Table 3: The live animal export process, including data required for mortality reconciliation
Livestock export process An example
Primary audit Mortality reconciliation
A. Administration prior to export
1. Notice of intent to export NOI lodged
2. Export clearance number ECN assigned
3. Proforma invoice issued
4. Letter of credit LC import permit received
5. LC confirmed.
6. Import permit verified against AQIS information
Estimate of number classes to be consigned. Confirmation of number classes to be exported.
B. Livestock: farm-of-origin to feedlot
7. Livestock purchased to fit order
Number purchased loaded Vendor declaration form, transport waybill
8. Livestock prepared for trade
9. Livestock transported to pre-export facility
Number entering feedlot, number rejected at unloading Number of transport deaths
C. Livestock: feedlot
10. Livestock held at pre-export handling facility Number of feedlot deaths, number leaving feedlot
D. Livestock: feedlot to export vessel
11. Livestock transported to point of export Number of deaths during transport
12. Livestock loaded onto export vessel Number loaded onto vessel, number rejected at wharf airport
E. Administration at export
13. EXIT system notified Number reported on ECN
14. Health
certificate
F. Livestock: export vessel to importing countryies
15. Livestock shipped to importing countryies Number of deaths on export vessel
16. Livestock unloaded at importing countryies Number unloaded from vessel
The primary audit - risk management As part of the primary audit, it is also recommended that auditing be conducted to assess
competency in the planning and implementation of risk management as it relates to animal health and welfare throughout the export process. In other words, the audit function in LEAP should be
expanded to assess whether appropriate risk management frameworks exist and have been applied by exporters and other bodies relevant to specified consignments to effectively identify, analyse,
evaluate, treat, manage and communicate key risks associated with animal health and welfare.
This aspect of the audit should be conducted after considering each of the criteria:
An integrated risk management
approach An integrated approach to risk management, by the exporter, requires
that risk management is an integral part of the live export process. The exporter has policies, strategies, and a comprehensive system to
demonstrate a risk management culture.
Commitment and leadership
The achievement of an integrated risk management approach and culture requires strong leadership and a commitment at the highest
levels within the exporter organisation. There is an active and committed focus by all senior executives to “champion” the practice of
risk management in order to minimise mortality rates that might be associated with the export of livestock.
A positive and proactive focus
The exporter maintains a proactive role in the identification, analysis and treatment of potential risks relating to the export of livestock.
A process-driven approach
The exporter has a framework capable of implementing risk management processes. The exporter is able to demonstrate that he
she has a clearly defined and documented risk management process, which is integrated into all live export related processes.
Planning for continuous
There is a continuous application of risk management practice with a clearly defined risk planning process. Continuous control,
88
improvement performance monitoring, review and improvement of planning and
practices are clearly part of the exporter’s culture.
Review and documentation
There are developed and applied mechanisms to ensure ongoing review of risks. The exporter has a well-developed review, reporting
and documentation system in place. The exporter monitors and documents all levels within the risk management process.
Active communication
Active communication and consultation occurs with internal and external stakeholders e.g. the LESCO at each stage of the risk
management process and concerning the process as a whole. A communication plan has been developed at the earliest stage in the
risk management process, with the plan addressing issues relating to the risks themselves and the process to manage it. There is a staff
position responsible for communicating risk management policies and the risk management program.
Resourcing
The exporter has identified and committed adequate resources to support the full implementation of risk management practices and
processes on a continuing basis. The business has assigned accountability for the management of risk and has adequate risk
management resources to protect it against these risks.
Training and education
The exporter is committed to the training and the education of staff in risk management with an ongoing and funded training and education
program.
RECOMMENDATION 31: As part of the primary audit, it is recommended that the auditor assess whether appropriate risk management frameworks have been applied
by exporters and other bodies relevant to specified consignments to effectively identify, analyse, evaluate, treat, manage and communicate key risks associated
with animal health and welfare. Key criteria relevant to this assessment would include evidence of an integrated risk management approach, commitment and
leadership, a positive and proactive focus, a process-driven approach, planning for continuous improvement, review and documentation, active communication,
resourcing, and training and education.
The LEAP auditors would have the ongoing role of reviewing these risk management plans against plans developed by the independent LESCO. As discussed previously, feedback from the auditor
would contribute to the industry risk management development plan.
RECOMMENDATION 32: It is recommended that the auditors review the risk management plans against model plans that have been developed by LESCO.
Further, it is recommended that feedback from this process be used by LESCO as part of the industry risk management development program.
89
The secondary audit The secondary audit to be enacted if aspects of the primary audit are considered uncertain or
unsatisfactory would involve a more detailed audit of compliance with increased levels of substantive testing. As previously explained, using the Audit Testing Matrix, where the primary audit has raised
suspicions over the compliance of the exporter, more detailed testing is required to obtain the level of assurance required to assess whether the exporter is in fact compliant.
The secondary audit would therefore involve: • Audit of a larger sample of an exporter’s shipments; and
• Conducting random audits of physical livestock shipments.
in order to obtain the required level of assurance as to whether the exporter is in fact compliance.
RECOMMENDATION 33: It is recommended that a secondary audit be enacted where the primary audit results are unsatisfactory or inconclusive. The secondary
audit would audit an increased sample of shipments in addition to increased instances of random physical audits of shipments in order to obtain sufficient
evidence to assess compliance or non-compliance.
5.3.3.3 Action Plans
