KEY POINTS:
CANBERRA - Australia yesterday took off its gloves and prepared to slug it out in court with New Zealand over Canberra's decades-old ban on transtasman apple exports.
While both sides emphasised that Wellington's decision to haul Canberra before the World Trade Organisation would not hurt the $16 billion two-way trade between the two countries, neither was backing down.
Trade Minister Phil Goff and Agriculture Minister Jim Anderton announced the WTO action after years of frustration and delays by Canberra in a bid to protect Australian apple and pear growers from New Zealand imports and the claimed potential for an outbreak of the devastating fire blight disease.
"We have made every effort over many years to resolve this issue bilaterally, but we have said that if the bilateral route could not deliver commercially meaningful access for our apples, then WTO dispute settlement would be the only option left," the two ministers said. "Regrettably, we have now reached that point."
Australian Agriculture Minister Peter McGauran vowed in response to defend his country's position vigorously.
"The Australian Government will strongly defend its actions and policy determination on the basis of science," he said. "I am confident our approach to quarantine is consistent with the WTO rules."
Under WTO rules a country can ban imported produce only on the grounds that the imports could introduce damaging pests and diseases. They cannot be used to protect an economically threatened local industry.
New Zealand has long argued that it can prevent fire blight disease - endemic in its orchards - from crossing the Tasman and has fought a long scientific argument to push its case.
But Australia - where a politically influential lobby has successfully thwarted Wellington's repeated efforts - has dragged the chain for decades until finally conceding Kiwi apples could be imported, but only under very tough quarantine conditions.
Mr Goff and Mr Anderton said the two sides had been working to determine how New Zealand could comply with the quarantine conditions announced by Canberra in November.
"There is no doubt that the final import risk analysis imposed a very restrictive regime for our apple exports and requires methods that are not scientifically justified," they said.
"We will be challenging those measures in the WTO, which has already held that measures imposed by Japan for fire blight were not justified for trade in commercial apples."
They also complained at continued delays, including a last-minute "technical experts' workshop" convened by Australia on August 3, the results of which were not yet available.
Mr McGauran said Australia's workplan for the importation of New Zealand apples would be completed before the case was heard by the WTO and would be submitted to Wellington soon.
