Canada's ag minister urges U.S. to reconsider labeling law
Monday, November 4, 2013
by SUSAN MANN
Canada has a window of opportunity now to encourage the United States to dump the mandatory country of origin labelling law (COOL) through its Farm Bill, says federal Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz.
American senators and congressmen are currently discussing the Farm Bill. “We spoke with the American industry to continue to press their legislatures to make sure they bring in the necessary changes to bring COOL in line with their obligations under the World Trade Organization,” Ritz says. There are many supporters of Canada’s quest to quash COOL from within the American meat and livestock industries.
Ritz made the remarks Monday afternoon during a telephone press conference from Chicago where he along with several Prairie provincial agriculture ministers and livestock industry representatives were attending the North American Meat Association’s annual conference. At that meeting, Ritz says he told American meat industry leaders Canada will do whatever it takes to help fix “this bad law, including acting on our list of retaliatory measures,” which includes actions against U.S. pork and beef products.
Eight million American jobs are on the line, Ritz says, noting that’s how many U.S. jobs depend on trade with Canada, including in meat processing. A substantial amount of money is also at risk. Canadians buy more than $2.2 billion worth of American products annually. But if Canada implements its list of retaliatory measures, those sales could evaporate.
John Masswohl, Canadian Cattlemen’s Association’s director of government and international relations, says Canada’s list of retaliatory products has snagged attention in Washington, D.C.
Implemented in 2008, the mandatory labelling system has caused an industry-estimated $1 billion in damages annually to Canada’s beef and pork industries due to “price discounts, lost sales and added costs,” Ritz says. And if allowed to stand, the law will do even more damage to Canada’s industries, he says.
The latest version of the rules makes it even worse, he notes. The new amended rules were announced by the United States Department of Agriculture in May. They are a response to a World Trade Organization (WTO) July 2012 ruling that the original legislation did not comply with the United States’ trade obligations. Canada and Mexico had challenged the legislation at the WTO. The two countries are also challenging the new labelling rules at the WTO.
Tyson Foods’ recent announcement that it would no longer accept Canadian cattle exemplifies how the new rules are damaging Canadian beef and pork industries, Ritz says. Tyson was Canada’s third largest buyer of slaughter cattle. “Our industry has called this move devastating,” he says.
If other customers follow Tyson’s lead “it will be catastrophic,” he adds.
Masswohl agrees the United States could repeal COOL through the Farm Bill and notes there may be the political will to do so. As U.S. congressmen and senators began discussions about the bill last week, 10 “talked about the possibility of retaliation” and the need to resolve COOL, he says. “Only one senator talked in favour of keeping COOL the way it was and really it wasn’t one of his priorities.”
Another development working in Canada’s favour is the job losses Tyson’s decision will likely create. Masswohl explains Tyson was buying Canadian cattle to keep its plants running efficiently. The U.S. cattle herd at its lowest level in 60 years and is unlikely to satisfy the processing demand once Canadian shipments cease. Job loss will be inevitable, he says.
Masswohl says Canadian Cattlemen’s wants the United States to repeal COOL for red meat. “We’re not talking about going back to what it was prior to USDA (United States Department of Agriculture) changing the rule a few months ago. We’re talking about getting rid of it and that’s what everybody is rallying around.” BF