I know you are not illiterate but I am starting to wonder about your comprehension skills, I have shown you the relevant EU council regulation in respect to FSANZ/ EU regulatory equivalence for organic products and production. You seem to be under illusion that all organic production is destined for the EU.
There is no HS code for organic products, and organic certification does not say anything about the eligibility of your products being admissible in any market.
The relevance of organic labelling as far as international trade goes doesn't move the needle above zero. Mostly because you still have to abide by all the other, heavier rules.
Did I say that Regulatory Equivalence means Australia can automatically export organic products to the EU without complying with EU regulations for the importation of organic goods?........NO
Then what's the relevance? Organic is a note at the bottom on the book of international trade. It's basically meaningless. So meaningless a lot if not most countries don't bother making their own rules on it and rely on private certificators.
All I'm trying to say is if the EU insisted on every nation having the exact same rules as the EU to export to the EU no one would trade with the EU.
And you're being shown the absolute opposite of this affirmation. If you want to trade with the EU, you need to have your goods certified as EU compliant. Not just for food, but also for manufactured goods like the famous CE marking which goes as far back as the 80s.
That doesn't mean that country X can't have their own standards, or that those standards may or may not be more stringent that the EU's, but in order to trade with the EU you need to have them certified and verified under EU rules. It's not unique to the EU: USA, Japan, China.... everyone does it.
Australia imports to the EU beef quotas under GATT for High-quality beef Grain-fed beef, which is open to Australia, the US, New Zealand, Uruguay and Argentina for the 45,000-tonne beef quota issued by the EU, Australia also has access to the dairy sheep and goatmeat quota. Canada used to be a part of it but under CETA they have their own quota
Which again is a trade question, the EU opens their borders to whatever amount of meat from X countries. But that meat still has to be certified as fit for the EU (like the famous no hormone, no antibiotics rules, which means cattle meant for the EU can't be mixed in the same property as hormone or antibiotic-grown cattle). You can apply for your quota all you want, but if you don't have the necessary certifications most times you won't be able to even load it into the ship (pre-clearing) or it will be rejected and destroyed on entry.
The point I am trying to make is that the EU has recognised the Australian regulatory controls for organic Agri production under regulatory equivalence with EU council regulation 1235/2008 you seem to think it relates only to labelling which it does not, and is clearly represented in the heading;
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1235/2008
of 8 December 2008
laying down detailed rules for implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 as regards the arrangements for imports of organic products from third countries
The only reason you want your meat or beans or mayonnaise certified it organic is to put it on the label. Organic used to be something anyone could just put on the label until at some point the authorities stepped in.
You can follow organic guidelines for production but you won't be able to put it in your label unless you have the necessary certification.
As I pointed out before Regulatory alignment does not necessarily mean identical rules but the end result in the same outcome, this is what the above means for Regulatory Equivalence it recognises nothing more nothing less. The UK divergences from the minimum food standards is nothing to be afraid of.
Excuse me? The UK is openly talking about allowing hormone and antibiotic-grown meat, chlorine-washed chicken and open the floodgates to all GMO crops. That's a major divergence, and the EU should protect the single market accordingly.
Keep rules aligned with the EU and there won't be a problem in keeping the borders open, but any divergence will be grounds for strengthening rules and controls. Hence the whole conversation about "independent trade policy". It's cool to be independent, but that comes with harsh tradeoffs.