Standards and accreditation

In general, Australia's standard setting and laboratory accreditation services are effective, but there is scope for improvement.

The Australian Government should ensure both Standards Australia and the National Association of Testing Authorities (NATA) serve agreed public and national interest objectives by way of Memoranda of Understanding, targeted funding, representation on governance bodies of both organisations and by recognising the special status of both bodies.

Standard setting

Standards Australia should make the following improvements:

• systematically consider costs and benefits before developing or revising a standard, and publish reasons for such decisions
• ensure more balanced stakeholder representation
• reduce barriers to volunteer and public participation
• improve accessibility, transparency and timeliness, including an improved appeals and complaints mechanism.

All government bodies should rigorously analyse impacts before making a standard mandatory by way of regulation and ensure it is the minimum necessary to achieve the policy objective. Each Australian Government agency should also provide the funding necessary to ensure free or low cost access to such standards, including Australian Standards.

The Australian Government should continue to support Standards Australia's role in facilitating international standardisation activities.

The Standards Accreditation Board should be renamed the Accreditation Board for Australian Standards to better reflect its role and should be recognised by the Australian Government.

Laboratory accreditation

The Australian Government should continue to progress government-to-government mutual recognition of conformance assessment and NATA should continue to progress voluntary mutual recognition.

The Australian Government should continue to support NATA's international roles.

NATA's proficiency testing programs should not be funded by the Government unless there are net public benefits beyond those which the market would provide.

NATA's prime role with regard to proficiency testing should be to set what is required for accreditation and to accredit proficiency testing bodies.

Governments should only impose a mandatory requirement for NATA accreditation, if a comprehensive assessment demonstrates a net benefit to the community.

There is a need to improve arrangements for the development of Australian Standards and the accreditation of laboratories in Australia, according to a report released by the Productivity Commission.

The report — Standard Setting and Laboratory Accreditation — examines the Australian Government's relationship with the two main non-government bodies in these areas: Standards Australia and the National Association of Testing Authorities (NATA).

Commissioner Robert Fitzgerald said: 'Overall, both Standards Australia and NATA are effective and their recognition by the Australian Government should continue. However, areas for improvement have been identified and changes to government funding arrangements are needed to better reflect the balance of private and public interests in their activities.'

With over 6 750 Australian Standards already in place, the Commission has identified the need for Standards Australia to improve its framework for standard setting, including by ensuring better justification processes before new standards are developed, implementing an improved appeals and complaints mechanism and balancing stakeholder representation on committees.

It has also called on governments to ensure rigorous cost benefit assessments are undertaken before referencing additional standards in regulation. Where standards are made mandatory by way of regulation, government agencies should provide funding to ensure free or low cost access to such standards.

The Commission has emphasised the importance of NATA and the Australian Government pursuing the mutual recognition of accredited laboratories internationally to facilitate trade. It has also called for the development of a more competitive market for the proficiency testing of laboratories.

Preliminaries
Cover, Copyright, Foreword, Terms of reference, Contents, Abbreviations, Key points, Overview, Recommendations

1 About this study
1.1 The Commission’s approach
1.2 The standards and conformance infrastructure
1.3 Guide to the report

2 Overarching issues
2.1 Why have standards and laboratory accreditation?
2.2 Policy issues
2.3 Summing up

STANDARD SETTING

3 The standards development infrastructure
3.1 Structure of the standards system
3.2 Standards Australia
3.3 Other bodies developing standards
3.4 International context
3.5 Conclusion

4 Standards Australia and the Australian Government
4.1 Governments’ relationship with Standards Australia
4.2 MoU and Deed of Agreement
4.3 Other MoUs and agreements
4.4 Conclusion

5 Overall assessment and status of Standards Australia
5.1 Overall assessment
5.2 Peak body status
5.3 Broadening the standards writing base
5.4 Standards Australia's relationship with SAI Global

6 Assessment: international
6.1 International collaboration
6.2 International alignment of standards

7 Assessment: the standards produced and access
7.1 Determining the need for standards and setting priorities
7.2 Regulatory standards
7.3 Access to and cost of standards
7.4 Compliance and conformity issues

8 Assessment: governance and processes
8.1 Introduction
8.2 Transparency and consensus
8.3 Technical expertise
8.4 Efficiency of project management and timeliness
8.5 Review processes
8.6 Appeals and complaints handling mechanism

9 The future relationship between the Australian Government and Standards Australia
9.1 Funding issues
9.2 How should the MoU be changed?

LABORATORY ACCREDITATION

10 Laboratory accreditation infrastructure
10.1 Laboratory accreditation in the conformance infrastructure
10.2 The National Association of Testing Authorities
10.3 Other bodies involved in laboratory accreditation
10.4 International context
10.5 Related areas
10.6 Conclusion

11 NATA and the Australian Government
11.1 Governments’ relationship with NATA
11.2 MoU and the Deed of Agreement
11.3 Other MoUs and agreements
11.4 Conclusion

12 Assessment of laboratory accreditation arrangements
12.1 International aspects
12.2 Laboratory accreditation services
12.3 Other issues
12.4 Overall assessment

13 The future Australian Government relationship with NATA
13.1 Recognition of NATA
13.2 Funding
13.3 Memorandum of Understanding

A Submissions and meetings

B MoU with Standards Australia

C MoU with NATA

D Membership of Standards Australia and Sector Boards

E State and Territory regulation referring to NATA

F List of private sector, Commonwealth and intergovernmental writers of standards, codes and guides

References