RECOMMENDATION 19: It is recommended that pre-accreditation training become a mandatory requirement for new entrants seeking first time accreditation. Before
achieving accreditation, exporters and key staff would be expected to attend relevant training, and demonstrate competence in a range of topics, including outcome-based
standards, risk management, incident management, compliance and legislative issues. The training will be specific to livestock-type and export-method.
Furthermore, it is recommended that the LESCO be responsible for the development, conduct and scheduling of relevant pre-accreditation training; and the monitoring of attendance. The fee structure
for such training would be determined on a fee-for-service basis.
RECOMMENDATION 20: It is recommended that the LESCO be responsible for the relevant pre-accreditation training, including development, conduct, scheduling and
quality assurance.
5.2.2 Accreditation and demonstrated ability
An application for accreditation does not currently distinguish exporters according to: • The species of livestock for example, sheep, cattle or goats; or
• The methods of export for example, air or sea.
Under current arrangements there appears to be nothing to prevent an exporter who, for example, exports breeding cattle by air from commencing exporting sheep by sea. Knowledge and experience
are reasonably applicable across species but not between different methods of transport.
Whilst the LEAP accreditation rules require exporters to implement a Quality Management Program, this in itself does not demonstrate that the exporter has the relevant knowledge or skills regarding
animal welfare or is familiar with the specific risks associated with the export of livestock by air or sea.
As a consequence of these concerns and consistent with the recommendations with respect to pre- accreditation training, it is recommended that exporters be accredited on the basis of livestock-type
and export-method.
RECOMMENDATION 21: Practicalities notwithstanding, it is recommended that exporters be accredited on the basis of livestock-type for example: sheep, cattle
andor goats and export-method that is, air andor sea.
74
5.2.3 Accreditation fees and industry access
Since 1 July 2003, the cost of accreditation has been determined on the basis of export-method. Conceptually, there may be a case for structuring fees for accreditation according to the level of
associated risk
21
. There are two reasons for this: • It would be consistent with the broad approach of an outcome standards approach, which is
underpinned at many levels by the issue of risk; and • It may help to limit new entrants to those enterprises that have given serious consideration to all
dimensions of the industry – not just the immediate commercial prospects. While the industry should do nothing to limit the healthy competition and innovation that new entrants might bring, it
should also want to signal to potential entrants that the sustainability of the industry relies on high technical and ethical standards.
Historical data, routinely collected by LiveCorp, could provide a useful indicator with respect to risk with riskier ventures being associated with higher levels of adverse animal health and welfare
outcomes. However, the practical difficulties of developing differential fees is readily acknowledged so a hard and fast recommendation is not proposed at this time.
RECOMMENDATION 22: It is recommended that a risk-based approach to determining accreditation fees be given consideration. Using this approach, riskier
ventures which are associated with higher levels of adverse animal health and welfare outcomes might incur higher accreditation costs. Data collected by
LiveCorp could be used to assess the level of risk. Actual implementation would depend on further analysis.
The Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry Act 1997 the Act does not necessarily make it mandatory for an exporter to be accredited by LiveCorp in order to be granted an export licence.
Section 12 of the Act states the requirements for the granting of a licence as follows:
1 The Secretary must not grant an export licence unless satisfied that:
a if the applicant is an individual, the applicant is:
i a person of integrity; and
ii competent to
hold the licence; and iii
a person of sound financial standing; and b
if the applicant is a body corporate, the applicant is: i
a body corporate of integrity; and ii competent
to hold the licence; and
iii a body corporate of sound financial standing; and
c each person who participates or would participate, in the management or control of the
applicants meat or live-stock export business or proposed meat or live-stock export business is a person of integrity; and
d the applicant is, and is likely to continue to be, able to comply with the conditions to which the
licence, if granted, would be subject; and e
the granting of the licence to the applicant would not, for any other reason, be contrary to the interests of the industry.
21
Structuring fees to reflect inherent risk is not uncommon eg, the insurance surcharge placed on young drivers.
75
2 The regulations may prescribe the matters to which the Secretary is to have regard for the purpose of
satisfying himself or herself about the matters referred to in subsection 1.
It seems, therefore, that the Secretary is only required to have regard to the regulations
22
and might not be prevented from granting a license, should the exporter be unable to demonstrate that they are
accredited by LiveCorp. Legal opinion, sought by LiveCorp, refutes this possibility as follows: • The Secretary must take into account whether or not LiveCorp has granted accreditation to an
exporter; • There is no other mechanism for an exporter to establish competency;
• The Secretary may refuse an export licence even if LiveCorp grants the exporter accreditation; and
• LiveCorp must give procedural fairness to exporters in respect of LiveCorp’s decisions regarding accreditation
23
.
SUMMARY: The Secretary must take into account whether or not LiveCorp has granted accreditation to an exporter but he she may refuse an export licence even if
LiveCorp grants the exporter accreditation.
5.2.4 Cessation of accreditation and formal undertakings
