Hong Kong opens up to Canadian beef.

[kato]

Hong Kong to accept Canadian UTM beef
Staff
1/17/2009 2:21:00 PM

The Canadian government has reached an agreement in principle to begin restoring Canadian beef producers' market access to Hong Kong.

The agreement, which federal Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz announced Friday from Hong Kong, "immediately expands key export opportunities for Canadian beef and sets out a clear time table to open that market to all commercially-significant Canadian beef exports," the government said.

The announcement followed a meeting between Ritz and Hong Kong's secretary for food and health, Dr. York Chow, the government said.

The agreement calls for Canada to meet Hong Kong's "high quality and safety standards" so as to complete a "staged process" by the end of 2009.

Ritz, who called the agreement a "breakthrough for Canadian beef exporters," said he's confident Canada can meet "and exceed" Hong Kong's terms by year's end.

The first stage of the process gives Canadian beef producers access to the Hong Kong market for rib cuts and most bone-in beef products (except for vertebral column cuts) from cattle under thirty months of age (UTMs).

Then, the government said, after Canada meets Hong Kong's requirements during the first four-month phase-in period, Hong Kong would allow Canadian exports of rib cuts, boneless beef and offal from all Canadian cattle.

If Hong Kong's remaining requirements are met by the end of 2009, it would then open its borders to all remaining Canadian UTM beef exports, including T-bones and porterhouse steaks.

The Canada Beef Export Federation estimated in Ritz's press release Friday that the improved access could mean an increase in Canadian beef exports to Hong Kong by as much as $26 million, almost doubling Canada's current exports.

[Kathy]

"Then, the government said, after Canada meets Hong Kong's requirements..."

Excuse me, but does Hong Kong, China now dictate Canadian law?

I suppose they hold alot of our debt; perhaps our Canadian government has some unique plans/ways to pay it back?

Check out this article, entitled:
Our Land - Collateral for the National Debt.
http://www.newswithviews.com/brownfield/brownfield59.htm

[grassfarmer]

Kathy, No they don't dictate our law - but they are a potential customer and as such have every right to state the standard of product they would be interested in purchasing. Unfortunately most industry groups, and a few producers evidently, have forgotten the old maxim that the customer is always right.

The part of kato's post that interested me more were Ritz's two comments;

first "...reached an agreement in principle to begin restoring Canadian beef producers' market access to Hong Kong."

followed by the contradictory but more truthful statement " .... called the agreement a "breakthrough for Canadian beef exporters,"

Astute observers will note that "beef producers" and "beef exporters" are not one and the same, unfortunately any increased market access achieved in Asia will not benefit beef producers in Canada because the packers have no need to pass on any increased revenue they may receive due to their monopoly slaughter and captive supply situation.

[Kathy]

grassfarmer we are not too far apart in our thoughts, except you cannot believe that if our customers want something, our government will alter laws to suit ALL of them. They will only alter and introduce laws that benefit the packers - the money makers.

The EU customer wants growth hormone free beef, but government and industry has fought the idea of banning them in Canada.

It is not to the benefit of the veterinary medicine suppliers/manufacturers to get rid of products. Legislation that will mandate their ever increasing usage, is the Governments plan.

Producers are being stopped short from giving their customers what they want on an individual contract basis - for the good of the masses involved in this industry. That is communism.

I remember how Premier Ralph, and my own former MLA Shirley McLellan had made back-door agreements to let Tiawanese Pork build a packing facility in Southern AB. When this fell through, the foreign companies (seeking food for their starving masses) turned to this new ALMS (NAIS) system to guarantee their product, as they want it.

[kato]

What I find most interesting is how all of a sudden Hong Kong is getting attention, and results, from top brass, and the MCOOL rules were adjusted to take a bit of the sting out of them. How come now? At the risk of sounding jaded, I think it's mainly due to the fact that the Conservatives had their socks scared off before Christmas.

If that's the case, then they need to keep getting their socks scared off. It needs to be a permanent state of mind in Ottawa. LOL

But I also don't see any harm in having a new market opened, especially when our market south is being constantly threatened by protectionist groups. We've been saying all along that we're too reliant on one market, so now we're starting to see new ones. How can that be bad?

[grassfarmer]

Kato, new markets or new market access is not bad per se. I was pointing out that our #1 problem remains having no competition in the packing sector. This would have been far better news if the federal government had achieved this market access for beef from Ranchers Beef or any of the other alternative, producer backed plants. This would have introduced crucial competition into the live cattle bidding process.
"Market access" to Asian countries is heralded as a big breakthrough for Canadian beef or Canadian producers but in reality it is business as usual for the beneficiaries - the Cargills and Tysons. Big deal they can ship some Canadian beef into HK, Cargill has presumably been able to ship it in from their Australian or South American operations up to now. How will any of this have a noticeable direct influence on fed cattle prices in Canada?

[rkaiser]

Exactly right GF. The only way this or any other newly opened markets will help will be with producer owned cattle. I know it is not perfect, but have any of you considered the Canada Gold approach? Yes the ranchers beef plant with producer ownership would be the optimum answer to more exports off the continent,but when Canada Gold gets it's feet under it, plant ownership may not be the only answer.

[Sawbones]

Canada Gold is a good idea Randy but until they have a packing plant solution with fixed costs for at least 2 years, they are no different than the rest of us.

[kato]

Ok, so now it's open to Hong Kong. The operative word is open. It's open to anyone with beef to sell, not just Cargill and friends.

Is it not the responsibility of individual processors to go out and make connections for exporting their product? The groundwork is there now so it is possible for them to do it. Before this, there was no option at all. The border was closed.

Just trying to look at it as a glass half full. Now if the producer backed plants were to approach the Hong Kong market with their source verified beef that has been raised in a consistent manner I'm sure they could pick up some business over the commodity style beef offered by the big packers.

[grassfarmer]

Fair comments Kato, I guess we shouldn't be so cynical. But hold on a minute, which producer backed plants do we have that would be in a position to export? any? I guess if an independent, producer backed plant wanted they could go to CBEF for advice/assistance? Oh,no wait a minute that's the outfit with the Cargill, Tyson and XL executives as vice-chairmen. I think I know who will be at the front of the queue to receive CBEF advice/assistance.
Actually in all seriousness I think this is where the AB Governments ALMA will have a role to play - Alberta has beef to sell so our officials approach the Chinese on that basis. This may benefit independent processors more than having the checkoff funded, but big packer run, CBEF act on their behalf.

Speaking of Canada Gold what's happening on that front? I was a supporter from the outset, qualified my calves, paid the fees involved only to find there were no bids on my calves when I offered them for sale. Very disappointing. After such a big deal was made about it being essential for everybody to be on the same page and agree to deliver cattle at a specified time to balance inventory it's disappointing to find the feedlots didn't feel the need to buy the cattle that were lined up for them in December. I swallowed the additional costs and sold my calves outwith the program as we needed cash-flow. I still support the program but wonder how others have fared with it?

[per]

Grassfarmer, I have had a good experience with Canada Gold. Sold about half of my steers in Mid January through the local Market. They brought a premium compared to similar non CG calves.

[rkaiser]

Sawbones - "Canada Gold is a good idea Randy but until they have a packing plant solution with fixed costs for at least 2 years, they are no different than the rest of us."

Mac Creech tells us to lay in the weeds and wait in his bull sale ads this year. Well some of us may be in the weeds, but we aren't lying around, including that cagey critter Mac.

There are things happening that need to stay in the weeds for now but just keep thinking about that half full glass Kato. Good intentions followed by dedication always make for good endings.

Don't give up on the producer plant thing Sawbones, or anyone else. You are right --- it is the last piece to this puzzle we are all trying to solve.

All I can say is thank God for the little plant in Lacombe where we are custom harvesting and moving ahead with our little program. The plant is the final piece all right -- Canada Gold or Canadian Celtic or Canadian Legacy Partners or grassfarmers direct marketing program.

Never say die.

[Kathy]

Canada Gold looked like a good idea, until they bought into the ALMS and the new Animal Health Act and regs.

I just can't believe that there are so many landowners and producers that ACCEPT our government taking control of their land and what can and can't be grown on it, and WHO will get to do this.

All this legislation has done is made it easy as pie for the CFIA to close "premises" to production of food. Your animals don't have to be sick to be destroyed.

The vets and the pharmaceuticals will be beneficiaries of the new order; globalization at the expense of national soverienty and individual rights.

Why the hell did any of us bother buying the land, when we can work as government employees? What value does the land hold? What happens now to our equity?