 2007-08 to 4.95

days, compared with 9.4 days for the Australian Public Service as a whole.

• Revised our awards and recognition scheme to acknowledge, in a more informal

manner, the contribution of staff members to the objectives of the agency.

83O U R P E O P L E A N D O R G A N I S A T I O N A L C A P A B I L I T Y


Overview

Maintaining organisational capability in an economic downturn presents small agencies like

FSANZ with immense challenges.

Capability has a number of dimensions, including the employment of high-quality staff

in scientific and regulatory areas, the flexibility to form multidisciplinary teams to address

unforeseen issues, resources to commission external studies, the need to meet statutory

timelines in processing Applications, and the effectiveness of our work prioritisation regime.

Applications to amend the Food Standards Code, once accepted, are placed on a work plan

which is published on our website. We process the Applications in the order that they are

received, except for paid Applications, which receive immediate attention. Once we have

started the standard-development process and identified the type of assessment procedure to

be applied to an Application, completion dates are determined by statutory timelines.

We ensure that this core business is adequately resourced. Remaining resources can then

be allocated to activities that are not bound by statutory timelines. These include Proposals

to amend the Code raised by the agency itself, reviews of food standards and the conduct

of non-standards projects. Projects of this kind are subjected to close scrutiny by the

Executive before approval to proceed is granted. The Executive places these projects onto a

prioritisation ladder, under the categories ‘Priority’, ‘Active’, ‘Slow burn’ and ‘Wait’.

In reaching its decisions, the Executive takes into account a business case put forward by a

project team, the available resources (human and financial) and a Prioritisation Model Score

against key criteria related to the agency’s key strategic directions.

One area of organisational capability for which we received extra support from the Australian

Government in the 2009-10 Budget allocation was our modelling and data management

capacity. We received $2.85 million, over two years, to upgrade two databases developed in

the 1990s.

These databases underpin FSANZ’s scientific evidence base. They provide crucial information

on the dietary exposure of consumers to chemicals in food and on the nutrient composition of

thousands of Australian foods. This information feeds into our risk assessments for both the

development of food standards and the management of food emergencies.

We continue to maintain professional development of staff at high levels. This has included

participation in international forums, such as committees of the Codex Alimentarius

Commission. We intend to continue to support staff in this way and through domestic training

opportunities, including staff exchanges with other agencies.



Because we conduct staff surveys every two years, and did not this year, we have no current

indicator of staff satisfaction with FSANZ as a place of employment. Morale usually suffers

when an organisation is downsizing and projects are terminated or suspended. Senior

management is carefully monitoring staff reaction to the changes. FSANZ will report on

quantitative feedback from staff in next year’s annual report.

On the surface, at least, our people appear to be coping well in the current period of

uncertainty. FSANZ’s performance in 2008-09 owes its success to the continued commitment

and drive of our people on both sides of the Tasman.

Staff Forum

The Staff Forum continued to provide the Executive and staff with an important mechanism

to discuss matters of mutual concern. In 2008-09, the Staff Forum identified a number of

initiatives that would improve the working conditions of staff.

These initiatives included the need for a ‘buddy system’ and online interactive induction course

for new staff , a mentoring system for staff, and the ongoing need for an effective learning and

development program that would be of benefit to both staff and the agency.

The Forum also identified the need to review the Staff Reward and Recognition Policy to allow

for more informal ways of recognising staff members who had made a strong contribution to

the work of the agency, and to upgrade the bullying and harassment policy and provide staff

with information sessions on how the policy worked. The Executive supported these initiatives

during the year.

We developed frameworks for the buddy and mentoring systems and introduced an online

interactive induction course. We revised the Rewards and Recognition Policy and facilitated

staff participation in activities under the FSANZ Wellness Program, including the provision of

facilities to encourage cycling to work. We also took action to strengthen our learning and

development program and our approach to bullying and harassment, as described in more

detail below.

Under the auspices of the Staff Forum, FSANZ continued to support the Workplace Giving

Program in 2008-09. We supported the Australian Cancer Research Foundation, the Eden-

Monaro Cancer Support Group, Médecins sans Frontières and the RSPCA. Donations to

these selected charities are made via deductions from the pre-tax pay of staff members.



Organisational capability and capacity

Information and communication technology (ICT)

ICT has a significant impact on organisational performance and, unless managed

appropriately, can introduce financial and operational risks. FSANZ’s ICT systems continued

to support the agency’s business practices during the year. Because of the rapidly

evolving nature of the technology, ICT also acted as a driver for change, especially in our

communication activities.

After reaching the end of the lease lifecycle, we replaced all desktop computers in our

Canberra and Wellington offices. We reduced costs by extending the new lease to four years

rather than the previous three-year cycle. We also leveraged off the buying powers of larger

government organisations for the procurement of the new equipment. The new computers are

faster, with greater capability and energy efficiency than our previous models.

We improved our ability to store and retrieve email correspondence by implementing an

email vault system that reduces the amount of space required for storage. This means that

finding past emails is faster and simpler, with greater efficiency for the network. We intend to

install a similar system for the archiving of all files that will enable us to provide greater search

functionality for staff.

With business continuity and disaster recovery in mind, we upgraded our back-up software

and systems. Business continuity testing is now carried out on a regular basis and we have

commenced planning for an off-site disaster recovery setup.

We greatly reduced the amount of physical hardware in our back-end systems by advanced

use of virtualisation and by embracing new technologies. This reduction in hardware has the

added effect of producing savings in outright costs, as well as reducing our carbon footprint.

We also improved systems for our New Zealand office by more efficiently utilising the existing

link between our two offices.

FSANZ tested different technologies available for mobile devices during the year. We intend

to provide Windows mobile and improved Blackberry systems to staff, with a new carrier, to

reduce costs and to provide a much-needed increase in mobile reception.



FSANZ’s databases

As mentioned earlier, much of our risk assessment capacity is dependent on two in-house

databases.

DIAMOND (Dietary Modelling of Nutritional Data) is used to predict the dietary exposure

(intake) of food chemicals such as food additives, heavy metals, pesticide residues and

nutrients for both Australian and New Zealand populations. ANDB (the Australian Nutrient

Data Bank) allows for the storage, manipulation and reporting of large quantities of data on the

nutrient composition of thousands of Australian foods.

We commissioned studies in 2008 which recommended that a reliance on outdated or poorly

supported software left FSANZ highly vulnerable to failure of these systems. This represented

a key business continuity risk for the agency.

This modelling and data analysis capability underpins our scientific evidence base. The

Department of Health and Ageing supported our application for additional Australian

Government funding to renew both systems and we received $2.85m over two years for such

a project in the 2009-10 Budget.

Attraction, development and retention of a skilled workforce

At 30 June 2009, FSANZ employed 135 people (119 in Canberra, 15 in Wellington, 1 in

Tasmania), compared with 158 last year. Of these, 17 are employed on a non-ongoing

basis, down from 28 in 2007-08, including 8 employees on long-term leave or secondment

to another agency. Tables 11, 12 and 13 provide a snapshot of our staffing profile and

movement over the past few years.

Table 11. Distribution of APS employees by level and gender at 30 June 2009

Classification Female Male Total

Full time Part time Full time Part time Full time Part time

PEO 1 1

SEB2 1 1

SEB1 4 4

Exec2 16 2 13 29 2

Exec1 18 8 13 31 8



Classification Female Male Total

Full time Part time Full time Part time Full time Part time

APS6 19 4 7 26 4

APS5 6 1 4 1 10 2

APS4 10 1 1 11 1

APS3 2 1 1 3 1

APS2 1 1

Total 72 18 44 1 116 19

Agency total: 135

Table 12. Staffing levels 2003-2009

Total Male Female

2008-09 135 45 90

2007-08 158 54 104

2006-07 146 42 104

2005-06 146 40 106

2004-05 132 40 92

2003-04 132 44 88

Table 13. Employee commencements and cessations

Male Female Total

OngoingNon-

ongoing OngoingNon-

ongoing OngoingNon-

ongoing Total

Commencements 3 3 2 9 5 12 17

Cessations 4 6 16 7 20 13 33

At 30 June 2009, the average age of staff members was 42.5 years, a slight rise over the

previous year. Our retention rate for 2008-09 was 86.3%, compared with 88.7% in 2007-08.

These are high levels for an agency in the Australian Public Service.



Table 14 contains Equal Employment Opportunity information for about 71% of our Australian

staff members. It highlights our employment of professionals at E1 and E2 levels, from non-

English speaking backgrounds, to provide specialised support to our standards-development

activities. In the past four years, we have more than doubled our employment of people from

non-English speaking backgrounds to almost 10% of employees in Australia.

Table 14. FSANZ staff in Australia by EEO classification

Staff with EEO data

Salary classification

Aboriginal and Torres

Strait Islander people

People of non-English

speaking background

(1)

People of non-English speaking

background (2)

People with a disability

Male Female Total

APS Level 1-6 0 1 0 0 9 38 47

Exec Level 1 0 8 1 0 13 14 27

Exec Level 2 0 3 0 0 4 10 14

SES 0 0 0 0 2 1 3

Totals 0 12 1 0 28 63 91

(1) includes people born overseas whose first language was not English and who came to

Australia after the age of five years.

(2) includes people born overseas who came to Australia before the age of five years and

whose first language was not English, or people born in Australia with one or both

parents born overseas and whose first language was not English.

Learning and development

FSANZ maintained an active program of professional development for staff, linked to the

annual performance appraisal process, whereby individuals identify training opportunities

appropriate to their career needs. In addition, the agency organised development activities for

all staff members.

As an example, recognising that as many as 75% of our staff are involved in multiple projects

at any one time, we arranged a two-day project management course for twenty participants



The course aimed to improve the way staff manage projects and, most importantly, helped to

increase staff satisfaction by making more productive use of their time.

Our Employee Assistance Program providers organised four training sessions on bullying and

harassment awareness, attended by senior managers and the majority of staff. We arranged

a separate session for our New Zealand employees. Following these training sessions,

staff participated in practical refresher sessions involving discussions on options to different

scenarios.

We organised training sessions on ‘resilience’ to help staff identify ways of dealing with stress

in the workplace and outside. We provided this training in 2008 and, at the request of staff,

repeated the sessions in 2009. We also provided training for senior staff on presentation skills,

with an emphasis on dealing with difficult audiences.

Constraints on our budget led us to consider more cost-effective ways of providing learning

and development activities for staff, including the use of in-house experts to share their

knowledge and experiences. Our Chief Public Health Nutrition Advisor commenced a series of

seminars for our science specialists on epidemiology, which will continue into 2009-10.

Staff exchanges

Staff exchanges and secondments provide us with a valuable means of enabling staff to gain

experience of other areas of the food regulatory system, both at home and overseas. We

encourage and facilitate these types of experiences.

In recent years, such placements have included secondments to and from other Australian

Government agencies, and secondments to State agencies, international organisations (WHO/

FAO) and national food regulators overseas. Our regulatory science has benefitted significantly

from these activities.



Case study: staff exchange with the United Kingdom Food Standards Agency

(UKFSA)

Through its Memorandum of Understanding with UKFSA, FSANZ initiated a staff

exchange in 2008-09 to foster closer collaboration and improved networks between

the two agencies.

Both agencies committed to providing a program of work that exposed the visiting staff

member to a range of opportunities designed to develop their understanding of each

agency’s regulatory approach while also assisting them to develop their individual skills

and capabilities.

Ms Helen Riley, a senior nutritionist based in the Wellington office, commenced a six-

month placement at UKFSA in November 2008. Ms Riley participated in a program

aimed at reducing peoples’ salt intake through public awareness campaigns and

working with food manufacturers to reformulate foods. The work involved evaluating

scientific literature to support nutrition policy development and providing nutrition

advice for various agency projects and media and consumer enquiries.

In exchange, Ms Emma Peacock, a nutritionist from UKFSA, is spending six months

from March 2009 in our Canberra Office. During her time with us, Ms Peacock

contributed significantly to FSANZ’s activities on the implementation of mandatory

fortification standards. This has been of particular mutual benefit as the UKFSA is

currently considering the introduction of mandatory folic acid fortification.



Encouraging a rewarding environment

Conditions of employment

Collective Agreement

FSANZ’s present Collective Agreement expires on 30 June 2010. Negotiations for a new

Agreement will commence with staff in late August 2009 to allow sufficient time to provide for

the best possible outcome for both the agency and employees.

Australian Workplace Agreements

All Australian Workplace Agreements (AWAs) negotiated under the former Australian

Government’s workplace relations arrangements have a nominal expiry date of 30 June 2010

and will need to be replaced in accordance with the newly passed Fair Work legislation. Of

the 26 individual agreements in force in FSANZ, 22 are AWAs and four are Common Law

Agreements introduced under the amended policy directives issued by the present Australian

Government.

Occupational Health and Safety (OH&S)

We continued to meet our obligations under occupational health and safety legislation.

We arranged workplace assessments for all new staff and for staff who had been relocated

within the office during the year. Other staff were also offered assessments if they identified an

issue. We also conducted inspections in our Canberra and Wellington offices to ensure there

were no safety issues or hazards that could endanger staff.

Over the 12-month period, FSANZ filed no Incident Reports and lodged no claims with

Comcare. As a result, our Comcare premiums were reduced further to a low 0.45%

premium rate, compared with an average of 1.36% for combined agencies. This translates into

savings for 2008-09 of approximately $42,000, in addition to the $110,000 premium reduction

we received last year. In addition, following a review of our estimates for 2007-08, we received

a further refund on our premium of $15,000.

This year, we provided 54 free influenza vaccinations by on-site a visiting nurse and through

appointments at Health Services Australia, compared with 49 the previous year.

The average employee absence for all APS agencies was 9.4 days in 2007-08 compared

to 6.7 days for FSANZ. In the period 1 July to 31 December 2008, the FSANZ figure had

reduced further to 4.95 days. We interpret these low levels of unscheduled absences as



a strong indicator of a workplace where employees are engaged and committed to the

organisation and its leadership.

Workplace wellness

Our Workplace Wellness program continued to be actively supported by many staff. Over

80 staff members took advantage of health checks organised by the agency. The checks

included total cholesterol, body composition, blood sugar and blood pressure. The health

check provider reported that FSANZ employees are well above average for fitness and health

compared to other government agencies.

Weekly yoga sessions continued throughout the year. More informal activities included

lunchtime walks, tennis and team entries for various fun runs. During Wellness Week, we

arranged a number of additional activities, including sessions on fitness training, healthy-diets

and cooking demonstrations.

Workplace Harassment Policy

While several staff members discussed issues with Harassment Contact Officers (HCOs)

during the year, no formal complaints were lodged under the policy. One matter was resolved

informally by senior management.

Following a suggestion made by the Staff Forum, we revised the FSANZ Workplace

Harassment Policy, organised information sessions and provided staff with literature and

contact cards for our Employee Assistance Program. We also appointed additional HCOs

during the year, bringing the total to six, including one in our New Zealand office. The new

HCOs received appropriate training.

Commonwealth Disability Strategy and workplace diversity

In keeping with the Australian Public Service (APS) policy directives on recognising and valuing

workplace diversity, FSANZ continued to ensure that all employment matters were handled

in accordance with APS requirements. Human resources personnel scrutinised selection

decisions to ensure that principles of equal employment opportunity had been applied.

We reviewed the FSANZ Disability Plan and updated it to incorporate the new terminology

used to present the Access and Equity Bi-annual Report to Parliament. We also reviewed our

Workplace Diversity Policy; it did not require amendment.



Rewards and recognition

Our Staff Rewards and Recognition Scheme acknowledges individuals or teams who achieve

a level of performance in their work over and above that expected of them. Nominations are

assessed by a panel comprising representatives from each Branch of FSANZ. In that respect,

the awards are peer recognition of achievement.

Chairman’s Award – an annual award bestowed on an individual or team demonstrating

excellence and outstanding achievement in a work-related activity. Dr Hong Jin received the

award in 2008-09 for his initiative in arranging for Dr Charles Yeo to come from the United

States and deliver a number of workshops for FSANZ staff on risk analysis.

Annual Development Award – in recognition of one-off contributions or achievements by

a team or individual, which were significant to FSANZ. This award provides funding for the

recipient to further his or her expertise, usually through an overseas placement. The 2008

recipient was Christina Belperio. She used her award to further her knowledge and experience

in food safety management by spending time with the UK Food Standards Agency and

visiting raw-milk production facilities in the United States.

Australia Day Achievement Medallion – provided to acknowledge an individual or team

contribution to FSANZ’s work, demonstrating achievements beyond the expectations of their

role. In 2009, the recipient was Janis Baines.

Waitangi Day Achievement Award – inaugurated in 2007 to recognise and acknowledge

contributions by New Zealand staff to FSANZ’s work, demonstrating achievements beyond the

expectations of their role. In 2009, the recipient was Dr Leigh Henderson.

Quarterly Awards – available to individuals or teams to acknowledge their contribution to the

corporate goals of FSANZ. The recipients for 2008-09 were Diane Bourne, Sue Harvey and

Marianne Hoey.

Staff Long Term Service was recognised for 10 years’ service by John Fladun, Rocky

Dalmolen, Liz Dean and Kent Brown. Those who have provided 15 years of service were

Patricia Blenman, Janis Baines and Mary-Lou Dalzell.

The Staff Forum requested a review of our formal Rewards and Recognition Scheme, to move

away from a structured, formal approach and to allow for a more informal recognition of staff

contribution to FSANZ. In response, we reduced the number of formal rewards on offer in

favour of setting out a framework for informally acknowledging staff performance.



Organisational structure

Our Chief Executive Officer leads the agency and works closely with the other members of a

five-person Executive: Chief Scientist, General Manager Risk Assessment Branch, General

Manager Food Standards (Canberra) Branch, General Manager Food Standards (Wellington)

Branch, and General Manager Legal and Regulatory Affairs Branch.

The Food Standards Branch in Canberra is largely responsible for risk management in

relation to food safety standards in the Food Standards Code, for coordinating Australia-wide

responses to food incidents, and for nutrition and public health activities. The Branch also has

carriage of corporate operations, consumer and social sciences, regulatory analysis and ICT.

The corresponding Branch in Wellington is responsible for the development of labelling and

compositional standards and for communication and enquiry services.

Our Risk Assessment Branch carries out the scientific evaluation of risks to human health

through food, including the collection of compositional information, dietary modelling and

evaluations of the effectiveness of food standards.

Our work is organised in the following Sections:

• Communication

• Food Composition, Evaluation and Modelling

• Food Safety

• Labelling and Information Standards

• Office of Legal Counsel and Secretariat

• Operations

• Product Safety Standards

• Public Health Nutrition Standards

• Risk Assessment - Chemical Safety

• Risk Assessment - Microbiology

• Risk Assessment - Public Health Nutrition

• Scientific Strategy, International and Surveillance

In addition, we maintain a number of smaller units.



Senior management

The Executive’s role is to provide leadership, stewardship and control of the agency. It

manages the implementation of the statutory functions of FSANZ in line with the strategic

priorities set by the Board.

A Management Group, comprising Section Managers and the Executive, facilitates the

two-way information between Sections and the Executive on our progress against strategic

directions, day-to-day management and the coordination of section activities. Section

Managers, and their General Managers, are responsible for supervising the activities of staff to

ensure milestones are met, budgets and staffing resources are appropriately utilised and the

Section outputs contribute effectively to our goals and outcomes.

During the year, five Senior Executive Staff received performance bonuses totalling $64,685

and 20 employees received performance payments totalling $183,137.

At 30 June 2009, our Executive team comprised:

Steve McCutcheon – Chief Executive Officer

As Chief Executive Officer, Mr McCutcheon is responsible to the FSANZ Board for the efficient

administration of the agency and, in conjunction with the Board, for the corporate and

strategic directions of FSANZ. He is also an ex officio member of the Board.

Dr Paul Brent – Chief Scientist

As Chief Scientist, Dr Brent has executive responsibility for FSANZ’s scientific work, data

collection activities and development of collaborative relations with scientific institutions and

the program that evaluates the impact of our standard setting activities. He also coordinates

our scientific relations with international agencies, especially Codex.

Dr Andrew Bartholomaeus – General Manager

Dr Bartholomaeus is General Manager Risk Assessment, a role that gives him executive

oversight of the agency’s risk assessment activities involving chemical, microbiological and

nutritional analyses. He is also responsible for the agency’s work on food composition

analysis, dietary modelling and evaluations.



Melanie Fisher – General Manager

As General Manager Food Standards (Canberra), Ms Fisher is responsible for the risk

management functions associated with the development of food standards that primarily

address health and safety matters, including standards for the primary industries, as well as for

the agency’s social sciences, regulatory impact and economic analysis activities. In addition,

she has senior management responsibility for corporate services, including a library, human

resources and ICT functions and financial management. Ms Fisher is secretary to the Board’s

Finance, Audit and Risk Management Committee.

Dean Stockwell – General Manager

Mr Stockwell is General Manager Food Standards (Wellington). He is responsible for the risk

management functions associated with the development of food standards that address

labelling and information matters, food contaminants, food composition, food additives and

foods requiring pre-approval such as novel foods. He also has oversight of the agency’s

communications function. Mr Stockwell is the senior FSANZ representative in New Zealand

and is responsible for managing our relationships with consumers, industry, government and

other stakeholders in that country.

John Fladun – General Manager

As General Manager Legal and Regulatory Affairs, Mr Fladun has senior management

responsibility for FSANZ’s corporate governance arrangements. Mr Fladun also has oversight

of the agency’s Office of Legal Counsel and is FSANZ’s General Counsel.

Our Accountability

98 O U R A C C O U N T A B I L I T Y


Our Accountability

Objectives

• Ensure clear stakeholder understanding of our roles.

• Achieve best practice in our corporate governance arrangements.

• Establish and maintain a clear understanding of our responsibilities and accountabilities

in delivering statutory obligations.

Performance

• Level of compliance with statutory and other external reporting requirements.

• Extent to which our management reporting and planning processes track progress

against agency priorities.

• Effectiveness of cooperation between ourselves and our jurisdictional partners.

Highlights

• Met the reporting requirements of the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act

1997 and Section 152 of the Food Standards Australia New Zealand Act 1991.

• Received ‘satisfactory’ response from the Parliamentary Secretary on the quality and

timeliness of our briefings and advice.

• Received ‘Comprehensive’ ranking in the Comcover Risk Management Benchmarking

Survey 2009, placing FSANZ in the top quartile of risk management performance in the

Australian Government arena.

• Achieved administrative savings of $200,000 a year (ongoing).

• Developed a new Corporate Plan for the period 2009-12.

• Completed a framework for business continuity management in the event of

unforeseen and catastrophic circumstances.

99O U R A C C O U N T A B I L I T Y


Overview

Effective accountability depends as much on the quality of the planning capability and

business systems of an organisation as on its performance reporting.

Prior to each Federal Budget, FSANZ provides the Australian Government with proposed

strategic directions for the next year. These responsibilities are described in the Food

Standards Australia New Zealand Act 1991. The proposed strategic directions and supporting

activities appear in the annual Portfolio Budget Statements for the health and ageing portfolio.

Our annual report contains an account of FSANZ’s expenditure of public funds on the activities

described in the Portfolio Budget Statements. In addition, we provide information on the

outputs and outcomes that contribute to our overall performance as a national food regulator.

As part of its governance responsibilities, the FSANZ Board determines the long-term goals for

the agency, the more immediate strategic directions and the criteria that we use to assess our

performance.

These objectives and performance measures underpin the agency’s ability to demonstrate

compliance with statutory responsibilities – financial and non financial – and to assure

consumers, the food industry, our regulatory partners and other stakeholders (including the

Australian Parliament) that we discharge those responsibilities in a professional and objective

manner.

At the agency level, we are guided by the Corporate Plan. The Corporate Plan identifies the

main reporting areas for FSANZ’s work, as well as agency goals.

At an operational level, the planning process addresses corporate risk such as fraud, risks

posed by an innovative food industry, and emerging food safety risks to the food supply.

For example, is the industry about to unveil a new food production technology? Are there

pathogens or contaminants in overseas food markets that have the potential to enter Australia

or New Zealand?

Because we cannot plan in detail for such eventualities, we need to ensure that our processes

are sufficiently robust to accommodate such challenges and that our staffing regime has

the flexibility to form project teams with the necessary skills to provide expert advice when

required.

Business systems such as financial management, business continuity planning, asset control

and record keeping also play a significant role in enabling us to account for our performance.

During the year, for example, we used the results of detailed time recording of activities by staff

to generate information for our funding discussions with the New Zealand Government.



In our Corporate Plan, the Board has identified a goal of ensuring ‘clear stakeholder

understanding of our roles’. This aspect of accountability was discussed earlier in the

section Our Stakeholders. It has to do with expectations and perceptions. Without an

accurate understanding of what FSANZ is supposed to do, how can stakeholders judge our

performance?

Closer working relationships with jurisdictions, in particular, are proving beneficial in clarifying

our role and generating an informed appreciation for our capabilities.

For example, the National Food Incident Response Protocol has provided the agency with

opportunities to work collaboratively with enforcement agencies on risk assessments, risk

management and risk communication. Another example has been the collaborative work

between FSANZ and the Implementation Sub Committee to produce food standards and

implementation plans simultaneously, instead of in sequence. This has required a thorough

understanding of the roles of all participating parties.

In conclusion, therefore, we have sought to improve our accountability on a broad front during

the year. We value our reputation as a transparent organisation. This annual report is but one

link in the transparency chain.

Our roles and priorities

Section 13 of the Food Standards Australia New Zealand Act 1991 sets out twenty functions

ascribed to FSANZ. The primary function is to develop and review food standards. Other

functions include promoting consistency between domestic and international food standards

and, in consultation with States and Territories, coordinating the monitoring, surveillance and

enforcement of activities relating to food available in Australia.

Section 18 of the Act describes the objectives of the agency in ‘developing or reviewing food

regulatory measures and variations of food regulatory measures’. In descending order of

priority, FSANZ’s objectives are:

• the protection of public health and safety; and

• the provision of adequate information relating to food to enable consumers to make

informed choices; and

• the prevention of misleading or deceptive conduct.



In addressing these objectives, we must also ‘have regard’ to a number of issues:

• the need for standards to be based on risk analysis using the best available scientific

evidence;

• the promotion of consistency between domestic and international food standards;

• the desirability of an efficient and internationally competitive food industry;

• the promotion of fair trading in food;

• any written policy guidelines formulated by the Council for the purposes of this

paragraph and notified to the Authority.

These are the main legislative requirements governing FSANZ. The need to protect the health

and safety of the community through a safe food supply permeates all of our assessment

processes, our decision making and our planning. It shapes our prioritisation model and the

strategic directions set by the Board. It is the key measure by which our performance is judged.

FSANZ’s goal is to achieve a high degree of consumer confidence in the quality and safety

of food produced, processed, sold or exported from Australia and New Zealand; and an

effective, transparent and accountable regulatory framework within which the food industry

can work efficiently.

Within this legislative framework, we work within a tripartite food regulatory system, the other

two areas being the development of food policy and the implementation and enforcement of

food standards. We are bound by food policy guidance handed down by the Australia and

New Zealand Food Regulation Ministerial Council and must develop standards that are consistent

with this guidance. We must also review our regulatory decisions at the request of States,

Territories or the Australian or New Zealand Governments, through the Ministerial Council.

Our approaches and decisions, therefore, are under continual scrutiny. This scrutiny ensures

that our work does not deviate from our legislative responsibilities.

Stakeholders and regulatory partners

The first step in being accountable to stakeholders is to ensure that our roles are fully

understood. This is particularly important in our dealings with our regulatory partners –

national and State/Territory agencies – which use the provisions of the Australia New Zealand

Food Standards Code to ensure the safety of the food supply in the various jurisdictions.

During the year, our Executive team maintained a program of engagement with peak industry

organisations, senior officers in government agencies, CHOICE and other consumer groups,



public health associations and community activists. The emphasis of this interaction was to

not only explain our approaches to particular issues, but also to emphasise the limitations on

FSANZ for what it could and could not do.

Our aim was to help stakeholders to more accurately identify which components of the food

regulatory system could be of most assistance to them. We intend to continue this awareness

program into 2009-10.

Australian States and Territories

Under a 1991 Inter-Governmental Agreement between all Australian governments, the States

and Territories adopt, without variation, food standards recommended by the National Food

Authority (now FSANZ). The purpose of the 1991 agreement was to consolidate responsibility

for developing food standards in one specialist agency and to ensure the uniformity of food

standards across all States and Territories, which continue to have primary responsibility for

enforcing food laws.

The Australian Government and the States and Territories became signatories to this

Agreement on 3 November 2000. The Australian Parliament passed an amendment Act

setting up these new arrangements – including the creation of Food Standards Australia New

Zealand – on 1 July 2002.

More recently the Food Standards Australia New Zealand Amendment Act 2007, proclaimed

on 1 July 2007, resulted in changed requirements for applicants and shortened timelines for

FSANZ to process Applications. These new arrangements came into effect on 1 October 2007.

New Zealand

On 1 July 1996, a Treaty between Australia and New Zealand to establish a single joint food-

standards system came into force. The joint arrangement aims to harmonise food standards

between the two countries, reduce compliance costs for industry and help remove regulatory

barriers to trade in food.

The Treaty does not cover maximum residue limits, food hygiene provisions and export

requirements relating to third country trade. It also contains provisions that allow New

Zealand to opt out of a joint standard for exceptional reasons relating to health, safety, trade,

environmental concerns or cultural issues. In such cases, FSANZ may be asked to prepare a

variation to a standard to apply only in New Zealand.

The Treaty to develop joint food standards requires that FSANZ and the New Zealand Minister

of Food Safety conclude a funding and performance agreement. The performance agreement



details the services FSANZ is to provide and includes quarterly performance reporting, details

of New Zealand’s contribution and the payment schedule. Technical aspects of the Treaty are

presently being reviewed by the governments of Australia and New Zealand.

Requests under FOI legislation

In 2008-09, FSANZ received one request for access to documents under the Freedom of

Information Act 1982. That request was transferred to the Department of Health and Ageing

as the subject matter of the documents was more closely connected with that Department’s

functions.

FSANZ Service Charter

Our Service Charter is a document that sets out the service standards by which we wish to be

judged and describes complaints procedures that can be used by individuals or organisations

if they believe we have not met those standards. We received no such complaints in 2008-09.

Corporate governance arrangements

Government and Parliament

To ensure quality practices, efficiently managed workloads and the ability to meet our statutory

obligations, FSANZ has a number of policies and practices in place to handle the interaction

with Ministers, Parliamentary Secretaries and their offices, as well as Departments.

Most of our contact at Government level is with the office of the Parliamentary Secretary for

Health. This contact relates to information, Parliamentary-related functions and the provision

of public affairs support. We also provide the Parliamentary Secretary’s and Minister’s offices

with weekly ‘Hot Issues’ reports.

We use a number of quality control and evaluation measures to meet our obligations of

responsiveness to Ministers and Departmental requests for assistance or input. Our quality

control measures include the employment of a FSANZ Parliamentary Liaison Officer, policies

and protocols on the minimum classification level for the clearance and signing-off of

documents, and training of FSANZ staff on Parliamentary procedures, including attendance at

Question Time.



Table 15 shows that we completed 97% of Ministerial briefings and correspondence on time,

in line with our performance since 2006-07. We also provided input into correspondence on

a large number of matters relating to FSANZ responsibilities, the responses for which were

the responsibility of other Branches within the Department of Health and Ageing or other

departments.

Table 15. FSANZ Performance – Ministerial briefings and correspondence

Ministerial correspondence

Completed on time

1-2 days late

3-7 days late

8-14 days late

>14 days late

TOTAL for action

For info / no further

action

2008-2009168 4 1 0 0 173 24

97% 2% 1% 0% 0% 100%

2007-2008174 4 1 0 0 179 24

97% 2% 1% 0% 0% 100%

2006-2007134 3 3 0 0 140 29

96% 2% 2% 0% 0% 100%

Minutes

Sent Returned Unsatisfactory % Satisfactory or better

29 100%

Briefing Note Requests

Received Sent Late % Sent late

8 6 0 0%

Senate Estimates

Senior staff members were required to appear before Senate Estimates on two occasions

during the year (October 2008 and June 2009). Issues raised during the hearings included

safety and labelling of genetically modified food, testing of imported food, melamine

contamination of dairy products, labelling of isinglass in wine products, food colourings, safety

of novel foods, irradiation of pet food and Bisphenol A.



FSANZ Board

FSANZ has a 12-member Board appointed by the Australian Government Minister for Health

and Ageing, following consultation with the Australian, State, Territory and New Zealand

Governments. Members of the Board have been drawn from a number of areas of expertise

covering public health, food science, medical science, consumer policy, primary industry, the

National Health and Medical Research Council, the food industry and government.

All members are part-time, except for the Chief Executive Officer. Details of the qualifications

of Board members and their attendance at meetings are summarised in Appendix 11.

Directors are appointed for varying terms. The four year appointment term of the Chair, Ms

Philippa Smith AM, commenced on 1 July 2008, following the cessation of appointment of

the former Chair, the Hon Rob Knowles AO. On 1 July 2008, Ms Dianne Yates was appointed

for a four-year term to fill the vacancy created by the retirement of Mr Owen Symmans, one of

three New Zealand members.

The terms of Dr John Craven, Mr Peter Milne, Mrs Hikihiki Pihema and Dr Pamela Williams

ceased on 30 June 2009.

The CEO of FSANZ is an ex-officio member of the Board. Mr Steve McCutcheon was

appointed to the position of Chief Executive Officer on 29 October 2007.

The Board meets at least five times per year and also convenes through teleconferences to

discuss urgent issues. Five Board meetings and four Board teleconferences were held in

2008-09. Members also considered matters out-of- session. FSANZ provides secretariat

services to the Board and published outcomes of its meetings on its website.

FSANZ has well-established procedures in place to ensure that conflicts of interest issues are

addressed prior to Board consideration of any issue. A register of interests is maintained and

is available for public scrutiny on our website.

Finance, Audit and Risk Management Committee

Mr Peter Milne chaired the Finance, Audit and Risk Management Committee of the Board in

2008-09. The committee comprises three Board members. Other members of the Board

are welcome to attend as observers. In practice, most Board members and relevant senior

FSANZ staff attend these meetings.

The Committee has principal responsibility for overseeing FSANZ’s corporate governance

arrangements, including financial management, internal audit and risk management and

compliance systems. Specifically, the Committee helps FSANZ and its directors with



obligations under the CAC Act and provides a forum for communication between the

directors, the senior managers and the internal and external auditors.

It approves the three-year Strategic Internal Audit Plan (SIAP) and reviews the plan on an

annual basis based on a risk management analysis of our corporate arrangements and

advises the Board in relation to financial management within FSANZ.

Audits are conducted by an external provider, currently Ascent Governance Pty Ltd (Ascent).

The contract with Ascent spans three years and is due to expire in October 2009. To this end,

we issued a Request for Tender in April for the supply of the Internal Audit service to FSANZ

for the 2010-12 financial years, commencing 1 Janurary 2010. The preferred provider will

conduct a risk assessment of FSANZ business processes and develop a revised SIAP 2010-12.

We conducted two internal audits under the SIAP during the year: Project Management

within FSANZ and a Review of Internal Purchasing Processes. The Finance, Audit and Risk

Management Committee reported the outcomes of these audits to the Board.

Business planning and management

Fraud Control Plan

We met all of the requirements in the Australian Government’s Fraud Control Guidelines and

have undertaken a comprehensive fraud risk assessment.

FSANZ has an approved Fraud Control Plan which has been provided to the Australian

Federal Police and the Australian Institute of Criminology. To ensure best practice in fraud

risk mitigation, we have developed fraud prevention, detection, investigation, reporting and

data collection procedures and processes that meet our specific needs and comply with the

guidelines.

Comcover Risk Management Benchmarking Survey 2009

Comcover’s benchmarking program measures the effectiveness of an agency’s risk

management framework, practices and systems. The survey provides agencies with a

strategic overview of their performance in five key result areas (KRAs). We received an overall

score of 7.3 (out of 10) and, as such, are considered to be at the level of Comprehensive.

Our individual performance rating for each of the KRAs were: Risk Management Governance

(Advanced), Risk Sharing (Satisfactory), Business Continuity Management (Superior),

Communication and Training (Advanced) and Monitoring and Review (Advanced).



This result for FSANZ puts the agency in the upper end of the top quartile of risk management

performance in the Australian Government arena. As a result, Comcover reduced its insurance

premium for FSANZ for 2009-10 by 7.3%

Business continuity management (BCM)

FSANZ completed the development of a business continuity management process. Its

purpose is to provide a framework that enables FSANZ to rebound from any unplanned and

disruptive event, thereby providing continuity of service to key stakeholders and protection

for our reputation. Disruptive incidents can arise from accidents, criminal activity or natural

disasters.

In developing the BCM framework, we applied internationally accepted BCM practices,

including the identification of critical business functions, key business systems, processes and

resources supporting those functions, functional interdependencies and maximum acceptable

outages. We incorporated risk management and business analysis activities into the BCM

strategy and made provision for the ongoing testing, evaluation, updating and reporting of the

BCM plan and the overall framework.

From a whole-of-government perspective, however, FSANZ has been externally assessed as

‘not having critical Australian Government functions’. Nonetheless, business is an important

risk area for the agency. We have implemented a Chief Executive Instruction (CEI) that

provides strategic and operational direction should such an event occur. The CEI includes

individual plans which can be used in isolation – that is, Business Continuity Plan, Information

Technology Disaster Recovery Plan, and Business Continuity Plan (Pandemic).

As a result of the recent H1N1 influenza virus alert in mid-2009, we revised the Business

Continuity Plan (Pandemic) to ensure that it met all current requirements, including the WHO

and revised Australian Government phases of human influenza pandemic.

Chief Executive Instructions

As a CAC agency, FSANZ is not required to maintain Chief Executive Instructions (CEIs).

However, our CEOs have historically supported the development of CEIs as a means of

providing a framework for sound management and good governance practices.

We now have more than fifty CEIs in place, covering all aspects of our administration, including

general administration, financial controls, human resource policies, information technology

and security. During the year, we finalised a number of important CEIs and reviewed others

These included new CEIs on purchasing and procurement, security (physical and information

handling), and a new Information and Communications Technology Security Policy.



Purchasing (including asset management)

As part of its oversight and review of organisational risks, the Finance, Audit and Risk

Management Committee decided to replace a planned audit of financial statements with one

of purchasing and procurement procedures.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether FSANZ has an appropriate framework to

regulate procurement activity within the agency. The auditors found that FSANZ had a robust

procurement framework based on relevant current better practice guidance. They also noted

that their conclusions were consistent with that of the Australian National Audit Office during

their audit of financial statement in 2007-08.

Cost recovery

We have a number of business operations subject to cost-recovery arrangements. We

recover costs from Applications that have an exclusive capturable commercial benefit or

where applicants have opted to generate priority consideration of their Application. The cost

recovery arrangements are set out in the FSANZ Act and Regulations.

Record keeping

The maintenance of effective record keeping systems helps us to ensure that we are

openly accountable for our actions within the framework of ministerial responsibility to the

Government, the Parliament and the public.

Our Records Management Policy reflects the requirements of Australian Government

legislation and other official guidelines. Document management and storage is undertaken by

the Department of Health and Ageing under a Memorandum of Understanding that we have

negotiated for the provision of this service.

Review of administrative expenditure

We achieved administrative savings of $200,000 during the year, most of which will be

ongoing. Part of the savings came from lower activity levels such as in recruitment, but the

bulk of savings arose from using in-house capacity instead of contract labour – for example,

moving furniture or providing reception services.

The other main area of savings in accommodation has been in office lighting. Following a

comprehensive energy review of our premises, we negotiated an agreement with the building

owner to install energy efficient lighting. This has generated annual savings in electricity costs

of $16,500 as well as helping to reduce our carbon footprint by 21%.



Additional savings in electricity costs have been obtained from January 2009 by joining a

whole-of-government electricity contract managed by the Department of Defence. This

has provided savings of $1,800 or 4.2% on total electricity costs. Changing our cleaning

contractors, our recycling bin providers and our stationery suppliers resulted in further savings.

Consultants, competitive tendering and contractors

We spent $1.032 million on consultants and contractors during the year on services and

products costing more than $2,000 (see Appendix 9 for details).

Corporate planning

FSANZ and the Board maintain an annual planning schedule that addresses the Corporate

Plan, the Portfolio Budget Statements, the Business Plan and strategies for individual activities.

We involve all staff in planning activities for Sections and work projects. We also set aside time

in the schedule of Board members and the Executive to address strategic issues.

Corporate Plan 2009-12

During the year, we developed a new Corporate Plan to cover 2009-12. Through the

Corporate Plan, the Board sets the strategic directions for the agency. Board members have

extensive experience of private and public sector organisations and have a duty of care to

ensure that FSANZ acts within its legislative remit and to allocate its resources wisely. The

Board is also committed to excellence and quality in everything that FSANZ does.

Our Vision is ‘a safe food supply which supports the health of people in Australia and New

Zealand’. FSANZ’s role in the food regulatory system is critical to the maintenance of public

health and public safety and we are confident that, despite difficult financial times ahead, we

will be smart enough to continue to produce high quality standards in a timely way and meet

most stakeholder expectations most of the time.

The Corporate Plan 2009-12 provides the foundations of this process. It is structured

around four strategic imperatives (replacing the key result areas in previous plans):

Regulatory Standards, Stakeholder Relationships, People and Organisational Capability, and

Accountability. A supporting framework includes objectives, strategies and outcomes.



Priorities

The Board determined four key issues on which FSANZ should focus in 2009-10:

• the need for greater clarity of FSANZ role and scope;

• enhancing FSANZ performance in achieving regulatory measure goals;

• enhancing FSANZ relationships, engagement and communication with stakeholders;

and

• enhancing FSANZ’s reputation and credibility.

We appointed an Executive Sponsor to each issue so that they would be driven from the top

of the agency. We expect that agreed strategies will be finalised and implemented in 2009-10.

Performance measurement

As mentioned in the Corporate Overview section of this report, we will be changing our

reporting framework in 2009-10 from an outputs and outcomes approach to reporting by

program. Program 1.1 for FSANZ is ‘Food regulatory activity and services to the Minister and

Parliament’.

This program has three key strategic directions:

Manage the development and maintenance of effective evidence-based food standards

contributing to the provision of a safe food supply.

Ensure effective engagement with regulatory partners in the implementation of these

standards to protect the health and safety of Australians.

Strengthen engagement with industry, consumers and the general community to increase

awareness of the food regulatory system.

We will report against the deliverables for these key strategic directions in our 2009-10

annual report.

111A P P E N D I X 1 – F I N A L I S E D P R O J E C T S 1 J U L Y 2 0 0 8 - 3 0 J U N E 2 0 0 9


Appendix 1 – Finalised projects 1 July 2008 to 30 June 2009

Gazettal and registration on the Federal Register of Legislative Instruments of amendments

to the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code occurs throughout the year after the

Ministerial Council notifies FSANZ that it does not need to review its decision on a Standard

or a variation to a Standard; or if, after a Second Review by FSANZ, the Ministerial Council

accepts or amends the Standards or variation to a Standard. Each gazette is sequentially

numbered.

FSANZ gazetted (published) the following amendments to the Australia New Zealand Food

Standards Code relating to the following Applications and Proposals:

Amendment No. 100 (10 July 2008)

Application A592 – Food derived from Glyphosate-tolerant Soybean MON89788

To seek permission for food derived from soybean genetically modified to provide tolerance to

the herbicide glyphosate.

Application A606 – Asparaginase as a Processing Aid (Enzyme)

To seek the approval for a new enzyme preparation produced from a genetically modified

strain of Aspergillus oryzae for use in food production to reduce the risk of acrylamide

formation.

Proposal P272 – Labelling Requirements for Food for Catering Purposes and Retail Sale

To review the labelling requirements, limitations or exemptions for food for retail sale, food for

catering purposes, packaged meals provided by delivered meals organisations and meals

provided in hospitals and similar institutions.

Amendment No. 101 (14 August 2008)

Application A566 – L-5-Methyltetrahydrofolate, Calcium as a Permitted Vitamin Form of Folate

To allow L-5-methyltetrahydrofolate, calcium salt (L-MTHF) as a permitted form of folate in

Standard 1.1.1.

112 A P P E N D I X 1 – F I N A L I S E D P R O J E C T S 1 J U L Y 2 0 0 8 - 3 0 J U N E 2 0 0 9


Application A570 – Ferric Sodium Edetate as a Permitted Form of Iron

To amend Standard 1.1.1 to include ferric sodium edetate as a permitted form of iron.

Application A607 – Maximum Residue Limits (April, May, June 2007)

To amend maximum residue limits for a number of agricultural and veterinary chemicals.

Application A610 – Maximum Residue Limits (July, August 2007)


Application A612 – Maximum Residue Limits – Dimetridazole (Antibiotic)

To reduce maximum residue limits for the antibiotic dimetridazole.

Proposal M1001 – Maximum Residue Limits (September, October, November, December 2007)


A number of amendments relating to Editorial Notes were also made. These were originally

included in Proposal P1001 – Omnibus VII. An amendment to an Editorial note in Standard

2.2.1 is also being made.

Amendment No. 102 (3 October 2008)

Proposal P1001 – Omnibus VII (only Item [35] was gazetted)

To correct errors of minor significance or complexity (including typographical errors,

inconsistencies, misspellings, grammatical errors, deletions and corrections of Tables)

identified in the Code.

Amendment No. 103 (9 October 2008)

Application A540 – Steviol Glycosides as Intense Sweeteners

To approve the use of steviol glycosides (extract of the herb Stevia rebaudiana) in

various foods.

Application A589 – Food derived from Glufosinate Ammonium-tolerant Rice LLRICE62

To seek permission for food derived from rice genetically modified to provide resistance to the

herbicide glufosinate ammonium.



Proposal P1001 – Omnibus VII (except for Item [35] which was gazetted as part of

Amendment No. 102

To correct errors of minor significance or complexity (including typographical errors,

inconsistencies, misspellings, grammatical errors, deletions and corrections of Tables)

identified in the Code.

Proposal P1003 – Mandatory Iodine Fortification for Australia

To amend the mandatory iodine fortification Standard for New Zealand to create a joint

Standard for Australia and New Zealand. The Proposal reflects advice that iodine deficiency in

Australia is prevalent, warrants intervention and mandatory fortification is considered the most

cost-effective strategy.

Amendment No. 104 (4 December 2008)

Application A595 – Food derived from Insect-Protected Corn Line MON89034

To seek permission for food derived from maize genetically modified to provide protection

against Lepidopteran pests.

Application A1003 – Asparaginase from Aspergillus niger as a Processing Aid (Enzyme)

To permit the use of a new microbial source for Asparaginase sourced from a genetically

modified strain of Aspergillus niger for use in food production to reduce the risk of acrylamide

formation.

Amendment No. 105 (15 January 2009)

Application A552 – Cadmium in Peanuts

To increase the maximum level of 0.1 mg/kg for cadmium in peanuts to 0.5 mg/kg.

Proposal M1002 – Maximum Residue Limits (January, February, March 2008)


Proposal P306 – Addition of Inulin / FOS & GOS to Food

To permit and regulate the composition of added inulin / fructo-oligosaccharides (FOS) and

galacto-oligosaccharides (GOS) as nutritive substances in infant formula products, infant foods

114 A P P E N D I X 1 – F I N A L I S E D P R O J E C T S 1 J U L Y 2 0 0 8 - 3 0 J U N E 2 0 0 9


and supplementary foods for young children (this category mostly comprises toddler formula).

To consider added FOS as not being a nutritive substance in other foods.

Amendment No. 106 (12 February 2009)

Application A1001 – Food derived from Insect-protected Corn Line MIR162

To approve food derived from corn genetically modified to provide resistance to Lepidopteran

species.

Amendment No. 107 (30 April 2009)

Application A1004 – Phospholipase A2 as a Processing Aid (Enzyme)

To seek approval for a new microbial source for phospholipase A2 produced from a genetically

modified strain of Aspergillus niger for use as an emulsifier in bakery products, sauces and

dressings.

Proposal P1002 – Hydrocyanic Acid in Ready-to-Eat Cassava Chips

To include a Maximum Level for hydrocyanic acid in ready to eat cassava chips.

Amendment No. 108 (28 May 2009)

Application A490 – Exemption of Allergen Declaration for Isinglass

To seek an exemption from the requirement to label beer and wine for the presence of

isinglass under clause 4, Standard 1.2.3.

Application A594 – Addition of Lutein as a Nutritive Substance to Infant Formula

To seek permission for the addition of lutein as a nutritive substance in infant formula.

Application A597 – Addition of Lutein to Formulated Supplementary Foods for

Young Children

To seek permission for the addition of lutein as a nutritive substance in formulated

supplementary foods for young children.



Application A1011 – Cellulase from Penicillium funiculosum as a Processing Aid (Enzyme)

To seek approval of a cellulase enzyme complex produced by fermentation using a non-

toxigenic strain of Penicillium funiculosum as a processing aid.

Amendment No. 109 (18 June 2009)

Proposal P1008 – Code Maintenance VIII (only amendments to Editorial notes

were gazetted)

To amend the Code to correct minor errors, inconsistencies and ambiguities and to amend

food regulatory measures in the Code to maintain its currency and clarify certain requirements.

116 A P P E N D I X 2 – A P P L I C A T I O N S R E C E I V E D A N D P R O P O S A L S P R E P A R E D


Appendix 2 – Applications received and Proposals prepared

Before 1 October 2007

Section 69 of the Food Standards Australia New Zealand Act 1991 (as was in force prior to

1 July 2007) requires FSANZ to report on its processing of applications and proposals in the

following manner:

During 2008-09, FSANZ progressed 30 Applications received prior to 1 October 2007:

(i) 6 were withdrawn;

(ii) 1 was rejected by FSANZ;

(iii) 7 were finalised and notified to the Ministerial Council;

(iv) 6 were considered after a request for a review and notified to the Ministerial Council;

and

(v) 10 were still being progressed as at 30 June 2009.

During 2008-2009, FSANZ progressed 8 Proposals prepared prior to 1 October 2007:

(vi) 2 were abandoned by FSANZ;

(vii) 0 were finalised and notified to the Ministerial Council;

(viii) 0 was considered after a request for a review and notified to the Ministerial Council;

and

(ix) 6 were still being progressed as at 30 June 2009.

(e) Any occasion during 2008-09 that FSANZ, after preparing a draft standard or a

draft variation of a standard, failed to make a decision under section 18 of the

FSANZ Act (as was in force prior to 1 July 2007) within the period required under

section 35 (as was in force prior to 1 July 2007) and a statement of the reasons

for that failure:

117A P P E N D I X 2 – A P P L I C A T I O N S R E C E I V E D A N D P R O P O S A L S P R E P A R E D


Application A490 – Exemption of Allergen Declaration for Isinglass

(due 2 March 2009, completed 5 March 2009)

Due to the requirement to conduct targeted consultations after the close of public

submissions on the Draft Assessment Report, it was not possible to prepare the Final

Assessment Report for consideration by the Board in December 2008. The next available

opportunity for the Board to make a decision was in March 2009, three days past the statutory

completion deadline.

Application A597 – Addition of Lutein to Formulated Supplementary Foods for

Young Children

(due 25 September 2008, completed 5 March 2009)

At Final Assessment, the FSANZ Board noted the concerns of submitters, including

jurisdictions, that both the safety and benefit of lutein should be demonstrated for vulnerable

populations such as young children. Therefore, in the absence of Ministerial guidance, the

Board deferred its decision and requested that, in addition to safety, further consideration

be given to the physiological function of lutein and the potential for a health benefit from the

addition of lutein to toddler milks. Further information was also sought from the Applicant.

In addition, the delay also allowed for consideration of the European Food Safety Authority

scientific opinion on lutein which was published in November 2008.

(f) Extensions of time FSANZ granted under subsection 35(2) of the FSANZ Act

during 2008-2009 and the reasons for those extensions:

A609 (6 months) Approval was sought to manage the concurrent processing of this

Application and a related Proposal, Proposal P306, within statutory

timeframes.

(g) The number of applications made to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal during

2008-2009 for a review of a decision made by FSANZ.

Nil

(h) The results of the applications made to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal that

were determined during 2008-09:

Nil

(i) The number of standards made under the FSANZ Act during 2008-09:

16 (this includes both standards and variations to standards gazetted)



(j) The number of draft standards and draft variations approved during 2008-2009

under:

(i) section 18 of the FSANZ Act; or

7

(ii) subsection 26(1) of the FSANZ Act.

Nil

(k) The number of occasions during 2008-09 when requests were made under

section 21 of the FSANZ Act (as was in force prior to 1 July 2007) for a review of

a draft standard or draft variation:

7

(l) The number of occasions during 2008-09 when requests were made under

section 22 of the FSANZ Act (as was in force prior to 1 July 2007) for a review of

a draft standard or draft variation:

0

(m) The number of occasions during 2008-09 when a draft standard or draft variation

was rejected under section 23 of the FSANZ Act (as was in force prior to

1 July 2007):

Nil

(n) The number of occasions during 2008-09 when requests were made under

section 28A of the FSANZ Act (as was in force prior to 1 July 2007) for a review of

a standard or variation:

Nil

(o) The number of occasions during 2008-09 when requests were made under

section 28B of the FSANZ Act (as was in force prior to 1 July 2007) for a review of

a standard or variation:

Nil

(p) The number of occasions during 2008-09 when a standard or variation was

revoked or amended under section 28C of the FSANZ Act (as was in force prior

to 1 July 2007):

Nil



(q) A summary of policy guidelines notified to FSANZ during 2008-2009 under

paragraph 18(2)(e) of the FSANZ Act (as was in force prior to 1 July 2007):

N/A

(r) such other matters (if any) as are specified in the regulations:

Nil

Applications received and Proposals prepared from 1 October 2007 onwards

Section 152 of the Food Standards Australia New Zealand Act 1991 requires FSANZ to report

on its processing of applications and proposals in the following manner:

The number of applications that were made under section 22 during 2008-2009:

21

The number of applications accepted under subsection 26(1) during 2008-2009:

14

The number of applications rejected under subsection 26(1) during 2008-2009 and the

reasons for the rejections:

6

1 PA1013 – on the basis that it did not meet the mandatory format and information

requirements under subsection 22(2) of the FSANZ Act which are set out in Part 3 of

the FSANZ Application Handbook. The Admin Assessment does not consider the

merits of the Application.

2 PA1014 – on the basis that it did not meet the mandatory format and/or information




3 PA1017 – on the basis that it did not meet the mandatory format and/or information






4 PA1022 – on the basis that it did not meet the mandatory information requirements

under subsection 22(2) of the FSANZ Act which are set out in Part 3 of the FSANZ

Application Handbook. The Admin Assessment does not consider the merits of

the Application.




the Application.




the Application.

Number of Applications withdrawn in 2008-09 under subsection 24(1) during the

current year:

0

The number of applications accepted under subsection 26(1) during 2008-09 that the

FSANZ had not begun to assess under section 29 during 2008-09:

7

The number of applications accepted under subsection 26(1) during a previous financial

year that the FSANZ had not begun to assess under section 29 before the end 2008-

2009:

1

(a) the number of applications that were considered under Subdivision D of Division

1 of Part 3 during 2008-09:

12

(b) the number of applications that were considered under Subdivision E of Division


0



(c) the number of applications that were considered under Subdivision F of Division


2

(d) Health claims

N/A

(e) for each of those Subdivisions, the number of applications considered under

that Subdivision that were disposed of during 2008-2009 and the manner of their

disposal:

Subdivision D:

4 Approved

0 Withdrawn

0 Rejected

Subdivision E:

0

Subdivision F:

0

(f) for each of those Subdivisions, the average time taken to dispose of applications

during 2008-2009 (for Approval only):

Subdivision D:

8.5 months

Subdivision E:

N/A

Subdivision F:

N/A

The number of applications accepted under subsection 26(1) during a previous financial

year that FSANZ had begun to assess under section 29 before the end of the current



year, but that the FSANZ had not disposed of before the end 2008-09 and the period

that elapsed since the application was accepted under subsection 26(1)

1

A1005 16 months

A1006 14.5 months

(g) the number of applications made during 2008-09 in relation to which a charge

fixed under section 146 was payable

9

(h) the number of applications made during 2008-09 in relation to which no charge

fixed under section 146 was payable

5

(i) the average number of days that elapsed between the acceptance or rejection

under section 26 of an application made during 2008-09 in relation to which no

charge fixed under section 146 was payable, and the commencement of the

assessment of the application under section 29

N/A

(j) each occasion during 2008-09 on which the consideration period under section

109 elapsed without FSANZ completing the procedure that FSANZ must, under

Subdivision C of Division 1, adopt in considering the application

Nil

(k) each occasion during 2008-09 on which FSANZ extended the consideration

period under subsection 109(4), and the reasons for that extension

A1006 (6 months) FSANZ completed a comprehensive safety assessment of this

Application and no public health and safety concerns were identified.

However, as two new genes have been introduced into soybean

356043, the assessment also included consideration of the toxicity

of novel herbicide residues, N-acetyl glyphosate (NAG) and N-acetyl

aminomethylphosphonic acid (N-acetyl AMPA), which have not

been assessed previously by FSANZ. FSANZ therefore referred the

completed safety assessment to two external reviewers for peer

scientific review, which has extended the assessment period.



Also, given that the labelling of GM foods is contentious and under

public scrutiny, the issue of whether the compositional changes in

soybean 356043 warrant more extensive labelling demanded further

consideration. There was a need to debate the issue internally

to arrive at a consensus interpretation of the Standard. These

additional processes imposed delays in completing the

1st Assessment.

In addition, due to a major illness, the project manager was forced

to reduce normal working hours on this Application and the work

could not be re-allocated to other staff as FSANZ considered the

project manager was the most appropriate person to complete the

assessment due to her familiarity with a number of complex issues.

The number of applications declared under section 95 to be urgent applications during

2008-09:

0

(l) the number of proposals made by FSANZ under section 55 during 2008-09:

5

The number of proposals prepared under section 55 during 2008-09 that the FSANZ had

not begun to assess under section 59 during that year:

0

The number of proposals prepared under section 55 during a previous financial year

that the FSANZ had not begun to assess under section 59 before the end of 2008-09:

0

(m) the number of proposals made by FSANZ under section 81 during 2008-09:

0

(n) the number of proposals so made that were disposed of during 2008-09 and

the manner of their disposal:

4 Approved



(o) the average time taken to dispose of proposals under each of Subdivisions D, E,

F and H of Division 2 of Part 3 during 2008-09:

5 Months

(p) the average number of days that elapsed between the preparation of a proposal

during 2008-09 under each of sections 55 and 81 and the commencement of the

assessment of the proposal under section 59:

68 days

The number of proposals prepared under section 55 during a previous financial year

that the FSANZ had begun to assess under section 59 before the end 2008-09, but that

the FSANZ had not disposed of before the end of 2008-09 and the period that elapsed

since the proposal was prepared under section 55:

0

The number of proposals declared under section 95 to be urgent proposals during

2008-09:

0

(q) the number of applications made to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal during

2008-09 for review of decisions of FSANZ:

0

(r) the results of the applications made to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal that

were determined during 2008-09:

N/A

(s) the number of standards made during 2008-09:

9

(t) the number of draft standards and draft variations approved during 2008-09

under each of the following:

(i) section 33:

10

(ii)section 41:

0



(u) the number of occasions during 2008-09 when requests were made by the

Council under Division 3 of Part 3 for a review of a draft standard or draft

variation:

1

(v) the number of occasions during 2008-09 when a draft standard or draft variation

was rejected by the Ministerial Council under Division 3 of Part 3:

N/A

(w) the number of occasions during 2008-09 when requests were made by the

Council under Division 3 of Part 3 for a review of a standard or variation:

N/A

(x) the number of occasions during 2008-09 when a standard or variation was

revoked or amended by the Ministerial Council under Division 3 of Part 3:

N/A

In relation to applications or proposals declared to be urgent under section 95, either

in 2008-09 or in previous financial years, the number which were disposed of under

section 101 and the manner of their completion:

1

P1006 Standard re-affirmed

In relation to applications or proposals declared to be urgent under section 95, either

in 2008-09 or in previous financial years, the number of occasions where disposal did

not occur within 12 months of the date of effect of the publication of a standard under

section 97:

0

(y) a summary of policy guidelines notified to FSANZ during 2008-09:

Nil

(z) such other matters (if any) as are specified in the Regulations:

Nil

126 A P P E N D I X 3 – F S A N Z P R O C E S S E S F O R A S S E S S I N G A P P L I C A T I O N S


Appendix 3 – FSANZ processes for assessing Applications

PLEASE NOTE:

On 1 July 2007, the Food Standards Australia New Zealand Act 1991 was amended.

New procedures for the assessment of applications and proposals and mandatory

format and information requirements for applications to FSANZ to amend the Australia

New Zealand Food Standards Code came into effect on 1 October 2007. Applications

received and proposals prepared before 1 October 2007 continue to be assessed under

the ‘Old’ procedures. For any application received or proposal prepared from 1 October

2007, the ‘New’ procedures and application requirements apply.

Information on the new processes can be found on the FSANZ website at

www.foodstandards.gov.au/standardsdevelopment/.

FSANZ’s process for assessing applications

FSANZ’s primary role is developing or amending food standards to ensure the safety of

food sold in Australia and New Zealand, to ensure the provision of adequate information to

consumers and to prevent misleading or deceptive conduct.

FSANZ work is open for public scrutiny. When developing or changing a food standard, there

is generally at least one round of public consultation.

Anyone can make an application to change a current standard or develop a new food

standard or code of practice. FSANZ can also initiate the development or review of a standard

by raising a proposal. Both follow the same steps (as set out below). Guidelines on how to

make an application are available from our Standards Management Officer or from the

FSANZ website.

FSANZ continually looks at ways to improve its assessment processes. In recent years a

number of changes have been adopted to improve the format of reports and to place greater

emphasis on impact or cost-benefit assessment of regulatory options.

Copies of some public documents are available on our website. For access to all documents

on our Public Register, contact FSANZ’s Standards Management Officer in Canberra on

(02) 6271 2280 or email [email protected].

127A P P E N D I X 3 – F S A N Z P R O C E S S E S F O R A S S E S S I N G A P P L I C A T I O N S


For more information about the detailed matters to do with food standards development

contact FSANZ’s Standards Management Officer in Canberra on (02) 6271 2280 or email

[email protected].

The steps to amend the Food Standards Code are:

New Procedures

FSANZ has developed an Application Handbook which includes mandatory guidelines to

assist potential applicants. FSANZ is able to reject an application on the basis that it has not

met the mandatory information requirements set out in the Application Handbook.

The application requirements seek to address the shortcomings in the previous FSANZ Act

which provided little guidance about application requirements. Applications received by

FSANZ often do not contain sufficient information to enable them to be properly assessed.

This has often led to delays in assessments while FSANZ awaits further information from an

applicant to enable an assessment to proceed.

The Application Handbook also includes information covering cost-recovery, confidentiality,

application templates and minimum data requirements to complete an assessment.

Administrative Assessment

The purpose of this assessment is to determine whether an application includes certain

minimum mandatory requirements (as outlined in the Application Handbook) and the

Procedure by which it should be assessed. Fees are payable after FSANZ has determined

whether or not to accept the application and the assessment Procedure. FSANZ has 15

working days to complete this process. A report is prepared which is available to the public.

An ‘early bird’ public notification is subsequently made by FSANZ, advising of the acceptance

of the application and its placement on the Work Plan. Proposals are treated in a similar fashion.

Procedures for the assessment of applications and proposals

General Procedure (Default) (9 months to complete assessment) – This Procedure is the

default process for variations to a food regulatory measure and involves one round of public

consultation. Most applications and proposals will be assessed under this Procedure.

Minor Procedure (3 months to complete assessment) – This Procedure applies to

minor variations to food regulatory measures including, but not limited to, correction of a

typographical error or minor editorial changes. It involves one round of limited consultation

with government agencies only, and if relevant, affected parties.



Major Procedure (12 months to complete assessment) – This Procedure applies to the

development of a new Standard or a major variation to a food regulatory measure involving

such scientific or technical complexity that it is necessary to adopt this procedure in

considering it or such a significant change to the scope of the food regulatory measure that it

is necessary to adopt this procedure to consider the application. This Procedure involves two

rounds of public consultation.

Assessment

The purpose of this assessment is to determine whether to proceed to develop a food

regulatory measure. FSANZ will then either prepare a draft food regulatory measure

or variation or reject (in whole or part) the application, or abandon the proposal. In this

assessment, FSANZ must have regard to the s.18 objectives (see below) and other relevant

matters, including consideration of the benefits vs. costs or alternatives. A report is prepared

and publicly released for consultation Calls for public comment is made via the Food

Standards Notification Circular, email alerts to interested stakeholders and on our website.

The consultation process is undertaken in line with the Community Involvement Protocol and

varied according to the nature of the application or proposal. If an application or proposal

is being considered under the Major Procedure, the Assessment is carried out in two parts

(1st and 2nd Assessments) with an additional round of consultation between. The 2nd

Assessment Report includes proposed draft variations to the Code.

Approval

After the submission period, FSANZ must either approve, approve subject to amendment,

or reject the draft standard or variation. FSANZ must have regard to all submissions made

during the submissions period. A report is prepared containing the decision, reasons,

submissions list, analysis of submissions, Regulatory Impact Statement and draft food

regulatory measure or variation.

The report is publicly released. Advice on approvals is made via the Food Standards

Notification Circular, email alerts to interested stakeholders and on our website, as well as

in the newspapers. The newspaper notices appear nationally in The Australian and in New

Zealand, The New Zealand Herald.



Old Procedures

Initial Assessment

The Initial Assessment stage involves the development of an Initial Assessment Report which,

while providing some information to stakeholders, is used primarily to stimulate useful input

from stakeholders by raising issues and asking questions.

Public submissions are invited through the Food Standards Notification Circular, Food

Standards News and email alerts to interested stakeholders and on our website.

The consultation process is undertaken in line with the Community Involvement Protocol and

varied according to the nature of the application or proposal.

Draft Assessment

After considering any submissions, we make a Draft Assessment. To do this, we must take

into account our statutory objectives under section 18 of the FSANZ Act and consider any

relevant New Zealand standards and any other matters pertinent to the particular standard.

Section 18 Objectives

(a) The protection of public health and safety; and

(b) the provision of adequate information relating to food to enable consumers to

make informed choices and

(c) the prevention of misleading or deceptive conduct.

In developing or reviewing food standards, the Authority is also required to have regard

to the following.

(a) The need for standards to be based on risk analysis using the best scientific

evidence.

(b) The promotion of consistency between domestic and international food

standards.

(c) The desirability of an efficient and internationally competitive food industry.

(d) The promotion of fair trading in food.

(e) Any written policy guidelines formulated by the Ministerial Council and notified

to FSANZ.



At this stage of the process, FSANZ undertakes most of its standards work. A comprehensive

scientific risk assessment is undertaken, together with a regulatory impact analysis

(incorporating a cost or risk benefit analysis).

The Board considers the Draft Assessment Report and, if endorsed, it is released for public

comment. The Report is posted on our website and stakeholders advised of its availability.

The Report includes a draft proposed standard when the Board concludes that a new

standard or an amendment to a standard is warranted.

More public consultation

After a standards amendment is drafted, a second round of public consultation follows. The

proposed amendment is intended to become law, so any problems with the drafting should

be notified to us without delay. After considering any further public submissions, the Board

considers whether or not to approve the proposed amendment to the Code and the reasons

for the decision are included in a Final Assessment Report which is made publicly available.

Advice on the Final Assessment is made via the Food Standards Notification Circular, email

alerts to interested stakeholders and on our website, as well as in the newspapers. The

newspaper notices appear nationally in The Australian and in New Zealand, The New Zealand

Herald.

Ministers consider approved food standards

Decisions on food standards, once approved by the FSANZ Board under either the New or

Old Procedures, are notified to the Ministerial Council. Within 60 days of this notification, any

one jurisdiction on the Ministerial Council may ask FSANZ to conduct a First Review of the

standards.

Alternatively, the Ministerial Council may inform FSANZ that it does not intend to request

a review. In the latter case, the standards are gazetted in Australia and New Zealand and

registered as legislative instruments and become law at the date specified in a public notice.

Advice on gazettals is made via the Food Standards Notification Circular, email alerts to

interested stakeholders and on our website, as well as in the newspapers. The newspaper

notices appear nationally in The Australian and in New Zealand, The New Zealand Herald.

If the Ministerial Council requests a review, FSANZ must conduct the review within three

months (or a longer period if allowed by the Ministerial Council) and either re-affirm the

decision, with or without amendments to the standard, or withdraw its approval of the

standard.



Our decision is then notified to the Ministerial Council. The Ministerial Council, by a majority

decision, may then, within 60 days, request a Second Review or decide a further review is not

required. After a Second Review, the Ministerial Council may approve, amend or reject the

standard.

If the Ministerial Council amends or does not amend the standard, the standards are gazetted

in Australia and New Zealand and registered as legislative instruments and become law at the

date specified in a public notice.

Once the amendment becomes law, it is the responsibility of State and Territory Governments

and the New Zealand Ministry of Health to enforce the standard. AQIS is responsible for

enforcing standards relating to imported food.

132 A P P E N D I X 4 – E X T E R N A L F S A N Z C O M M I T T E E M E M B E R S


Appendix 4. External FSANZ committee members

FSANZ maintains a number of advisory committees, with members selected for their skills

and knowledge, drawn from a wide range of industry, academia, consumer interests and

government bodies. We gratefully acknowledge the contribution that the committee members

below have made to the standard-development processes of the agency.

Advisory Group for Catering Operations

Ms Catherine Bass New South Wales Food AuthorityLieutenant Colonel Dave Caldwell Department of DefenceLieutenant Peter Moy Department of DefenceMs Tenille Fort Department of Human Services, VicMr Brett Esbensen Department of Health, QldMs Eva Mehakovic Department of Health and AgeingMr Mike Orchard New Zealand Food Safety AuthorityMs Narelle Marro Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and ForestryMs Usha Sriram-Prasad Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Mr Barrie Paynter Department of Health, South AustraliaMr Gary Smith Department of Human Services, VictoriaMr Vojkan Stefanovic ACT HealthMs Tracy Ward Department of Health and Community Services, NTMs Sophie Williamson Department of Health, WAMr Stan Goodchild Department of Health, WAMr Anthony Ball ClubsAustraliaMr Jeremy Draper Australian Institute of Environmental Health Mr John Hart Restaurant and Catering AustraliaMr Bill Healey Australian Hotels AssociationMs Margaret Kearney ClubsVictoriaMs Lisa Murray Catering Institute of AustraliaMs Maureen Wilson Spotless Services LimitedMs Hean Bee Wee National Council of Women of Australia

Advisory Group for Dietary Exposure Assessment

Dr Raj Bhula Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines AuthorityMr Mark Cooper-Stanbury Australian Institute of Health and WelfareMrs Beverley Cumming Goodman Fielder (NZ)Ms Clare Hughes CHOICE

133A P P E N D I X 4 – E X T E R N A L F S A N Z C O M M I T T E E M E M B E R S


Mr Kim Leighton Australian Food and Grocery CouncilDr Jason Lutze Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines AuthorityMs Sally Mackay New Zealand Ministry of HealthMs Narelle Marro Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and ForestryAssociate Professor Winsome Parnell University of OtagoMr David Roberts New Zealand Food Safety AuthorityMs Bronia Rowe Department of Health and AgeingMs Jennifer Savenake Department of Health and Human Services, TAS Dr Pieter Scheelings Queensland Health Forensic and Scientific ServicesProf Wayne Smith Department of Health, NSWDr Lisa Szabo New South Wales Food AuthorityDr Richard Vannoort Environmental Science and ResearchDr Karen Webb University of Sydney

Advisory Group for Food Composition

Dr Jayashree Arcot University of New South WalesDr Geoffrey Annison Australian Food and Grocery CouncilMr Paul Armishaw National Measurement InstituteMs Jane Barnes FoodsenseMs Annette Byron Dietitians’ Association of Australia Professor Lynne Cobiac Flinders UniversityMs Marjolein Collins Home Economic AssociationMs Vicki Deakin University of CanberraMs Veronique Droulez Meat and Livestock Association Dr Andreas Dubs Australian Chicken Meat FederationMr Chester Goodsell Xyris Software (Australia) Pty LtdDr Heather Greenfield University of Sydney, UNSWDr Russell Keast Deakin UniversityDr Lucy Lesperance Crop and Food Research, NZMs Anne-Marie Mackintosh Heart FoundationDr Peter Nichols CSIRO Food Futures FlagshipDr Yasmine Probst University of WollongongMr David Roberts New Zealand Food Safety AuthorityDr Pieter Scheelings Queensland Health Dr Andrew Sinclair Deakin University

Dr Craige Trenerry Department of Primary IndustriesMs Julie Woods Monash University



Consumer Liaison Committee

Ms Belinda Allan Consumers’ Institute of New Zealand IncMs Jenni Butterworth ConsumerMs Eileen Clark ConsumerMs Anita Gatley Holiday Shoppe TakapunaMs Clare Hughes ChoiceDr Erin O’Connor Queensland University of TechnologyMr Hayden Potaka Te Kaahui o RauruMs Vicki Potter ConsumerMr Mark Robinson Australian Taxation OfficeMr George Seymour-Dearness ConsumerMs Heather Tate ConsumerMs Sharon Thorpe Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Office, VicMs Nicole Turner Durri Aboriginal Corporation Medical ServiceMs Hean Bee Wee National Council of Women Australia

Jurisdictional Forum

Mr Gary Bielby Queensland HealthMr Victor Di Paola Department of Human Services, VicMr Chris Etherton Department of Primary Industry and Resources, SAMs Tenille Fort Queensland HealthDr Nora Galway Australian Quarantine and Inspection ServiceMs Eva Mehakovic Department of Health and AgeingMr Bill Porter New South Wales Food AuthorityMs Jenny Reid New Zealand Food Safety AuthorityMs Jennifer Savenake Department of Health and Human Services, TasMs Usha Sriram-Prasad Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and ForestryMs Emily White Department of Health, SA

Retailers and Manufacturers Liaison Committee

Dr Geoffrey Annison Australian Food and Grocery CouncilMr Tony Beaver Food and Beverage Importers’ AssociationDr Roger Bektash Mars Food AustraliaMrs Tracie Brady Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and ForestryMrs Yvette Dethridge Australian Quarantine & Inspection Service Ms Kirsten Grinter Nestlé Australia LtdMs Jackie Healing Coles SupermarketsMr Barry Hellberg New Zealand Retailers Association



Mr Ken Henrick National Association of Retail Grocers of AustraliaMs Melissa Hodd Foodstuffs (NZ) LtdMr Ed Klim Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and ForestryMr Kim Leighton Australian Food and Grocery CouncilMs Janet Macdonald Goodman FielderMs Catherine McVitty Woolworths SupermarketsMs Eva Mehakovic Department of Health and AgeingMs Julie Newlands Unilever AustralasiaMr Steven Newton Metcash Trading LtdMrs Susan Pragassen Progressive Enterprises LtdMs Stephanie Rajczyk Nestlé Australia LtdMs Linda Ralph Mars Food AustraliaMs Katherine Rich New Zealand Food and Grocery Council Ms Nadene Smith Woolworths SupermarketsDr Robert Solomon Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and ForestryMs Usha Sriram-Prasad Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and ForestryMr BenjaminWard ALDI StoresMs Barbara Waugh Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Scientific Advisory Group for Epidemiology

Professor Graham Giles Cancer Council of VictoriaProfessor Neil Pearce Massey University Associate Professor Damien Jolley Monash University

Scientific Advisory Group for Folate

Professor Carol Bower Telethon Institute for Child Health ResearchMs Ingrid Coles-Rutishauser Coles and Rutishauser ConsultantsDr Vicki Flood University of SydneyDr Tim Green University British Columbia, CanadaDr Mark Lucock University of NewcastleAssociate Professor Tim Wilkinson PrincessMargaret Hospital, ChristchurchDr Fiona Cumming (observer) Therapeutic Goods AdministrationProfessor C. Murray Skeaff (observer) University of OtagoMs Ursula Egan (observer) New Zealand Food Safety Authority



Scientific Advisory Group for Infant and Child Health

Associate Professor Peter Davies University of QueenslandDr Pat Tuohy New Zealand Ministry of HealthDr Clare Wall University of AucklandAssociate Professor Maria Makrides Child Health Research InstituteAssociate Professor Mimi Tang Royal Children’s HospitalAssociate Professor Tony Catto-Smith Royal Children’s HospitalProf Paul Mitchell Westmead Hospital

Scientific Advisory Group for Iodine

Professor Basil Hetzel Women’s and Children’s Hospital, Adelaide International Council for Control of Iodine Deficiency Disorders

Professor Creswell Eastman International Council for Control of Iodine Deficiency

Disorders Professor Aidan McElduff Royal North Shore Hospital; University of SydneyProfessor Brian Priestly Monash University; Australian Centre for Human Health

Risk Assessment Dr Sheila Skeaff University of OtagoDr Michael Croxson Auckland City HospitalDr Fiona Cumming Therapeutic Goods AdministrationDr Geoff Marks University of QueenslandMs Jenny Reid (observer New Zealand Food Safety Authority

Scientific Advisory Panel for Dairy

Mr Steve Rice Dairy Authority of South AustraliaMr Doug Eddy Dairy Food Safety VictoriaDr Roger McBean Consultant/Parmalat AustraliaDr Martyn Kirk Department of Health and Ageing/OzFoodNetDr Patricia Desmarchelier ConsultantDr Rod Dyson Countdown DownunderMr Neil Willman Consultant CheesemakerDr Jenny Robertson Consultant/National FoodsMr John O’Regan Murray Goulburn Co-op LtdDr Robin Condron Dairy AustraliaMr Les Hammond Consultant CheesemakerDr Peter Van der Logt New Zealand Food Safety Authority



Scientific Advisory Panel for Eggs

Mr Glen Abbott Farm Pride Dr Peter Scott Scolexia Pty Ltd Dr Mark Veitch University of Melbourne Associate Professor Julian Cox University of New South Wales Mr Bernie Davis Consultant Ms Sharon Wagener New Zealand Food Safety Authority

Science Network Forum

Mr John Bates Queensland HealthMs Joanne Bobbitt Department of Primary Industries, VicMs Nola Caffin Queensland HealthMs Charlotte Channer New Zealand Food Safety AuthorityDr James Chin Department of Primary Industries, NSWMs Julia Clarke New Zealand Food Safety AuthorityMs Erica Clifford Department of Human Services, VicDr Roger Cook New Zealand Food Safety AuthorityDr Paul Dansted New Zealand Food Safety AuthorityMs Candy D’Menzie-Bunshaw Department of Human Services, VicDr Chris Etherton Department of Primary Industries and Resources, SA Ms Angela Gaw Department of Primary Industries, VicMs Janet Goodman New Zealand Food Safety AuthorityDr Heather Haines Department of Primary Industries, VicMr David Harris Department of Health, WADr Michael Hornitzky Department of Primary Industries, NSWMr Edward Jansson New South Wales Food AuthorityMs Leah Magee Department of Health and Community Services, NTDr Ian McKay Department of Health and AgeingMr Russell McMurray Department of Primary Industries, VicMr Steve Munyard PathWest Laboratory MedicineMr Terry Oughtred Department of Human Services, VicProfessor Brian Priestly Monash UniversityDr John Reeve New Zealand Food Safety AuthorityMs Jenny Reid New Zealand Food Safety AuthorityMs Jenny Savenake Department of Health and Human, TasDr Pieter Scheelings Queensland Health and Scientific ServicesMs Judy Seal Department of Health and Human Services, TasMs Catherine Seamer New Zealand Food Safety AuthorityMs Kathleen Shaw Department of Health and Human Services, Tas



Dr Wayne Smith New South Wales HealthDr Fay Stenhouse Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and ForestryDr Lisa Szabo New South Wales Food AuthorityMs Agnes Tan University of MelbourneMr Roger Toffolon Department of Primary Industries, NSWMr John van den Beuken New Zealand Food Safety AuthorityMr Paul Vanderlinde Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and ForestryMs Sophie Williamson Department of Health, WA

Social Sciences Expert Advisory Group

Professor Chris Ryan University of Waikato Management SchoolProfessor Carlene Wilson Cancer Council of South Australia; Flinders UniversityDr Phil Mohr CSIRO Human Nutrition Professor David de Vaus La Trobe University Associate Professor John Coveney Flinders UniversityProfessor Elspeth Probyn University of South AustraliaAssociate Professor Ken Reed Deakin UniversityProfessor Richard Shepherd University of Surrey, UKProfessor John Cary Institute of Sustainability and Innovation, Victoria University

Stakeholder Advisory Group for Evaluation

Ms Eva Mehakovic Department of Health and AgeingMr Mark Phythian Australian Quarantine and Inspection ServiceMs Usha Sriram-Prasad Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and ForestryMs Barbara Waugh Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and ForestryMr Ed Klim Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and ForestryMr Kim Leighton Australian Food and Grocery CouncilMs Claire Hughes ChoiceMs Nerida Bellis-Smith Dietitians’ Association of AustraliaMs Annette Byron Dietitians’ Association of AustraliaMs Carole Inkster New Zealand Food Safety AuthorityMargaret Brooker New Zealand Food Safety AuthorityMs Ursula Egan New Zealand Food Safety AuthorityMs Brenda Cutress New Zealand Food and Grocery CouncilMs Belinda Allan New Zealand Consumers’ InstituteDr John Huckerby Power Projects Limited and FSANZ Fellow



Standard Development Advisory Committee for Health Claims

Ms Olivia Lawton Department of Health and AgeingMs Usha Sriram-Prasad Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and ForestryDr Fiona Cumming Therapeutic Goods AdministrationMs Joanne Riddiford Australian Competition and Consumer CommissionMs Yvette Popovic New Zealand Commerce CommissionMs Jenny Reid New Zealand Food Safety AuthorityMs Janet Goodman New Zealand Food Safety AuthorityMr Michael Apollonov New South Wales Food AuthorityDr Fay Jenkins Department of Human Services, SAMs Claire Hughes ChoiceDr Rosemary Stanton OAM Coalition for Health Food SupplyMs Belinda Allan New Zealand Consumers’ InstituteMrs Katherine Rich New Zealand Food and Grocery CouncilMr Kim Leighton Australian Food and Grocery CouncilMs Juliet Seif Australian Self-Medication IndustryDr Mark Lawrence Public Health Association of AustraliaMr Alan Barclay Dietitians’ Association of AustraliaDr Gay Keating Public Health Association of New ZealandMs Josie Hill Australian Medical AssociationDr Tony Lewis Complementary Healthcare Council of Australia

Standard Development Committee for Dairy (Raw Milk Products)

Dr Anne Astin Dairy Food Safety VictoriaMr Bill Calder Western Australian Department of HealthDr Scott Crerar New Zealand Food Safety AuthorityMs Narelle Marro Department of Agriculture Fisheries and Forestry Mr Phil Pond Safe Food Production QldMs Jane Raupach Department of Health, SA; OzFoodNetMr Steve Rice Dairy Authority of South AustraliaMr Peter Sutherland New South Wales Food AuthorityMs Slava Zeman Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service Mr Doug Eddy Dairy Food Safety VictoriaDr Jenny Robertson Consultant Mr Neil Willman Cheese Expertise Ms Karen Armitage Dairy AustraliaMr Tony Beaver Food and Beverage Importers AssociationMs Helen Dornom Dairy AustraliaMr Ross Greenaway Murray Goulburn Co-Op Ltd



Mr Wes Judd Queensland Dairy FarmersDr Roger MacBean ConsultantMr John O’Regan Murray Goulburn Co-Op LtdMrs Denise Riches Goat Industry Council of Australia Mrs Lesley Young Country Women’s Association of Australia

Standard Development Committee for Eggs and Egg Products

Mr Bill Calder Department of Health, WADr Margaret Darton Department of Primary Industries, VicMr Glen Martin Department of Human Services, SAMr Paul Dowsett Department of Primary Industries and Resources, SAMs Karen Krist New South Wales Food AuthorityMr Jason March Department of Primary Industries and Water, TasMs Usha Sriram-Prasad Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and ForestryMr Phil Pond SafeFood QueenslandMs Kathleen Shaw Department of Health and Human Services, TasMr Russell Stafford OzFoodNet, Department of Health and AgeingMs Sharon Wagener New Zealand Food Safety AuthorityMs Tracy Ward Department of Health and Community Services, NTMr Ian Lyall Australian Quarantine and Inspection ServiceMr Glenn Abbott Farm Pride Pty Ltd, VictoriaMs Christene Cantarella McLean Farms, QueenslandMrs Ivy Inwood Free Range Egg & Poultry Association of Australia;

Queensland Egg Farmers Association IncMr James Kellaway Australian Egg Corporation LtdMs Azadeh Laghai SunnyQueen Pty LtdMr Paul Maher Pace Farm Pty LtdMrs Meg Parkinson Victorian Farmers Federation, Free Range Egg and

Poultry Australia LtdMr Paul Pace New South Wales Farmers FederationDr Peter Scott University of Melbourne; ScolexiaMr Con Tamvakis Micro-Range Farmers AssociationMr Steven Todd Southern Egg Pty LtdMs Mandy Tyack Golden Egg FarmsMs Rachelle Williams FSANZ Consumer Liaison Committee



Standard Development Committee for Meat and Meat Products

Dr John Dorian Australian Meat Industry CouncilMr Dougal Gordon Australian Lot Feeders AssociationMr Allan Bloxsom Meat and Livestock Australia LimitedMs Kate Joseph Sheepmeat Council of AustraliaMr Wesley Judd Australian Dairy Farmers LimitedDr Patricia Mitchell Australian Pork LtdMr Tim Juzefowicz Australian Renderers’ Association IncMr Michael Mulligan Australian Game Meat Producers Association Mr Robert Parkes Stockfeed Manufactures’ Council of AustraliaMs Denise Riches Goat Industry Council of AustraliaMr David Inall Cattle Council of AustraliaMr Peter Merrell Australian Quarantine and Inspection ServiceMr Ed Klim Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

(also representing SAFEMEAT)Dr Barbara Wilson SafeFood QueenslandMr Stan Goodchild Department of Health, WA Dr David Miles New South Wales Food AuthorityMr Brian Casey PrimeSafe, VicMr Brian Jones Department of Health and Community Care, ACTMr Chris Lyall Department of Primary Industries and Water, Tas Mr Geoff Raven Department of Primary Industries and Resources, SAMs Judy Barker New Zealand Food Safety AuthorityMrs Lesley Young Country Women’s Association of Australia

Standard Development Committee for Poultry Meat

Mr Chris Lyall Department of Primary Industries and Water, Tas Mr Brian Casey PrimeSafe, VicDr David Miles New South Wales Food AuthorityMr Phil Pond Safe Food Production Queensland(Mr Kerry Bell – Proxy) Safe Food Production QueenslandMr Martyn Kirk Department of Health and AgeingMs Narelle Marro Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Mr Stan Goodchild Department of Health, WAMr Geoff Raven Department of Primary Industries and Resources, SA (Dr. Margaret Sexton – Proxy) Department of Primary Industries and Resources, SA Mr Karl Fraser Game Farm Pty LtdMr John Houston Pepe’s Duck Pty LtdMr Tony Pavic Baiada Poultry Pty Limited



Dr Andreas Dubs Australian Chicken Meat FederationDr Margaret Mackenzie Inghams Enterprises Pty LimitedMr Gary Sansom Australian Chicken Growers’ CouncilMs Megan McGhie Bartter StegglesMs Clare Hughes Choice

Standard Development Committee for Seed Sprouts

Ms Catherine Bass New South Wales Food AuthorityMr Bill Calder Department of Health, WA(Mr Stan Goodchild – Proxy) Department of Health, WAMr Paul Dowsett Department of Primary Industries and Resources, SA Ms Katie Fullerton Dept of Health and AgeingMs Kira Goodall Department of Primary Industries, VicDr Olivia McQuestin Department of Health, TasMr Phil Pond Safe Food Production Queensland(Mr Brain Witherspoon – Proxy) Safe Food Production QueenslandMs Usha Sriram-Prasad Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry(Ms Narelle Marro – Proxy) Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and ForestryMs Marion Castle New Zealand Food Safety AuthorityMr Richard Bennett Horticulture Australia LimitedMr Andrew Boundy Australian Mungbean AssociationMr Alan Davey Rural Industry Research and Development Corporation Ms Michele van der Sander Parilla FreshMs Patricia Donald Healthy Sprout Company Mr Stephen Donnelly Grain Research and Development CorporationMs Alison Gallagher Woolworth LimitedMr Will Golsby Australian Seed Federation(Mr Tim Teague - Proxy) Australian Seed FederationDr Andreas Klieber Coles SupermarketsMr Andrew Phin Booborowie Seed Pty Ltd(Mrs Michele Phin – Proxy) Booborowie Seed Pty LtdMr James Rattray Flowerdale Sprout Farm Mr Rob Sanders Lucerne AustraliaMr George Seymour-Dearness Consumer

143A P P E N D I X 5 – F I N A N C I A L S T A T E M E N T S


Appendix 5 - Financial Statements

144 A P P E N D I X 5 – F I N A N C I A L S T A T E M E N T S


174 A P P E N D I X 6 – F U N C T I O N S A N D P O W E R S


Appendix 6 – Functions and powers

Food Standards Australia New Zealand is a statutory authority established by the Food

Standards Australia New Zealand Act 1991. The Act came into effect on 19 August 1991.

FSANZ is part of the Health and Ageing portfolio of the Australian Government and, on day-

to-day matters, is accountable to the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health and

Ageing, the Hon. Mark Butler, MP.

Sections 13 and 14 of the Act state:

Functions

(1) The functions of the Authority are:

(a) in accordance with this Act, to develop standards and variations of

standards, and to review standards and variations of standards; and

(b) in accordance with this Act, to develop codes of practice and variations of

codes of practice for industry and to review codes of practice; and

(c) to develop guidelines to assist the interpretation of the Australia New Zealand

Food Standards Code on its own initiative or in consultation with the States, the

Territories and any other body or person that the Authority considers appropriate;

and

(d) to promote consistency between standards in Australia and New Zealand with

those used internationally, based on the best available scientific evidence; and

(e) in consultation with the States and Territories, or on its own initiative, to facilitate the

harmonisation of State and Territory laws relating to food; and

(f) in consultation with the States and Territories, or on its own initiative, to co ordinate

the development of procedures required to implement requirements set out in

standards; and

(g) in consultation with the States and Territories, to co ordinate the monitoring,

surveillance and enforcement of activities relating to food available in Australia; and

(h) in consultation with the States and Territories, or on its own initiative, to conduct

research and surveys in relation to any of the matters that may be included in a

standard; and

175A P P E N D I X 6 – F U N C T I O N S A N D P O W E R S


(i) in co operation with the States and Territories, to develop food education initiatives,

including the publication of information to increase public awareness of food

standards and food labels; and

(j) in co operation with the Department administering Division 1A of Part V of the Trade

Practices Act 1974, to co ordinate the recall of food under that Division; and

(k) at the request of the States and Territories, to co ordinate action by the States and

Territories to recall food under State and Territory laws; and

(l) to develop assessment policies in relation to food imported into Australia; and

(m) to provide advice to the Minister on matters relating to food; and

(n) to participate in international, regional and bilateral negotiations on matters that

may be included in standards; and

(o) to make the Authority’s knowledge, expertise, equipment, facilities and intellectual

property available to other persons on a commercial basis; and

(p) at the request of New Zealand, to perform functions for New Zealand similar to the

functions that the Authority may perform in relation to the States and Territories;

and

(q) at the request of New Zealand, to perform functions for New Zealand similar to the

other functions that the Authority may perform; and

(qa)such other functions as are conferred on the Authority by this Act; and

(r) any functions incidental to any of the foregoing functions.

(2) The function conferred by paragraph (1)(o):

(a) can only be exercised:

(i) for a purpose for which the Parliament has power to make laws; or

(ii) to utilise the Authority’s spare capacity; and

(b) does not authorise the Authority to do something that would impede the Authority’s

capacity to perform its other functions.

176 A P P E N D I X 6 – F U N C T I O N S A N D P O W E R S


Powers

(1) The Authority has power to do all things necessary or convenient to be done in

connection with the performance of its functions and, in particular, may:

(a) enter into contracts; and

(b) acquire, hold and dispose of real or personal property; and

(c) occupy, use and control any land or building owned, or held under lease, by the

Commonwealth and made available for the purposes of the Authority; and

(d) engage persons to perform services for the Authority; and

(e) provide assistance to bodies or persons to prepare submissions:

(i) relating to the development or consideration of draft food regulatory measures or

draft variations of food regulatory measures; or

(ii) relating to the performance of any other function of the Authority;

if the Authority determines that such assistance will advance the development or

consideration of that draft or the performance of that other function; and

(f) accept gifts, grants, bequests and advances made to the Authority (whether on

trust or otherwise) and act as trustee of money or other property vested in the

Authority on trust; and

(fa) form, or participate in the formation of, companies; and

(fb) subscribe for or purchase shares in, or debentures and other securities of,

companies; and

(fc) participate in partnerships, trusts and unincorporated joint ventures; and

(g) do anything incidental to any of its powers.

(2) The powers of the Authority may be exercised within or outside Australia.

177A P P E N D I X 7 – C U R R E N T P U B L I C A T I O N S


Appendix 7 – Current publications

All publications are available from the FSANZ website, www.foodstandards.gov.au, and

limited hard copies of certain publications are available from the Information Officer.

Please note that the hard copy of the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code and User

Guides are available from Anstat Pty Ltd at http://www.anstat.com.au/legislation/

or on 03 9278 1144.

Title Description

A guide to meeting the standard drink-labeling requirement for alcoholic beverages

This guide is to assist alcoholic beverage manufacturers and importers meet the requirement to label each container with the number of standard drinks in the container. This includes bottles, cans, and casks.

Published 1995, still current.

Allergen Cards Allergen information cards for egg, soy, wheat, peanuts, sesame, tree nuts, fish, shellfish and milk developed by Anaphylaxis Australia with funding from FSANZ and the NSW Food Authority.

Annual Report A report to the Australian Parliament on FSANZ’s activities for the year. Annual publication

AUSNUT Australian Food and Nutrient Database. AUSNUT is FSANZ’s first ever data release on CD Rom. The AUSNUT CD contains a set of 7 inter-related data files and explanatory notes that contain a wealth of descriptive and numerical data on the food and nutrient composition of Australian foods.

First published 1999.

Contact the Information Officer for more information.

Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code This document contains food standards (regulations) that apply to food businesses in Australia and New Zealand. Compliance with the standards is mandatory.

Available in loose-leaf form by subscription from Anstat and from website free-of-charge.

Australian Total Diet Study (formerly the Australian Market Basket Survey)

This study monitors pesticide and contaminant residues present in food and estimates their intake in the diets of Australians. FSANZ uses this information when developing food standards.

19th ATDS published April 2001

20th ATDS published January 2003

21st ATDS Latest edition released August 2005

178 A P P E N D I X 7 – C U R R E N T P U B L I C A T I O N S


Title Description

Choosing the Right Stuff - the official shoppers’ guide to food additives and labels, kilojoules and fat content.

Available from Murdoch Books or from major booksellers, newsagents or supermarkets

May 2007

Code of practice on nutrient claims in food labels and in advertisements (CoPoNC)

The code of practice provides ensure provision of consistent and accurate information about Nutrient content of foods. It provides a basis for self-regulation of nutrient claims by the food Industry. Published January 1995. Under review and available from website only.

Corporate Plan The corporate plan sets out FSANZ’s strategic directions over a three-year period. Latest edition 2009-2012.

Printed August 2009.

Equivalence: Guidelines for determining the equivalence of food safety measures

Guidelines drafted by FSANZ for determining the equivalence of food safety measures in a consistent and transparent manner.

Published May 2002.

Updated and published November 2003

Evaluating benefits and costs of food regulation: a scoping study

A study examining the feasibility of developing an econometric model that would quantify the impact of food regulation on the economy

Published March 2002

Food safety general fact sheets

• New Food Safety Standards for Australia

• Food Safety Standard 3.1.1 Interpretation and Application

• Food Safety Standard 3.2.1 Food Safety Programs

• Food Safety Standard 3.2.2 Food Safety Practices and General Requirements

• Food Safety Standard 3.2.3 Food Premises and Equipment

• Food Safety Standards – Definitions

• State & Territory enforcement of the Food Safety Standards

• Food Safety Standards – Sources of information & advice

For business and enforcement agencies.

Published May 2001.

Updated June 2004.

Also available from States and Territories



Title Description

Food safety facts sheets for charities and community organisations

• An introduction to new Food Safety Standards

• Notification

• Skills and knowledge

• Labelling

• Temperature control

• Sausage sizzles and barbecues

• Preparing and cooking food

• Transporting food

• Camping

• Health and hygiene for food handlers

Easy to use fact sheets for charities and community organizations to help explain the new food safety requirements

Published August 2002.

Feedback and complaints A brochure explaining our feedback and complaints process.

Published April 2001

Folic Acid and Pregnancy brochure A brochure for women planning pregnancy about the need to consume folic acid.

Printed June 2006

Food Industry Recall Protocol This booklet is a step-by-step guide to carrying out food recalls. It explains what must be done when food products have to be recalled from shops or consumers for health and safety reasons.

First published June 1994.

Latest edition 5th September 2002

and print rerun June 2004, September 2008

Food labels: What do they mean? (Poster) A full colour A2 poster explaining the changes to food labels.

First published October 2001.

Print reruns 2002, 2003, 2004.

Updated 2007.

Food Safety Standards – costs and benefits A report of the regulatory impact of the proposed national food safety reforms on the food industry and state, territory and local government.

Published 1999.



Title Description

Food Safety Standards 3.1.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3

Booklet Chapter 3 of the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (Australia only) including 3.1.1 Interpretation and Application; 3.2.2 Food Safety Practices and General requirements; 3.2.3 Food Premises and Equipment.

Published March 2001 Available from Anstat at cost

Food Safety Standards Food Safety programs Booklet. Chapter 3 of the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (Australia only) Standard 3.2.1 Food Safety Programs.

Published March 2001.

Food Safety Standards for Food Businesses in Australia

Brochure outlining the three food safety standards that apply to food businesses in Australia.

Published April 2001.

Food Safety: Framework for the Development of Food Safety Program Tools

A guide to the production of practical, easy-to-use tools for food businesses.

Published July 2001

Food Safety: An Audit System. An information paper outlining an audit system developed for the purpose of auditing food safety programs

Published January 2001

Food Safety: Guidance for food safety auditors Information on compliance assessment of Food Safety Programs and Food Safety Standards.

Published October 2001.

Food Safety: Guidelines for the microbiological examination of ready-to-eat foods

This document provides assistance in the interpretation of microbiological analyses of foods.

Published December 2001.

Food Safety: Skills and knowledge for food businesses

Booklet on skills and knowledge requirement of Food Safety Standard 3.2.2.


Food Safety: Temperature control of potentially hazardous foods

Booklet on the temperature control requirements of standard 3.2.2.


Food Safety: The priority classification system for food businesses

A risk based system designed to classify food businesses into priority ratings based on the risk they present to public health and safety. This information paper outlines the system and describes how to apply it to food businesses.

Published January 2001



Title Description

Food Standards News A quarterly newsletter about the key issues and significant projects undertaken by FSANZ.

First published as ANZFA News May 1998.

Published as Food Standards News from Feb 2001.

Available by email,.

Food Surveillance News A quarterly publication co-coordinating microbiological and other food safety studies from the States and Territories

First published Spring 2001.

Available by email.

FSANZ Evaluation Strategy 2004 – 2008

Outlines the strategy for undertaking a scientific and technical evaluation of new key food regulatory measures developed by Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ).

Published May 2004.

GM Foods FSANZ’s safety assessment process for genetically modified foods Replaces previous publication ‘GM foods and the Consumer’ (2000)

Published June 2005; Released August 2005

Listeria and Food brochure. An easy-to-read brochure which explains how to reduce the risk of contracting the Listeria infection – specifically advice for people at risk – pregnant women, their unborn and newborn children, older people (65 years and older), or the immuno-compromised. The brochure sets out foods which are safe and those at ‘higher risk’ of Listeria contamination.

This brochure replaces the Listeria and Pregnancy brochure released in June 2001.

Printed July 2004 Reprinted June 2005.

Listeria Recall Guidelines for Packaged Ready-to-Eat foods

Recall Guidelines for Packaged Ready-to-eat foods found to contain L. monocytogenes.


Mercury in Fish brochure and fact sheet Mercury in fish brochure contains information on the recommended portions of fish that should be consumed by various sectors of the population. Further Information fact sheet also provides more detailed information on the consumption of certain species of fish.




Title Description

NUTTAB NUTTAB 2006 is an updated food composition publication containing data on the nutrient content of foods available in Australia.

Nutrition information panel calculator A database to allow industry to calculate NIPs

Released August 2001.

Public Health and Safety of Poultry Meat in Australia

This Explanatory Summary provides an overview of the Scientific Assessment of the Public Health and Safety of Poultry Meat in Australia undertaken by Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ).

Published 2006

The Analysis of Food-Related Health Risks Publication providing information on the risk analysis process used by FSANZ to identify, assess and manage food-related health risks within a structured framework.

February 2009

Safe Food Australia 2nd Edition January 2001 (A Guide to the Food Safety Standards)

This book contains Chapter 3 of the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (Applies to Australia only). The guide had been prepared to assist with the interpretation of three of the food safety standards in Chapter 3 of the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code. They are: 3.1.1 Interpretation and Application; 3.2.2 Food Safety Practices and General requirements; 3.2.3 Food Premises and Equipment

Available from Anstat at cost and from the website free-of-charge.

Safety Aspects of Dietary Caffeine – Report from the Expert Working Group

Report on examination on the wider aspects of the safety of dietary sources of caffeine.

Published June 2000.

Scientific Evaluation of Pasteurisation for Pathogen Reduction in Milk and Milk Products

Published May 2007.

Science Strategy 2006-09 Published 2006

Service Charter A pamphlet to describing FSANZ’s role and commitment to service.

Published May 2004



Title Description

Food Safety Technical Fact Sheets

• Food handling skills and knowledge Food business notification requirement Health and hygiene: Responsibilities of food handlers

• Health and hygiene: Responsibilities of food businesses

• Receiving food safely

• Food recall systems for unsafe foods

• Thermometers and using them with potentially hazardous food

• Temperature control requirements

A series of fact sheets for food businesses.

The Food Safety Fact Sheets are also available (website only) in the following languages: Arabic, Cambodian, Chinese, Croatian, Greek, Hindi, Italian, Indonesian, Macedonian, Serbian, Spanish, Filipino/Tagalog, Thai, Turkish and Vietnamese.

Published May 2001

Technical Report Series

1. Phomopins in Food: Toxicological Review and Risk Assessment

2. Pyrrolizidine Alkaloids in Food: A Toxicological Review and Risk Assessment

3. Lupin Alkaloids in Food: A Toxicological Review and Risk Assessment

4. Food Derived from High Oleic Acid Soy Bean Lines G94-1, G94-19 and G168: A Toxicological Review and Risk Assessment

5. Food derived from Insect Protected Corn Line MON810: A Safety Assessment

6. Food Derived from Glyphosate-Tolerant Cotton Line1445: A Safety Assessment

7. Food Derived from Glyphosate-tolerant Corn Line GA21: A Safety Assessment

8. Food Derived from Glyphosate-tolerant Corn Line GT73: A Safety Assessment

9. Food Produced from Insect-Protected Bt-176 Corn: A Safety Assessment

10.Food Derived from Insect-Protected, Herbicide Tolerant Corn Bt-11: A Safety Assessment

11.Food Derived from Insect-Protected (New leaf R) Potato Lines BT-06, ATBT04, ATBT04-36, SPBT02-05: A Safety Assessment

A series of scientific and technical papers.

Technical Series 1 – 14, published March 2002.

Technical Series 15 - 27, published June 2003

Technical Series 27 – 34, published 2004

Technical Series 35, published June - December 2004

Technical Series 36, published January 2006

Technical Series 37 – 43, published June 2006

Technical Series 44, published March 2007



Title Description

Technical Report Series (cont’d)

12.Food Derived from Insect and Potato Leafroll Virus Protected (New leaf R plus) Potato Lines RBMT21-129, RBMT21-350, RBMT22-83: A Safety Assessment

13.Food Derived from Insect and Potato Virus Y-Protected (New Leaf R Y) Potato Lines RBMT15-101, SEMT15-02, SEMT15-16: A Safety Assessment

14.Shellfish Toxins in Food: A Toxicological Review and Risk Assessment

15.Chloropropanols in food - An analysis of the public health risk

16.Oil derived from glufosinate-ammonium tolerant and pollination controlled canola - A Safety Assessment

17.Food derived from bromoxynil-tolerant cotton transformation events 10211 and 10222 - A Safety Assessment

18.Food derived from insect-protected and glufosinate ammonium-tolerant DBT418 corn - A Safety Assessment

19.Food derived from bromoxynil-tolerant canola line Westar-oxy-235 - A Safety Assessment

20.Monosodium Glutamate (MSG) - A Safety Assessment

21.Erucic acid in Food - A Toxicological Review and Risk Assessment

22.DHASCO and ARASCO oils as sources of long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids in infant formula - A Safety Assessment

23.Food derived from glufosinate ammonium tolerant corn line T25 - A Safety Assessment

24.Food produced from glyphosate-tolerant sugar beet Line 77 - A Safety Assessment

25.Food produced from glyphosate-tolerant corn line NK603 - A Safety Assessment

26.Listeria monocytogenes in cooked prawns - A Microbiological Survey report

27.Dioxins in food: Dietary Exposure Assessment and Risk Characterisation











Title Description

Technical Report Series (cont’d)

28.Cyanogenic Glycosides in Cassava and Bamboo Shoots: A Human Health Risk

29.D-Tagatose: A Human Health Risk Assessment

30.Kava: A Human Health Risk Assessment

31.Nitrofurans in Prawns: A Toxicological Review and Risk Assessment

32.Food derived from Insect-Protected and Glufosinate-Ammonium tolerant Corn Line 1507: A Safety Assessment

33.Food derived from Glufosinate Ammonium Tolerant Soybean Lines A2704 -12 and A5547 -127: A Safety Assessment

34.Food derived from Insect-Protected Mon863 Corn: A Safety Assessment

35.Association between Johne’s Disease and Crohn’s Disease: A Microbiological

36.Evaluation of the risks to human health from the consumption of food products derived from cerids affected by chronic wasting disease

37.Food derived from glyphosate-tolerant sugar beet line H7-1: A Safety Assessment

38.Food derived from insect-protected cotton line COT102: A Safety Assessment

39.Food derived from insect-protected, glufosinate ammonium-tolerant corn line DAS-59122-7: A Safety Assessment

40.Food derived from insect-protected, glufosinate ammonium-tolerant cotton line MXB13: A Safety Assessment

41.Food derived from glusfosinate ammonium tolerant cotton line LL25: A Safety Assessment

42.Ice structuring protein as a processing aid in ice cream and edible ices: A Safety Assessment

43.Dioxins in Seafood from Sydney Harbour A Revised Assessment of the Public Health and Safety Risk

44.Dioxins in Prawns and Fish from Sydney Harbour - An Assessment of the Public Health and Safety Risk(updated)











Title Description

The National Food Business Notification System – Information for State and Local Governments

A paper developed by the National Food Business Notification System Working Group, coordinated by ANZFA/FSANZ. Published June 2001.

User guides:

1. Overview of Food Labelling

2. Legibility Requirements for Food Labels

3. Information Requirements for Foods Exempt from Bearing a Label

4. Warning and Advisory Declarations

5. Ingredient Labelling

6. Food Additives

7. Microbiological Limits for Foods

(with additional guideline criteria)

8. Generally Expected Levels (GELs) for Metal Contaminants

9. Methods of Analysis for Food

10.Percentage labelling

11.Nutrition Information labelling

12.Date marking

13.Meat and meat products

14.Flavourings and flavouring enhancers

15.Safe Food Australia

16.Country of Origin Labelling of Food. A Guide to Standard 1.2.11 – Country of Origin Requirements (Australia Only)

17.Safe Seafood Australia

18.Food Safety Programs - A guide to Standard 3.2.1 Food Safety Programs

19.A guide to Standards 3.3.1 - Food Safety Programs for Food Service to Vulnerable Persons Mandatory Iodine Fortification User Guide

20.Mandatory Folic Acid Fortification User Guide’

21.guide to Standard 4.2.4 -Primary Production and Processing Standard for Dairy Products -Part 1: Dairy Primary Production Requirements

22.Part 2: Dairy Collection and Transport Requirements

23.Part 3: Dairy Processing

FSANZ Guidelines to assist industry and enforcement agencies with the interpretation and application of the joint code.

Published July 2001.

Available in loose-leaf form by subscription from Anstat



Title Description

Evaluation Report Series

1. National Food Handling Benchmark Survey - Documents research on the awareness and knowledge of safe food handling practices and actual food handling practices by food businesses within Australia.

2. Survey Report: Food Labelling Issues: Qualitative Research with Consumers - Qualitative research on labelling issues.

3. Food Labelling Issues: Qualitative research with stakeholders other than consumers - Qualitative research on labelling issues.

4. Consumer Food Labelling survey - Quantitative research on labelling issues, Includes CD with PowerPoint presentation of results. Printed June 2003

5. Food Labelling Issues: Qualitative consumer study related to food-type dietary supplement labelling - A study conducted to gain qualitative information on food-type dietary supplement labelling from consumers to assist FSANZ in the future development and review of food labelling standards, codes of practice and guidelines.

6. Food Labelling Issues: Qualitative consumer study related to nutrition content claims on food labels - A study conducted to gain qualitative information on nutrient content claims on food labels from consumers to assist FSANZ in the future development and review of food labelling standards, codes of practice and guidelines.

7. Food Labelling Issues: Quantitative consumer survey related to allergen labelling on food products - Allergen Labelling Standard, an assessment of the impact on consumers.

8. Quantitative research into the consumption of intense sweeteners in the Australian and New Zealand Populations - Food Additive Standards, an assessment of the impact on consumers. Published February 2004.

9. Food Labelling Issues: Qualitative consumer study related to food labelling of infant foods - Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) has undertook a review (Proposal P274) of the minimum age labelling so that infant food labelling reflects the revised Australian guidelines, and also takes into account New Zealand policy. Published February 2004.


Evaluation Series 1 & 2, published December 2001.

Evaluation Series 3, published June 2002.


Evaluation Series 5 & 6, published July 2003.

Evaluation Series 7 – 9, published February 2004.

Evaluation Series 10, published February 2005.


Evaluation Series 12, published 2005.

Evaluation Series 13, published September 2005.

Evaluation Series 14, published October 2005.

Evaluation Series 15, published May 2006.




Title Description

Evaluation Report Series (cont’d)

10. Food Labelling Monitoring Survey: Phase 1 Pilot Report (Incorporating Stages 1 and 2) - As part of the FSANZ Evaluation Strategy 2001-2003, a Food Label Monitoring Survey was initiated in mid 2002 with the intention of developing an ongoing monitoring system for food labels.

11. Benchmark Research of the Poultry Industry - FSANZ have identified the need for benchmark data on awareness, knowledge and behaviour of poultry meat businesses, government enforcement officers and consumers in relation to food safety issues.

12. Food Labelling Issues: Qualitative research on participants’ perceptions and use of nutrition, health and related claims on packaged foods and associated advertising material

13. Food Labelling Issues: Quantitative research on consumers’ perceptions and use of nutrition, health and related claims on packaged foods - This research project collected baseline data from consumers before Standard P293 for nutrition, health and related claims was finalised and will be useful both for the development of the standard and for future evaluation purposes.

14. Food Labelling Issues: On-going Food Label Monitoring Survey in Australia and New Zealand - Report on the re-assessment of 2003 labels for nutrition, health and related claims ( Phase 2, Part C)

15. Benchmark research on the impact of labelling and compositional standards in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code on Food Industry, Enforcement Agencies and Health Professionals - The study aimed to evaluate how appropriate the labelling and compositional standards in the new Code were with respect to the needs of stakeholders that were identified in the review of the old regulations in respect to a food regulation system.

16. Report on the Assessment of 2005 Labels for Nutrition, Health and Related Claims - Label monitoring surveys have been commissioned by FSANZ since 2002 to assess how food manufacturers are managing key labelling requirements set out in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (the Code). Correct labelling is considered an important means for FSANZ to achieve one of its objectives of ensuring consumers have adequate information on food labels to assist them to make an informed choice.
















Title Description

Evaluation Report Series (cont’d)

17 On-going Food Label Monitoring Survey in Australia and New Zealand No - Report ‘Assessment of 2005 Labels for Key Mandatory Labelling Elements for Consistency against Labelling Provisions (Phase 2 Report)

18 On-going Food Label Monitoring Survey in Australia and New Zealand - Report on the Assessment on 2006 labels for key mandatory Labelling elements for consistency against labelling provisions (Phase 2 report)

19 2007 National Food Handling Survey














Consumer Attitudes Survey Consumer Attitudes Survey 2007 - A benchmark survey of consumers’ attitudes to food issues.

Safe Food for all A2 Poster / brochure on the clearance processes in the food industry from producer to consumer. Includes contact details of organisations involved in Australia.

Printed 2004

Safe Seafood Australia A Guide to the Primary Production and Processing Standard for Seafood (Australia only)

- Standard 4.2.1

1st Edition Published June 2005

Fact Sheets 2008/2009

Nutrition Claims (June 2009)

Food irradiation (June 2009)

Cereal-based beverages including rice and oat drinks (June 2009)

Bisphenol A (BPA) and food packaging (March 2009)

How much sodium and salt are we eating? (May 2009)

H1N1 Influenza 09 (Human Swine Influenza) and Food (May 2009)

National approach to managing meat safety in Australia (April 2009)

Fact sheets on particular food issues relevant to the year.

Available on website only.



Title Description

Fact Sheets 2008/2009 (cont’d)

National food safety standard for eggs and egg products - update (April 2009)

Food safety during fires, floods and power cuts

Acrylamide in food (February 2009)

A1 and A2 Milk (February 2009)

Voluntary addition of fluoride to bottled water (February 2009)

US peanut butter and salmonella ( March 2009)

Update: Impact of Austrian reproduction study on the safety of GM corn lines MON810 andNK603 (January 2009)

Nutrition and Health Related Claims updated (December 2008)

Hipp’s fruit puree with banana and apricot baby food advisory (December 2008)

Update on dioxins in Irish pork (10 December 2008)

A national food safety standard for seed sprouts (November 2008)

Iodine sensitivities and mandatory iodine fortification (November 2008)

Mandatory iodine fortification (November 2008)

Voluntary addition of fluoride to bottled water (November 2008)

Health advisory labels on alcoholic beverages (November 2008)

Canned foods: purchasing and storing (October 2008)

GM foods: Safety of ingested recombinant DNA

Update on melamine in foods from China

Healthy eating and pregnancy

Contaminated baby formula made in China (September 2008)

MSG in food (August 2008)

Trans fatty acids (August 2008)

Primary production and processing requirements for raw milk products: Public comment invited (6 August 2008)

Raw Milk Products – Current Situation in Australia (July 08)

Chemicals in glass jar seals (July 08)

Mandatory folic acid fortification in Australia (June 09)

Fact sheets on particular food issues relevant to the year.

Available on website only.

191A P P E N D I X 8 – C A T E R G O R I E S O F D O C U M E N T S H E L D


Appendix 8 – Categories of documents held

Administration

Documents relating to administration include personnel, finance, property and resource

management records.

Agreements

FSANZ holds copies of the following agreements:

• The Agreement between the Commonwealth of Australia, the States, the Northern

Territory of Australia and the Australian Capital Territory in relation to the adoption of

uniform food standards (2000).

• The Agreement between the Commonwealth of Australia and New Zealand

establishing a system for the development of joint food standards which was signed in

1995 and came into effect in 1996. (This document can be found on the Internet under

the Australian Treaty Series 1996 Number 12. This link is available from the our website

at www.foodstandards.gov.au, together with links to all relevant legislation).

Food recalls

A full list of the products involved and the reasons for each recall are given in an end-of-year

food recall report. A summary appears in this annual report.

Briefs, submissions and reports

We prepare and hold copies of briefing papers, submissions and reports relevant to specific

functions. Briefing papers and submissions include those prepared for ministers, Australia

and New Zealand Food Regulation Ministerial Council, Food Regulation Standing Committee,

Implementation Sub Committee and other committees.

Databases

We maintain a wide range of computer databases to support our information and processing

needs, including the Australian Nutrient Databank and our dietary modelling software

(DIAMOND). All are held in our Canberra office.

192 A P P E N D I X 8 – C A T E R G O R I E S O F D O C U M E N T S H E L D


Files

Both paper-based and computer-based records are maintained on FSANZ’s activities. They

primarily relate to the processing of Applications or Proposals associated with a draft standard

or a draft variation to a standard. While most of these records are held in our Canberra office,

some are held in the Wellington office.

Finance documents

We maintain a series of documents relating to FSANZ financial management, including our

chart of accounts, expenditure and revenue ledgers and appropriation ledger.

Freedom of information enquiries

Initial enquiries concerning access to documents under the Freedom of Information Act 1982

should be directed to the General Manager (Legal and Regulatory Affairs) on (02) 62271 2222.

Mailing lists

We maintain, for our own use, mailing lists to disseminate information to key stakeholders and

interested individuals. Documents distributed through this list include FSANZ annual reports,

Food Standards News, food standards, Food Surveillance News, information circulars,

information summaries, Explanatory Notes and Statement of Reasons.

Maps and plans

Maps and plans held are mainly working drawings, plans and specifications for our offices.

Public register

We maintain a Public Register of documents for all applications and proposals. Applications,

public submissions and other associated material (with the exception of any commercially

confidential material or other confidential information), as well as relevant FSANZ documents

are placed on the Public register file.

The Public Register files are now generally available electronically and members of the public

wishing to access files, do not have to come to the Canberra or Wellington offices to view the

documents.

193A P P E N D I X 8 – C A T E R G O R I E S O F D O C U M E N T S H E L D


Public Register files can be inspected for an administrative charge with five working days’

notice. In Australia, the charge is: 1 file $AUD110; 2-4 files $AUD145; and 5 or more files

$AUD180. Copying, postage and CDs are charged in addition to these costs. The charge

may be partially or fully waived for academic institutions, private individuals, community,

consumer or non-profit organisations.

Review and research

Documents relating to policy review, dietary surveys, labelling research and organisational and

communications reviews are held in our Canberra office.

Media releases

All media releases are available on request. They can also be accessed from the FSANZ

website at www.foodstandards.gov.au.

Publications

See Appendix 7 for a list of current publications.

194 A P P E N D I X 9 – C O N S U L T A N T S A N D C O N T R A C T O R S


Appendix 9 – Consultants and contractors

Consultant Nature of consultancy Amount $ - excl GST

Reason for use

Selection process

Section

Advanced Analytical Australia

Services for the preparation and analysis of food

samples for melamine

3,210 1 Selective tender

SSIS

Achieve Group Workshop Facilitation 2,091 1 Selective tender

PHNS

Australian Government Solicitor

Legislative Drafting 45,500 5 Sole provider OLC

Ascent Governance Internal Audit Services 32,566 1 Selective Tender

Planning

Charles Yeo Consultancy services on meat industry practices

5,000 1 Sole provider FSS

Colmar Brunton Stakeholder Satisfaction Survey


Comms

Centre for Public Management

Executive 360 degree feedback program

9,773 1,4,5 Sole Provider Operations

Curtin University A review of the effectiveness of advisory statements on packaged

alcohol


LISS

Database Mining Maintenance of Standards Management System

and associated database consultancy

13,500 1.4 Part of existing

contract

OLC

Davidson Trahaire Employee Assistance Program

3,068 1 Preferred provider

with Aust DoHA or NZ

Ministry of Health

Operations

Enable Business Control Systems

Board Strategic Planning Workshop


Board

Gillian Beaumount Executive Search & Recruitment

6,353 1,4 Sole Provider OLC

195A P P E N D I X 9 – C O N S U L T A N T S A N D C O N T R A C T O R S



Reason for use

Selection process

Section

Harley Juffs Review of Industry Practices for Control of Listeria in Ready-to-Eat

Food Products

24,016 1,4 Sole provider RAMS

IPSOS Public Affairs Pty Ltd

Provision of services to conduct a qualitative study of consumers’ awareness,

attitudes and behaviours to fortified foods.

29,637 1,4,5 Selective tender

FEMS

Leeder Consulting Services for the preparation and analysis of food


24,630 1,4 Selective tender

SSIS

Millpost Technologies Consultancy services for software development,

support and enhancement of the food composition

data management system

26,758 1,4 Sole provider FEMS

Motivating Excellence Pty Ltd

Executive Mentoring 5,365 1 Sole provider Executive

National Measurement institute

Nutrient analysis as part of the 2008 adult Key Foods

Program

82,216 1,4 Selective Tender

FEMS

National Measurement institute

Folic Acid fortification proficiency testing


Omni Potent Solutions

Consultancy services for software development,

support and enhancement of the food composition

data management system


Peoplebank Recruitment

Consultancy Services for software development,

software support and enhancement

33,331 1 Sole Provider FEMS

Peter Abbott Consultancy services for development of guidelines

11,000 1 Sole Provider OLC

Queensland University of Technology

Collection and analysis of infant dietary data

24,000 5 Sole provider FEMS/SSIS

196 A P P E N D I X 9 – C O N S U L T A N T S A N D C O N T R A C T O R S



Reason for use

Selection process

Section

Rural Industries Development Research Corporation

Review of Australian Food Safety Practices for the production of Meat for Human Consumption

5,000 1,4 Sole provider FSS

Roger Fry Communication training 4,000 1 Sole provider COMMS

Roy Morgan Research

Consumer Survey Egg Consumption

43,864 4 Selective Tender

CASS

Roy Morgan Research

Single Source Survey 60,627 1 Sole Provider FEMS

Roy Morgan Research

Young Australian Survey 27,591 1 Sole Provider FEMS

Roy Morgan Research

Consumer Survey on Nutrient Content Claims


CASS

Safefood Queensland Review of Australian Food Safety Practices for the production of Meat for Human Consumption

63,636 1 Sole provider FSS

South Australian Research Development Institute

Statistical Analysis of Poultry Survey Data

5,000 1 Sole Provider RAMS

Scitox Review of pyrrolizidine alkaloids to set new health

standard


RACS

Silk Associates Maori cultural awareness training


LISS

Sparkos Website redevelopment 11,590 2 Part of an existing

contract

COMMS

Sydney West Area Health Service

Services for the analysis of food samples collected as part of the 2008 trans fatty acid survey for sodium and

iodine

22,664 1,4 Part of an existing

contract

FEMS

Symbio Alliance Services for the preparation and analysis of food



SSIS

197A P P E N D I X 9 – C O N S U L T A N T S A N D C O N T R A C T O R S



Reason for use

Selection process

Section

Symbio Alliance Services for the preparation and analysis of food

samples for sulphites


SSIS

Symbio Alliance Services for nutrient analysis

23,326 1,4 Part of an existing

contract

FEMS

Symbio Alliance Services for the co-ordination, preparation and analysis of specified foods

for the 23rd Australian Total Diet Study -


SSIS

Taylor Nelson Social Research

Services to conduct a quantitative consumer

Survey on Food Allergen Labelling


FEMS

$1,032,156

Reason for use

1. Need for specialised skills

2. Rapid access to latest technology and experience

3. Limitations on Executive time

4. Lack of in-house resources

5. Need for independent study

6. Need for change of agent or facilitator

198 A P P E N D I X 1 0 – F S A N Z R E P R E S E N T A T I O N


Appendix 10: FSANZ representation

International forums attended, including Codex/WHO/FAO

Date International Committee Meeting Who Attended Country

28 June – 2 July 2008

IFT Nanotechnology Seminar IFT Annual Conference

Dennis Thomas United States

30 June – 4 July 2008

Codex Alimentarius Commission Paul Brent Geneva, Switzerland

7-8 July 2008 Joint Institute of Food Safety and Applied Nutrition Risk Analysis Training Program

Christel Leemhuis Washington, DC, United States

3 – 7 August 2008 International Association for Food Protection

Amanda Hill Ohio, United States

4-8 August 2008 APEC Food Safety Cooperation Forum 2008

Steve McCutcheon Paul Brent Debbie Battaglene

Peru

8-12 September 2008

Developing Food Laws, Standards and Enforcement Systems workshop

John Fladun Donna Bakovski Peter Keegan Debbie Battaglene

Hanoi, Viet Nam

3-7 November 2008

30th Session of the Codex Committee Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses

Janine Lewis Dorothy Mackerras

Cape Town, South Africa

5-7 November 2008

ILSI meeting on Food and Nutrition Safety Bonnie Field Cebu, Philippines

10-13 November 2008

FAO/WHO Update of Risk Assessment Principles Workshop

Janis Baines Seoul, South Korea

10-14 November 2008

Meetings with Chinese State Food and Drug Administration, Ministry of Science and Technology, Ministry of Agriculture and the General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of the People’s Republic of China

Steve McCutcheon Sonia Bradley

Beijing, China

18-19 November 2008

JIFSAN Workshop on Dietary Exposure Assessment Tools for Prioritising Food Safety Concerns

Tracy Hambridge United States

199A P P E N D I X 1 0 – F S A N Z R E P R E S E N T A T I O N



24-28 November 2008

17th Session of the Codex Committee on Food Import and Export Inspection and Certification Systems

Mark Salter Cebu, Philippines

1-4 December 2008

WHO Expert Meeting to review the toxicological aspects of melamine and cyanuric acid

Janis Baines Ottawa, Canada

1-5 December 2008

40th Session of the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene

Amanda Hill Michelle Robertson

Guatemala City, Guatemala

7-12 December 2008

FAO/IAEA Food Irradiation Workshop Glenn Stanley The Philippines

9-12 December 2008

Centre for Food Safety and World Health Organization Joint Workshop on Total Diet Study

Julie Boorman Hong Kong, China

10-12 December 2008

International Food Safety Authorities Network Advisory Group Meeting

Mark Salter Ottawa, Canada

15-17 December 2008

11th Meeting of the Expert Committee of the Hong Kong Centre for Food Safety

Paul Brent Hong Kong, China

16-18 February 2009

Developing Food Laws, Standards and Enforcement Systems follow-up workshop

John Fladun Donna Bakovski Debbie Battaglene

Ho Chi Minh City, Viet Nam

16-20 March 2009 41st Session of the Codex Committee on Food Additives

Paul Brent Leanne Laajoki

Shanghai, China

23-28 March 2009 12th Meeting of the Expert Committee of the Hong Kong Centre for Food Safety and Regional Symposium on Pesticide

Paul Brent Hong Kong, China

23 March 2009 ILSI Korea GMO consultation Andrew Bartholomaeus

Seoul, Korea

1-4 May 2009 Codex Committee on Food Labelling Jane Allen Calgary, Canada

10-14 May 2009 7th International Symposium on Shiga Toxin (Verocytotoxin) – Producing Escherichia coli Infections

Hong Jin Buenos Aires, Argentina

11-15 May 2009 Food Regulatory Systems and Developing Food Laws workshop

John Fladun Mary Jordan Robert Keane Debbie Battaglene

Beijing, China

12-14 May 2009 Workshop on the Tolerable Level of Risk in Food Allergy

Hikmat Hayder Vienna, Austria




1-5 June 2009 FAO/WHO expert consultation on nanotechnology


Rome, Italy

16-25 June 2009 FAO/WHO Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA 71)

Janis Baines (FAO) Utz Mueller (WHO)

Geneva, Switzerland

22-23 June 2009 ILSI Symposium on Plant Polyphenols: Nutrition, Health and Innovations

Trevor Webb Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Speaking engagements

Date Event Presenter(s) Title

6-9 July 2008 Population Health Congress, Brisbane

Peta Chubb Mandatory folic acid fortification in Australia: the next piece of the puzzle

7 July 2008 Home Economics and Technology Teachers’ Association of New Zealand Conference

Dennis Thomas Lisa Katzer

Food standards development –protecting public health, providing consumer information and preventing fraud and deception

16 July 2008 NZ Industry Food Regulation Update

Dean Stockwell Food regulation update

21 July 2008 AFGC Processed Meats Forum, in association with AIFST Convention

Dennis Thomas Technical options for preservative reduction in processed meats

22 July 2008 41st Annual Australian Institute of Food Science and Technology Convention, Sydney

Mark Salter National Food Incident Response Protocol

Christina Belperio 2007 National Food Handling Survey

Dean Stockwell Bringing new foods to market

25 July 2008 Australian Beverages Council Technical School, Melbourne

Tracey Cridge Food standards and labelling

12 August 2008 University of Canberra, human nutrition students

Janis Baines Food and nutrition monitoring and surveillance systems in Australia

19 August 2008 National FASD Workshop, Adelaide

Diane Bourn FSANZ Update: health advisory labels on alcoholic beverages




21 August 2008 AIHW Fortification Monitoring Coordination Program Workshop, ANU, Canberra

Jacinta Dugbaza Background to the folic acid and iodine fortification standards

28 August 2008 5th Codex Australia Industry Forum

Amanda Hill New work in food hygiene: Campylobacter and Salmonella in chicken meat and Vibrio spp. in seafood

7-9 September 2008

HACCP Conference – Adelaide

Paul Brent Food recalls and safety of GM foods

8 September 2008 University of Otago, food science students

Tracey Cridge Diane Bourn

Food labelling

11 September 2008 Allergen Bureau Conference

Hikmat Hayder Review of the regulatory management of food allergens

17-19 September 4th Innovative Foods Centre Conference, Brisbane

Leanne Laajoki Regulation of foods produced using new technologies

27 September 2008 New Zealand Guild of Food Writers’ Seminar, Auckland

Lydia Buchtmann Using new media to communicate food issues

8 October 2008 Croplife 3rd Annual Perspectives Conference, Sunshine Coast

Steve McCutcheon The evolving world of food standards

14 October 2008 Nutrition Society Australia – Nanotechnology and Food, Melbourne

Paul Brent Regulation of nanotechnology in food products in Australia

16 October 2008 Matters of Health Series, Canberra

Paul Brent GM foods – why all the fuss?

28-30 October 2008 Quads Social Research Coordination Group Technical Workshop, United States

Trevor Webb Overview of consumer tracking surveys

Do nutrient content claims influence consumer purchase intentions and product nutrition evaluations?

Marianne Hoey Australian and New Zealand Allergens Surveys: 2003 and 2009

Melanie Fisher The 2007 Australian and New Zealand Consumer Attitudes Benchmark Survey




3-4 November 2008 Pacific Food Safety & Quality Legislation Expert Group Meeting, Sydney

Paul Brent APEC Food Safety Cooperation Forum Activites

7 November 2008 Global Health Forum: adding value to Pacific Island foods

Janis Baines The role of the food regulatory system in protecting Australia’s health

10 November 2008 WHO/FAO International Symposium: international activities and risk assessment in South Korea, Seoul

Janis Baines Food additives and flavouring agents

13 November 2008 Lexis Nexis Food and Beverage law, Auckland

Dean Stockwell Health claims

16 November 2008 10th Annual Food Regulations and Labelling Standards

Steve McCutcheon Food regulation: previewing the year ahead

Leigh Henderson Acrylamide migration in food

17 November 2008 International workshop on food safety assessment, Beijing

Janis Baines Role of exposure assessments in chemical risk assessment

30 November – 3 December 2008

2008 Nutrition Society of Australia Conference

Renee Sobolewski Development of the new Australian food composition tables AUSNUT 2007

5 December 2008 Health Canada/Initial Workshop

Food Additives: current environment and future directions, Montreal, Canada

Janis Baines Regulation of food additives in Australia and New Zeland

23 February 2009 Papua New Guinea delegation

Rob Keane Features of the Food Standard Code

Glenn Stanley Risk assessment framework

18-19 February 2009

Quads Communicators Group

Lydia Buchtmann Communicating the melamine incident in Australia

18 – 20 February 2009

OCEANIAFOODS Food Composition Training course

Judy Cunningham Data compilation.

User perspectives – labelling

User perspectives – national nutrition surveys




20 February 2009 OCEANIAFOODS Training course

Dorothy Mackerras User perspectives – nutritional epidemiology

20 – 21 February 2009

8th OCEANIAFOODS Conference

Dorothy Mackerras User perspectives – food fortification

Renee Sobolewski Update on Australian food composition activities

22-24 February 2009

Australian Government Analysts’ Conference

Leanne Laajoki Current and potential food regulatory issues – relevance of analytical survey data

24 February 2009 Workshop on Source Control of Hazardous Substances

Rob Keane Water and the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code

23-28 March 2009 Regional Symposium on Pesticide, Hong Kong

Paul Brent Regulation and assessment of chemical residues in Australia

24-26 March 2009 13th Australian Food Microbiology Conference, Melbourne

Hong Jin Patricia Blenman Duncan Craig Melanie Fisher

Development of a primary production and processing standard for seed sprouts – a new national initiative

31 March 2009 Allergen Bureau Conference

Hikmat Hayder Luisa Trevisan

Update on the allergen review and consumer survey

4 May 2009 8th Annual Food Safety Summit, Auckland

Dean Stockwell Food regulation update – including health claims

19 May 2009 Physicians Week 2009, Sydney

Paul Brent Melamine incident and Australian response

19 May 2009 10th National Public Affairs Convention, Sydney

Lydia Buchtmann The practical use of conventional and new media during the Chinese melamine milk contamination incident

21-22 May 2009 MidNorth Coast Food Producer Workshops

Rob Keane FSANZ and Australia’s Food Regulatory System

28-30 May 2009 Dietitians Association of Australia Annual Conference, Darwin

Dorothy Mackerras Update on the ABC Study

Ann Hunt New territory for bread – mandatory fortification with folic acid and iodine

22-23 June 2009 ILSI Symposium on Plant Polyphenols: Nutrition, Health and Innovations

Trevor Webb Consumers and polyphenols: current trends and consumer behaviour




24 June 2009 New Zealand Institute of Food Science and Technology


Dean Stockwell

Dennis Thomas

Leigh Henderson

Keynote address on nanotechnology and food regulation. Presentations on FSANZ update, new processing technologies and acrylamide mitigation

205A P P E N D I X 1 1 – F S A N Z B O A R D M E M B E R S , A T T E N D A N C E ,

Q U A L I F I C A T I O N S A N D E X P E R I E N C E


Appendix 11 – FSANZ Board members, attendance, qualifications and experience

Table 1. Board attendance

Member Meetings Teleconferences

Ms Philippa Smith AM (Chair) 4/5 4/4

Dr Michele Allan 5/5 4/4

Professor Katrine Baghurst 5/5 4/4

Mr Peter Boyden 5/5 3/4

Dr John Craven 5/5 3/4

Dr Laurence Eyres 5/5 4/4

Mr Peter Milne 5/5 4/4

Mr Steve McCutcheon (CEO) 5/5 4/4

Ms Hikihiki Pihema 4/5 4/4

Dr Pamela Williams 4/5 4/4

Associate Professor Peter Williams 5/5 4/4

Ms Dianne Yates 5/5 4/4

Observer (Does not participate)

Dr Anne Astin

Mr Stan Goodchild

206 A P P E N D I X 1 1 – F S A N Z B O A R D M E M B E R S , A T T E N D A N C E ,



Table 2. Finance, Audit and Risk Management Committee attendance

Member Meetings

Mr Peter Milne (Chairman) 5/5

Mr Peter Boyden 5/5

Dr Laurence Eyres 5/5

Observers

Dr Michele Allan 5/5

Professor Katrine Baghurst 5/5

Mr Peter Boyden 5/5

Dr John Craven 5/5

Mr Steve McCutcheon (CEO) 5/5

Ms Hikihiki Pihema 4/5

Ms Philippa Smith 4/5

Dr Pamela Williams 4/5

Associate Professor Peter Williams 4/5

Ms Dianne Yates 5/5

Ms Audrey Gormley (Chief Finance Officer) 5/5




Food Standards Australia New Zealand Board expertise and experience (2008-2009)

Ms Philippa Smith AM

Ms Philippa Smith, AM [s.116(1)(a)] was appointed Chair of the FSANZ Board in July 2008. Ms

Smith is a former Commonwealth Ombudsman, CEO of the Association of Superannuation

Funds of Australia and the inaugural Chair of the Consumer’s Health Forum. She currently

serves on the boards of a number of organisations, including the Australian Institute of Public

Health and the Sax Institute. Ms Smith has developed strong strategic skills and extensive

experience in ensuring effective accountability and governance structures across a number of

portfolios.

Dr Michele Allan

Dr Michele Allan [s.116(1)(f)] has strong leadership experience across many facets of the

food industry. Her areas of expertise include food science, food allergy, food safety, food

manufacturing, food packaging innovation and bioinformatics. She has had senior executive

positions with Bonlac Foods Limited, Kraft Foods, ICI, Nestle and Amcor Limited. Dr Allan

was CEO/MD of Patties Foods Limited a listed food company and is currently a non-executive

director of William Angliss Institute and CaroMel Ocean Limited.

Professor Katrine Baghurst

Professor Katrine Baghurst [s.116(1)(e)] has been involved in research and in translation of

research to practice in the nutrition field in both Australia and New Zealand over the past 30

years, notably at the CSIRO Human Nutrition Division. Her extensive experience makes her

a specialist in relation to determining food choice, consumer needs, current dietary patterns

in the community and nutritional and food education. Professor Baghurst is a member of the

National Health Committee of the NHMRC and is an Adjunct Professor in the Department of

Medicine, University of Adelaide and currently works as a nutrition consultant.

Mr Peter Boyden

Mr Peter Boyden [s.116(1)(g)] is an internationally experienced CEO with extensive general

management and marketing experience gained in consumer foods businesses in Australia,

United Kingdom, Netherlands and Greece. His most recent role was Managing Director and

regional Board member of the Unilever Australasian foods business and a Board member of




the Australian Food and Grocery Council. He currently acts as a business mentor for senior

executives and is a non-executive director of Meat and Livestock Australia, Stuart Alexander

and Dairy Innovation Australia Ltd. His areas of responsibility have included the management

of consumer marketing, product and packaging development, food production and general

management, where he has focused on strategy development and portfolio management.

Dr John Craven

Dr John Craven [s.116(1)(f)] is a veterinarian with post-graduate qualifications in microbiology

and pathology. His research interests have primarily been in the areas of identifying the

causes of neonatal diarrhoea in animals and in preventing spread of food poisoning organisms

from animals to people. He has been Director of the central Victorian veterinary diagnostic

and research laboratory and held other senior positions in the Victorian Department of

Agriculture and Rural Affairs (now Department of Primary Industries). Dr Craven was, for

seven years, a Portfolio Manager for the Dairy Research and Development Corporation and is

currently Director of Terip Solutions Pty Ltd. He has considerable experience in working with

rural communities to improve agricultural productivity and sustainability by development and

subsequent adoption of technology.

Dr Laurence Eyres

Dr Laurence Eyres [s.116(1)(c)] has expertise in food science and technical management

and his present research and professional speciality is quality assurance and research and

development of food products, particularly oils and fats. He has worked both in industry

and academia for over 35 years and brings a food technology, industry and New Zealand

perspective to the Board. He is currently Director, ECG Ltd, a specialist contracting and

consulting company.

Mr Steve McCutcheon

Mr McCutcheon [s.116(1)(B)] was appointed CEO of FSANZ in October 2007. Prior to his

appointment, Mr McCutcheon held a number of senior executive positions in the Australian

Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. During that time he led the

team that developed the new food regulatory framework for Australia and New Zealand under

the auspices of the Council of Australian Governments. He also led the Australian delegation

to annual sessions of the Codex Alimentarius Commission from 2004-2007. Mr McCutcheon

holds a Bachelor of Economics degree and has undertaken further studies in public law and

public policy. The Chief Executive Officer of FSANZ is an ex officio member of the Board.




Mr Peter Milne

Mr Peter Milne [s.116(1)(g)] has worked all his life in the Australia cattle industry and managed

Cracow Station in Central Queensland for many years. He has been active in rural industry

organisations and involved in training, industrial relations, on-farm quality assurance, research

and development, and marketing. He was Chairman of the Red Meat Advisory Council in

2001, on the Executive of the National Farmers’ Federation for four years and President of the

Cattle Council of Australia until November 2001. He is a member of the National Institute of

Accountants and a Fellow of the Taxation Institute of Australia.

Ms Hikihiki Pihema

Ms Hikihiki Pihema [s.116(1)(ca)] is currently the Senior Dietitian at Gisborne Hospital, Tairawhiti

District Health, Gisborne, New Zealand. She is a Maori dietitian with 32 years’ experience

in a range of clinical, administration, management, community, public health, Maori health,

education and policy settings within New Zealand. Ms Pihema is also a past President

of the New Zealand Dietetic Association (NZDA) and has assisted in the strengthening of

collaborative links between the NZDA and the Dietitians’ Association of Australia.

Dr Pamela Williams

Dr Pamela Williams [s.116(1)(d)] has a strong background in consumer participation,

consumer behaviour and consumer decision-making. Her extensive experience includes

Home Economics teaching and Home Economics teacher preparation. After 35 years as an

academic, she is now contributing to consumer advocacy, especially in the health system and

breast cancer areas, mainly with women’s groups locally, and nationally.

Associate Professor Peter Williams

Associate Professor Peter Peter Williams [s.116(1)(f)] brings to the Board a strong background

in public health, human nutrition, food service management and consumer studies. He is an

Associate Professor in the School of Health Sciences at the Wollongong University and led

the regulatory affairs work of the National Centre of Excellence in Functional Foods. Before

his employment at Wollongong, Associate Professor Williams was the Director of Scientific

and Consumer Affairs at Kelloggs for three years and previously worked as the Chief Dietitian

and Food Services Manager at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital. Associate Professor Williams

served a two-year term as President of the Dietitians Association of Australia from 2001 and




has served on NHMRC working parties for the review of dietary guidelines for Australia and the

review of recommended nutrient intakes.

Ms Dianne Yates

Ms Dianne Yates, M.Ed. (Howard, USA), B.A. (Victoria, Wellington), Dip Tchg, NZCTC,

LTCL. Ms Yates is a former Labour Member of Parliament in New Zealand, retiring in her

15th year in the House. During this period she chaired the Foreign Affairs Defence and

Trade Select Committees, as well as the Government Administration Select Committee and

the Education and Science Committee. She also served for three terms on the Regulations

Review Committee of the New Zealand Parliament and has been a member of the Health

Select Committee. The Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Act in New Zealand was a

private members bill in her name. Prior to Parliament Ms Yates has had a career in education

(teaching and management) in New Zealand, UK, Zimbabwe and USA at the secondary and

tertiary levels. Ms Yates continues to serve the community on the local WINTEC Council, Trust

Waikato, and the New Zealand Learning Media Limited.

Note: The reference after each member’s name refers to the role specified in section 40 of the Food Standards

Australia New Zealand Act 1991 which the member fulfils. All members, with the exception of the CEO of FSANZ, are part-time. Members are listed alphabetically after the Chair.

Top: Dr Laurence Eyres, Professor Katrine Baghurst, Ms Dianne Yates, FSANZ CEO Steve McCutcheon, Mr Peter Boyden, Dr Michele Allan, Associate Professor Peter Williams. Bottom: Mrs Hikihikki Pihema, Dr John Craven, FSANZ Chair Ms Philippa Smith AM, Mr Peter Boyden, Dr Pamela Williams.

211A C C R O N Y M S A N D A B B R E V I A T I O N S


Acronyms and Abbreviations

ACCC Australian Competition and Consumer Commission

ADI Acceptable daily intake

AFGC Australian Food and Grocery Council

ANAO Australian National Audit Office

ANZFRMC Australia and New Zealand Food Regulation Ministerial Council

APEC Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (Forum)

APS Australian Public Service

APVMA Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority

AQIS Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service

ASEAN Association of South-East Asian Nations

ATDS Australian Total Diet Study

AusAID Australian Agency for International Development

ATO Australian Taxation Office

AWAs Australian Workplace Agreements

CCCF Codex Committee on Contaminants in Food

CCFA Codex Committee on Food Additives

CCFH Codex Committee on Food Hygiene

CCFL Codex Committee on Food Labelling

CCFICS Codex Committee on Food Import and Export Inspection Certification Systems

CCGP Codex Committee on General Principles

CCPR Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues

COAG Council of Australian Governments

Codex Codex Alimentarius Commission and its committees

DAFF Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

212 A C C R O N Y M S A N D A B B R E V I A T I O N S


DIAMOND Dietary Modelling of Nutritional Data

EEO Equal Employment Opportunity

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization

FDA United States Food and Drug Administration

FOI Freedom of Information

FRSC Food Regulation Standing Committee

FSANZ Food Standards Australia New Zealand

FSANZ Act Food Standards Australia New Zealand Act 1991

GM Genetically modified

IGA Inter-Government Agreement

ILSI International Life Sciences Institute

ISC Implementation Sub Committee

IT Information technology

JECFA FAO/WHO Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives

JEMRA FAO/WHO Joint Expert Meeting on Microbiological Risk Assessment

MoU Memorandum of Understanding

MRL Maximum residue limit

NHMRC National Health and Medical Research Council

NZFSA New Zealand Food Safety Authority

NICNAS National Industrial Chemicals Notification and Assessment Scheme

NUTTAB Nutrient content of food in Australia (publication)

OBPR Office of Best Practice Regulation

OECD Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development

OGTR Office of the Gene Technology Regulator

OH&S Occupational Health and Safety

PMD Performance Management and Development initiative

213A C C R O N Y M S A N D A B B R E V I A T I O N S


QUADS Food Safety Quadrilateral meetings involving Australia, New Zealand, Canada

and the United States

SARDI South Australian Research and Development Institute

SCSC APEC Sub-Committee on Standards and Conformance

SDC Standard Development Committee

SES Senior Executive Service

TGA Therapeutic Goods Administration

USFDA United States Food and Drug Administration

WHO World Health Organization

WTO World Trade Organization

214 I N D E X


Index

A

A2 milk, 77

abbreviations, 211–213

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people on staff, 88

absenteeism, 91–92

ACCC (Australian Competition and Consumer Commission), 73

accountability see management and accountability

acronyms and abbreviations, 211–213

acrylamide formation in processed foods, 33

addition of folic acid to flour, case study, 72

additives see food additives

administrative assessment of procedures, 127

administrative documents, 191

administrative expenditure, 108–109

adulteration of dairy products, 22, 47–48, 60, 77, 104

advisory and liaison committees, 68–71, 132–142

catering operations, 132

consumers, 70, 78, 134

dietary exposure assessment, 132–133

Egg Implementation Plan Working Group, 39

food composition, 52, 133

international food chemical safety, 61

novel foods, 32

retailers and manufacturers, 78, 134–135

Social Science Expert Advisory Group, 56, 138

stakeholders, 53, 138

see also Science Network Forum

advisory statements, 24, 73

age of staff, 87

agreements

Australian Workplace Agreements, 91

bilateral partnership, 16

Collective Agreement, 91

Common Law Agreements, 91

documents, 191

inter-governmental, 29, 102

215I N D E X


agricultural and veterinary chemical residues, 33, 50, 73

maximum residue limits (MRLs), 33–34

agriculture portfolio, 25

alcohol products, 22, 77

in relation to pregnancy, 24, 37, 73

alfalfa see seed sprouts

Allan, Dr Michele, 207

allergens, 31, 38, 58, 77

amendments to Food Standards Code, 13, 15, 22, 34, 51, 68

gazettals, 111–115

hydrocyanic acid in cassava chips, 31

isinglass, 38

MRL values, 34

processing aids, 33

ANDB (Australian Nutrient Data Bank), 54, 86

Annual Development Award, 93

APEC Food Safety Cooperation Forum, 75

APEC Sub-Committee for Standards and Conformance (SCSC), 75

Application Handbook, 15, 26, 46, 51

Applications

finalised, 28

problems associated with, 22, 24

processes and procedures for assessment, 27, 83, 126–131

received before 1 October 2007, 26, 116–119

received from 1 October 2007 onwards, 27, 119–125

statutory objectives, 129

see also gazettals

appointments to staff, 87, 108

appraisal of staff, 88

approval or rejection of submissions, 128

APVMA (Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority), 73

AQIS (Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service), 45, 72, 73, 76, 131

Ascent Governance Pty Ltd, 106

Asia-Pacific Region, 75–76

asparaginase enzymes, 33

assessment of Applications and Proposals, 27, 83, 126–131

assets management, 99

ATDS see Australian Total Diet Study

attitudes and behaviour of consumers, 15, 55

216 I N D E X


attraction and retention of skilled staff, 5

audits, 105–106, 108

AusAID, 75

AUSNUT 2007, 52

Australia and New Zealand Food Regulation Ministerial Council see Ministerial Council

Australia Day Achievement Medallion, 93

The Australian, 130

Australian Cancer Research Foundation, 84

Australian Children’s Nutrition and Physical Activity Survey, 30, 31, 52

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, 73

Australian Federal Police, 106

Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing see Department of Health and Ageing

Australian Government Fraud Control Guidelines, 106

Australian Government Health Safety and Environment Working Group, 46

Australian Institute of Criminology, 106

Australian Institute of Food Technology Convention, 78

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 35, 58

Australian National Audit Office, 108

Australian Nutrient Data Bank, 54, 86

Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority, 73

Australian Public Service Commissioner, 67

Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service, 45, 72, 73, 76, 131

Australian States and Territories, 102

Australian Total Diet Study (ATDS)

20th Study, 50

21st Study, 30

22nd-24th Studies, 50

Australian Workplace Agreements, 91

authority, 66

awards

Annual Development Award, 93

Australia Day Achievement Medallion, 93

Chairman’s Award, 93

Public Relations Institute Golden Target awards, 80

Quarterly Awards, 93

Waitangi Day Achievement Award, 93

awareness raising of organisation, 61–62, 64, 102

AWAs see Australian Workplace Agreements

217I N D E X


B

baby bottles, 44, 77

Baghurst, Professor Katrine, 207

Baines, Janis, 93

bakers and bakeries, 80

Bartholomaeus, Dr Andrew, 95

Beer, Wine and Spirits Council of New Zealand, 38

beer and wine, isinglass-fined, 38, 104

behaviour of children, 10, 22, 43

behaviour of consumers, 15, 55

Belperio, Christina, 93

benzoates, 30

bilateral partnership agreement, 16

biotechnology see genetically modified (GM) foods

Bisphenol A (BPA), 44, 77, 104

Blackberrys, 85

Blenman, Patricia, 93

Board, 13, 105

approval or rejection of submissions, 128

Fellows presentations to, 54

meets with Ngã Kaitohutohu members, 71

members, 205–210

reputation of organisation, 7, 65–67

reviews financial plan, 17

sets priorities for organisation, 110

bottled water, 30, 36

Bourne, Diane, 93

Boyden, Peter, 207–208

bread-making flour, 34

Brent, Dr Paul, 95

briefs, submissions and reports, 104, 191

British Medical Journal, 44

Brown, Kent, 93

Buckle, Professor Ken, 54

buddy system, 84

bullying, 84, 89

business continuity, 85, 86, 107

Business Plan, 109

business planning and management, 106–109

218 I N D E X


Butler, Hon. Mark, 10

buying decisions, 5, 23

Byles, Professor Julie, 53

C

cadmium, 10, 22, 29

caffeine, 44–45

calcium, 29, 35

Campylobacter contamination, 39, 59

Canada, 44, 56, 60, 61, 79

Canadian Food Inspection Agency, 61

Canadian Government, 44

Canberra office, 78, 85, 91, 191, 192, 193

canola, 32

capability of organisation, 83–84

capacity building, 74, 75

carbon footprint, 85, 108

cardiovascular disease, 44

career opportunities for staff, 8

Cary, Professor John, 53

case studies

addition of folic acid to flour, 72

consumer attitudes and behaviour in response to nutrition claims, 55

melamine adulteration of dairy products from China, 48

staff exchange with the United Kingdom Food Standards Agency, 90

cassava chips, 22, 30, 31

Castanheira, Dr Isabel, 52

categories of documents, 191–193

catering sector, 41, 70, 132

cattle, 40

cellulase enzyme, 33

Certificate of Compliance, 17

cessations of staff, 87

Chair of Board, 207

Chairman’s Award, 93

charities, donations to, 84

cheese, 25, 32, 39–40, 74

chemical and microbiological risk, 10, 23, 38

219I N D E X


chemicals, 23

agricultural and veterinary, 33, 50, 73

Australian Total Diet Study, 30, 50

cadmium, 10, 22, 29

fluoride, 30, 36, 50, 57

food, 50, 51, 61

chewing gum, 29

chicken meat, 39, 59, 141–142

Chief Executive Instructions, 107

Chief Executive Officer, 13, 94, 105

review by, 5–9

see also McCutcheon, Steve

Chief Public Health Nutrition Advisor, 43, 89

Chief Scientist, 13, 94, 95

children, 32, 73, 136

eating habits, 31, 52

food colours and behaviour, 22, 39, 43

Children’s Nutrition and Physical Activity Survey, 30, 31, 52

China, 47, 75, 79

chips, cassava, 22, 30, 31

chocolate, 44

CHOICE, 101

cholesterol absorption, 32

classification levels of staff, 86–87

performance payments, 95

workplace agreements, 91

clearance and signing-off of documents, 103

Cobiac, Professor Lyn, 53

Code Inquiry Unit, 78

Codex, 24

Codex Alimentarius, 59

Codex Alimentarius Commission, 59, 60

Codex Committee on Contaminants in Food (CCCF), 60

Codex Committee on Food Additives (CCFA), 59

Codex Committee on Food Hygiene (CCFH), 59

Codex Committee on Food Import and Export Inspection and

Certification Systems (CCFICS), 60

Codex Committee on Food Labelling (CCFL), 59

Codex Committee on General Principles (CCGP), 60

220 I N D E X


Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses (CCNFSDU), 59

Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues (CCPR), 60

coffee, 44

Collective Agreement, 91

colours see food additives

Comcover, 91, 106–107

commencements of staff, 87, 108

comments, public, 15

commercial benefit, 108

commercial-in-confidence, 71

committees

finance, audit and risk management, 16, 17, 105, 106

food regulation, 11

Implementation Sub-Committee, 10

Jurisdictional Forum, 134

Science Network Forum, 137–138

scientific advisory groups, 64, 135, 136, 137

standard development, 40, 70, 139–142

see also advisory and liaison committees

Common Law Agreements, 91

Commonwealth Disability Strategy, 92

communication, 65, 67, 76–80

see also publications

community involvement, 67–71, 102

competitive tendering and contracting, 109

completion dates of Applications, 83

compliance, 12, 17, 39

Compliance and Enforcement Model for Mandatory Fortification, 8

compliance index, 3–4

Compliance Plan for egg industry, 39

computers, 85

conditions of employment, 91–92

conduct, misleading or deceptive, 11, 73

conferences and forums

APEC, 75

Code Enquiry Unit staff present at, 78

international, 198–200


see also international networks

221I N D E X


conflicts of interest issues, 105

conjugated linoleic acid triglycerides, 31, 32

consensus, whole-of-government, 7

consultants, competitive tendering and contractors, 109, 194–197

consultation

with government and industry, 35, 38, 47, 50, 100

with Maori, 71

public, 13, 39, 41, 130

targeted, 117

see also advisory and liaison committees

consumer advice, 78

consumer affairs portfolio, 25

consumer and social sciences, 54–56

consumer attitudes and behaviour in response to nutrition claims, case study, 55

consumer research, 22

consumers, 24, 54–56, 67–68

attitudes and behaviour of, 8, 15, 55

CHOICE, 101

community involvement, 67–71, 102

education package, 80

enquiries from, 78

information provided to, 11, 23, 24

contact details, 2, verso of title page

contamination, 23, 34, 39, 40, 47, 50, 60

guidance documents, 51

and nanotechnology, 46

see also melamine adulteration of dairy products

content of food, 23

continuity planning, 85, 86, 107

contracting see purchasing

cooking techniques, 80

Coordinated Food Survey Plan, 50, 72

core business, 83

corn, 32

corporate governance, 103–110

corporate overview, 10–17

corporate plans, 18, 109

correspondence, 85, 104

cost-benefit analyses, 24

222 I N D E X


cost-effectiveness analyses, 24

cost recovery, 108

see also paid Applications

cotton, 32

Council of Australian Governments, 11, 37, 74

cow milk, 39

Craven, Dr John, 105, 208

criteria for review requests, 29

crustacea, 31

cultural awareness training program, 71

customary practices (Tikanga Maori), 71

cyanogenic glycosides, 60

cyanuric acid, 60

cycling to work, 84

D

dairy products see milk and milk products

Dalmolen, Rocky, 93

Dalzell, Mary-Lou, 93

databases, 191

ANDB (Australian Nutrient Data Bank), 54, 86

DIAMOND (Dietary Modelling of Nutritional Data), 15, 52, 53, 54, 86

Dean, Liz, 93

death in infants, 48

deliverables, program reporting, 20

dental benefits of sugar-free chewing gum, 35

Department of Defence, 109

Department of Finance and Deregulation, 17

Department of Health and Ageing, 10, 39, 45, 58, 80, 103, 108

funding received from, 16, 86

reporting outcomes linked with, 18

deregulation, 57

Developing Food Laws, Standards and Enforcement Systems, 75

diabetes, 44

DIAMOND (Dietary Modelling of Nutritional Data), 15, 52, 53, 54, 86

dietary exposure

assessments, 52–53

to food chemicals, 51

223I N D E X


dietary modelling, 31

see also DIAMOND (Dietary Modelling of Nutritional Data)

Directors, 105

disabilities, people with, 88

Disability Plan, 92

disaster recovery, 85, 107

diseases, control of, 33

diversity in workplace, 88, 92

documents maintained, 51, 103, 191–193

domestically produced foods, 23, 25

dried fruit, preservatives in, 30

drinks, 32, 44, 77

high-risk drinking, 37

preservatives in, 30

see also alcohol

E

eating habits of children, 31, 52

economic benefits of new food standards, 57

Eden-Monaro Cancer Support Group, 84

education and information campaigns, 79–80

effective regulation, 24

effectiveness of food labelling, 37

eggs and egg products, 23, 31, 38, 48, 137, 140

compliance with new standard, 39

study on consumption, handling and storage of, 55

electricity costs, 108–109

electronic media, 76

email correspondence, 85

emergencies, food, 12

emerging issues, 46

Employee Assistance Program, 89, 92

employees see staff

employment conditions, 91–92

energy drinks, 44, 77

energy review, 108

enforcement of food standards, 11, 16, 58, 78, 101

224 I N D E X


enquiries


from consumers, 78

freedom of information, 192

media, 77

enzymes as processing aid, 33

epidemiology, 43, 64, 89, 135

equal employment opportunity, 88

equity see social justice and equity

erythrosine, 77

Estimating Dietary Exposure to Food Chemicals for Food Regulatory Purposes, 51

ethyl lauroyl arginate, 33

European Commission, 61

European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), 43, 44, 61

Evaluation Strategy 2009-2013, 54, 57

evaluations see reviews (evaluation and monitoring)

evidence base, 15, 24, 41, 51–62, 65

scientific evidence, 22, 25, 42, 52–53, 83, 86, 101

and stakeholders and regulatory partners, 68, 71

used in risk assessments, 18, 25, 41

exchanges, staff, 89–90

Executive, 66, 83, 84, 94, 95

Executive Level staff, 88

Executive Sponsor, 110

expectations of stakeholders, 65

expenditure see finance

external audits, 106

Eyres, Dr Laurence, 208

F

fact sheets, 70

Fair Work legislation, 91

FAO/IAEA Regional Training Workshop, 76

FAO/WHO Expert Meeting on the Application of

Nanotechnologies in the Food and Agricultural Sectors, 46, 60

FAO/WHO Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA), 60

FAO/WHO meetings, 46

Federal Register of Legislative Instruments, 111

fee-for-service activities, 16

225I N D E X


feedback from stakeholders, 64

feeding bottles for infants, 44, 77

Fellows Program, 53–54

female staff, 86, 87, 88

files, 192

finalised projects, 111–115

finance, 16–17

Comcover premium rate, 91

consultant and contractor expenditure, 109

documents, 192

fraud control, 106

operating revenue and expenses, 17, 108–109

performance pay and bonuses, 95

Finance, Audit and Risk Management Committee, 16, 17, 96, 105, 106

financial management, 105–106

financial performance, 16–17

financial statements, 143–173

Fine Foods, 78

fires, 77

fish, 31, 38, 80

Fisher, Melanie, 95

Fladun, John, 93, 96

floods and fires, 77

flour for bread-making, 34

flour millers, 80

fluoride, 50, 77

in bottled water, 30, 36

foetal alcohol syndrome, 24

folic acid, 34, 70, 72, 135

mandatory fortification, 58, 74, 77, 80

food additives, 30–31, 33, 59, 60

food colours, 30, 43, 50–51, 77, 104



see also fortification of foods; preservatives

food allergens, 31, 58

food-borne illnesses, 24, 38, 40, 78

food chemicals, 50, 51, 61

food classification systems, 73

226 I N D E X


food colours see food additives

food composition, 52, 133

food control systems, 60

food emergencies, 12, 77

timeliness in management of, 22

food handling, 12, 58

food hygiene, 59

food import and export inspection, 60

food incidents, 10, 22, 47–48, 77

food labelling, 23, 36–38, 59, 78

of alcohol products, 22, 24, 37, 73, 77

law and policy, 37

monitoring survey, 58

Ongoing Food Label Monitoring Survey in Australia and New Zealand, 8

review of standards, 30

food-medicine interface, 45, 74

Food Ministers, 25

food packaging, 44, 46, 77, 78

food preservatives, 30–31

food production technologies, 23

food recalls, 12, 49

documents, 191

see also contamination; melamine adulteration of dairy products

Food Regulation Standing Committee (FRSC), 11, 38, 57

see also Implementation Sub-Committee

food safety, 41, 60, 77, 78, 80

capacity building activities, 75–76

networks, 75

new foods, new techniques, 80

review of assessment of, 33

risk to consumers, 38

in seed sprouts industry, 40

see also primary production and processing standards

Food Safety Information Council, 80

Food Safety Week, 80

Food Standards Australia New Zealand Act 1991, 10, 68, 100

and evidence-based regulation, 15

legislative changes to, 51

Food Standards Australia New Zealand Amendment Act 2007, 102

Food Standards Branch, 94

227I N D E X


food standards (Food Standards Code), 10, 23, 25–41, 101


economic benefits of, 57

maintaining currency of, 30

reviews of, 30–31, 37

setting standards, 11, 25, 67, 74

see also amendments to Food Standards Code; enforcement of food standards; evidence base; gazettals

Food Standards News, 77

Food Surveillance Network, 47, 50, 72

Food Surveillance News, 77–78

foods for special dietary uses, 59

formula for infants, 29, 59, 60

fortification of foods, 24

mandatory, 22, 34–35, 52, 58, 74, 77, 80

voluntary, 35–36

forums see conferences and forums; international networks

four-year financial plan, 17

fraud control, 106

fraud risk assessment, 106

freedom of information, 103, 192

French, Professor Nigel, 54

French Food Safety Agency, 61

fruit juice and fruit juice drinks, 32

FSANZ Act see Food Standards Australia New Zealand Act 1991

FSANZ Application Handbook, 15, 26, 46, 51

FSANZ Board see Board

FSANZ decisions, reviews of, 29–30

FSANZ Fellows, 53–54

FSANZ Parliamentary Liaison Officer, 103

full-time staff, 86, 87

functions see roles and functions

funding see finance

G

galacto-oligosaccharides, 30

gazettals, 25, 111–115, 130–131

exemption for isinglass, 38

hydrocyanic acid in cassava chips, 31

maximum residue levels (MRLs), 34

processing aids, 33

228 I N D E X


gender of staff, 86–87

General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine, China, 75

General Managers, 13, 95, 96

Food Standards (Canberra) Branch, 94

Food Standards (Wellington) Branch, 94

Legal and Regulatory Affairs Branch, 94

Risk Assessment Branch, 94

General Procedure, 27, 127

General Standard for Food Additives, 59

genetically modified (GM) foods, 10, 22, 29, 74, 77, 104

first generation traits, 33

reviews by Ministerial Council, 32

safety assessments, 33, 51

second generation traits, 33

Gidley, Professor Mike, 53

Giles, Professor Graham, 53

gluten, 48

goal for organisation, 10, 101, 109

goats and goat milk, 39, 40

Goodall, Dr Stephen, 54, 56

governance, 103–110

Government and Parliament, interaction with, 103–104


guide to report, 1–2

guidelines

bacterial contamination of chicken meat, 59

healthy eating in pregnancy, 80

safe production of seed sprouts, 40

H

H1N1 influenza, 77, 107

handling of food, 23

Harassment Contact Officers (HCOs), 92

harassment in the workplace, 84, 89, 92

Harvey, Sue, 93

hazards, 50–51

health advisory labelling, 22, 37

health and safety, 11, 23, 24, 91–92

and the catering sector, 41

229I N D E X


food-related health risks, 51

health issues, 43–49

timeliness in management of issues, 22

see also agricultural and veterinary chemical residues; food safety; fortification of foods; nutrition; risk assessments

health associations, 102

Health Canada, 33, 61

health claims, 37, 55, 73, 77

Health Ministers, 25

health non-government organisations, 68

Health Safety and Environment Working Group, 46

Henderson, Dr Leigh, 93

hepatitis A, 77

herbicide tolerance, 32, 33

high-risk drinking, 37

Hoey, Marianne, 93

Hong Kong, 79

Hot Issues reports, 103

Huckerby, Dr John, 53

human resources see staff

hydrocyanic acid in cassava chips, 22, 30, 31

hygiene and food handling, 12

I

ICT see Information and communication technology

illness, food-borne, 24

impact statements, 15, 24

implementation of new regulations, 35

Implementation Sub-Committee (ISC), 12, 39, 45, 50, 57, 72, 100

Imported Food Inspection Scheme, 60, 73

imported foods, 23, 25, 73, 104

incident reports, 91

India, 79

Indigenous Australians see Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people on staff

Indonesia, 75

induction course for new staff, 84

industry, 12

industry advice, 78

industry organisations, 101

230 I N D E X


industry portfolio, 25

industry user guides, 80

infants, 29, 44, 48, 59, 60, 77

influenza, H1N1, 77, 107

influenza vaccinations, 91

information and communication technology, 85

disaster recovery, 107

security policy, 107

information for consumers, 11, 23, 24

see also publications

information sharing in Asia-Pacific Region, 75

inquiries see enquiries

insect protection, 33

inspection of food imports and exports, 60

Instituto Nacional de Saude, Portugal, 52

inter-governmental agreements, 29, 102

internal audits, 105–106

international capacity building, 74, 75

international networks, 59, 64, 198–200

secondment of staff, 86

inulin/fructo-oligosaccharides, 30

iodine, 10, 22, 34, 52, 58, 74, 77, 136

Ireland, 47

irradiation, 76, 77, 104

isinglass, 38, 104

J

Japan, 79

Japan Food Safety Commission, 61

Jin, Dr Hong, 93

Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA), 59

Jurisdictional Forum, 134

K

key performance indicators, program reporting, 20

kidney stone illnesses, 48

Kids Eat Kids Play Survey, 52

Knowles, Hon Rob, 105

231I N D E X


kola-type soft drinks, 44

L

labelling see food labelling

Langridge, Professor Peter, 54

learning and development see staff learning and development

legislation, 10

changes to Food Standards Australia New Zealand Act 1991, 51

Fair Work, 91

functions and powers under, 174–176

requests under FOI, 103

legislative framework of organisation, 101

legislative instruments, 111, 130, 131

letter of transmittal, i

linoleic acid, 32

listeria, 77, 80

liver enzyme levels, 44

Loblay, Dr Rob, 54

location of staff, 12, 86

long term-leave staff, 86

low-fat cheese, 32

lucerne, 32

lunchboxes, 77

lupin, 31

lutein added to infant formula, 29

M

mailing lists, 192

Major Procedure, 27, 128

male staff, 86, 87, 88

management and accountability, 98–110

Management Group, 95

mandatory fortification, 22, 34–35, 52, 58, 74, 77, 80

Compliance and Enforcement Model for Mandatory Fortification, 8

enforcement agencies, 12, 24, 100

NZFSA, 74

mandatory health warnings on packaged alcohol, 37

Maori Cultural Awareness Training for staff, 71

Maori Network, 71

232 I N D E X


maps and plans, 192

market failure, 23

mass media, 76

Maximum Residue Limits, 33–34

McCutcheon, Steve, 95, 105, 208

McLucas, Senator the Hon. Jan, 10

McNeil, Professor John, 54

meat and meat products, 30–31, 40–41, 141

Médecins sans Frontières, 84

media and information services, 76–78

media releases, 193

medicines (therapeutic goods), 45

melamine adulteration of dairy products, 22, 47–48, 60, 77, 104

melamine adulteration of dairy products from China, case study, 48

Memorandums of Understanding, 73, 74, 90, 108

men staff, 86

mentoring for staff, 84

mercury in fish, 80

microbiological risk, 10, 23, 38, 40

Microsoft Office 2007, 7

milk and milk products, 23, 25, 31, 39–40, 55, 61, 74

melamine adulteration of, 22, 47–48, 60, 77, 104

see also cheese

Milne, Peter, 105, 209

minerals, 35

minimum regulation, 23, 24, 25

Minister for Health and Ageing, 103, 105

see also Parliamentary Secretary

Ministerial briefings and correspondence, 104

Ministerial Council (ANZFRMC), 26

activities and issues reported to, 16

assessments provided to, 10, 22, 130–131

endorses National Food Incident Response Protocol, 47

policy guidelines from, 11, 25–26, 41, 101

primary production and processing standard presented to, 38

Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy, 37

Ministerial Council Reviews, 28–30, 31, 35, 130–131

of Board decisions, 13

of draft standard on nutrition, health and related claims, 8, 55

of labelling law and policy, 8, 37

233I N D E X


Ministers, 10, 16, 25

Minister for Health and Ageing, 103, 105

New Zealand Minister of Food Safety, 102

see also Parliamentary Secretary

Ministry of Health (New Zealand) (MoH), 73

Minor Procedure, 27, 127

minutes, 104

mobile devices, 85

modelling, dietary, 10, 15

modelling and data management, 83

monitoring see reviews (evaluation and monitoring)

Monitoring of Emerging Issues, 78

MRLs see Maximum Residue Limits

mung beans see seed sprouts

mustard seed see seed sprouts

mycotoxins, 50

N

nanotechnologies, 16, 46, 54, 60, 70, 77

National Children’s Nutrition and Physical Activity Survey, 30, 31, 52

National Drug Research Institute, Curtin University, 37

National Food Authority (now FSANZ), 102

National Food Handling Survey 2007, 8, 58

National Food Incident Response Protocol, 47, 100

National Health and Medical Research Council, 73

National Industrial Chemicals Notification and Assessment Scheme (NICNAS), 73

National Institute for Agricultural Research, France, 53

National Measurement Institute, 58, 74

National Nanotechnology Strategy, 46

neural tube defects (NTDs), 34

New South Wales Food Authority: trans fatty acid survey, 52

New Zealand

children’s nutrition survey, 52

food-medicine interface, 45

funding from, 16, 17

mandatory fortification with folic acid, 74

Maori cultural awareness training, 71

Treaty with, 102–103

see also Wellington office

234 I N D E X


New Zealand Food Safe Partnership, 80

New Zealand Food Safety Authority (NZFSA), 43, 45, 53, 61, 72, 74, 80

The New Zealand Herald, 130

New Zealand Institute of Food Technology Convention, 78

New Zealand Minister of Food Safety, 102

New Zealand Ministry of Economic Development, 57

New Zealand Ministry of Health (MoH), 45, 73

newsletters, 35, 71, 76, 77–78

Ngã Kaitohutohu Kounga Kai, 71

NHMRC (National Health and Medical Research Council), 73

NMI (National Measurement Institute), x, 58, 74

non-English speaking background of staff, 88

non-ongoing staff, 86, 87

non-traditional foods see novel foods

Notification Circular, 130

novel foods, 32, 104



see also genetically modified (GM) foods

NTDs (neural tube defects ), 34

numbers of staff, 87

Nutridate, 79

nutrients, 15, 50

AUSNUT database, 52


profiling scoring criteria model, 73

nutrition

children, 30, 31, 52

claims, 55

and health and related claims, 37, 55, 73, 77

risk analysis principles, 59

special diets, 59

see also databases; nutrients

nuts, 10, 22, 29, 31, 77

NUTTAB, 15, 52

O

objectives

accountability, 98

235I N D E X


organisational, 10–11, 100–101

people and organisational capability, 82

regulatory measures, 22

stakeholders, 64

statutory, 129

occupational health and safety, 91–92

Office of Best Practice Regulation (OBPR), 10, 11, 24, 57, 74

Office of the Gene Technology Regulator (OGTR), 74

ongoing staff, 87

onion see seed sprouts

operating revenue and expenses, 17

organisation and structure, 12–16, 94–96

organisation chart, 14

organisational capability, 83–84, 85–90

outcomes and outputs, 16, 18–20

food regulatory outcomes, 22

overview

accountability, 99–100

corporate, 10–17

people and organisational capability, 83–84

regulatory measures, 23–25

stakeholders, 65–67

P

packaged alcohol, 37

paid Applications, 93

Papua New Guinea, 75

Parliament, interaction with, 103–104

Parliamentary Liaison Officer, 103

Parliamentary procedures, 103

Parliamentary Secretary, 10, 16, 103

part-time staff, 86, 87

partnerships, 73–75

pasteurised dairy industry, 39–40

pay see remuneration

Peacock, Emma, 90

peanuts, 10, 22, 29, 31

peer recognition of achievement, 93

perceptions of stakeholders, 65

236 I N D E X


performance, 18–20

accountability, 98

financial, 16

people and organisational capability, 82

regulatory measures, 22

reporting of, 16

stakeholders, 64

performance appraisal of staff, 88

performance bonuses, 95

performance measurement, 110

performance payments, 95

personnel see staff

pesticide residues, 50, 60

pests and diseases, control of, 33

Philippines, 75

phospholipase, 33

phytosterols, 32

pigs, 40

Pihema, Hikihiki, 105, 209

plans and planning

business, 107, 109

compliance for egg industry, 39

coordinated food survey, 72

corporate, 18, 109

disability, 92

disaster recovery, 107

financial, 17

fraud control, 106

standards development, 26–27, 83

plants and plant products, 40

plastic items or containers, 44, 77

Population Health, 18

pork, 47

Portfolio Budget Statements 2008-09: Health and Ageing Portfolio, 16, 18, 19, 99, 109

portfolios

agriculture, 25

consumer affairs, 25

finance and deregulation, 57

industry, 25

potato, 32

237I N D E X


poultry meat, 39, 59, 141–142

powers see roles and functions

pre-market approvals, 31–32

pregnancy

advice, 70, 79, 80

and alcohol consumption, 24, 37, 73

and caffeine consumption, 44

and neural tube defect (NTD), 34

presentation skills, 89

preservatives, 30–31, 43

see also food additives

Priestly, Professor Brian, 54

primary production and processing standards, 12, 24, 38

for plants and plant products, 40

Principal Food Technologist, 72

print media, 76

priorities and performance, 18–20

priorities determined by Board, 110

Prioritisation Model Score, 83

prioritisation of projects, 5, 83

problems associated with Applications and Proposals, 22, 24

processes and procedures for assessment of Applications and Proposals, 27, 83, 126–131

new procedures, 127

old procedures, 129–130

processing aids, 33, 38



procurement see purchasing

professional development see staff learning and development

professionalism, 66

program reporting, 19–20, 110

project management

audit, 106

course for staff, 88

projects finalised, 111–115

Proposals, 28

finalised, 28

prepared before 1 October 2007, 26, 116–119

prepared from 1 October 2007 onwards, 27, 119–125

238 I N D E X


problems associated with, 22, 24

processes and procedures for assessment, 27, 83, 126–131


see also gazettals

Proposed Draft Guidelines for the Control of Campylobacter and Salmonella spp. in chicken meat, 59

public comment, 15

public consultation, 13, 39, 41, 130

public health see health and safety

public health associations, 102

Public Register, 71, 192–193

Public Relations Institute Golden Target awards, 80

publications, 76, 177–190


interest group newsletters, 35

royalties on, 16

purchasing, 107, 108

consultants and contractors, 109, 194–197

Q

Quadrilateral Group

Food Safety Group, 60

member nations, 56

Social Research Coordination Group, 56

Working Groups, 60

Quality Adjusted Life Days, 57

Quarterly Awards, 93

Question Time, 103

R

radish see seed sprouts

ratite meat, 40

raw meat sausages, 30–31

raw milk products, 23, 25, 39–40, 55, 74, 77

readability

of presentation of conclusions, 68

of scientific reports, 42

recalls, 12, 48, 49, 78

Food Surveillance News, 77–78

web seminars, 79

239I N D E X


recognition of staff, 93

records, 108

Records Management Policy, 108

recruitment see appointments to staff

reduced-fat cheese, 32

reduced staff levels, 7

reference groups, 71

register see Public Register

regulatory analysis, 22, 24, 56–57

regulatory impact statements, 15, 24

regulatory measures, 22–62, 46

evaluation of, 57–58

implementation of, 35

Office of Best Practice Regulation, 10, 11, 24, 57, 74

performance, 19, 22

regulatory partners and stakeholders, 64, 71

regulatory science, 24

rejection of submissions, 128

remuneration, 91

performance bonuses and payments, 85

reporting performance

against outputs, 16

on program basis, 19–20, 110

reputation, 65–67

Reputation Management Strategy, 7

requests to examine Public Register, 71, 192–193

requests under FOI legislation, 103, 192

residues

agricultural, 33, 50, 73

pesticide, 50, 60

veterinary, 33, 50, 73

resilience, 89

responsibilities see roles and functions

responsiveness to requests, 103

retention of staff, 87

review and research documents, 193

reviews (evaluation and monitoring)

emerging issues, 78

energy, 108

240 I N D E X


Evaluation Strategy 2009-2013, 54

food composition program, 52

food labels, 8, 58

food standards, 30–31, 37

internal audit plan, 106

internal purchasing processes, 106

ISC work program, 72

mandatory fortification, 45

science strategy, 41

stakeholder relations, 64

trans fatty acids, 45

reviews (food standards), 30–31

see also Ministerial Council Reviews; risk assessment

rewards and recognition, 84, 93

rice, 32

Riley, Helen, 90

risk analysis, 13, 51

food standards based on, 11, 42

Nutritional Risk Analysis Principles, 59

workshops, 93

Risk Assessment Branch, 94

risk assessments (safety assessments), 18, 25, 41

Bisphenol A, 44

chemical and microbiological, 10, 23, 61

fraud, 106

of nanotechnology, 46

of raw milk products, 55

surveillance activities, 50

use of Codex in, 24

risk management, 105–106

business continuity, 86

Finance, Audit and Risk Management Committee, 16, 105

of melamine adulteration of dairy products, 48

mitigation control measures, 39

and regulatory measures, 23

and reputation, 67

and surveillance activities, 50

roles and functions, 10–12, 65, 100–103, 174–176

Rong, Zhang, 75

royalties on publications, 16

RSPCA, 84

241I N D E X


S

safety see health and safety

safety standards see food standards

safflower oil, 32

salaries see remuneration

Salminen, Professor Seppo, 54

Salmonella contamination, 39, 40, 59

Salmonella Oranienburg, 40

salt, 34, 77, 80

sausages, 30–31

schools, 79


Science Network Forum Workshops, 54

science of regulation, 24

Science Strategy 2006-09, 41

Science Strategy 2010-15, 42

scientific advisory groups

for dairy, 136

for eggs, 137

for epidemiology, 64, 135

for folate, 135

for infant and child health, 136

iodine, 136

scientific capability, 41–42

scientific evidence base, 22, 25, 42, 52–53, 68, 83, 86

scrutiny, 57, 105

see also audits; reviews (evaluation and monitoring)

secondment of staff, 86, 89

Section Managers, 95

security (physical and information handling), 107

seed sprouts, 40, 70, 142

seminars see workshops and seminars

Senate Estimates, 104

Senior Executive Service (SES) staff, 86, 88

senior management, 7, 95–96

separations of staff, 87

service charter, 103

services and responsibilities of organisation, 66

sesame seeds, 31

242 I N D E X


setting food standards, 11, 25, 67, 74

sheep, 40

Shepherd, Professor Richard, 54

Singapore, 79

Skeaff, Professor Murray, 54

small agency syndrome, 8

Smith, Professor Anthony, 54

Smith, Philippa, 105, 207

social justice and equity, 92

social networking sites, 78

social sciences and consumer, 54–56

sodium, 52

Southampton Study (UK), 30, 43

soybean, 31, 32, 40, 48

see also seed sprouts

speaking engagements, 200–204

special diets, 59

see also allergens

spina bifida, 34

sprouts see seed sprouts

staff, 82–96

attraction and retention of, 5

career opportunities, 8

Fellows presentations to, 54

Maori Cultural Awareness Training, 71

reduction of, 7

satisfaction, 8

senior management, 95–96

see also occupational health and safety

staff appraisal, 88

staff exchange with the United Kingdom Food Standards Agency, case study, 90

Staff Forum, 84, 93

staff learning and development, 42–43, 83, 84, 88–89, 103

Staff Long Term Service, 93

staff retention and turnover, 87

staff rewards and recognition, 84, 93

Stakeholder Engagement Strategy, 7

stakeholders, 64–80

accountability to, 101–103

243I N D E X


dietary modelling advisory group, 53

expectations of, 5

impact of regulatory changes on, 57

Stakeholder Engagement Strategy, 7

views and opinions of, 7

standards see food standards

Standards Australia, 74

standards development committees

dairy (raw milk products), 139–140

eggs and egg products, 140

health claims, 139

meat and meat products, 141

poultry meat, 141–142

primary production and processing standard for seed sprouts, 70

seed sprouts, 142

Standard Development Committee, 40

Standards Development Work Plan, 26–27, 83


statutory timelines, 83

steviol glycosides, 33

Stockwell, Dean, 96

Strategic Internal Audit Plan (SIAP), 106

stress in the workplace, 89

structure see organisation and structure

student projects, 54, 61–62

sugar beet, 32

sugar-free chewing gum, 35

sulphites, 30

surveillance and monitoring, 72, 78

surveillance activities, 12, 50

surveys

added food colours, 50–51

Australian children’s nutrition and physical activity, 30, 31, 52

Comcover risk management, 106–107

consumer attitudes, 8

Coordinated Food Survey Plan, 50, 72

dairy products, 47

food allergen labelling, 58

food handling, 58

food labelling, 8, 58

244 I N D E X


Kids Eat Kids Play, 52

melamine in foods, 47–48

New Zealand children’s nutrition, 52

staff, 84

trans fatty acids, 52

sushi, 50

sweeteners, 33, 77

Symmans, Owen, 105

T

table spreads, 32

Tamplin, Professor Mark, 54

Tasmania, 40, 86

tea, 44

technologies for food production, 23

teleconferences, 105

television advertising to children, 73

tertiary education institutions, 79

Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), 45, 72, 74–75

thiamin, 72

Tikanga Maori (customary practices), 71

timelines, statutory, 83

timeliness

of briefings and advice, 104

of management of food emergencies and public health issues, 22

tomatoes, 77

Torres Strait Islander people on staff, 88

toxicants, natural, 51

training

food standards in Asia-Pacific Region, 76

to visiting food safety officials, 75

trans fatty acids (TFA), 30, 45, 52, 77

Treaty between Australia and New Zealand, 102–103

tree nuts, 31

trust, 66

turnover of staff, 87

U

United Kingdom, 79

245I N D E X


United Kingdom Food Standards Agency (UKFSA), 43, 61, 65, 72

United States, 56, 60, 75, 79

United States Food and Drug Administration (USFDA), 44, 61

unpasteurised milk products, 23, 25, 39–40, 55, 74, 77

unscheduled absences, 91–92

urgent Applications and Proposals, 27

User Guides, 35

V

vaccination of staff, 91

Verger, Dr Philippe, 53

veterinary chemicals see agricultural and veterinary chemical residues

Victoria, 40

Video Education Australasia, 79

videos, 70, 79, 80

Viet Nam, 75

vision statement, 10, 101, 109

vitamins, 35

voluntary fortification of foods, 35–36, 58

W

Waitangi Day Achievement Award, 93

water, addition of fluoride to, 30, 36

website and new media, 16, 35, 70, 76, 78–79

seminars, 79

weight management, 32

Wellington office, 12, 72, 78, 85, 91, 192

wellness program, 84, 92

Western Australia, 40, 52

WHO (World Health Organisation), 60, 61

whole-of-government consensus, 7

wild-game animals, 40

Williams, Dr Pamela, 105, 209

Williams, Associate Professor Peter, 209–210

Windows mobiles, 85

wine, isinglass-fined, 38

women staff, 86

workplace agreements, 91

246 I N D E X


workplace diversity, 92

Workplace Giving Program, 84

Workplace Harassment Policy, 84, 92

workplace health and safety, 91–92

workplace stress, 89

workshops and seminars

FAO/IAEA Regional Training Workshop, 76

Quadrilateral Social Research Coordination Group, 56

risk analysis, 93

Science Network Forum, 54

web seminars, 79

Y

Yan, Dr William, 33

Yates, Dianne, 105, 210

Yeo, Dr Charles, 93

Australia

PO Box 7186 Canberra BCACT 2610Australia

Tel: +61 2 6271 2241 Fax: +61 2 6271 2278

[email protected]

New Zealand

PO Box 10559 The TerraceWellington 6036 New Zealand

Tel: +64 4 978 5630 Fax: +64 4 473 [email protected]


Annual Report2008-2009

An

nu

al Rep

ort 2008 - 2009

Foo

d S

tandard

s Australia N

ew Z

ealand