- Print Friendly - Help

AgVetLink June 2004: Page 5

Previous page  | Contents |  Next page

---

REVIEWS

EU banned substances

An ACVM Group review of substances banned in the EU for food-producing animals is underway. (This group of products includes the nitrofurans, which have been the subject of recalls or advisory notices in Canada and in Australia recently.) The substances are not banned in New Zealand, but there is concern that their presence might endanger market access.

The recommendations for control of use conditions under the ACVM Act will be peer reviewed by a group of toxicologists from other regulatory bodies before formal consultation with affected registrants takes place. This process is likely to take about three months.

Animal feeds

NZFSA is looking at overlaps/ gaps in the ACVM and Animal Products Acts in the area of animal feeds. Issues and options will be considered over the next few months. Australia is conducting a similar review.

Imports

The imports review team is close to finalising a document for public consultation. There will also be a workshop on imports at the NZFSA annual conference (29-30 September) in Wellington that will include ACVM-related issues. To accommodate participants, the workshop will be held on both days of the conference: 3.30 - 5.00 on the 29th, 10.45 - 12.30 on the 30th.

 

Registration Liaison Committee

The 26th Registration Liaison Committee (RLC) meeting was held in Canberra in March 2004. Brian Pidford and Maree Zinzley of the ACVM Group attended.

The agenda covered the following:

1. The representatives from the States and Territories seemed more prepared to require action by the APVMA on outstanding project commitments than has been noticed in the past. However, the States and the APVMA appear to be trapped by conflicting interpretations that constrain some of their activities and, on a number of occasions, APVMA stated that it was unable to move on an issue until further legal advice had been obtained.

There were positive references by some States’ representatives to the way New Zealand regulates in certain areas, in particular our:

• default withholding period;

• PAR classification system;

• registration system that does not rely on permits.

2. Long-term (three years) issues relating to Appendix J were discussed. The States have long wanted APVMA to declare dangerous chemicals as restricted products and establish policy on training requirements and competencies for their use so that States can play their part in control of use. APVMA claims not to have the legal ability to restrict products and therefore continually places them into Appendix J of their poisons schedule system. This in turn leaves each State (under its own legislation) to determine what controls and training for use are needed. APVMA states that a law change will be required to resolve this issue.

3. The APVMA is in the process of developing an ‘account management system’ for dealing with other agencies. No details or specified contacts were provided.

4. There was much discussion on permits. In particular States continue to have problems with the operational implementation of permits – they are being provided too slowly and the process is inefficient. APVMA was questioned on the closure of the Permit Group, and the transfer of issuing of permits to the Registration Groups, with a consequent lack of consistency. States said the issuing of permits seems to be outstripping registrations.

5. The APVMA review of 1080, which had been stalled, is being reactivated under the leadership of Subbu Putcha. Some significant issues to be resolved are variability of use between States and variability of pests. States suggested that New Zealand experience with 1080 be accessed and the ACVM Group will provide appropriate contacts if requested.

6. The issue of the appropriate disposal of dips continues unresolved. The APVMA is now asking States for a priority list of dip chemicals for which controlled disposal methods are required. APVMA is considering recommencing work on its draft guideline. NSW provided the meeting with a desk top review of dip disposal advice taken from APVMA approved labels of ectoparasiticides and post harvest dipping products. The advice statements vary greatly for the same chemical. States recommended a focus on high risk products first rather than trying to implement a complete scheme to cover all chemical types.

7. Work on the new labelling guide has slipped by a year so far. APVMA is looking for more State support.

8. Another issue yet to be resolved concerns the development of policy on disposal of timber treated with copperchrome- arsenate (CCA) preservative. CCA-treated timber may be employed in structures and then need to be disposed of many years after any actions on the regulation of the chemical occurs. APVMA has taken the first step by restricting the use of CCA treatment of timber used for decks and playground structures.