Meeting with Cam Ostercamp

[jensend]

something else that needs to be said rsomer is that we're not disregarding the science by 100% testing - we're going beyond it to absolute safety. i don't think putting it that way is going to panic the general public especially if it is presented in tandem with the economic effects across a broad part of the whole agricultural economy. why allow people of the jewish faith to insist on kosher slaughter and treatment of beef if there's no scientific justification? the japanese insistence on testing is at least partly rooted in concern for safety and with the changing science they may be well ahead of us in determining prudent methods of food handling.

[rsomer]

Chapter Seven: Agriculture and Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures has two sets of bilateral market access agreements (a Canada-Mexico Agreement and a US-Mexico Agreement). The three countries have agreed to general provisions covering domestic policies and programs that provide support to farmers, export-subsidies, and sanitary and phytosanitary measures that affect trade in agricultural products. Market access for agricultural products between Canada and the United States is governed by the provisions of the FTA.

Special rules set out in Article 2015 of Chapter 20 permit the use of Scientific Review Boards to address factual issues related to environmental, safety, health or conservation measures. In any panel proceeding, the Board is selected by the panel from among highly qualified, independent experts in the scientific matters at issue. The model rules of procedure will set out the procedures by which a panel will select the board. The disputing parties will have full opportunity to comment on the issues to be put to the board and on the board's report to the panel.

Paragraphs 3 and 4 of Article 2005, Chapter 20 set out special rules regarding certain environmental and health matters. In any dispute where the defending Party claims that its action comes within the terms of Article 104 (Relation to Environmental and Conservation Agreements), or where the dispute arises under chapter seven-B (sanitary and phytosanitary measures) or chapter nine (standards-related measures) concerning a measure which is both adopted for the protection of life, health or the environment in the defending Party's territory and which raises factual scientific issues concerning the environment, health, safety or conservation, the defending Party may bring the dispute to NAFTA dispute settlement.

Beyond NAFTA Canada has signed many bilateral trade agreements, all of which depend upon science based rule making to govern trade.

Kato: I agree with your comments. I really do. If we are going to use the "but" word I would say "but" we need to be aware that by lobbying for 100% testing that public will interpret that as our meat is not safe not we need to open borders. The media are not our friends, they feed off of sensationalism. Yes we desperately need the border to open "but" we also need to maintain our consumer’s confidence. Our meat is guaranteed safe because we remove all SRMs "but" will the public understand that if we keep saying we should be testing 100%. Yes we need to lobby government "but" there is no way they are going to budge on the 100% testing issue. The U.S. is playing with a double edged sword when they deny access to our product "but" want other countries to use science when trading with them. One last "but". "But" Canada cannot support sensationalism and protectionism by catering to the unfair demands of other trading partners. We have to stick to the science.

Whiteface: You are right, I cannot hang on indefinitely. This needs to be over and soon. If we were to loose our consumers confidence it really would be worse. I would like to see this issue tackled head on by demanding action on packing plants. I have suggested government financing or loan guarantees. There is no consumer backlash from that, there is no NAFTA or other trade sanctions involved with that. It is something we really can do and with a little push it could happen. The testing issue will evolve but Canada cannot push the agenda. Lets focus on what we can accomplish, a packing plant industry in Canada. 100% testing raises far too many concerns with no hope of opening any borders.

Jensend: If the Japanese demands of 100% testing were related to food safety they would be demanding 100% testing of all imports including Australia. Remember testing will not detect BSE in any animal under 24 months of age so where is the justification in asking for it. 100% is not only way beyond science it goes all the way to nonsense.

[rsomer]

Wow rsomer. Now you have gotten to the point of calling this meeting "potential for disaster".
Come out and tell the media and everyone else that the border needs to be open (once again). Or come out and tell everyone how you are 100% behind the bogus sceince of the day, and that every country in the world should agree with you and the United States and Bob Speller. How can you keep ignoring that people have other opinions than your own.
Why don't you start another thread about how this meeting will cause a negative impact on society if we try to insist on testing to open new markets.
I am so upset with your comment about negative impact that I can barely sit in my chair.
I can't beleive that garbage about following rules can come from the obvious intellegent mind of a man like yourself. There are no rules, except for Canadians, and the so called rules that there are are coined after a bungled catastrophe in the UK and one egotistical scientist named Prusiner. I bet you have never had the guts to read Mark Purdey's theory about the NON INFECTIOUS cause of BSE, or have not studied it for the substance it holds. Neither have any other Canadian officials, or ego gushing intellectuals who don't want somebody different to be smarter than them.
Maybe your blaming Japan for following a non scientific route is your own pigheaded mind not allowing any sceintific theory other than one in.
Maybe we should all follow the route of depopulating the cattle industry because of a theory with no room for challenge. Or maybe, just maybe the Japanese have got this thing figured out and know that it will take years to change the world's notions about the hyperinfectious theory of BSE, and are using RULES to protect their government from collapsing due to comsumer backlash.
Your theory on our consumer backlash will be led by people like yourself, not by us. People who will not move off of this bull shit infectious theory.
People who would rather scare the comsumer than work them though this.
People to proud to admit that someone else may be right.
Keep it up rsomer, I beleive you are actually helping our cause with your childish narrow focused offering.

[jensend]

australia is still bse free. puts them in a different category from either japan or canda or the us or most of the world. we have bse - let's deal with it. this state of denial where we attempt to say black is really just dark grey has gone on long enough.

[jensend]

nonsense is verbose justification of watching the world leave us behind.

[rsomer]

You all should know I am with you in this 100%. I understand your frustration and share your sense of urgency. I completely relate to everyone that wants to see action on BSE and completely agree that there is a lot of BS going on out there that has nothing to do with science. I do think we need to channel our frustration and what energy remains into something that has at least a shadow of a chance of success. I think we need to be aware that BSE is a sensitive issue at the best of times and we have been extremely fortunate up to now that our consumers have stayed with us all the way. I am trying to point out that right or wrong, 100% testing is not something that has any chance of success with government. Canada is 100% committed to a harmonized North American beef market and that is just how it is. On top of that producers raising the issue of 100% testing before the media has the potential to erode customer confidence in our product, that is something we cannot afford to have happen. I recall Joe-2 and his sign that would read "Eating BSE Infected Beef CAN Cause Fatal vCJD.DEMAND 100% TESTING". Producers may think their demands for 100% testing are to open markets for their beef but the public is going to going to get Joe-2’s message when they see it on the news.

I have seen that obtaining financing is what is keeping more packing plants from being built in Canada and have offered as a solution that governments provide the needed financing or guarantees that would see these projects go ahead. In my time I have championed more than one hopeless cause but a hopeless cause like 100% testing has way too many negative aspects associated with it for us as an industry to be championing at this time. We need to focus our frustration on those things which can be done. Building packing plants is one, pressuring the government to do more to see our border open to live cattle during this election is another. This meeting or rally that is proposed is a good idea but we have to be very careful about the messages that come out of it. We need to be focused as an industry on asking for one or two things that can really be done and realize that if the media is there that the public/customer is watching, not just government.

Jensend: Many of use believe that our case of BSE was a spontaneous occurrence. If so then Australia would also have spontaneous occurrences only they are not looking very hard to find it. If BSE can happen in Canada it can happen anywhere. Our beef is just as safe as theirs.

[kato]

I spoke with a vet from the CFIA about testing, and he said that every country that has actually looked for BSE has found it.

Australia is not looking very hard.

My main point is that if we don't stand up for ourselves we are done for. No one else seems willing to go to bat for us, so what else do we do? Give up? I don't think so, not without a fight.

BTW Today on the news they reported that the Western Diversification Fund, and Farm Credit have both turned down the Rancher's Choice slaughter facility proposal in Winnipeg.

As you can see, no one else is looking out for us, we have to do it ourselves.

Our consumers are not dumb. In fact, after the last year, I would say they are about the smartest ones in the whole wide world.

They know that the beef is safe.

They also know that we are dealing with a tough world that will do whatever it takes to shut us out, and we have to play hardball to get any changes made.

[kato]

You sure do write well rsomer, too bad you can't read.

[kato]

Oh yea... on the subject of bilateral agreements.

If my memory serves me correctly, did we or did we not relax the restrictions on bone in beef from the States the same day that they relaxed them for our beef.

And if my memory serves me correctly, did they not renege on their side of the deal?

And if my memory serves me correctly, we kept our side of the deal.

Another point for the meeting... any relaxations we have put on the import of American beef should be suspended until they are equal going both ways across the border.

Everyone is equal, but some are more equal than others. I think we all know who is more equal, and it's sure not us.

[jensend]

rsomer - i agree wholeheartedly with you that the aussies are doing their best not to find bse but as long as they successfully keep up the charade they can't be challenged. the japanese cannot justifiably ask the australians to 100% test intil there is a case discovered down under. i am sure you and i can disagree on the way out of this in many ways but the paradigm has changed. we are not bse free or even minimal risk for another year. the americans aren't playing by the rules and never will. we can be morally and intellectually superior to r-calf but as soon as we stand up they'll kick us in the crotch and the argument is over. we have to look beyond the usa for markets and let the big three packers open the border for us. we need the american market more than any other for a variety of reasons but we will never again be able to rely on it as we have in the past. there is no time like the present to move on.