October 8th 2005

  Buy Issue 2717

Articles from this issue:

COVER STORY: THE WAR ON TERROR: Identifying and tackling the causes of terrorism

EDITORIAL: Ethanol back on the national agenda

NATIONAL SECURITY: 800 potential terrorists in Australia

CANBERRA OBSERVED: Can Labor ignore Latham's message?

QUARANTINE: Federal Court overturns pig meat import ban

EUROPE: France pays mothers to have more children

DIVORCE LAWS: Fathers turning against Howard

FAMILY: Parental duty of care fails adolescents

EDUCATION: University students struggling with English

SCHOOLS: Primary schools performing poorly

STRAWS IN THE WIND: Germany and the hazards of proportional representation / Minefield Childcare and its critics / Latham diaries fall-out / State-federal jousting

HIV/AIDS EPIDEMIC: Using common sense, not condom sense

OPINION: Why Latham's Labor lost

POPULATION: Communist China's abuse of pregnant women

Real face of Labor (letter)

Legal redress for paternity fraud (letter)

Elite media's hatred of Bush (letter)

BOOKS: THE COLLAPSE OF GLOBALISM: and the Reinvention of the World, by John Ralston Saul


Books promotion page

Federal Court overturns pig meat import ban

by Peter Westmore

News Weekly, October 8, 2005
A quarantine ban on uncooked pig meat imports has been overturned by the Federal Court of Australia, writes Peter Westmore.

A quarantine ban on uncooked pig meat imports has been overturned by the Federal Court of Australia.

A full session of the Federal Court has overturned, on appeal, an earlier judgment of Justice Wilcox that found that the entry of uncooked pig meat from the United States imposed an unacceptable risk of the entry of exotic diseases to Australia.

Justice Wilcox found that arguments contained in the import risk assessment (IRA) were defective and, contrary to the expert panel's assessment, there was a substantial risk that exotic disease could enter Australia through the imported pig meat.

On appeal, the Federal Court judges stated that they would not rule on the competence of IRA.

They said, "While there is room for debate as to some aspects of the IRA Report, the Panel did not carry out its task irrationally or unreasonably. The Court is not empowered to adjudicate on the factual correctness or otherwise of the IRA Report."

The judges stated, "In the present case, the [IRA] Panel was not only concerned with fact rather than discretion, it had to make an assessment of future risk and measure that risk against the imponderable standard of acceptable lowness. An element of speculation, in the sense of assessing the likelihood of future occurrences, was necessarily involved."

The Full Court endorsed the appeal on the basis that the pork industry had attempted "to move into the Court the exercise of risk assessment which Parliament has conferred on an administrative decision-maker".

Responding to the judgement, a director of Australian Pork Limited (APL), Dr Paul Higgins, said there were a number of worrying aspects about the court's judgment:

  • the court acknowledged that Australia's appropriate level of protection is an "imponderable standard of acceptable lowness";

  • the court acknowledged that it is a legitimate argument that the IRA "was not an ideal process as a matter of scientific method"; and

  • the court acknowledged that, in determining the likely risks, "some experiments might have been conducted". He said APL has argued for years that those experiments should be conducted.

Peter Westmore

Join email list

Join e-newsletter list

Your cart has 0 items

Subscribe to NewsWeekly

Research Papers

Trending articles

COVER STORY Don't grieve dumped TPP; rather, thank Trump

ENVIRONMENT U.S. Congress to investigate shonky climate report

COVER STORY Money flows freely to fuel anti-coal campaign

ENVIRONMENT Ignore claims that Antarctic ice sheet will melt away

EDITORIAL What future has Senator Cory Bernardi?

EDITORIAL Commission report demonstrates old saying about statistics

ELECTRICITY Green policies threaten energy security and jobs

News and views from around the world

Scientists criticise "hottest year on record" hype (James Varney)

States, territories slash school funding by $100 million (Stephanie Balogh)

Confirm Judge Gorsuch to the Supreme Court (Stephen Mosher)

Rescuing Governor Ahok (Bob Lowry)

Future shock: What happens when robots take our jobs? (Adam Creighton)

President Trump: Protect religious freedom (Ryan Anderson)

China to crack down further on "cult" activities (Ben Blanchard)

Polish president rules out gay marriage (Radio Poland)

U.S. state legislatures sign 334 laws in five years to restrict abortion (Micaiah Bilger)

Clinton, Trump and the politics of the English language (Ben Reinhard)

© Copyright NewsWeekly.com.au 2017
Last Modified:
March 16, 2017, 10:40 am