Chlorflurazon. 1999. Overview of economic effects from the contamination of Australian meat by Tony St. Clair of the Federated Farmers of NZ.

FLUORIDE ACTION NETWORK PESTICIDE PROJECT

Chlorflurazon. 1999. Overview of economic fallout from the contamination of Australian meat; by Tony St. Clair of the Federated Farmers of NZ.

http://www.fedfarm.org.nz/public/TSspc199.htm

Address to the

New Zealand Meat Industry Standards Council

by

Tony St. Clair

Chief Executive

Federated Farmers of New Zealand (Inc)

on

27 January 1999

Wellington

The Australian Livestock Industries Experience of Residues and

the impact on International Trade

and

Issues to look out for, for the future

Federated Farmers of New Zealand (Inc)

P O Box 715

Wellington

In the decade following the 1987 organochlorine (OC) crisis, Australia has had many repeat encounters with a range of offending residues.

Many of these crisis could have been avoided if a better understanding had existed amongst producers, other agricultural enterprises, chemical companies and numerous other agencies participating in the industry.

During 1994-95 severe drought throughout Queensland and most of New South Wales many producers resorted to feeding cotton trash. Cotton trash was the "stubble" left remaining after harvest and provided what at the time was considered a cheap and nutritious food source for cattle.

To the total dismay of the industry, cattle arriving at a mid coast NSW abattoir were found to be testing positive to an unrecognisable substance, later to be shown as Chlorofluazuron (CFZ). Not only did the carcasses retained (some 500 plus) ultimately end up being rendered, but also resulted in a major international product recall, properties and cattle being quarantined throughout NSW and Queensland, trade with United States of America ceasing overnight (and other domestic and export trading partners taking similar action), but the Australian Livestock and Meat industry would never be the same again, and farmers throughout Australia were overnight introduced to the litigious world of the food industry.

Papers throughout Australia ran banner headline after banner headline (Fig 1) and did irreparable damage to the Australian beef industry.

Property owners who had been feeding "cotton trash" contaminated with CFZ (product name Helix ¨ ) and even those who had not faced quarantine looked down the barrel of financial ruin as they were unable to substantiate the feeding regimes their cattle had been managed under.

The US Meat Importers Council immediately ceased trading with Australian meat companies. Large consignments of Australian meat were put on hold regardless of where in Australia it had been sourced. Slaughtering establishments were irrelevant, Australia Inc was the source.

However, on 1 August 1995 Joel Berg, President of Meat Importers Council of America wrote as a result of CFZ,

"Several of our importer members report that they have received notification of cancellation of rejection insurance.

We had thought that the pressing issue of the day was how to extend traditional insurance to see that it covers chemical or biological contaminants which are perceived by many persons not to be covered by the traditional rejection coverage in some situations. Removal of existing rejection insurance would constitute an essential change in the nature of the purchase contract which we must protest in the strongest possible terms.

Of course, each importing company has the freedom to decide on its own policy. However, as an institution representing the industry, if cancellation of rejection insurance proceeds, MICA will have no choice but to pursue recommendations to its members concerning new ways of purchasing Australian product or serious consideration, in view of unacceptable risk, of refraining from purchasing product altogether.

Indeed, several major importers advised that, in view of Australia losing its ability to supply residue/pathogen insurance, and no provision made for the Australian Government to supply protection, they had already decided to cease purchasing within the next few weeks."

The total Australian industry was in turmoil. Overnight $100m surety had to be found to keep open trade with the US. After days and nights of deliberations and negotiation this was put in place, later to be reduced and some 18 months later removed but only after other protocols had been put in place and proven.

These included:

Establishment of a Residue Management Group (Attachment 1)

National Residue Survey

National Vendor Declarations (See Attachment 2)

HACCP based QA programmes continued to evolve e.g. Cattlecare ¨

Why the Concern?

Agricultural and veterinary chemicals are widely used in Australia as an essential tool for beef production. They are used to treat and prevent cattle diseases and parasites to optimise production and improve productivity.

At the point of slaughter small amounts of these chemicals are occasionally found in the carcass. These are called chemical residues. This term is also applied when small amounts of environmental contaminants such as cadmium, lead or mercury are found in the meat or offal.

The presence of chemical residues in food, particularly meat, is a long standing international trade issue.

Over the past 10 years, the presence of chemical residues in food of animal origin has assumed a much higher profile for consumers and has dominated public health concerns about the regulation of food safety.

However, in the past three years, concern about microbial contamination of meat has probably superseded that of chemical residues.

Both issues remain the cornerstones of quality assurance systems that are being developed, implemented and audited have been put in place by the Australian meat industry so as to assure the customers of the high quality of Australian beef and sheepmeats.

With the exception of environmental contaminants, chemical residues in meat generally are from the misuse of chemicals and drugs or failure to observe the prescribed withholding periods (WHP) or export slaughter intervals (ESI) between the last treatment and slaughter.

In most cases failure to comply is unintentional though the consequences to the meat industry can be catastrophic.

Residue monitoring has an important role to play in the overall strategy to minimise chemical residues in meat.

It is a mandatory requirement for any country exporting to USA, Canada, Mexico, European Union participants Japan and Korea. Internationally this demand is increasing as is the range of residues with which different countries are concerned.

Two types of sampling are undertaken by NRS i.e. randomised and targeted.

In 1996/97 about twice as many samples were collected to both targeted and randomised programmes. During this period 99.7% of tests met with compliance.

Those targeted tests include:

National Organochlorine Residue Management (NORM) Programme

National Antibacterial Residue Minimisation (NARM) Programme

Hormonal Growth Promotants (HGP) Audit Programme

Chlorflurazoron (CFZ) Programme.

Endosulfan Programme

Since the introduction of Cattlecare¨ in 1995, (an on farm quality assurance programme operating to internationally recognised standards, and unique to Australia); cattle producers on the programme find themselves in a position to optimise competition on their stock by both domestic and export meat processing operators.

To add further support to the Cattlecare¨ programme other government and industry agencies have compiled and distributed awareness brochures, illustrating the responsibilities and importance producers must observe when consigning livestock.

The introduction of the National Vendor Declaration (NVD) for cattle initially in a trial in 1996, was ultimately seen as a natural fit with a range of programmes operating and is complimentary to the overall industry effort in pursuing food safety.

The physical act of declaring the residue status of a consignment at the point of sale creates a real commitment between producer and purchaser.

The NVD is now a permanent part of the transaction process for all cattle (and likely to be extended to sheepmeat prior to year end).

The advent of the NVD was primarily driven by a need to meet customer requirements in the meat processing industry. Consequently the use of the NVD in store stock and breeder sales to date has been minimal. Pressure is now mounting for the NVD to be provided in these sales so a concise traceback can be maintained, and claims for example, like HGP freedom can be successfully demonstrated.

The NVD is voluntary. However, producers not utilising the NVD face minimal competition for their livestock. The next phase in the use of the NVD is the conversion to that of being mandatory for use in ALL states of Australia. This debate will escalate as Australia approaches the introduction of a permanent machine readable livestock identification scheme in mid 1998.

The state of Victoria has already set the pace with the enactment in early 1997 of legislation that provides fines up to $6,000 for the first offence and $12,000 for each subsequent offence, when fraudulent misuse of the NVD is proven. Other states are following.

With the introduction of whole of life tagging of cattle the NVD fills the "substantiation" gap between each transaction an animal is subjected to during its life.

With the next round of WTO to occur in late 1999 have no doubt from a New Zealand perspective that systems such as those in place in Australia will be used to out position us in gaining trade access.

Systems are in place in the EU and Canada, Argentina is working rapidly on whole of life tagging of cattle, and these are some our major competitors.

The demand of the megaregs in the USA, traceback by 1 Jan 2000 in UK, etc set the scene for equivalence being demanded by our customers.

Let’s hope New Zealand does not have to have confirmation of a date, time and venue for one of these residue or microbial occurrences to occur prior to acting to protect New Zealand Inc!

References:

Jonathan Webber, Manager Animal Programs, NRS "Enhancing Consumer Confidence In Australian Beef"

David Palmer: QA and Food Safety Program Manager - Australia

Attachment 1

Residue Management Group

Strategic Plan 1997-99

1 A Solid Foundation

When customers from around the world purchase Australian meat and livestock they know they can do so with confidence. As the largest meat and livestock exporter in the world, Australia is renowned for the quality and safety of its products.

However, maintaining this enviable reputation requires the unwavering commitment of both industry and government.

The Residue Management Group (RMG) was formed in 1994 to provide leadership and strategic direction for the proactive management of agricultural and chemical residues in the red meat industry.

RMG relies on a working partnership between Australia’s peak meat industry bodies and Federal and State Ministers of Agriculture (ARMCANZ). Chairmanship and funding are provided directly by industry.

As part of its pro-active process, the RMG has developed this Strategic Plan for 1997-99 to ensure this joint effort is continued and the integrity of Australian Meat products on domestic and international markets is preserved.

This plan will capitalise on the solid foundations laid to date and chart a course to the Year 2000. As consumers both here and overseas place increasing emphasis on the need for safe and wholesome food, this coordinated approach will ensure the Australian Meat and livestock industry is well placed to seize the competitive advantage.

2 Meeting the Challenge

In just three years the RMG has achieved considerable success in developing preventative and response strategies to address potentially damaging residue incidents.

Significant achievements to date include:

Providing leadership for residue issues and securing financial support to carry out individual residue management programs;

Developing and operating a residue emergency and contingency planning system;

Effectively managing the chlorfluazuron (CFZ) incident from October 1994;

Formulating a Strategic Residue Management Plan in July 1995 and associated residue management programs for antibacterials, organophosphates and synthetic pyrethroids;

Developing the National Organochlorine Residue Management (NORM) program in November 1995 and supportive funding arrangements;

Establishing the State Residue Management Committees to manage and monitor potential sources of chemical contamination;

Negotiating bilateral import tolerances for key agricultural chemicals based on sound scientific evidence, thus protecting key trading markets;

Monitoring compliance with domestic and international residue standards through extensive general and targeted testing programs by the National Residue Survey;

Integrating research and development activities into a product integrity and chemical usage program aligned with RMG objectives and priorities.

With export markets for the Australian beef and sheep meat industries worth over $3.5 billion a year, these initiatives have been of major benefit. More importantly, Australia’s quality reputation has been upheld - an outcome of immeasurable value.

3 A Future Vision

The RMG’s 1997-99 Strategic Plan highlights the need for continued emphasis on preventative management and strategic planning to meet market expectations for safe wholesome food.

Vision

"Adoption of best practice performance in residue management to meet consumer requirements for safe, wholesome meat in domestic and export markets".

Mission

"To provide industry leadership, strategic direction and a committed partnership between industry and government in developing and implementing a residue management strategy for beef and sheep meat".

Goals

"To ensure that consumer and market expectations concerning residues in beef and sheep meat are fully met in both domestic and export markets".

"To adopt a preventative and strategic approach towards residue management in the red meat sector and to minimise future occurrences of residue incidents".

"To ensure proper contingency planning for the effective management of any residue incidents within the red meat industry".

"To ensure residue management considerations are fully integrated into food safety and quality assurance systems for the beef and sheep meat industries".

4 An Integrated Approach

RMG agreed in September 1996 to develop this 3-year Strategic Plan as part of a comprehensive, integrated framework for residue management in the red meat sector. The components of this integrated framework are:

RMG Strategic Plan for 1997-99

RMG National Prevention Strategies

- On-farm Management, Education and Training Strategy

- Animal and Product Identification Strategy

- Research and Development Strategy

- Agriculture and Veterinary Chemicals Strategy

- Residue Monitoring Strategy

- Legal Strategy

- International Residues Strategy

- Communication Strategy

RMG Business Plan for 1997

Contingency Response Planning and Operational Manuals

Specific Residue Management Plans

Data Management and Support Structures

This Strategic Plan is the cornerstone of this framework and links in closely with the Meat Industry Strategic Plan (MISP). Collectively, this framework is designed to give industry the confidence that it can deliver on consumer expectations with respect to residue levels in domestic and export markets.

5 Strategic Directions

RMG has identified six major imperatives which are essential for effective residue management over the next three years. They are:

Undertaking a preventative approach to residue management by industry and government;

Encouraging a highly integrated approach to residue management issues;

Achieving commercial incentives to effective residue management;

Developing improved national animal and product identification systems;

Incorporating residue management into all food safety and quality assurance programs;

Improving communication between producer, processor, consumer and inter-governmental levels.

6 Measurable Outcomes

The strength of the RMG’s 1997-99 Strategic Plan is its emphasis on results. The following are key outcomes it aims to achieve:

Preventative Management

have all enterprises, from producer to retail, operate in accordance with an accredited HACCP-based (Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point) Quality Assurance system by the end of 1999 (consistent with the MISP).

Residue Monitoring

maintain the already negligible level of carcasses exceeding Maximum Residue Limits for organichlorine (OC), organosphosphates (OP) and other agricultural and veterinary chemicals;

continue to minimise the risk of antibacterial residues in livestock through ongoing testing, backed by widespread education and awareness.

Research and Development

implement a cohesive and comprehensive program of research and development of support residue management activities.

Product Integrity

introduce a national ID system to identify and track individual animals from birth to slaughter by 1998;

encourage the commercial adoption of identification technology for individual meat primals by 1999.

Legislation

reform Commonwealth and State/Territory legislation to provide an improved legal framework for residue management and contingency response programs.

International Competitiveness

extend the range of chemicals covered by bilateral import tolerance arrangements in major markets and further progress multilateral initiatives.

Management, Education and Training

provide support to enhanced on-farm management and producer education and training programs, including support systems and information management networks.

Communication

develop systems to effectively communicate advice and action relating to residue matters to a wide cross-section of the community.

7 RMG Business Plan for 1997

To implement this framework, the 1997 RMG Business Plan calls for:

the finalisation and distribution of this 3-year Strategic Plan;

development of National Prevention Strategies in the eight policy and program areas identified previously;

a review of current contingency planning arrangements;

updates to existing residue management plans, including a new plan for plant toxins;

a review of the OC and HGP programs and agreement on a new OC program from 1 January 1998;

drafting of Commonwealth legislation for emergency response situations;

agreement to a permanent uniform national identification system by end 1997, to be implemented progressively over the next decade;

a review of the National Vendor Declaration scheme.

Future Requirements

RMG believes it has a substantive role to play in the red meat sector for the foreseeable future. While RMG’s role may be refined further in the light of developments with the Meat Industry Review, each member organisation remains committed to the task.

The future of RMG will be reviewed in 2-3 years time to ensure that it continues to deliver on industry expectations for effective residue management.

This Strategic Plan has been developed as a "living document" so that it can continually meet the needs of red meat industries. Comments and suggestions are welcome and can be forwarded to: