The Rudd Labor government is preparing to relax Australia's strong quarantine rules on 1 March 2010 to allow beef imports from countries known to have had outbreaks of 'mad cow' disease.

 

The Rudd government wants us all to believe that because there is only negligible risk of 'mad cow' of getting into Australia that it's OK to change the rules.

 

The fact there is negligible risk of mad cow disease getting into Australia means there is a risk.

 

I don't think anyone wants to walk into a restaurant with a sign out the front saying 'negligible risk of 'mad cow' here'?

 

Rudd Labor are racing to put the 'mad cow' beef import changes in by next Monday, 1 March 2010 but no-one knows how the 'mad cow' protocols will work because they haven't been developed yet!

 

'Mad cow' disease has a dormant period of 40 years. How can Rudd Labor say, 'yes, this is safe, and this is fantastic for Australia because there is only negligible risk you'll get 'mad cow'?

 

Some parties to the secret 'mad cow' negotiations, which have only recently come to light, suggest we need the changes to prevent international trade retaliation from some of Australia's trading partners.

 

For years Australia's trading partners have been pushing to get access to our market saying they feel they're unfairly precluded because of our strong quarantine laws. Then on the other hand we're told there isn't going to be any great increase in beef imports to Australia.

 

Australia is an island nation, we have no common borders with other countries like nations in the Americas or Europe. So why does agriculture minister Tony Burke want to compromise our Australia's disease free status?

 

Even if Tony Burke makes the 'mad cow' import protocols publicly available today, there is neither time nor opportunity for any thorough public or parliamentary scrutiny before their introduction on Monday, 1 March 2010.

 

Every Australian should be alarmed and concerned that Rudd Labor wants to relax Australia's strong quarantine rules and put Australia at needless risk of 'mad cow' disease coming into our nation.   

Tags: BSE, Fiona, Nash, Senator, cow, mad

Views: 1183

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I am not sure Jeff. I'll see what I can find out. On the positive side, I think the US is likely to have a pro freedom congress after November 2010. I don't expect major problems for us regarding this carbon nonsense if the congress is changed.
If it is not, we could be in big trouble. Also, if this debate about bse gets out or if the Australian government backs off its committment to remove the current ban on US beef imports, then all bets are off. It is not hard to imagine us losing this 400,000 tonne account.
Janet I believe you were? born in USA, it can hardly not be affecting your views.
I wonder how finding a family member/friend with CJD would influence your opinion?

and we DO have stringent Quarantine protocols for any returning or visiting citizens who have been to rural or animal containment areas, already, shoes to be cleaned- clothing etc, and they DO ask upon return, or I was, when I went OS.
.I threw away the footwear I used OS to be safe, apart from animal contaminant I was also worried about weed seeds. maybe others don't care enough to be careful?

As a CAFo Operator, I would bet the Bank owns you, and the need to get ANY market is a priority, hence the comments re us Losing USA markets if? we dare refuse to import? I m sure you have USA contacts and would have had interesting convos about the possible retaliations..
you and Jeff have a vested, income driven reason,to support this.

We the consumers, and people who prefer to err on the side of caution have NO financial, but a whole lot of ethical , and I guess you scoff at, Altruistist reasons, but odd as you may find it, some of us care less about money than doing whats safest and best for Everyone, not just ourselves.
Beverley, re reading you post. a thought occurred.:-)
If the govt used their OWN stats provided so thoughtfully by US in census forms, and their own Tardes and Labour figures..
blind Freddy should have known, Installers AND sparkys, in fact any, tradies are run ragged, and the lists a mile long,
training 3,000 people to assess homes? they paid near 2,500 to be trained? and expected 1,000 a day, at 5 inspections by $200 a pop.
but ? it should have been used, to get apprenticeships going again.. paying the learners and mentoring in the workplace would have benfitted the unemployed, and the industries.
and as for Imported chaep foil batts. Nuff Said. complete loss of jobs there too.
Ian, I can't help it.
Road toll for 2008 Aus was 1464
toll for 2009 was 1500+ they did NOT say how much + either...
so assume 22 million people
my calculator cant do millions, someone? anyone want to work oit out..just for fun?

then take non drivers the aged and very young . take them out of the car death group as they are NON participant on the majority. is 2 million too much? to deduct..

I suggest, do NOT leave any ( or maybe 100k?) out in the BSE risk as almost:-) EVERY person eats a meat product,
from babyfood to ..hmm hospital /aged care, almost Baby food:-) cheap processed and likely to be the cheapest meat (thereby the riskiest really) made to a budget and quality comes far second!
ditto the poorer classes, who tend to use more of the near bone and less muscle meats, those crunchy bits in the mince? near bone stripping, near emulsify the meat and its noticed less, doesnt mean it isnt there! do we add a higher risk for them as in Insurers do for Drivers in danger ages?
so what does the figure come out at?
40 mill to one? or?
Joanne,Julia and JeffT- you all should be on the Cattle Council. They have just got to learn to say No-we aren't doing THAT, sorry.

Simple, next bit of business please.
I'd rather give it away to hungry Aussie's than multi-national import/exporters.

After all charity starts at home.
http://www.aph.gov.au/Hansard/senate/commttee/s5564.pdf

This is from the PDF Page 12...........
Mr Sutton—As I think you may be aware from documents we provided to the secretariat this
morning—on Tuesday, following our hearing, we sent a circular request to every US registered
processing plant in Australia, asking them whether they were prepared to reveal their export
data, and how they would be treated under the RMAC proposal and the minister’s proposal. We
received a fairly mixed response the next day and further replies this morning. Some 42 plants
have responded and, of these, 14 have attached conditions to the provision of this information.
Central to that provision is confidentiality to this committee. It is not for publication and not for
disclosure to the audience at this hearing. Unfortunately, many of the firms that indicated in this
hearing a preparedness to reveal the data put a condition on it that they would reveal it if every
other processor was prepared to have their data revealed. Accordingly, we have prepared, for
the committee only, a schedule with blanking out. Unfortunately, there is not a lot of
information that has been able to be declared to the committee.
--------------
WOW now is that Not Illgeal? they were ASKED as foreign companies to TELL OUR GOVT how much they exported, and They! refuse to give figures upon request??
Gee and I wonder HOW we would go if an Aussie co in USA tried that stunt?
___________________________________
Tariffs and quotas from 2002 rather interesting( in small bites)
To Matt Thompson 10 hours ago:

Having read the posts since I last commented I am still not convinced this is a good move for either the beef industry, and we all know they get it in the neck from the duopoly but is that a good enough reason to expect consumers to accept "negligible risk" on beef exports from the US when there is no Import Risk Analysis.

From a personal viewpoint Matt I don't think this subject should be left alone or dropped because I don't trust American exporters and beef importers here. You say yourself you are in that market place and it will make no difference to you. So why do it?

You said "They wish to ship us about 30 to 40 tonnes of very high quality grain fed beef, and I think we should let them. I am one of the few that actually has to compete with them in this market and I can assure you it will make no difference in my sales.

Matt will this lead to more economical beef prices? I doubt it, at this end of the stick we are paying more and more for meat and if the government were serious they would be looking at what happens between the farm gate and the supermarket/butchery outlets. Not rolling over to the US.

I see cherries from USA in winter no cheaper than the prices of our own cherries in summer. Will that happen with the imports or will it be cheap beef ?

I cannot bear cryopacked meat, either pork, lamb or beef in any case, so will this be cryopacked? It will be an easy choice for me if it is.

I am assuming these beasts will be killed in the US? I don't know if this is the case, they are not planning to import live animals are they?

You see Matt there are so many questions we should know and don't, and there is a huge lose of confidence in this government presently. People on the land are caught in the middle as usual. Nobody denies you get a bad deal but so does the consumer.

You are lucky, you won't have to make a decision about what beef to eat, you will eat your own.

Matt what if BSE gets into the herds here? Or is it already here?

Can you answer these questions because obviously I don't know.
“The U.S. has lower sanitary and phyto-sanitary standards (SPS) for imports than many other countries, especially those concerning bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). These low standards have made the U.S. a dumping ground for beef from the countries that have experienced BSE problems. Food Safety and SPS issues continue to be problematic for our industry, as some countries comply with OIE standards, while others ignore them either for cultural reasons, or too often use them as trade barriers. The USITC October 7, 2008 release reported, ‘U.S. beef processors and beef cattle ranchers lose billions of dollars in export opportunities each year because of animal health and food safety measures in other countries that are inconsistent with international standards and vary by country.


http://www.cattlenetwork.com/USCA-Testifies--Before-USITC/2010-03-0...




>>> “The U.S. has lower sanitary and phyto-sanitary standards (SPS) for imports than many other countries, especially those concerning bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). These low standards have made the U.S. a dumping ground for beef from the countries that have experienced BSE problems. Food Safety and SPS issues continue to be problematic for our industry, as some countries comply with OIE standards, while others ignore them either for cultural reasons, or too often use them as trade barriers. The USITC October 7, 2008 release reported, ‘U.S. beef processors and beef cattle ranchers lose billions of dollars in export opportunities each year because of animal health and food safety measures in other countries that are inconsistent with international standards and vary by country. br />






Rangen Inc 2/11/10

Department of Health and Human Services Public Health Service
Food and Drug Administration
Seattle District Pacific Region 22201 23rd Drive SE Bothell, WA 98021-4421 Telephone: 425-486-8788 FAX: 425-483-4996

February 11, 2010

CERTIFIED MAIL

RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

In reply refer to Warning Letter SEA 10-11

Christopher T. Rangen, President Rangen, Inc. 115-13th Avenue South PO Box 706 Buhl, Idaho 83316

WARNING LETTER

Dear Mr. Rangen: On June 9-11, 2009, U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) investigators inspected your animal feed manufacturing facilities located at 115-13th Avenue South, Buhl, Idaho. The inspection revealed significant deviations from the requirements set forth in Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations, Section 589.2000 (21 C.F.R. 589.2000), Animal Proteins Prohibited in Ruminant Feed. This regulation is intended to prevent the establishment and amplification of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE). You failed to follow the requirements of this regulation, resulting in products being manufactured and distributed by your facility that were adulterated within the meaning of section 402(a)(4) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act), 21 U.S.C. § 342(a)(4), and misbranded within the meaning of section 403(a)(1) of the Act, 21 U.S.C. § 343(a)(1). Our investigation determined that adulteration resulted from the failure of your firm to provide for measures to avoid commingling or cross-contamination. The adulterated feed was subsequently misbranded because it was not properly labeled. Specifically, we found:

1. Your firm failed to provide for and use cleanout procedures or other means adequate to prevent carry-over of products that contain or may contain proteins derived from mammalian tissues into animal feed that may be used for ruminants, as required by 21 CFR 589.2000(e)(1)(iii)(B). Since your feed is prepared, packed, or held under these conditions it is, therefore, adulterated under section 402(a)(4) of the Act, 21 U.S.C. § 342(a)(4).

. Mink feed that was not labeled "Do not feed to cattle or other ruminants," in accordance with 21 CFR 589.2000(e)(1)(i) and that, therefore, might be fed to ruminants, was produced using the same equipment as aquaculture feed that contains proteins derived from mammalian tissues, such as meat and bone meal. You conducted no clean-outs or flushes of equipment to remove proteins derived from mammalian tissues that may have been present before manufacturing the mink feed that might be fed to ruminants.

. The auger trucks you used to deliver bulk mink feed which contained or may have contained proteins derived from mammalian tissues were not subject to an effective clean-out prior to their use to deliver bulk animal feed, including ruminant feed, that did not contain such materials. There were no procedures to clean the trucks to remove proteins derived from mammalian tissues before shipment of animal feeds that did not contain such materials.

2. You failed to label all products which contained or may have contained proteins derived from mammalian tissues with the statement, "Do not feed to cattle or other ruminants," as required by 21 C.F.R. 589.2000(e)(1)(i). Such products are misbranded under Section 403(a)(1) of the Act, 21 U.S.C. § 343(a)(1). The misbranded product includes bulk mink feed.

. On June 9, 2009, the investigators observed approximately (b)(4) pallets of (b)(4) 50 pound bags of (b)(4) MINK FEED, lot 06/05/09. All bagged mink feed, as well as approximately (b)(4)% of bulk mink feed, manufactured at your facility, was produced using the aquaculture feed production equipment used to produce feed containing proteins derived from mammalian tissues. Because mink feed produced using this equipment may have contained mammalian tissues, it was not properly labeled, as required by 21 C.F.R. 589.2000(e)(1)(i).

This letter is not intended to serve as an all-inclusive list of violations at your facility. As a manufacturer of materials intended for animal feed use, you are responsible for ensuring your overall operation and the products you manufacture and distribute are in compliance with the law. You should take prompt action to correct the above violations and you should establish a system whereby violations do not occur. Failure to promptly correct these violations may result in regulatory action, such seizure and/or injunction, without further notice.

We acknowledge your July 31, 2009 letter detailing procedures you had implemented or planned to implement to prevent future violations of FDA regulations relating to mammalian proteins in animal feed. In particular the letter stated that Rangen would no longer purchase meat and bone meal for use in any of its animal feeds and that existing inventories of mammalian protein ingredients would be exhausted by December 31, 2009. Division Manager, Joy Kinyon made similar assertions in the course of FDA's June 2009 inspection. The July 31, 2009 letter further set out procedures Rangen would use to remedy observed violations of FDA regulations while mammalian proteins were still being used at Rangen. Finally you explained steps taken to recover or relabel feed that may have been contaminated due to commingling resulting from your manufacturing and distribution procedures. Within fifteen (15) working days of receiving this letter you should, in writing, confirm the steps you took prior to receiving this letter and notify FDA of steps you have taken since receiving this letter to bring your firm into compliance with the law. Your response should include each step that has been taken or will be taken to correct the violations and prevent their recurrence. If corrective action cannot be completed within fifteen (15) working days, state the reason for the delay and the time frame within which the corrections will be completed. Please include copies of any available documentation demonstrating that corrections have been made.

Your written reply should be directed to Scott A. Nabe, Compliance Officer, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 22201 23rd Drive SE, Bothell, Washington 98021-4421. If you have any questions about this letter, please contact Mr. Nabe at (425) 483-4753.

Sincerely,

/s/

Charles M. Breen District Director Seattle District

cc: Joy A. Kinyon, Division Manager, Aquaculture Feeds-General Feeds Rangen, Inc. PO Box 706 115-13th Avenue South Buhl, Idaho 83316

http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/EnforcementActions/WarningLetters/ucm20189...



Monday, March 1, 2010

ANIMAL PROTEIN I.E. MAD COW FEED IN COMMERCE A REVIEW 2010

http://madcowfeed.blogspot.com/2010/03/animal-protien-ie-mad-cow-fe...



TSS
To Terry 3 hours ago:

Thanks for the input.

It is indeed very, very important the people in this country and politicians are made aware of the situation in the US if they don't already know. I suspect some do and don't care.

I had look at these attachments and find it alarming and concerning that some in our industry find these warnings of no consequence. The warning letters just this year are of concern.

The madcowfeed blog spot was extremely worrisome considering the warning letters list.

I hope others here are having a look at these blogs. Hope.... But $$$ are on the minds of some obviously. I can't blame them, they have to make a living but they should be looking at the moral aspect of the quick buck too.

Thanks for the inputs it is better to know, even if this does go ahead. I for one would prefer to be aware of the risks rather than being kept in the dark. I can at least be diligent in my choices. Sarah commented here that this aspect was handled badly, you bet it was. They tried to keep it quiet and thought it would slip quietly through.

A bit like our ETS 'Emissions Trading Scheme' (carbon trading). The politicians in Federal Government tried to slip that through the senate with very little information and advice about the overall effect on the social fabric of this society. Just a big tax for nothing in return, but that came unstuck. It won't get through the senate now because we all know much more than we did.

We will see how this one pans out. I believe this is more important. The long term ramifications of beef imports is far more dangerous than any concerns about AGW aka Climate Change. That's only my opinion though.
Rae,

The problem here is that you naysayers are going to destroy a 400,000 tonne market for Aussie beef in favor of getting us another 30 or 40 tonnes of sales in Austrlalia. It makes absolutely no sense.

If you want to promote Aussie beef production, you couldn't possibly take a worse position.
Matt just read what I said 22 minutes ago, I said I understand to an extend where you are coming from. Nobody wants to see the beef industry destroyed in this country.

But you must try to see where we are coming from too. We are the ones who quite unknowingly could eat imported rubbish.

We may not be at risk but we might be. As I said I would rather know and choose to buy 'Australian grown beef' not imported US beef. I do have a say Matt about what I want to eat regardless of the fact that you say I am a naysayer. I would rather support the beef growers in Australia than the Americans anyway even without risk.

What makes no sense is that I have to now be wary of the meat I choose. Can you understand that at all?

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Honest Government, Fair Rights to property and compensation, Australia and our people strong and proud, reinstatement of values and respect

Members

Forum

Autism and aborted fetal cells in vaccines? 15 Replies

Started by Rory Donnellan in General. Last reply by Rory Donnellan 3 hours ago.

Islamia Anyone? 2606 Replies

Started by Bob Stewart in Activism. Last reply by Rory Donnellan 3 hours ago.

DAIRY FARMING ISSUES 111 Replies

Started by Alyn Roule in General. Last reply by Rory Donnellan 3 hours ago.

TOWN HALL -- Australia + Global 170 Replies

Started by Alyn Roule in General. Last reply by Alyn Roule 5 hours ago.

100th Anniversary, 4th of August 1st war. 301 Replies

Started by Barbara lee in General. Last reply by Dr Caroline Wright 14 hours ago.

TASMANIA AT THE CROSSROADS? 1090 Replies

Started by Dr Caroline Wright in General. Last reply by Dr Caroline Wright 15 hours ago.

How to bring an Industry to it's knees! 812 Replies

Started by Rob Moore in General. Last reply by Rory Donnellan 22 hours ago.

JOKES, FUNNY PICS & VIDEOS PAGE. 2293 Replies

Started by Brendan Michael in Humour. Last reply by Dr Caroline Wright 23 hours ago.

HOUSE PRICES 23 Replies

Started by Alyn Roule in General. Last reply by Alyn Roule 23 hours ago.

SUPER TRAWLER IN TASMANIA, BAIT FISH AND THE ECOSYSTEM 460 Replies

Started by Dr Caroline Wright in Activism. Last reply by Stephen Cox yesterday.

Barb's veggie flower Receipe photo chatt Patch 1380 Replies

Started by Barbara lee in Entertainment, Books, Movies, Music. Last reply by Stephen Cox yesterday.

CALL to ACTION 34 Replies

Started by Alyn Roule in General. Last reply by Stephen Cox yesterday.

Point of View from SA 605 Replies

Started by Bob Stewart in General. Last reply by Stephen Cox yesterday.

GLOBAL PEOPLE of INFLUENCE 49 Replies

Started by Alyn Roule in General. Last reply by Stephen Cox yesterday.

IS AUSTRALIA ADEQUATELY PROTECTED FROM FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC INVASION ? WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM HISTORY? 1843 Replies

Started by Dr Caroline Wright in Politics. Last reply by Dr Caroline Wright yesterday.

ODDS AND ENDS AND OTHER THINGS 2248 Replies

Started by Dr Caroline Wright in General. Last reply by Geoff Hutchesson yesterday.

#FCG = FRAUD - CORRUPTION - GREED & The Need for TRANSPARENCY 99 Replies

Started by Alyn Roule in General. Last reply by Alyn Roule yesterday.

PRODUCTIVITY Commission 3 Replies

Started by Alyn Roule in Politics. Last reply by Alyn Roule yesterday.

BUDGET = 2014 - 15 82 Replies

Started by Alyn Roule in Politics. Last reply by Alyn Roule yesterday.

Internal Issue INDEX 36 Replies

Started by Alyn Roule in Activism. Last reply by Alyn Roule yesterday.

© 2014   Created by Rob Moore.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service