- PDF Version (244K) - Print Friendly - Help

Summary of Submissions on the Transition Policy and Related Implementation Discussion Document

20 Timeframe for Implementation

Introduction

This section collects together comments made by submitters on the proposed commencement of transition on 1 July 2008 and the subsequent five year transition period to the new regime. In establishing this date and the subsequent timeframe, NZFSA proposes to assign the transition of each food sector to one of the five years reserved for transition (2008-2013). Comments relating to the transition year for specific sectors are examined in Section 18.

As well as identifying a commencement date for the period for transition, NZFSA also advanced a set of basic principles for each food sector. These consist of proposals that:

• new food regulations and supporting specifications will apply from the start of the transition period

• tools for each relevant sector will be in place six months before the scheduled Food Control Plan application lodgement date

• If required for the sector, recognised evaluators will be available six months before the scheduled FCP lodgement date

• verifiers will be recognized by the scheduled registration date

• minimum required competency of ‘persons’ will be mandated by the scheduled registration date but ‘persons’ will be given a reasonable time period to fulfil their education and training needs

• all ‘persons’ whether their sector-specific parts are in place or not, will be required to continue to meet food safety and suitability requirements including the new food regulations and associated specifications, and with the joint Food Standards Code

• when ‘persons’ have an existing food safety programme they cannot change to a control tool of a lower standard, such as registering under the new food regulations.

The discussion document proposes that Food Control Plans be available to ‘persons’ nine months before the identified final transition date for their sector and that these plans can be lodged with regulators three months prior to the identified date. It is then proposed that the regulator will be able to provide a registration certificate by the identified date.

Overview of Submissions

Twenty one submitters made specific comments in relation to the transition timeframe and the timeframes associated with the basic principles for each sector listed above. These submitters comprised:

• 14 government bodies (including TAs, PHUs and DHBs)

• 4 industry organisations

• 2 business groups

• 1 community group

Summary

Most submitters supported the five year timeframe as an appropriate period to make the transition to the new regime, but many had additional concerns. Two submitters returned comments that gave full support to the proposed transition timeframe.

1 July 2008 – too soon

Although most submitters supported the five year transition period, many expressed concern that the date for the commencement of implementation does not allow sufficient time for TAs, ‘persons’ and other stakeholders to establish appropriate administrative systems. One submitter, a PHU, frames this concern concisely:

“[we] believe that the five year transition time frame appears to be appropriate and it is important to have an end date to this process. However, we do have concerns that the 1 July 2008 start date may be too ambitious. [We] believe it is essential that the NZFSA ensures the entire infrastructure is in place prior to commencement of the new regime”.

One submitter traced the timeline back from the first registrations on 1 July 2008 nine months to 1 September 2007, the date when TAs would be expected to be able to provide advice on the preparation of Food Control Plans. This timing, another submitter comments, is very tight. The approach of the implementation date was of particular concern to TAs and PHUs, many of whom, urged NZFSA to consider building in the

“necessary time for allocation of budgets, staff training and system change”.

Timeframe

Although comments and concerns in relation to the wider timeframe for implementation will be examined in subsequent sections (see Section 18), it is helpful to include a brief summary here examining how the proposed timeframe for implementation will impact on stakeholders’ capability and capacity to implement the new regime. This is especially important,

“in view of council Long-term Council Community Plans only being reviewed every three years”.

Confusion in interpreting the timeline

There was also some confusion noted about the interpretation of the timeline. One submitter, a PHU, noted that on page 11 of the discussion document it states that Food Control Plan material will be available to ‘persons’ and that recognised evaluators will be available (if applicable) nine months prior to the date of transition for the identified sector, while on page 14 it states the “tools for each relevant sector will be in place six months before the scheduled Food Control Plan lodgement date.” The submitter urges that “the timeframe needs to be consistent,” recommending that “nine months is appropriate.” Another submitter suggested that a set of flow diagrams would assist in communicating the transition timeframe proposals to stakeholders.

The concern of many submitters is captured in the comment of one, who asserted that it is

“vital that the entire system is in place, (for example the compliance structure) at the start of the transition period 1 July 2008 and not developed as the transition period progresses”.

In order to meet this deadline, systems need to be in place to

“train regulators for their roles…[and develop] standards and guidelines to ensure consistency of approach among regulators”.

Timeframes for individual elements of the transition

Most submitters supported the length of time allotted to individual aspects of the registration, evaluation and verification processes (if not the specific date for their implementation), however a few submitters were concerned that the six-month period allotted to each sector to submit a Food Control Plan for registration is not long enough. For small business operators especially, the time frame does not build in enough time to become familiar with the new requirements. One industry organisation pointed out that although a five-year transition timeframe is proposed, in reality each sector is given less than one year to transition into the new regime.

Other factors

One government submitter pointed to a range of other factors that may impact on the ability of TAs to the meet the timeframes proposed for the transition period. The two principal examples cited were:

“the rapid turnover of food business operators particularly in larger cities; and the possibility of a civil defence emergency or an influenza pandemic”.

Timeframe for Food Handler Guidance

One submitter, a community group, asked that the preparation and introduction of Food Handler Guidance criteria be carried out at the earliest possible time in the transition sequence and noted that no specific transitional arrangements are proposed. This request is underscored by a belief that occasional events may provide increased risk of food-borne illness to the consumer.