MS KERR: I think - - - MR BAXTER: Independent process - sorry to interrupt. Independent process to do specifically what? MS KERR: For the standards and guidelines, so making sure that it’s - so an independent body - there are probably a number of models that can be looked at. You know, Standards Australia is one model, FSANZ is a different type of model. The Commission has recommended another which probably aligns a bit more with the Australian Farm Institute’s recommendation. The question mark we had around particularly that model and the Commission’s model was how would the scientific committee work? You know, I can commission work. An animal rights group can commission some scientific work. They could be all plausible, really it’s how that independent science-based body would work, or ethics committee would work. For us, the key issue is we want science-based standards and guidelines. We want a process that results in harmonised standards and guidelines being legislated in Australia. So in other words, what we don’t want is state governments picking bits and pieces or doing their own process which means that others don’t have a standards and guidelines or have a dated standards and guidelines process. It’s making sure that we have harmonised legislation in each state that means that producers across state borders are operating on a level playing field. That is the outcome that we want to see. It’s how we get to that. We see an independent process as - it’s the independence of the process that is probably more the point for us. MR BAXTER: Have you had a look at the New Zealand MS KERR: Not in detail, no, but we will be going into that process. MR BAXTER: Yes. I we would appreciate you having a look at that which has been a very effective and well-regarded model from both sides of the fence, so to speak. So we would be interested to have your reactions. I am having some difficulty, I have got to say, in what you describe as an independent process. Who runs that process? What is the expected outcome of it? Is the expected outcome just the harmonisation of current regulations or is it ultimately leading to a national body with the capacity to ensure that those standards are harmonised and implemented?
MS KERR: I think - - - MR BAXTER: Independent process - sorry to interrupt. Independent process to do specifically what? MS KERR: For the standards and guidelines, so making sure that it’s - so an independent body - there are probably a number of models that can be looked at. You know, Standards Australia is one model, FSANZ is a different type of model. The Commission has recommended another which probably aligns a bit more with the Australian Farm Institute’s recommendation. The question mark we had around particularly that model and the Commission’s model was how would the scientific committee work? You know, I can commission work. An animal rights group can commission some scientific work. They could be all plausible, really it’s how that independent science-based body would work, or ethics committee would work. For us, the key issue is we want science-based standards and guidelines. We want a process that results in harmonised standards and guidelines being legislated in Australia. So in other words, what we don’t want is state governments picking bits and pieces or doing their own process which means that others don’t have a standards and guidelines or have a dated standards and guidelines process. It’s making sure that we have harmonised legislation in each state that means that producers across state borders are operating on a level playing field. That is the outcome that we want to see. It’s how we get to that. We see an independent process as - it’s the independence of the process that is probably more the point for us. MR BAXTER: Have you had a look at the New Zealand MS KERR: Not in detail, no, but we will be going into that process. MR BAXTER: Yes. I we would appreciate you having a look at that which has been a very effective and well-regarded model from both sides of the fence, so to speak. So we would be interested to have your reactions. I am having some difficulty, I have got to say, in what you describe as an independent process. Who runs that process? What is the expected outcome of it? Is the expected outcome just the harmonisation of current regulations or is it ultimately leading to a national body with the capacity to ensure that those standards are harmonised and implemented?