‘Paddock to the Plate’ (Part 2) – Amendment of the Food ... · ‘Paddock to the Plate’...

Queensland Parliamentary Library

‘Paddock to the Plate’ (Part 2) –Amendment of the Food Act 1981(Qld) by the Health LegislationAmendment Bill 2001 (Qld)

A risk-based management system for food safety has already beenimplemented in the primary production sector by the Food Production(Safety) Act 2000 (Qld). The new regime will soon be extended tocover food sold or given away by businesses in the food manufacture,food services and food retail sectors. The moves are part of anational scheme to embrace consistent and effective food safety andhygiene standards from ‘paddock to plate’. The impetus has comefrom the development of a new joint Australia New Zealand FoodStandards Code, to include new Food Safety Standards to be adoptedin all jurisdictions through appropriate legislation. How thatlegislation should look has been set out in a national Model Food Billagreed to by all governments in November 2000.

Amendments to the Food Act 1981 (Qld) made by the HealthLegislation Amendment Bill 2001 (Qld) and to the Food HygieneRegulation 1989 (Qld) allow the Food Standards Code, includingthree new Food Safety Standards, to apply to Queensland foodbusinesses.

Nicolee Dixon

Research Brief No 2001/24

Queensland Parliamentary LibraryResearch Publications and Resources Section

Ms Mary Seefried, Director (07) 3406 7116

Ms Karen Sampford, Research Publications Officer (07) 3406 7310

Mr Wayne Jarred, Senior Parliamentary Research Officer (07) 3406 7422

Ms Nicolee Dixon, Parliamentary Research Officer (07) 3406 7409

Ms Cathy Green (part time), Parliamentary Research Officer (07) 3406 7641

© Queensland Parliamentary Library, 2001

ISSN 1443-7902ISBN 0 7242 7930 X

Copyright protects this publication. Except for purposes permitted by the Copyright Act 1968,reproduction by whatever means is prohibited, other than by Members of the Queensland Parliament inthe course of their official duties, without the prior written permission of the Parliamentary Librarian,Queensland Parliamentary Library.

Inquiries should be addressed to:Director, Research Publications & ResourcesQueensland Parliamentary LibraryParliament HouseGeorge Street, Brisbane QLD 4000Director: Ms Mary Seefried. (Tel: 07 3406 7116)

Information about Research Publications can be found on the Internet at:Http://www. parliament. qld. gov. au/parlib/research/index. htm

CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 1

2 PREVIOUS FOOD REGULATION REGIME – PRE 2001-2003 ................. 1

DIAGRAM 1 ............................................................................................................ 2

2.1 COMMONWEALTH LEVEL – EXISTING FOOD STANDARDS CODE...................... 3

2.2 CURRENT FOOD LAWS IN QUEENSLAND ........................................................ 3

3 REFORMS TO CREATE A NEW REGIME.................................................. 4

3.1 COMMONWEALTH LEVEL............................................................................... 6

3.1.1 New Joint Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code........................ 6

3.1.2 Food Safety Standards – Chapter 3 of the New Joint Code...................... 7

3.1.3 National Model Food Bill to Apply the Food Safety Standards................. 8

4 STATE LEVEL - IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FOOD SAFETY STANDARDS IN QUEENSLAND

4.1 LEGISLATIVE REFORMS................................................................................... 9

4.1.1 The Food Production (Safety) Act 2000 (Qld)..................................... 10

4.1.2 Amendments to the Food Act 1981 - the Health Legislation AmendmentBill 2001 (Qld) ...................................................................................... 10

4.1.3 Changes to the Food Hygiene Regulation 1989....................................... 16

4.1.4 Food Standards Regulation 1994 (Qld).................................................. 17

5 OVERVIEW OF THE FOUR FOOD SAFETY STANDARDS.................... 17

5.1 STANDARD 3.1.1: INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION ............................... 17

5.2 STANDARD 3.2.1: FOOD SAFETY PROGRAMS............................................... 17

5.3 STANDARD 3.2.2: FOOD SAFETY PRACTICES AND GENERAL

REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................................. 19

5.4 STANDARD 3.2.3: FOOD PREMISES AND EQUIPMENT.................................... 20

6 CHANGES TO AUSTRALIA NEW ZEALAND FOOD AUTHORITY.......21

APPENDIX A-SUMMARY OF REGULATORY RESPONSIBILITIES FORCOMMERCIAL SEAFOOD SAFETY AND HYGIENE INQUEENSLAND ......................................................................................................22

APPENDIX B – NEWSPAPER ARTICLES.........................................................23

RECENT PARLIAMENTARY LIBRARY RESEARCH PUBLICATIONS 200129

‘Paddock to the Plate’ (Part 2) Page 1

1 INTRODUCTION

The legislative framework in Queensland for food safety from the ‘paddock to the plate’seeks to ensure that all food is safe for consumption and thereby increase publicprotection from food-borne illnesses.

A risk-based management system for food safety has already been implemented in theprimary production sector by the Food Production (Safety) Act 2000 (Qld). The newregime will soon be extended to cover food sold or given away by businesses in the foodmanufacture, food services and food retail sectors. The moves are part of a nationalscheme to embrace consistent and effective food safety and hygiene standards from‘paddock to plate’. The impetus has come from the development of a new joint AustraliaNew Zealand Food Standards Code, to include new Food Safety Standards to beadopted in all jurisdictions through appropriate legislation. How that legislation shouldlook has been set out in a national Model Food Bill agreed to by all governments inNovember 2000.

Amendments to the Food Act 1981 (Qld) made by the Health Legislation AmendmentBill 2001 (Qld) (the Bill) and to the Food Hygiene Regulation 1989 (Qld) allow the FoodStandards Code, including three new Food Safety Standards, to apply to Queenslandfood businesses. The new provisions are reinforced by strong penalties for seriousbreaches in relation to unsafe or unsuitable food and for non-compliance with the FoodStandards Code.

2 PREVIOUS FOOD REGULATION REGIME – PRE 2001-2003

Constitutional limitations on Commonwealth legislative powers mean that the regulation ofthe safe production and processing of foods occurs largely through legislation in eachstate and territory. Attempts have been made over the past few decades to develop aNational Model Food Act for uniform implementation of food standards across Australia.It was not until 1991 that all states and territories agreed to adopt the Food StandardsCode (developed by the Commonwealth’s Australia New Zealand Food Authority(ANZFA)) as part of their food legislation.

The operation of food laws prior to the commencement of the new regime in Queenslandis set out in Diagram 1.


DIAGRAM 1

PRE 2001-03 FOOD REGULATION REGIME

Commonwealth Level

State Level (Queensland)

*There is also legislation dealing with the primary industry sector. TheFood Production (Safety) Act 2000 will be discussed as a reform tofood regulation in Queensland as it commenced only recently.

Food Standards Code(composition and labelling of food)- developed by ANZFA and approved byANZFC (no food safety standards).

Food Act 1981 (Qld)

Creates offences relating to sale, preparation,labelling etc of food in manufacturing, foodservice and food retail sectors; contains labellingrequirements; enforcement; analysis of samples;duties of Qld Health officers and other officers.Makes it an offence not to comply withprescribed standards.

Food Hygiene Regulation 1989 (Qld)- regulates safety of food in the manufacture,

food service and food retail sectors, includinghygiene of food handlers and food premises;

- administration and enforcement is mainly byLocal Government.

Food Standard Regulation1994 (Qld)- adopts relevant parts of FoodStandards Code inmanufacturing, food service andfood retail sectors.


2.1 COMMONWEALTH LEVEL – EXISTING FOOD STANDARDS CODE

Despite constitutional impediments, the Commonwealth has, nevertheless, played a largepart in developing Australian food laws. That has been mainly through the auspices ofANZFA, established by the Australia New Zealand Food Authority Act 1991 (Cth).The main function performed by ANZFA is the development, review and amendment ofstandards for inclusion in the Food Standards Code and to make appropriaterecommendations concerning them to the Australia New Zealand Food StandardsCouncil (ANZFSC). Among other activities, it is also empowered to facilitate theharmonisation of state and territory food laws and procedures.1

The existing Food Standards Code contains more than 90 food standards relating to thecomposition and labelling of food products (ie food quality). Until the reforms dealt within this Brief, there were no standards dealing directly with food safety issues such as thecleanliness of food premises and the hygienic handling of food.

Food standards developed or varied by ANZFA are often an outcome of a publicprocess involving an application for variation and a call for submissions. Followingapproval by ANZFSC, the new standard or variation is gazetted and becomes part of theFood Standards Code. The Code is enforceable through legislation in the states andterritories in Australia and in New Zealand which makes it an offence to supply food thatdoes not comply with the Code. In Queensland, this is achieved through adoption of theFood Standards Code, and any variations to it, by the Food Standards Regulation1994 (Qld).

The existing Food Standards Code is being phased out and will, by January 2003, bereplaced by the new joint Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code. Until then, theexisting Code will be known as ‘Volume 1’ of the Food Standards Code and may stillbe followed by food businesses during the phasing-in period.

2.2 CURRENT FOOD LAWS IN QUEENSLAND

In Queensland, food hygiene and safety in the manufacturing, food service and food retailsectors are regulated by Queensland Health and local government under the authorityprovided primarily by the Food Act 1981 (Qld), the Food Hygiene Regulation 1989(Qld), and the Food Standards Regulation 1994 (Qld).

The Food Act 1981 regulates the quality of food prepared and sold, sets labellingrequirements, and establishes a range of offences for conduct such as selling food that is

1 Australia New Zealand Food Authority Act 1991 (Cth), s 7, as amended by the Australia New

Zealand Food Authority Amendment Act 1999 (Cth).


unfit for human consumption, is adulterated or is damaged etc. Powers are given toQueensland Health officers and local government officers in relation to administration andenforcement of the legislation, including a power to act in an emergency.

The Food Standards Regulation 1994 imports some standards in the Food StandardsCode regarding food standards, names of foods, packing and labelling, advertising, foodsamples and methods of analysis.2

As discussed in LB No 8/00, the Food Hygiene Regulation 1989 (Qld) deals withfood safety and hygiene issues in the manufacturing, food service and food retail sectorssuch as the protection of food from contaminants; hygiene of food handlers; and safety offood. It also covers licences and registration matters. The provisions are enforced bylocal government.

The recently proclaimed Food Production (Safety) Act 2000 (Qld) (not represented inDiagram 1 as it essentially forms part of the new regime of food safety and is thusincluded in Diagram 2) controls food hygiene and safety at the primary production level tothe point of manufacture or retail and also includes raw meat, dairy factories andsmallgoods.3 This Act is discussed in Section 4.1.1.4

3 REFORMS TO CREATE A NEW REGIME

A number of food safety reforms have occurred over the past decade, gaining impetusfrom an agreement between Australia and New Zealand to develop joint food standards.Those reforms relevant to the matters in this Brief are outlined below. Details about thevarious initiatives are provided in LB No 8/00. Diagram 2 sets out the reform processat the federal and state levels.

2 See Food Standards Regulation 1994, Part 2.

3 Queensland. Queensland Health, Environmental Health Unit, ‘It’s in our Hands’, Food ReformInformation Paper Two on the Implementation of the National Food Reforms in Queensland,May 2001, http://www.health.qld.gov.au.

4 Other legislation (not further considered) includes the Agricultural Standards Act 1994 (Qld),the Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals Act 1994 (Qld), and the Stock Act 1915 (Qld).


DIAGRAM 2

REFORMS IN FOOD REGULATION – NEW REGIME 2001-03

Development at Commonwealth Level

Development at State Level (Queensland)

Both the old FSC andnew Joint FSC willoperate concurrentlyuntil Dec 2002.

Old Food Standards Code “Vol 1” - toremain in force until Dec 2002 whensuperseded by new Joint FoodStandards Code.

National Model FoodBill to say howFood SafetyStandards to beimplemented in eachState and Territory

IntergovernmentalAgreement on FoodRegulation – 3 Nov2000. Includes aNational Model FoodBill.

Annex B “non-core”provisions which States &Territories can elect toadopt or not. Need not beuniform (eg powers andfunctions of officers,registration)

Amendments to Food Act 1981 (Qld) by HealthLegislation Amendment Bill (Qld Health)- Pt 5 implements Annex A provisions of Model Food

Bill and, thereby, adopt the Food Standards Code(and 3 of the 4 Food Safety Standards inmanufacturing, food services & food retail areas).

- Standard 3.2.1 has not been adopted;- Parts of Standard 3.2. 2 (re knowledge, skills &

notification) not operating until July 2002.

Food Production (Safety) Act 2000 (DPI)- covers Qld’s primary industry sector up to point of

manufacture.- Safe Food Production Qld controls safety and

hygiene of primary produce, shore-based commercialfishing activities of commercial fishers, dairyprocessing and manufacture; and butcher shops.

New Joint Food Standards Code “Vol 2” -being phased in over 2 years and will replaceold Food Standards Code in Jan 2003.

The Food Safety Standards developed by ANZFAwere gazetted on 24 August 2000, to form Chapter 3of the Food Standards Code. The new Joint FoodStandards Code was gazetted on 20 December 2000.

Chapter 2 – Minimum productstandards for particular foods.

How does the Food Standards Code,containing the Food Safety Standards,become enforceable in all States andTerritories?

Chapter 3 – Food Safety Standards(Australia only)• Standard 3. 1. 1 - Interpretation

& application;• Standard 3. 2. 1 – Food Safety

Programs (voluntary only);• Standard 3. 2. 2 – Food Safety

Practices & GeneralRequirements;

• Standard 3.2.3. – Food Premises& Equipment

Annex A “core”provisions which Statesand Territories must adoptin substantially similarterms. (eg key definitions,major offences relating tobreaches of standards).

Chapter 1 – General food standards

Food Hygiene Regulation 1989 (Qld)

- main means of adopting the Food Safety Standards(apart from 3. 2. 1 Food Safety Programs). Hasrequired significant amendment and repeal of anumber of provisions to be consistent with FoodSafety Standards.

- further amendment may be needed when Annex Bprovisions considered further.

Food Standards Regulation 1994Will require revision and amendmentin light of new Food Safety Standards


3.1 COMMONWEALTH LEVEL

As discussed in LB No 8/00 at pp 13-17, much of the impetus for change came from thenational 1998 Food Regulation Review Committee Report Food: A Growth Industry(the Blair Report). The Committee recommended the implementation of an integratedand coordinated national food regulatory system (covering the whole food chain from‘paddock to plate’). It was envisaged that nationally consistent minimum performancestandards would be set by government, in consultation with industry, and a responsibilitybe imposed upon food businesses to achieve those standards through preventative, risk-based programs.

3.1.1 New Joint Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code

ANZFA’s objective in developing the new joint Food Standards Code for Australiaand New Zealand was to remove the numerous prescriptive and outdated requirementsfor individual foods and replace them with more generic standards. For the first time itcontains specific food safety and hygiene standards (in chapter 3).

The new joint Food Standards Code embraces a number of foods not previouslycovered by composition and labelling standards in the old Code, or in the New Zealandfood laws, and it will reflect current scientific and clinical knowledge.

The new joint Code was approved by ANZFSC in November 2000, and gazetted on 20December 2000 as an amendment to the current Food Standards Code. It will replacethe existing Code by January 2003, allowing for a two-year phase in period during whichboth Codes will run side-by-side.

During the transition phase foods can comply with either the existing Food StandardsCode (Volume 1) or the new joint Food Standards Code (Volume 2) but not acombination of both.5 It is anticipated that Volume 1 will be repealed in December 2002.A taskforce, established by the ANZFSC, has been considering a number of issuesconcerning the content of some of the Standards in the new joint Code (Volume 2) andthe implementation approaches for small business.

The new joint Food Standards Code (Volume 2) has three parts –

• General food standards (Chapter 1) concerning matters such as –

• labelling and other information to include, among other things, percentage ofcharacterising ingredients of foods (eg percentage of strawberries instrawberry jam) and information requirements for other items; warnings and

5 See ANZFA website at http://www.anzfa.gov.au/foodstandards/.


mandatory advisory statements on certain foods to alert allergy sufferers;directions for safe use and storage of food; mandatory nutrition informationpanels and ingredient lists on most foods, including a need to declaresaturated fat levels; and labelling of genetically modified (GM) foods;

• date stamping – when to use ‘best before’ or ‘use by’;

• substances added to food (eg food additives, processing aids, vitamins andminerals);

• contaminants and residues (including generally expected levels (ie acceptablelimits) for metal contaminants; prohibited and restricted plants and fungi;

• maximum limits for foodborne microorganisms in certain foods;

• standard methods of analysis to be used to determine compliance bybusinesses with the Code;

• foods requiring pre-market clearance (eg GM foods, novel foods andirradiated foods).

• Minimum product standards for particular foods (Chapter 2) such as –

• meat, eggs and fish;

• dairy products;

• non-alcoholic and alcoholic beverages;

• special purpose foods eg infant formula, sports foods, formulated mealreplacements;

• cereals, fruit and vegetables.

• Food Safety Standards (Chapter 3) which will apply to Australia only as NewZealand has its own food safety regime, adopting a similar focus.

3.1.2 Food Safety Standards – Chapter 3 of the New Joint Code

The Food Safety Standards (Chapter 3 of the new joint Food Standards Code) must beimplemented by legislation in each state and territory to take full effect.

The Food Safety Standards impose a basic requirement that food must be safe forconsumption and it is then for the particular food business to ensure that this occurs. If afood business is operating properly and producing safe food now, it should have nodifficulty complying with the new requirements. There are, however, some additionalmatters that businesses will have to attend to, particularly in relation to training andknowledge of staff.


The new Standards reflect international best practice and were the subject of aRegulatory Impact Statement by ANZFA in May 1999.6

The four new Food Safety Standards (discussed in detail in Section 5) are –

• Standard 3.1.1: Interpretation and Application;

• Standard 3.2.1: Food Safety Programs;

• Standard 3.2.2: Food Safety Practices and General Requirements;

• Standard 3.2.3: Food Premises and Equipment.

Following approval by the ANZFSC, the Commonwealth gazetted three of the fourFood Safety Standards on 24 August 2000. ANZFSC decided that Standard 3. 2. 1:Food Safety Programs be adopted as a voluntary rather than a mandatory standardpending the outcome of a Commonwealth Government impact study (late 2001). Theother three Food Safety Standards (Standards 3.1.1, 3.2.2 and 3.2.3) became part ofthe Food Standards Code on 24 February 2001 (six months after gazettal).

On 3 November 2000, the Senior Officials Working Group (SOWG) of the Council ofAustralian Governments (CoAG) signed an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) onFood Regulation, which included a national Model Food Bill to allow consistentadoption of the new Food Safety Standards in each state and territory. Queensland isrepresented on SOWG by the Department of Premier and Cabinet.

3.1.3 National Model Food Bill to Apply the Food Safety Standards

The Model Food Bill has two separate parts. Annex A contains ‘core’ provisions thatthe IGA requires each jurisdiction to adopt in legislation ‘as is’, or as similarly as possible.The Annex A provisions relate to issues such as important definitions, such as ‘foodbusiness’ and ‘sell’, major food safety offences and defences, and emergency provisions.The Annex B ‘non-core’ provisions do not need to be uniform across jurisdictions andeach state or territory can adopt or leave out whatever provisions they choose. Theseprovisions concern matters such as registration of food businesses and the powers ofenforcement authorities.

6 Australia, ANZFA Food Safety Standards – Costs and Benefits: An analysis of the regulatory

impact of the proposed national food safety reforms, May 1999.


4 STATE LEVEL - IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FOOD SAFETYSTANDARDS IN QUEENSLAND

Although the Food Safety Standards became part of the new joint Food StandardsCode on 24 February 2001, they will not be legally enforceable in a state or territory untilthey are ‘picked up’ by that state or territory’s legislation.

Queensland Health has sought to contribute to an integrated and coordinated nationalfood regulatory system with improved compliance and enforcement mechanisms.7 In thelead up to the introduction of changes to Queensland’s food laws to implement the FoodSafety Standards of the Food Standards Code, Queensland Health facilitated a numberof information sessions and workshops to explain how the implementation strategy forfood reforms will work and how it will impact on food businesses. It has also placed aseries of information papers on its website (the ‘It’s in our Hands’ series) to helpbusinesses and local governments adjust to the new regime.8 Further information aboutfood safety issues for industry and regulators as well as details of various courses andprograms can be found at the Queensland Health website.9

To assist with the implementation of the reforms, a Food Reform Implementation Team offour persons (an environmental health adviser and three senior project officers) has beenworking with local governments and industry and coordinating seminars about the newStandards.

4.1 LEGISLATIVE REFORMS

Amendments will be made to the Food Act 1981 (Qld) by the Health LegislationAmendment Bill 2001 (Qld) (the Bill) to achieve consistency with Annex A of theModel Food Bill and provide the mechanism through which the Food Safety Standardsare adopted in Queensland at the food manufacturing, service and retail level. Thesechanges will also support amendments to the Food Hygiene Regulation 1989 to remove anumber of provisions that will conflict with, or duplicate, the new Food Safety Standards.

Pre-empting these changes, the Queensland Government introduced a risk-based foodsafety management regime in the primary industries sector with the passage of the FoodProduction (Safety Act) 2000 (Qld).

7 Queensland Health, ‘It’s in our Hands’, Food Reform Information Paper Two, May 2001, p 4.

8 Queensland. Queensland Health, Environmental Health Unit, ‘It’s in our Hands’, AnInformation Paper on the Implementation of the Food Safety Standards in Queensland,October 2000, http://www.health.qld.gov.au.

9 At http://www.health.qld.gov.au following the ‘health topics’ link and clicking on ‘food safety’.


4.1.1 The Food Production (Safety) Act 2000 (Qld)

The Food Production (Safety) Act 2000 (Qld) forms part of Queensland’s responseto initiatives at a national and international level to regulate food safety from ‘paddock toplate’. The Act covers Queensland’s primary industry sector (the ‘paddock’ and,eventually, the fishing boat). The measures appear to reflect those in the Food SafetyStandards in the Food Standards Code and the philosophies of recent food regulationreviews, such as the Blair Report, considered earlier.

A regulatory authority, known as Safe Food Production Queensland, was established asa statutory body within the Primary Industries portfolio to take over the food safetyfunctions of the Queensland Meat and Livestock Authority and, eventually, theQueensland Dairy Authority. It has the responsibility for controlling food safety andhygiene associated with the production of primary produce, including shore-basedcommercial fishing activities of commercial fishers, dairy processing and manufacture, andretail butcher shops.

Queensland Health (and local government) takes over once the food reaches themanufacturing stage and has control over the food service and retail sectors (apart frombutcher shops). Those sectors are regulated by legislation under the Health portfolio iethe Food Act 1981, the Food Hygiene Regulation 1989 and the Food StandardsRegulation 1994.10 It is envisaged that dairy processing and manufacture andsmallgoods will transfer to the health portfolio (and to local government administrationand enforcement) once the food safety reforms in the manufacturing, food service andfood retail sectors have been implemented.

Appendix A sets out the division of responsibilities between the Health and PrimaryIndustries portfolios for seafood safety, but it is fairly representative of the division ofresponsibilities described in the previous paragraphs.

4.1.2 Amendments to the Food Act 1981 - the Health Legislation AmendmentBill 2001 (Qld)

Part 5 and Schedule 1 of the Health Legislation Amendment Bill 2001 (Qld) amends theFood Act 1981 (Qld) to include provisions in line with the ‘core’ (Annex A) provisionsof the national Model Food Bill. This will enable the Food Standards Code, includingthe Food Safety Standards, to be consistently implemented across jurisdictions. As the

10 Queensland. Queensland Health, Food Legislation Reforms – Newsletter 8 for the Food

Industry and Regulators, June 2001, p3, at http://www.health.qld.gov.au.


Food Act already contains provisions similar to previous attempts at a national modelfood bill, the amendments are not extensive.

The changes will make it an offence not to comply with the new joint Code, including theFood Safety Standards. They also establish other major offences regarding unsafe orunsuitable food, defences to them, and new definitions. Strong penalties will apply toserious offences. Further amendments may be required after the Annex B (‘non-core’)provisions of the Model Food Bill have been considered more fully in early 2002.

The amendments will commence on a date to be proclaimed (anticipated as being 1January 2002). It was decided that Standard 3.2.1: Food Safety Programs would notbe implemented at this stage, pending a cost benefit analysis of trial food safety programsthroughout the State conducted in association with the food industry, and the outcome ofa Commonwealth Government impact study. Thus, there will be no mandatoryrequirements for food safety programs at this stage.11 The parts of Standard 3.2.2:Food Safety Practices and General Requirements concerning notification requirementsand food handling skills and knowledge will not apply until 1 July 2002: proposed s 5B.

Objects

New objects provisions will be inserted by clause 26. Those are –

• ensuring food for sale is safe and suitable for human consumption;

• preventing misleading conduct relating to the sale of food;

• applying the Food Standards Code.

Interpretation and Application

Clauses 27 and 28 of the Bill amend the interpretation and application provisions of theFood Act to ensure consistency with the Model Food Bill and the Food SafetyStandards. Regulations made under the Act must not be inconsistent with the FoodStandards Code.

The new and amended definition provisions and the application provisions inserted by theBill reflect, and in many cases replicate, those used in Standard 3.1.1: Interpretationand Application of the Food Safety Standards.

The new legislation provides that all food businesses must comply with the FoodStandards Code (which includes the Food Safety Standards). A food business isdefined quite broadly in s 5 as a business, enterprise or activity that involves the handling

11 ANZFA, State and Territory Enforcement of the Food Safety Standards, downloaded from

ANZFA website.


of food for sale or intended for sale, and includes those of a community nature, charitiesand ‘once-off’ sales of food projects. The Standards will not apply to primary producersnot involved in processing or retail sales or to businesses such as butcher shops and milkfactories.12 Note, however, that not all of the Standards will apply to the charities,community activities and temporary projects.

The regulatory provisions of the Food Act or Food Hygiene Regulation 1989 are notcurrently binding on the Crown ie State Government owned and operated food premiseson Crown land (eg school tuckshops, public hospitals). However, this position may alterin the near future as further changes to the regime are considered. It is quite likely thatsuch premises do already follow safe food practices in line with the Food SafetyStandards.13

Under the IGA all governments agreed to implement certain terms from the Food SafetyStandards into their Food Acts, as set out in the Model Food Act (eg ‘food’, ‘unsafefood’ and ‘food business’), while others are optional (eg ‘unsuitable food’). The new s5A of the Food Act will give food a broad meaning but it continues to includeingredients, additives, raw substances, processing aids but excludes a therapeutic goodwithin the meaning of the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989 (Cth). The meaning of sell hasbeen extended to food that is given away to advertise or to further a trade or business (ega sausage sizzle at the local hardware store), or by way of a raffle, or offered as a prizeor reward, or food supplied to employees at the workplace: proposed s 5C.14

The new term unsafe food is food that would be likely to cause physical harm to aperson: proposed s 5D. However, the definition assumes that after the food has left thecontrol of the food business, and before consumption, it was properly subjected to allprocesses relevant to its reasonable intended use; that nothing happened to it along theway that would prevent it being so used and that it was consumed according to itsreasonable intended use. For example, raw meat may contain harmful bacteria but it willnot be ‘unsafe’ if it is intended that the meat should be cooked before it is consumed todestroy the bacteria. In addition, food will not be ‘unsafe’ because it causes an allergicreaction not common to the majority of persons. For example peanuts and pine-nuts aresafe for most people but some people are allergic to them.

Unsuitable food is food that may be safe but is, or contains a substance that is,damaged, deteriorated or perished to an extent that affects its reasonable intended use; is

12 Queensland Health, Food Reform: Information Paper No 2, p 3. Primary production is covered

by the Food Production (Safety) Act 2000 (Qld).

13 Queensland Health, Food Legislation Reforms – Newsletter 8, p 5.

14 Some activities now brought in under the definition of ‘sell’ (eg offering as a prize or given awayas part of a promotion) were separately provided for under the Food Act in s 5A.


the product of a diseased animal or one that has not been killed for food; or contains aforeign matter such as glass or metal fragments: proposed s 5E. Food will not beunsuitable if it contains foreign matter in an amount that does not contravene the FoodStandards Code.

Offences Relating to Food

Clause 30 inserts a new Part 2 to deal with offences relating to food. Many of the newprovisions are similar to the existing ones but will now contain new terminology consistentwith that in the Model Food Bill. Penalties will be increased, including prison terms formore serious offences. It will also be made clear that the offences in Part 2 apply to foodsold or intended for sale outside of Queensland. Enforcement will generally lie with therelevant local government authority for the area in which the business is situated.

A new Division 1 will cover Serious Offences Relating to Food and provide for highmaximum penalties of up to $101,250 for a person (and up to over $500,000 for acorporation) or two years imprisonment.

A serious offence relating to food is committed where a person knows, or reasonablyought to know, that their actions will make food unsafe for consumption. The acts are–

• handling food in an unsafe way;

• selling unsafe food;

• falsely describing food in such a way that consumer relying on the description will,or is likely to, suffer physical harm, or selling falsely described food: proposed ss9-11.

A new Division 2 will cover Other Offences Relating to Food. Those will carry finesof up to $52,500 for a person and up to $262,500 for a corporation. The offencesprovided for in the proposed ss 12-17 are –

• handling food in a way that will make, or is likely to make, the food unsafe orunsuitable, or selling food that is unsafe or (even if it is safe) is unsuitable;

• engaging in misleading or deceptive conduct in relation to advertising, packagingor labelling of food in the course of carrying on a food business;

• causing the food to be advertised, packaged or labelled in a way that falselydescribes the food or selling food that is so falsely described. A new s 17 willindicate what to ‘falsely describe’ entails and is quite comprehensive;

• selling equipment (eg a utensil, machinery, appliance etc.),15 or packaging, orlabelling material that would make or be likely to make food unsafe or put other

15 See new definition of equipment in the proposed Dictionary: Health Legislation Amendment Bill

2001 (Qld), cl 27.


equipment at such risk (note that this offence requires that food become, or belikely to become, unsafe whereas previous offences do not);

• failing to comply with a requirement imposed by a provision of the FoodStandards Code.16

Note that if a person is tried for a serious offence in Division 1 but the court is notsatisfied that the offence has been committed (eg the person did not knowingly sell unsafefood), they can be found guilty of a lesser offence in Division 2 (eg selling unsafe food).

The proposed Division 3 provides for defences to the above offences with the onus ofproof on the person charged with a breach.17

Note that the proposed section 17E excludes two defence provisions in the CriminalCode (‘intention – motive’ and ‘mistake of fact’) from affecting offences under theproposed Part 2. This is to prevent confusion, and possible litigation, over the interactionbetween the different provisions. It is understood that other safety legislation takes asimilar approach.18

The defences (in the proposed ss 17B-17D) will apply if a person can prove that –

• in relation to an offence concerning advertising, that the publication or arrangingfor publication occurred in the ordinary course of that person’s advertisingbusiness (subject to certain exceptions);

• in relation to an offence involving a contravention of the Food Standards Code,that the food is for export to a place which have laws that apply to that food;

• the person exercised all due diligence (which includes the taking of allreasonable precautions) to prevent the commission of the offence by them or by aperson under their control. For example, a person may have sold food havingrelied on checks carried out by the supplier and it was reasonable in all thecircumstances to do so. An employer will also be able to rely on this defence byproving that he or she exercised all due diligence to prevent an employee fromcommitting an offence against the Act;19

• in relation to an offence involving the handling of food in an unsafe way, or thehandling and sale of unsafe or unsuitable food, that the food was destroyed ordisposed of immediately after that handling;

16 Note, however, the exception concerning labelling and advertising in certain cases.

17 Inserted by cl 31 of the Health Legislation Amendment Bill 2001 (Qld). For a justification ofplacing the onus of proof on the defendant rather than the prosecution, see Health LegislationAmendment Bill 2001 (Qld), Explanatory Notes, p 10.

18 Health Legislation Amendment Bill 2001 (Qld), Explanatory Notes, pp 19-20.

19 Proposed amendment to s 50 inserted by Health Legislation Amendment Bill 2001 (Qld), cl 39.


• in relation to an offence involving the sale of unfit equipment etc., that the personreasonably believed that it was not intended for use in connection with thehandling of food.

Emergency Powers

Clause 32 of the Bill replaces the existing Part 3 of the Food Act (LabellingRequirements) with a new Part 3 – Emergency Powers .20

The proposed provisions attempt to parallel those in the Model Food Bill, especially inrelation to national food recalls. They will enable the Chief Executive of QueenslandHealth to make an order, if there are reasonable grounds to believe that an order isnecessary to prevent or reduce the possibility of a serious danger to public health, or tomitigate the adverse consequences of such: proposed s 18. The proposed s 19 sets outthe types of orders that may be made. For example, an order might require warnings tobe published about a particular food being unsafe and must be recalled in a particular wayby a certain time. It will be an offence to fail to comply with an order without reasonableexcuse.

A new s 19A will make special provisions about the details of recall orders (eg whetherthey should state why the food is considered to be unsafe and what consumers shoulddo) and a new s 19B will set out how orders are to be made and their duration (generallyfor 90 days from taking effect, unless revoked sooner).

A new s 19C will enable a person bound by an order to seek compensation from theChief Executive on the basis that there were insufficient grounds for the order. An appealcan be made to the Magistrates Court against an adverse decision regardingcompensation (but not against the order itself). The issue is dealt with by way of arehearing of the matter. Further appeal to the District Court is on a question of law only:proposed Part 5A.21

Modifications to the Food Standards Code

Clause 42 of the Bill inserts a proposed Schedule 2 into the Food Act to adapt theCode to Queensland’s regulatory system. It alters some definitions and applicationprovisions in Food Safety Standard 3.1.1: Interpretation and Application ofStandards. For example, meanings such as ‘primary food production’ are replaced andgiven the same definition as in the Food Production (Safety) Act 2000.

20 Some other existing provisions (ss 20 and 25) will be removed to avoid duplication.

21 Inserted by Health Legislation Amendment Bill 2001 (Qld), cl 35.


Other Amendments

Other necessary amendments to the Food Act will include expanding the duties of localgovernment to include the superintendence and execution of the Food Safety Standards(apart from those which do not yet apply) in the Food Standards Code given that thenew s 16 will require food businesses to comply with them. Consequently, a local councilwill be able to prosecute a person under s 16(1) for non-compliance. Furtheramendments of a consequential nature are also made.22

4.1.3 Changes to the Food Hygiene Regulation 1989

Amendments to the Food Hygiene Regulation 1989 (Qld) adopted the Food SafetyStandard as part of the Food Standards Code (apart from Standard 3.2.1: FoodSafety Programs which is a voluntary standard only).23 The changes took effect on 1July 2001 and represent an interim response to address immediate issues created by theFood Safety Standards coming into effect while the Queensland Government considersthe Annex B provisions of the Model Food Bill (relating to matters such as registration,licensing, powers of enforcement officers). The outcome of those considerations mayrequire further amendments to the Regulation.

Definitions have been amended and others inserted to take account of the adoption of theFood Safety Standards while a number of others have been omitted (eg the definition for‘bed and breakfast business’).

For the time being, Part 3 (previously Part 10) of the Regulation, which deals withlicensing and registration, will remain in place. The Part 3 provisions will require revisionfollowing release of a Public Benefit Test during 2002 and the recent NationalCompetition Policy review of food business registration.24 Queensland Health is alsoconsulting with stakeholders about the issues involved.

It appears that some provisions of the Regulation will need to be repealed followingadoption of the Food Safety Standards while others will need amending to avoidinconsistency (eg penalties prescribed in the proposed s 16 of the Food Act concerning

22 Health Legislation Amendment Bill 2001 (Qld), cl 33 amending s 26 and cl 34 inserting a new s

29A into the Food Act 1981 (Qld). See also a new s 40F re labelling.

23 See s 4 of the Food Hygiene Regulation 1989 (Qld). The amendments were effected by the FoodHygiene Amendment Regulation (No 1) 2001 No 58 (Qld).

24 Queensland Government. Queensland Health, Food Legislation Review Information Sheet,updated 11 September 2001, downloaded from Queensland Health’s website athttp://www.health.qld.gov.au .


non-compliance with the Food Safety Standards are high but in Part 2 of the Regulation,are quite low) and duplication (eg Schedule 2 of the Regulation duplicates the proposedSchedule 2 to the Act).

Many out-dated prescriptive requirements that do not have a specific safe food outcomehave been repealed to avoid duplication or conflict with those now incorporated in theStandards (eg ‘water supply’).

4.1.4 Food Standards Regulation 1994 (Qld)

The Food Standards Regulation 1994 adopts particular parts of the Food StandardsCode (and any amendments automatically) which means that those parts of the new jointCode potentially take effect (alongside the relevant parts of the existing Code). It isclear, however, that a number of changes will be needed to this Regulation to reflect theproposed amendments to the Food Act and the proposed incorporation of the new FoodSafety Standards into the food regulation system.

5 OVERVIEW OF THE FOUR FOOD SAFETY STANDARDS

As noted earlier, some provisions of the Food Safety Standards will not apply inQueensland at this stage. Standard 3.2.1: Food Safety Programs will not apply andthe provisions of Standard 3.2.2 relating to food handling skills and knowledge andnotification will not operate until July 2002. The details of the Food Safety Standardswere discussed in LB 8/00 at pp 20-24 but will be briefly outlined below.

5.1 STANDARD 3.1.1: INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION

As noted earlier, Standard 3.1.1 is introductory and defines the terminology usedregularly in each of the other Standards. It explains that the Standards apply to everyfood business but not to primary producers. In Queensland, the primary productionsector is covered by the Food Production (Safety) Act 2000. In addition, dispensationis given to charities, community groups, temporary premises and home-based foodbusiness concerning compliance with some of the Standards.

5.2 STANDARD 3.2.1: FOOD SAFETY PROGRAMS

Standard 3.2.1: Food Safety Programs will not apply to Queensland food businessesas a mandatory requirement until further notice. The Standard requires food businessesto examine their food production, manufacturing and handling operations to identify


potential food safety hazards and to prepare food safety programs to control them.25

Many businesses will have little trouble conforming to the requirements if they have safepractices operating now. Detailed consideration of the programs and the arrangementsfor auditing appear in LB 8/00 at pp 35-38.

It appears that a number of pilot programs are occurring throughout the State andcourses are being offered through Queensland Health as part of the Government’sdecision to progress the implementation of a risk-based food safety management systemin the food manufacture, food services and retail sectors.26

The food safety programs incorporate requirements for dealing with, and controlling,particular hazards, based on Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) principles.HACCP is a scientific process designed to prevent potential food hazards throughdetermining critical points of control and establishing procedures for monitoring andcontrol of identified hazards rather than rely on end-point testing.27 Regular auditing willensure compliance with the programs.

The speed at which a business has to implement a food safety program and the frequencyof auditing may be determined by a ‘Priority Classification System’ (designed by ANZFAand Food Science Australia with input from stakeholders) based on the risks posed bythe relevant food business’ operations (including the nature of the business and type offood). In the meantime, it is envisaged that Queensland local government authorities canuse the system to determine inspection priorities.

ANZFA has developed food industry guidelines to assist businesses in devising theirprograms, if and when the Standard is introduced. ANZFA has released a document,Food Safety: An Audit System to inform businesses and Governments about itsrecommended audit system that can be used to support the programs and the manner inwhich auditors are approved. It is understood that the matter of whether private auditorswill be permitted to conduct audits has been a controversial one. In the November 2000IGA it was agreed to change the Standard so that third party audits would not bemandated but it would be up to each state and territory to decide whether they usesecond party (regulatory) or third party auditors. The ANZFA recommended system

25 Note that the effect of the Food Production (Safety) Act 2000 (Qld) is to introduce risk based

programs into primary production and it is expected that this Standard will have a similar effectin the food manufacture, food services and food retail sectors.

26 ‘It’s in our Hands’, An Information Paper on the Implementation of the Food Safety Standardsin Queensland, October 2000, http://www.health.qld.gov.au.

27 A number of countries, including New Zealand, the United States, Canada and the EuropeanUnion have implemented food safety measures based on HACCP. The measures are in line withthe Codex HACCP Principles and Guidelines. Such consistency presumes consistency withWorld Trade Organisation obligations.


allows for the introduction of a second or third party audit system, or a combination ofboth.

5.3 STANDARD 3.2.2: FOOD SAFETY PRACTICES AND GENERAL

REQUIREMENTS

Standard 3.2.2: Food Safety Practices and General Requirements sets out specificfood handling controls relating to the receipt, storage, processing, display, packaging,transportation, safe disposal, and recall of unsafe food. The Standard attempts, amongother things, to prevent contamination of food by food handlers and to ensure hygienicpractices are adopted. Food businesses are also required to ensure a certain standard ofcleanliness, sanitising and maintenance of their premises and their fixtures, fittings andequipment. Some provisions relate specifically to food handlers (eg hygiene of theperson).28

Some provisions will not apply to temporary food businesses or businesses operatingfrom a home, provided they have asked for an exemption from the appropriate authority.The main features are –

• the need to notify the local government of the nature of the food business and forthose businesses to ensure that food handlers and supervisors of them have thenecessary skills and knowledge in food safety and hygiene matters (this need notbe formal training but can be, for example, in-house or through attending localcouncil workshops). These requirements do not apply in Queensland until July2002 to give businesses extra time to prepare and the extent to which charitiesand community groups will be covered, determined. After that time, businesseswhich are not licensed and registered under the Food Hygiene Regulation 1989must notify their local council that they are operating a food business;

• maintaining potentially hazardous food (ie food that needs to be kept at certaintemperatures to minimise the growth of harmful bacteria eg fried rice) at correcttemperatures (<5? C and >60? C). Provision is made for alternative measures ofcompliance;

• cooking food or taking another processing step to make food safe eg cookingchicken all the way through;

• protecting food from contamination, especially when on display;

• disposing of food that has been recalled or returned or may not be safe orsuitable, or clearly separating it from other food with an identifying label;

28 ANZFA. Fact Sheet on Standard 3.2.2: Food Safety Practices and General Requirements,

downloaded from ANZFA website.


• systems to ensure the recall of unsafe food and to comply with it;

• food business must tell food handlers about health and hygiene requirements andabout the need to report the fact of suffering from, or being a carrier of, a foodborne disease (eg Hepatitis A, salmonella). The businesses must ensure that foodhandlers with infections do not contaminate food; and must provide washingfacilities and ensure their use;

• food handlers are obliged to report symptoms of illnesses or conditions asdiscussed in the previous point, or any skin lesions or discharges; inform theirsupervisor of possible food contamination of food; not engage in any action thatmay contaminate food (eg smoking near food); must wash their hands etc;

• food businesses must not permit live animals to enter the premises and must takeall practicable measures to prevent entry by pests (however, guide dogs will beallowed in dining and drinking areas used by customers);

• food businesses must clean, sanitise and maintain food contact surfaces and foodserving equipment; maintain premises, fittings and equipment and not use chippedor broken utensils.

5.4 STANDARD 3.2.3: FOOD PREMISES AND EQUIPMENT

Standard 3.2.3: Food Safety Practices and Equipment sets out requirements that willassist compliance with Standard 3.2.2: Food Safety Practices and GeneralRequirements. The Building Code of Australia attempts to have standards foodpremises which are consistent with Standard 3.2.3. but any such standard is in additionto, not an alternative to, Standard 3.2.3.. Standard 3.2.3. applies to all food premises,including charities and community fundraisers that sell food and (unless an exemption isprovided) home-based food preparation. Note that this Standard does not applyretrospectively.

The Standard attempts to ensure that the layout of food business premises, vehicles,fixtures, fittings and equipment are such as to minimise the risk of opportunity forcontamination of food and that they are able to be cleaned and sanitised. However, theprescriptive mandates for design and construction of structures, noted earlier, have beenreplaced by a general requirement that design and construction be appropriate to thefood activities being carried on and are able to be cleaned and sealed. Businesses mustalso provide facilities such as water, waste disposal, light, ventilation, cleaning, storagespace and access to toilets.29 While charities and community groups are covered by the

29 ANZFA. Standard 3.2.2 : Food Premises and Equipment (Purpose clause). Downloaded from

ANZFA website.


Standard, if the kitchen used by such groups currently complies with the existing FoodHygiene Regulation 1989, it is unlikely that it will be affected.

6 CHANGES TO AUSTRALIA NEW ZEALAND FOOD AUTHORITY

Legislative changes will see ANZFA become Food Standards Australia and NewZealand (FSANZ) once outstanding issues between Australia and New Zealand arefinalised.30 The new authority is based upon, and will have the same functions as,ANZFA but will be administered by a differently constituted Board.

The changes also provide for a new Australia New Zealand Food Regulation MinisterialCouncil set up by the IGA. It has been decided that the Queensland Health Minister willbe the lead Minister on the Council with the Minister for Primary Industries alsorepresented. As only the lead Minister can vote, the Health Minister will seek acrossgovernment support for any views presented to it.31

30 See Australia New Zealand Food Authority Amendment Act 2001 (Cth), passed 29 June 2001.

31 ‘It’s in our Hands’, Food Reform Information Paper, May 2001, http://www.health.qld.gov.au


APPENDIX A-SUMMARY OF REGULATORY RESPONSIBILITIESFOR COMMERCIAL SEAFOOD SAFETY AND HYGIENE IN

QUEENSLAND

Downloaded from http://www.health.qld.gov.au/phs/ehu/9390_doc.pdf.

D


Copyright Provision: Copy recorded for Parliamentarians only.Disclaimer: No responsibility is taken for any transmission errors.

APPENDIX B – NEWSPAPER ARTICLES

Title Eating ourselves sick.

Author Julie Robotham

Source Sydney Morning Herald

Date Issue 19/12/00

The more we eat out, the sicker we get. Julie Robotham investigates thelinks between our changing lifestyle and increased food poisoning.

Reading this at the breakfast table? You have just reduced your food-poisoning risk by three-quarters by eating a home-prepared meal. Readingthis in the food court? Be aware you have increased your chances of beingamong the 11,500 Australians who are struck down each day by a foodbornebug. And that is just an average. The risk is considerably higher than thatnow as food poisoning rates spike in December and January when somefoods begin to spoil the moment they are taken out of the fridge. Thelikelihood of being struck down with salmonella is more than twice as highas in winter.

Food poisoning has been on the rise in Australia for a decade now. Rates ofsalmonella alone - the most common form of bacterial food poisoning -increased by two-thirds between 1992 and 1998, according the NationalEnteric Pathogens Surveillance Scheme. The bug now affects about one in50 people annually, with toddlers and pre- schoolers most at risk.

And the consequences of food poisoning are becoming potentially muchmore severe. An aging population makes death statistically more likelybecause the elderly (as well as very small children) are very vulnerable. Forthe increasing number of immunocompromised people, food poisoning couldbe deadly. A person with AIDS has a 300 times-increased chance ofbecoming ill if exposed to listeria bacteria. Chemotherapy patients andthose using anti-rejection drugs after organ transplants are also much morevulnerable. And just as the severity of the effects reflects change in society,the causes too can be mapped straight back to what we are eating, and theway we are eating.

"In children attending the emergency department, severe diarrhoea is mostcommon among nine- to 10-year-olds," says the emergency fellow at theChildren's Hospital at Westmead, Dr Jo Rainbow.

That coincides with the rising exposure of this group to takeaway meals andfood prepared outside the home, as their increasing independence andsocial and sporting activities thrust them in the line of burgers and kebabs.

"Takeaway food is the main culprit. Generally you find [food poisoning] inyounger children only if the whole family is affected," Rainbow says.



At Sydney Children's Hospital, Randwick, dietitian Maggie Aitken counselsfamilies of vulnerable children on how to keep their food safe. Theguidelines are salutary for everyone who thinks buying fresh and cooking athome is a foolproof way to avoid foodborne disease.

"When the family does the weekly shop, the refrigerated food needs to gointo an esky to travel home," she says. "When buying smallgoods, ask forthem to be cut fresh . . . On hot days, like we have been having lately, thefood would start to spoil almost immediately".

Other precautions are simple and well known but not always as wellobserved: keep food either cold or hot because in-between temperatures letbacteria breed; always wash hands and dry them well; separate foods thatwill be cooked from those that won't be cooked during preparation andstorage.

Dr Katrina Watson, a gastroenterologist and chairwoman of the DigestiveHealth Foundation, says Australia has been insulated from some of theworst crises in food contamination that occur in the US and Europe, where alarge and increasing proportion of food is imported from developing nationswithout strict hygiene rules. Food imported into the US had been grown insoil fertilised with sewage, she said.

"Human waste is a great way of spreading hepatitis A". But Australia wasnot exempt from the broader problem: "Food travels and people travel".

Closer to home, Watson has no doubt that takeaway food is a major culprit;she never eats from a bain-marie, because there is no way of telling howlong the food has been there. Though the major fast-food chains arescrupulous about hygiene, she points out that much of the industrycomprises single-operator businesses running on narrow margins with ahigh turnover of extremely young workers:

"It's not surprising hygiene sometimes breaks down".

But Watson's concerns go beyond takeaway to the heart of food production.

"Anything where food is pooled" presents a risk, she says. "Onecontaminated orange can be distributed among hundreds of litres of orangejuice". The numbers of people affected can be enormous; almost 250,000people in 1994 contracted salmonella from a single US ice-cream factory.Then, try recalling everything possibly affected after it has entered thedistribution chain.

It's not just the lukewarm lasagne or the grim meat pie that are to blame;paradoxically the quest for freshness and "real" ingredients also brings withit substantial risks. Walk into any smart supermarket in Sydney's moreaffluent suburbs and you find rows of fridges of expensive pre-preparedmeals. For time- poor people, they are positioned as a healthy alternativeto takeaway - gourmet, low-fat, the next-best thing to making it yourself.

"There are real risks," Watson says. "The more the food's been handled -because it's been marinated or half-cooked or it has sauce on - the greaterthe chance that parts of it have been kept too long at the wrongtemperature".



The science of identifying foodborne bugs has already come a long way, andit has much further to go. It seems barely credible that as recently as 20years ago, three of the most significant pathogens - campylobacter, listeriaand E.coli - had still not been identified as causes of food poisoning. Awider range of bacterial strains are affecting us - because of increasingdiversity in the origins of our food. Like other bacteria they are mutatingand becoming more resistant to treatment.

Craig Dalton, director of the Hunter Public Health Unit and a leadingspecialist in foodborne illness, identified Australia's first known case of non-invasive listeriosis. A less harmful form of the listeria bug, it invaded apotato and ham bake served to an unfortunate wedding party in the Hunterarea two years ago. More than half of the guests came down with, "fever,headaches, muscle pain," - not symptoms usually associated with foodpoisoning. Acting on a hunch, Dalton identified the culprit. His work isassisted by ever-more-sensitive tests, for example the sensitive moleculartest polymerase chain reaction (PCR), for viral infections transmitted infood. These are likely to be responsible for a large proportion of caseswhere no bacterial pathogen can be fingered - some estimates say a third ofall food poisoning cases.

But viruses almost never cause death and clear up spontaneously within aday or two. In that case, do they really matter? Yes, Dalton says.

"Every outbreak is a lesson. You need evidence to rank the major causes soyou can target prevention programs".

Tracing outbreaks helps crack complacency among producers of previously"safe" items such as orange juice.

"They say, 'OK, it's no longer a low-risk food. It's a wake-up call for thewhole industry'," Dalton says. Dalton estimates only one in 30 Australiancases of food poisoning is officially recorded, even though illnesses causedby salmonella, listeria and some other bugs are required to be reported tohealth authorities.

"We hear of very few outbreaks. We've learned it's very difficult to increasethe rate of reporting from GPs and the general public, despite educationcampaigns," he says.

For the last 18 months he has been running Australia's first "sentinel site"for foodborne illnesses; a clearing house for reports of outbreaks fromaround the State, their pathology identified and the source traced. Don'tworry if you're feeling too crook to go to the GP with a stool sample;.

Dalton's team will come to your home to collect pathology (including a bloodsample) and leftovers of suspect food. Their aim is to increase reportingrates. Then begins a forensic task of considerable complexity. Rarely isyour last supper the guilty party.

"People often blame the last meal because it's what they see when theythrow up," Dalton says.



In fact, salmonella symptoms can appear anything up to a week after theoffending meal, and viruses usually take a day or two to make people ill.

Match the symptoms to the probable incubation period, calculate when thefood might have been eaten, work out what it might have been, investigatewhether anyone else was affected by the same meal. If an outbreak is tracedback to a restaurant, health department food inspectors might contactparties from other tables to check if they were ill, and look at staffattendance records for evidence of illness.

Commonwealth funding - of $2.4 million over two years - has now beenapproved to formalise Dalton's work and launch similar schemes in fiveother cities. Together they should present the first comprehensive pictureof foodborne illness in Australia. The sentinel sites program is part of acultural shift in attitude to the food supply.

Australians have shown themselves wary of genetically modified crops andhave insisted on tighter food labelling laws; now food preparation andhandling are under the spotlight. Australia New Zealand Food Authority(ANZFA) food safety standards will be in force in all States, phased in fromFebruary. They include a philosophical shift in accountability for foodborneillness. In the past, council and health department inspectors have visitedpremises to check for problems. That system will remain but owners willalso be required to develop and commit to their own "safety program" - akind of pledge to do the right thing.

A restaurant or takeaway stall will have to "systematically examine all of itsfood handling operations in order to identify the potential hazards that mayreasonably be expected to occur", and work out how to avoid them. Thiswritten contract is audited by food inspectors.

Outbreaks of food poisoning in Australia:. 1995: E.coli contamination ofSouth Australian mettwurst made 150 people ill and killed one child. 1996:Salmonella contamination of Kraft peanut butter affected 60 people, manychildren. (The fat in products such as peanut butter protects bacteria fromstomach acid, meaning lower levels of contamination can cause poisoning.).1996: Salmonella infection in a chocolate sauce served on a single Qantasflight affected more than 100 people. 1997: Hepatitis A infected 700 peoplewho ate oysters from Wallis Lake in NSW. 1999: A fecal contamination ofSouth Australian orange juice affected nearly 500 people.



Title Food safety rules to cut poisoning.

Author Jason Koutsoukis

Source Age

Date Issue 04/08/00

Australia's 130,000 food businesses for the first time will be regulated bynational safety standards to cut food poisoning, the national food authorityannounced yesterday. Australia New Zealand Food Authority chairmanMichael MacKellar released a draft code designed to prevent about 11,500food poisoning cases that occur around the country every day.

Mr MacKellar said this amounted to 4.2 million cases a year, resulting in anannual bill of $2.6 billion. The standards are set to replace various statelaws and will force an overhaul of the food preparation industry. MrMacKellar said he believed the standards were among the most progressivein the world.

"They give Australia, for the first time, a national set of modern regulationsthat will also add value to the government's reforms to the food supply," hesaid.

"The new national standards have given all governments an opportunity torid themselves of these archaic requirements and to replace them withstandards which, I must say, my colleagues on the ANZFA board haveenthusiastically endorsed".

The code was agreed upon at last Friday's health minister's conference inWellington. Mr MacKellar said it would replace the complex, outdated andindividual health regulations that had evolved in Australia's states andterritories over the last century.

"The cost to small business alone of complying with the current array of foodsafety regulations amounts to more than $330 million a year," Mr MacKellarsaid.

He said the main reason for the rise in food poisoning cases was the changein general eating habits - about 60 per cent to 80 per cent of food-borneillnesses arising from the food service industry.

"Fast food outlets, restaurants, hotels and salad bars - rare 50 years ago -are today the primary source of food consumption for many Australians," MrMacKellar said. "We now spend an estimated 30 per cent of our food budgeton take-away food and dining out and this percentage is increasing".

"This is why the new food safety standards are so important - because theygo to the heart of the problem and focus on prevention rather than cure".

Australians consume more than 20 billion meals a year, of which less than0.002 per cent result in food-borne illnesses. The new code includesrequirements for food handlers to undergo training in food hygiene andsafety and for food businesses to notify details of their business to therelevant authority. Food must also be better stored and protected from



contamination and businesses must maintain washing facilities on thepremises and have proper ventilation in place.

Mr Mackellar said ANZFA studies showed that food-borne illness was beinglinked with long-term chronic disease. He said the draft code was beingreleased early to give people in the food industry ample opportunity tomake comments and contribute proposed amendments before the standardswere introduced next year.

"The period for comment will close at the end of September, when work willbegin on assessing the comments and adjusting the guide whereappropriate," Mr MacKellar said. "But for the majority of food businesses,which already have good hygiene standards and consistently provide safefood, the new requirements will involve little, if any, change".

RECENT PARLIAMENTARY LIBRARY RESEARCH PUBLICATIONS 2001

RESEARCH BRIEFS

RBR 2001/23 Duty and the Beast: Animal Care and Protection Bill 2001 Sep 2001

RBR 2001/22 Government Funding for Non-State Schools: the Education (Accreditation of Non-State Schools) Bill 2001

Sep 2001

RBR 2001/21 Accreditation of Non-State Schools: the Education (Accreditation of Non-StateSchools) Bill 2001

Sep 2001

RBR 2001/20 Penalties and Sentences (Non-Contact Orders) Amendment Bill 2001 Sep 2001

RBR 19/01 Current and prospective treatments for heroin dependence in the light of a recentnational evaluation (the NEPOD Report)

Aug 2001

RBR 18/01 Community Benefits Associated with the Gaming Machine Industry: The GamingMachine Amendment Bill 2001

July 2001

RBR 17/01 The Emergence of Community Style Banking as a Response to the Closing of BankBranches

June 2001

RBR 16/01 High Court Abolishes Negligence Immunity for Highway Authorities June 2001

RBR 15/01 Greenhouse Gases Emission Abatement and Carbon Credits – Australia’s Responseand the Queensland Forestry and Land Title Amendment Bill

June 2001

RBR 14/01 Regulating Pay Day Lending:The Consumer Credit(Queensland) Amendment Bill 200 June 2001

RBR 13/01 The Allocation of Parliamentary Seats for Indigenous Minority Groups June 2001

RBR 12/01 Employees and the Internet – Issues for Public and Private Sector Employers June 2001

RBR 11/01 Valuers Registration Amendment Bill 2001 May 2001

RBR 10/01 The New South Wales-Queensland Border Rivers Amendment Bill 2001 May 2001

RBR 9/01 The Dating Game: The Introduction Agents Bill 2001 (Qld) May 2001

RBR 8/01 Dangerous Goods Safety Management Bill 2001: Implementing the NationalApproach to the Handling of Dangerous Goods

May 2001

RBR 7/01 The Future of the Kyoto Protocol: The Lead Up to the Resumed Climate ChangeTalks in Bonn in July 2001

May 2001

RBR 6/01 The Status of Children Amendment Bill 2001 April 2001

RBR 5/01 The Crimes at Sea Bill 2001: National Legislation for Crimes in Australian Waters April 2001

RBR 4/01 Innovation Strategies of the Queensland and Commonwealth Governments Mar 2001

RBR 3/01 Drug Courts Mar 2001

RBR 2/01 E-Democracy and Election Campaigns: Recent Case Studies from USA andDevelopments in Australia

Feb 2001

RBR 1/01 E-Voting: Elections via the Internet? Feb 2001

RESEARCH BULLETINS

RB 4/01 Violence in the Mass Media: Are There Negative Consequences? Jun 2001

RB 3/01 Towards improved Public Health: The Tobacco and Other smoking Products(Prevention of Supply to Children) Amendment Bill 2001

April 2001

RB 2/01 Towards the ‘Smart State’: The Electronic Transactions (Queensland) Bill April 2001

RB 1/01 Laws against inciting Racial or Religious Vilification in Queensland and Australia: theAnti-Discrimination Amendment Bill 2001

Mar 2001

Research Papers are available as PDF files:• to members of the general public abstracts are available on the parliamentary web site, URL,

http://www. parliament. qld. gov. au• http://www. parliament. qld. gov. au/Library/Query. exe – ResearchPubs -Library

A complete listing of research papers is available at the following site: http://www. parliament. qld. gov. au/parlib/research/index. htmParliamentary Library - Research Publications & Resources Telephone (07) 3406 7108Orders may be sent to Maureen McClarty, Maureen. McClarty@parliament. qld. gov. au

This Publication:

RBR 2001/24 ‘Paddock to the Plate’ (Part 2) – Amendment of the Food Act1981 (Qld) by the Health Legislation Amendment Bill 2000(Qld) (QPL Oct 2001)

Related Publications:

LB 8/00 ‘Paddock to the Plate’: Food Production (Safety) Bill 2000(QPL Jul 2000)

RBR 2/00 Genetic Labelling (Mar 2000)

‘Paddock to the Plate’ (Part 2) – Amendment of the Food ... · ‘Paddock to the Plate’...

Documents

Transcript of ‘Paddock to the Plate’ (Part 2) – Amendment of the Food ... · ‘Paddock to the Plate’...