WTO and MCOOL

[farmers_son]

A very interesting site... for the latest information on Canada's challenge of MCOOL check out:

http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds384_e.htm

G/SPS/GEN/890

G/RO/D/6

4 December 2008

(08-5961)

Original: English

UNITED STATES - CERTAIN COUNTRY OF ORIGIN LABELLING (COOL) REQUIREMENTS

Request for Consultations by Canada

The following communication, dated 1 December 2008, from the delegation of Canada to the delegation of the United States and to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 4.4 of the DSU.
_______________

Pursuant to Articles 1 and 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU), Article XXII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 1994 (GATT 1994), Article 14 of the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT Agreement), Article 11 of the Agreement of Sanitary and Phyto-Sanitary Measures (SPS Agreement) and Article 7 of the Agreement on Rules of Origin, the Government of Canada hereby requests consultations with the United States of America concerning the mandatory country of origin labelling (COOL) provisions in the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 as amended by the 2008 Farm Bill (Food, Conservation and Energy Act, 2008) and as implemented through the Interim Final Rule of 28 July 2008. These include the obligation to inform consumers at the retail level of the country of origin in respect of covered commodities, including beef and pork. The eligibility for a designation of a covered commodity as exclusively having a US origin can only be derived from an animal that was exclusively born, raised and slaughtered in the United States. This would exclude such a designation in respect of beef or pork derived from livestock that is exported to the United States for feed or immediate slaughter.

The mandatory COOL provisions appear to be inconsistent with the United States' obligations under the WTO Agreement, including:

(i) Articles III:4, IX:4, X:3 of GATT 1994;
(ii) Article 2 of the TBT Agreement, or, in the alternative, Articles 2, 5 and 7 of the SPS Agreement; and
(iii) Article 2 of the Agreement on Rules of Origin.

These violations appear to nullify or impair the benefits accruing to Canada under those Agreements. Moreover, these measures appear to nullify or impair the benefits accruing to Canada in the sense of Article XXIII:l(b) of GATT 1994.

Canada reserves the right to raise additional claims and legal matters regarding the measures at issue during the course of consultations.

Canada looks forward to receiving the reply of the United States to this request and welcomes any suggestions that it might wish to make concerning the date on which these consultations could take place, and the location of the consultations.

[Sawbones]

It appears as though the Canadian government is doing their job so why does the ABP need $5 million of our check-off dollars to also pretend to challenge US legislation

[farmers_son]

Got this from Animalnet this morning. Not about MCOOL but on topic with WTO.

CANADA files WTO suit against KOREA over beef ban
13.apr.09
Arirang News
http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200904/200904130031.html
Canada has filed a complaint with the World Trade Organization calling on the Korean government to lift its ban on Canadian beef exports, which were imposed during an outbreak of mad cow disease there.
Canada requested a WTO consultation on the case. Canadian Trade Minister Stockwell Day in a statement said if the request fails, the WTO may have to form a dispute settlement panel.
Before Korea banned imports in 2003, it was one of the largest buyers of Canadian beef with imports totaling US$41 million a year.

Sawbones: the $5million is to defend our industry from another countervail challenge like R-Calf initiated in late 1990s. Countervails are related to subsidies. There is a tendency for us to forget about countervails because we have won in the past but the last one cost cow calf producers a lot of money. I think it would be very optimistic to believe R-Calf will not initiate another countervail, in fact I believe another countervail challenge is not far off.

The most famous countervail challenge was initiated by the Coalition for Softwood Lumber and became known as the Softwood Lumber Dispute although it was not a dispute it was full out war. In true Canadian fashion our government negotiated a compromise even though Canada had won most of the rulings. That compromise (Softwood Lumber Agreement) is coming back to bite the Canadian lumber in the behind big time as Canada agreed to accept duties if the U.S. price of lumber dropped below a certain point. Which is what is happening now due to the recession/Depression in the U.S. not because of anything the Canadian lumber industry did but still Canada is paying duties. I sincerely hope Canada does not negotiate a similar compromise with the U.S. regarding our cattle industry. If they do we can expect a similar bad deal like softwood lumber got.

Countervails can destroy an industry. It is a huge concern. As I understand it countervail defense cannot be paid for by government but by the affected industry. Not sure why... maybe because if government paid for the defense it would be considered just another subsidy. ABP cannot borrow the money to fight a countervail challenge so must have the money available which they do.

It is not much different than me keeping a reserve of hay over winter so I know I can feed the cows next winter if we have a drought. It is necessary to be prepared and ready. And I believe R-Calf sees that ABP and Canada is ready to fight a countervail challenge which should serve notice to R-Calf that they will have a fight on their hands so you would think R-Calf would back off. But who knows how those people think.