SUMMARY: The current system suffers from technical and structural faults. This review puts forward innovative and practical recommendations for addressing each
of the faults identified.
1.4 Aims of the project
In view of the above, the primary purpose of this review is to suggest changes to the system to enable consistent compliance with agreed animal health and welfare outcomes.
The principal objectives as specified in the terms of reference are as follows: 1. Review and make recommendations on LEAP as contained in the LEAP Handbook
• The recommendations will be practical and consider commercial constraints • The recommendations will be based on best industry practice
• Each recommendation will be communicated to industry, with any feedback documented.
2. Design and formulate outcomes standards based on risk identification • These standards will reflect the outcomes required by customer countries and animal welfare
stakeholders within accepted industry bounds. • The outcomes will be practical and achievable and pass consultation with industry.
3. Review and make recommendations on the relevance of the present ALES 4. Examine and make recommendations on the auditing process and other processes needed to
gain assurance of compliance. • Such recommendations will be based on the most current theory and practice in quality
management • The recommendations should be focussed on achieving a degree of assurance such that the
desired outcomes from 2 above are met • Any commercial implications to the audited exporter will be made apparent and be well
documented • Recommendations should be accompanied by an implementation plan.
1.5 Method
The generic management system The outcome-based model is being based on the management system as portrayed in Figure 2. By
necessity, this system incorporates all the institutional, operational and compliance issues surrounding the trade.
19
The institutional structure that maintains and applies the standards is seen as critically important to the overall functionality of the system. Unless the standards are jointly agreed and applied by industry
and government, their technical quality will count for nothing.
Live export industry stakeholders Although exporters are ultimately responsible for the animal welfare outcomes of each shipment, the
implications due to welfare concerns are much wider, and can include the country as a whole. For this reason, the current review has considered a wider range of industry stakeholders, as listed in
Table 1.
SUMMARY: The outcome-based model has been developed with regard to the broader management system that impacts on industry regulation. Further, the review
has been undertaken with regard to the wide range of stakeholders associated with the live export industry.
20
Exporters
Other stakeholders eg, state legislation,
interest groups
Compliance with acceptable animal welfare outcomes
AQIS
Set conditions Issue licences and
permits
Importing country requirements
LiveCorp ALEC
Representation Policy
Communications
Linkages with livestock producers
and service providers
Industry Consultative Committee ICC
Government Industry
Animal welfare Ship owners
Standards Management Group
Rules for accreditation Maintenance of ALES
Investigation of non compliance Auditing for compliance with ALES
Application of sanctions
Figure 2: Regulation of the live export industry
21
Table 1: Industry and government organisations and their roles in livestock exporting Organisation
Role Accountable to….
AFFA Coordination and implementation of
government policy, management of major incidents
Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry
AQIS Responsible for inter-government
certification; licensing of eligible exporters; assess compliance with
industry standards for issuance of export permits under the Export Control
Act; issue health certificates to allow entry into importing countries;
investigate mortality events. AFFA, importing countries,
Australian livestock industries and exporters
Livestock Export
Standards and Compliance
Organisation Governed by a broad based
representation with the power and authority to administer LEAP
accreditation rules and ALES. Industry and government but
demonstratively free to administer accreditation and
the standards in the public interest.
Industry Consultative
Committee ICC
Communication and coordination between industry and government on
livestock export issues. Also evaluation of issues requiring a strategic response.
Industry and government.
ALEC, LiveCorp, MLA
Represent industry to government and the Australian public; fund and manage
RD; determine industry representation on organisations
Industry constituents and the government.
Australian Maritime
Safety Authority
AMSA Administers maritime orders;
investigates mortality events in relation to Maritime Orders.
Minister for Transport, the shipping industry and
livestock exporters.
State governments
Animal welfare legislation
6
. Public perceptions of animal
welfare
6
Legislation varies between states but is otherwise general for example, the avoidance of cruelty to animals etc. Compliance with LEAP and ALES ensures observance of the animal welfare legislation
applied by the states, as well as consistency with voluntary QA programs such as Flockcare and CATTLECARE.
22
2 KEY ELEMENTS OF REFORM
2.1 Introduction
