To illustrate how little Canada has to offer, here are the EU and US proposals on market access:
The EU proposal that is getting the greatest attention is that tariffs between 0% and 20% be cut by an average of 30%; tariffs between 20% and 50% be cut by an average of 40%; tariffs between 50% and 60% be cut by an average of 50%; and tariffs over 60% be cut by an average of 60%. Also included in the proposal is a cap on tariffs at 100%, but the cap would not apply to sensitive products. The EU proposal includes a “pivot” to allow for flexibility in the tiered cuts, and the size of the pivot is linked to the number of sensitive products the EU says it would need. With a 10 percentage point pivot – more sensitive products within the tier could be cut by 10 percentage points less than the average cut, with an off setting cut of 10 percentage points above the average for another product in the tier. So in the first tier the minimum cut would be only 20%; the second tier 30%; the third 40% and the highest tier the minimum cut would be 50%. If they had a 10 percentage point pivot, the EU says it could limit the number of sensitive products to 200. With a 5 percentage point pivot, the EU says it would need 400 sensitive products.
The US proposal. Its proposal is for tariffs between 0% and 20% to be cut by an average of 60%; tariff between 20% and 40% to be cut by an average of 70%; tariffs between 40% and 60% to be cut by an average 80% and tariffs over 60% to be cut by an average of 90%. The U.S. also calls for a tariff cap to be set at 75% for all products, including sensitive products. The U.S. proposal includes the concept of “progressivity” which would cut higher tariffs within a tier by more than the lower tariffs within the tier.
And uh yah, Canada has the CWB guarantee. OK then. I wonder if grains and oilseeds will be a sensitive product?
Mexico did a great job of stabilizing their currency, something Canada could have done also, we just didn't. I think it is because the majority of the voting public in Canada see the rising dollar as a good thing - something to cheer on. The government must be doing a good job if the dollar is rising right?? Speaking of Leberal popularity.
I wish I could combine and not have any time to read Agriville......
The EU proposal that is getting the greatest attention is that tariffs between 0% and 20% be cut by an average of 30%; tariffs between 20% and 50% be cut by an average of 40%; tariffs between 50% and 60% be cut by an average of 50%; and tariffs over 60% be cut by an average of 60%. Also included in the proposal is a cap on tariffs at 100%, but the cap would not apply to sensitive products. The EU proposal includes a “pivot” to allow for flexibility in the tiered cuts, and the size of the pivot is linked to the number of sensitive products the EU says it would need. With a 10 percentage point pivot – more sensitive products within the tier could be cut by 10 percentage points less than the average cut, with an off setting cut of 10 percentage points above the average for another product in the tier. So in the first tier the minimum cut would be only 20%; the second tier 30%; the third 40% and the highest tier the minimum cut would be 50%. If they had a 10 percentage point pivot, the EU says it could limit the number of sensitive products to 200. With a 5 percentage point pivot, the EU says it would need 400 sensitive products.
The US proposal. Its proposal is for tariffs between 0% and 20% to be cut by an average of 60%; tariff between 20% and 40% to be cut by an average of 70%; tariffs between 40% and 60% to be cut by an average 80% and tariffs over 60% to be cut by an average of 90%. The U.S. also calls for a tariff cap to be set at 75% for all products, including sensitive products. The U.S. proposal includes the concept of “progressivity” which would cut higher tariffs within a tier by more than the lower tariffs within the tier.
And uh yah, Canada has the CWB guarantee. OK then. I wonder if grains and oilseeds will be a sensitive product?
Mexico did a great job of stabilizing their currency, something Canada could have done also, we just didn't. I think it is because the majority of the voting public in Canada see the rising dollar as a good thing - something to cheer on. The government must be doing a good job if the dollar is rising right?? Speaking of Leberal popularity.
I wish I could combine and not have any time to read Agriville......
Comment