Brett Mason (Queensland, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health and Ageing) Share this | Hansard source

I table a supplementary explanatory memorandum relating to the government amendments to this bill to be moved, including supplementary information relating to the explanatory memorandum for the bill. The memorandum was circulated in the chamber on 12 June 2007. I seek leave to move government amendments (1) to (3) on sheet QW325 together.

Leave granted.

I move government amendments (1) to (3) on sheet QW325:

(1)    Schedule 1, item 13, page 6 (lines 11 and 12), omit “boxed”.

(2)    Schedule 1, item 76, page 67 (lines 10 to 16), omit subsection 109(9), substitute:

        (9)    If the Council notifies the Authority that it is formulating policy guidelines for the purposes of paragraph 18(2)(e):

             (a)    the Authority may, subject to subsections (9A) and (9B), suspend its consideration of any application which, in the opinion of the Authority, would be affected by the guidelines once formulated; and

             (b)    if the Authority suspends its consideration of an application, notify the applicant of the suspension, and the period of the suspension.

     (9A)    If:

             (a)    an applicant has applied for the development or variation of a standard; and

             (b)    an exclusive capturable commercial benefit would be conferred on the applicant if the standard were made or varied in the manner sought in the application; and

             (c)    either:

                   (i)    the charge fixed under subparagraph 146(6)(b)(ii) in relation to the application is paid; or

                  (ii)    in a case where the charge is payable in instalments—each instalment that is due and payable in relation to the application is paid;

the Authority must not suspend its consideration of the application unless the applicant first consents to that suspension.

      (9B)    If:

             (a)    an applicant elects to have the consideration of his or her application expedited; and

             (b)    either:

                   (i)    the charge fixed under subparagraph 146(6)(b)(ii) in relation to the application is paid; or

                  (ii)    in a case where the charge is payable in instalments—each instalment that is due and payable in relation to the application is paid;

the Authority must not suspend its consideration of the application unless the applicant first consents to that suspension.

(3)    Schedule 1, item 76, page 70 (lines 12 to 14), omit subsection 112(6).

Why is the government introducing these amendments to the bill? On 29 March 2007 the Food Standards Australia New Zealand Amendment Bill 2007 was referred to the Senate Standing Committee on Community Affairs, which delivered its report on 1 May this year. As I mentioned previously, the Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills also reviewed the bill and included its comments on the bill in the bill’s Alert Digest No. 5 of 2007. Both reports make recommendations that propose the development and tabling of relatively minor government amendments. In light of these reports the government is moving three relatively minor non-controversial amendments to the bill. Amendment (1), in relation to the editorial notes, is to schedule 1, item 13, page 6, lines 11 and 12 of the bill, which amends the definition of ‘standard’ in subsection 3(1) of the act to clarify that text identified as an editorial note or an example is not part of the standard. The original drafting specifies that boxed text identified as editorial notes or examples is not part of a standard. The word ‘boxed’ has been removed so that proposed subsection 3(1) of the act also excludes editorial notes and examples which are not in boxed text format. The amendment proposed retains the policy intent that all text identified in the Food Standards Code as an editorial note or example is not part of a standard.

Secondly, the amendment proposed in relation to the stop-the-clock provisions is to schedule 1, item 76, page 67 of the bill. Clause 109 in the bill originally allowed the authority—that is, FSANZ—to suspend consideration of all applications if the authority considered that the application might be affected by the policy guideline under development by the Australia and New Zealand Food Regulation Ministerial Council. It is proposed to amend this provision to provide applicants with an option to proceed with the assessment process of a paid application. The authority will inform applicants about the role of the ministerial council in the standards development process and that approval, if it is granted, may be rescinded or amended if necessary following any contrary policy decision by the ministerial council.

Subclause 112(6) of the original bill authorised the amendment of the standards development process in the Food Standards Australia New Zealand Act 1991 by regulation. The Scrutiny of Bills Committee is concerned that such a provision involves a delegation of legislative power. Following consultation with Food Standards Australia New Zealand, it appears that the provision has never been utilised and that there are no existing regulations to this effect. The intention of this amendment is simply to remove the provision.

Question agreed to.