IAF–BD–01-042 / Annual Meeting
November 2001 / Page 1 of 6
Minutes of the Fourteenth Meeting of the IAF Board (Annual Meeting)
8 November, 2001, at the Kyoto International Conference Hall
Present– Takashi Ohtsubo (Chairman), Thomas Facklam (VC) Joseph Dunbeck, Dale Misczynski, Sandy Sutherland, Verónica Garcia de Solórzano (Board Members), Noel Matthews (Secretary).
1.Welcome
1.1.Review Agenda
1.1.1.The meeting adopted the draft agenda.
1.1.2.The Chairman reminded Directors that this Annual Meeting of the Board was legally required and must be held immediately after the annual meeting of the Members, or within 30 days at most. The Board was required at the Annual Meeting to appoint Officers and other business that must be transacted by the Board.
2.Appointment of Officers
2.1.Appoint President
2.1.1.The Board appointed Dr Takashi Ohtsubo as President of IAF until the next Annual Meeting of the Board.
2.2.Appoint Treasurer
2.2.1.The Board appointed Mr Joseph Dunbeck as IAF Treasurer until the next Annual Meeting of the Board.
2.3.Appoint Secretary
2.3.1.The Board appointed Mr Noel Matthews as Secretary of IAF until the next Annual Meeting of the Board.
2.4.Appoint Other Officers
2.4.1.The Board appointed Mr Roger Brockway as Vice-President, Technical, Ms Elva Nilsen as Vice-President, MLA, until the next Annual Meeting of the Board.
2.4.2.Dunbeck undertook to ensure that all Officers, including the Vice-Presidents, would be covered by IAF’s Directors and Officers Insurance.
3.Review of Immediate Past Annual Meeting
3.1.Report from President
3.1.1.The Board agreed that the Workshop on Sector Schemes had been a successful initiative. The Board appointed Thomas Facklam as convenor of an Ad-hoc Group responsible for strategic planning in relation to Sector Schemes. Other members of the Ad-hoc Group are Misczynski and Sutherland. The Ad-hoc Group should develop a strategy for interaction between IAF and industries that seek specific sector schemes, and an action plan for the changes in the operation of the MLA which full implementation of sector schemes will require.
3.1.2.The Secretary was asked to collect all the screen presentations made at the various meetings in Kyoto and to make them available to Members in the web site.
3.1.3.The Board agreed that, following the decision by the Members in the Annual Meeting to remove provision for payment of the auditors who conduct the internal audits, the provision in the budget for 2002 for internal audits of the Secretariat and the MLA program would be sufficient.
3.1.4.The Board agreed Mr Tokai of JAB had been extraordinarily helpful during the Annual Meeting. The Secretary was asked to write to Tokai-san, with a copy to the head of JAB, thanking him for the excellent work done in Kyoto. [Note – the letter has been sent.]
3.2.Lessons for Future Annual Meetings
3.2.1.The Board agreed that the experiment with Workshops on specific themes had been successful and such Workshops should become a regular part of the Annual Meeting program. Workshops on specific themes had been planned to use the time well and to allow interaction by delegates. The Workshops should be managed to encourage more participation by Members.
3.2.2.Facklam undertook to incorporate such Workshops into the planning for the 2002 Meeting in Berlin. The current program for Berlin allowed half a day for special meetings.
3.2.3.Facklam reported that the current plans for the meeting in Berlin provided for one & half days for the Annual Meeting of Members, and two days for the Conference. The first day of the Conference will be a general session for all delegates and the second day will be split into four blocks of topics.
3.2.4.The Board agreed that it would propose a reduction of the time of the Joint General Assemblies to one half day, and to use the other half day for an informal session in which the Chairmen of the three main Committees would report on the activities of their Committees in the previous year, and allow informal discussion of the reports. The Committee reports would then be taken as read during the Annual Meeting and only resolutions arising from the Committee reports put for voting, to free up time.
3.2.5.Solórzano asked that the plans for Berlin not schedule the meeting of the Development Support Committee in parallel with other Committees, as that would seriously disadvantage delegates from developing economies. All Committee chairmen were asked to advise Facklam quickly of their needs for space and time in Berlin.
4.Review of Work of Subordinate Groups
4.1.Board ad-hoc groups
4.1.1.The Board confirmed the establishment of a Chairman’s Advisory Group responsible for Promotion, convenor Dunbeck, members Misczynski and Craven (?) with power to co-opt a small number of members. It confirmed the establishment of an Ad-hoc Group for Strategic Planning for Sector Schemes, convenor Facklam, and members Misczynski and Sutherland.
4.1.2.Misczynski offered to discuss with ICSCA how to develop better relationships with industry sectors. He would explore whom to approach – what, where, who, when, and report to the Executive meeting in Mexico. [Note – at the JCCC meeting Misczynski and Richards (ILAC) were asked to develop a plan for liaison with regulators. That work is underway and it is planned to conduct a workshop in Vancouver following the Executive meetings in May.]
4.2.Executive Committee
4.2.1.The Board decided that the implementation of the new structure should ensure that all three main Committees had the same rules for membership. The Secretary should invite all Members to appoint a single delegate as their representative to speak and vote on their behalf on each Committee. Members should be asked to advise in advance the number of people they proposed to send to each Committee meeting.
4.2.2.Facklam was asked to decide on the appropriate time and person to pro-actively seek closer relationships with specific industry sectors. The person should act as a liaison with industry and also work to develop closer business relationships with specific industries.
5.Co-Operation with ILAC
5.1.JCCC
5.1.1.Facklam undertook to ensure that the meeting of the JCCC in Vancouver in May took effective actions to develop co-operative arrangements between IAF and ILAC.
6.Other Business
6.1.Code of Ethics for Directors and Officers
6.1.1.Misczynski tabled the draft Code of Ethics prepared by the small group. He pointed out that confidentiality of information made available to Board and Executive members can be a problem as not all the documents that come to meetings are marked “Confidential”. He suggested the Board adopt a policy of ensuring that confidential documents are clearly identified as such.
6.1.2.The Board approved the draft and directed the Secretary to circulate the final version to all members of the Executive with advice that the Code now applies to all members of the Executive.
6.2.Food Safety SQF Institute
6.2.1.The Board met with Paul Ryan of the SQF Institute as a follow up to its previous meeting with him in Seoul in April 2000. Ryan advised that since the previous meeting SQF had developed documentation intended to make the SQF program compatible with that of IAF. He tabled draft guidance for certification / registration bodies which wish to certify food safety issues, based upon Guide 62. It had also in co-operation with CIES, which operates its program in accordance with Guide 65, included guidance to Guide 65, so allowing certification / registration bodies to operate to either Guide 62 or Guide65.
6.2.2.Ryan advised that SQF participates in the Technical Committee of CIES. CIES operates a global food safety program intended for the entire food industry. The SQF standards are made up of two documents - SQF1000, which applies to farms and primary producers, and SQF2000, which applies to the entire food chain from the farm through processing to shops. The SQF standards do not purport to be fully compliant with ISO9001, but rather are based on HACCP plus some Quality Management elements.
6.2.3.Ryan explained that the SQF guidance for the accreditation of certification bodies which operate food safety certification programs to the SQF standards. SQF sees its role as to develop standards and of guidance to their application to meet the needs of the food industry. SQF hopes to rely on IAF accreditation bodies to ensure that certification / registration bodies operate the food safety standards certification programs appropriately.
6.2.4.The intellectual property in SQF standards is owned by the government of Western Australia, and the SQF Institute is owned by SGS. The objective is to assure the customers who buy food products that they comply with a standard the customer recognises. SQF standards are developed using food industry experts, and certification / registration bodies licensed by SQF are obliged to maintain compliance with the standards and integrity of the operations.
6.2.5.SQF was seeking an agreement with IAF that would enable members of the IAF MLA to accredit the competence of certification / registration bodies to operate certification programs to the SQF standards. SQF currently will only license certification / registration bodies that are members of the MLA, but he recognised that all IAF accreditation bodies do not now evaluate the competence of certification / registration bodies to operate a food safety standard.
6.2.6.Ryan offered the draft guidance document and asked IAF to begin a dialogue with SQF with the objective of developing an agreement for IAF accreditation bodies to accredit to the SQF standards. The SQF standard was already in use in Australia, Thailand, Philippines, Canada, some South Asian countries and some US States. Governments in those countries acknowledged that the requirements in the SQF standard exceed regulatory requirements.
6.2.7.SQF was hoping to rely on IAF accreditation for assurance of the competence of certification / registration bodies and auditors in the food safety field. The Board recognised that giving such an assurance would require accreditation body assessors and certification / registration body auditors to be trained in the additional skills needed. SQF standards would be made available to any food safety program which wished to use them.
6.2.8.The Board invited Ryan to make a formal proposal for co-operation between SQF and IAF in the food safety area. He undertook to submit a proposal as soon as practicable.
7.Next Meeting
7.1.1.The Board confirmed that it would not meet again separately from the Executive until the 2002 Annual Meeting in Berlin.
7.1.2.The next meeting of the Executive would be held on February 14 and 15 2002 in Mexico. The following meeting would be held on May 23 and 24 in Vancouver, Canada, simultaneously with a meeting of the ILAC Executive in the same location. The JCCC would meet on May 22.
8.Close
8.1.1.The Chairman thanked members of the Board for the hard work carried out over the past year. He wished them all a safe and comfortable trip home. He closed the meeting.
end of Minutes of Board of Directors 2001 Annual Meeting (Fourteenth Meeting)
Minutes approved at the Second Meeting of the Executive Committee in February 2002.
BoD14_1101min.doc Printed 24 February, 2002