WTO: Free Trade Pacts Can Trump Safety Rules

[Oscar]

WTO Ruling on Meat Labels Shows Free Trade Pacts Can Trump Safety Rules

[ http://www.democracynow.org/2015/5/19/headlines#5196 ]    

In a blow to consumer advocates, the World Trade Organization has struck down U.S. labels on meat products indicating where an animal was raised and slaughtered, saying they put Canadian and Mexican products at a disadvantage.

The case was brought by Canada and Mexico alleging violations of NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement.

The ruling validates the concerns of critics of another free trade deal, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP, who say it would undermine food safety rules to benefit corporations.

In a statement, Food and Water Watch said the ruling "proves that trade agreements can and do trump U.S. laws.

This is a chilling reminder that our very democracy is at stake in these trade deals," they said.

Last week the Senate advanced a bill to give Obama fast-track authority to present the secretive TPP to Congress for an up-or-down vote with no amendments.

But Obama faces opposition from fellow Democrats, including Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, who issued a report Monday highlighting how the United States has broken its promises to enforce labor standards in past trade pacts, allowing child labor and violence against union organizers to continue abroad.

Meanwhile, another spat has shown how free trade pacts may undermine U.S. financial regulations.

Canada’s finance minister has alleged the Volcker Rule restricting U.S. banks trading foreign debt violates NAFTA, and has demanded an exemption for Canada.

[Oscar]

GOVERNMENT OF SASKATCHEWAN ENCOURAGES U.S. TO REPEAL COOL

[ http://www.saskatchewan.ca/government/n ... ng-on-cool ]

Released on May 19, 2015

Saskatchewan Agriculture Industry Welcomes Final WTO Compliance Panel Ruling

Agriculture Minister Lyle Stewart welcomes the World Trade Organization (WTO) compliance panel’s final decision on Country of Origin Labelling (COOL). On Monday, May 18, 2015, the WTO again ruled in Canada’s favour urging the U.S. to comply with the WTO rules.

“This final ruling demonstrates the need for the United States to bring COOL in line with its WTO obligations,” Stewart said. “COOL does not address the best interest of the public and it unfairly discriminates against Canadian cattle and hog exports.”

Since COOL was introduced in 2008, Canada’s industry has estimated damages in excess of $1 billion a year due to price declines, lost sales and added costs.

In June 2012 and again in October 2014, the WTO compliance panel ruled in favour of Canada regarding the COOL requirements. The U.S. appealed the most recent ruling, bringing the decision back to the panel. This final ruling gives Canada permission to impose trade retaliations should the U.S. not comply with the ruling. Saskatchewan will continue to support the federal government in pursuing retaliatory tariffs.

“The WTO decision reflects what we’ve said all along,” Stewart said. “COOL is unjustifiable discrimination and we are encouraging the United States to recognize this so we can move forward as unified trade partners.”

Cattle and hog producers in the province will benefit if the U.S. becomes trade compliant. Saskatchewan’s cattle herd is the second largest in the country at nearly 2.9 million head. In addition, Saskatchewan markets around 2.1 million hogs every year. -30-

For more information, contact:

Sarah Hein, Agriculture
Regina
Phone: 306-787-5389
Email: sarah.hein@gov.sk.ca
Cell: 306-527-9102

[Oscar]

Barlow says WTO COOL ruling is not cool

[ http://canadians.org/blog/barlow-says-w ... g-not-cool

May 19, 2015 - 2:26 pm

Council of Canadians chairperson Maude Barlow has stated that yesterday's World Trade Organization (WTO) decision against country-of-origin labelling (COOL) is an affront. She says, "People have a right to know where and under what conditions their food was produced!" This is especially true as the Harper government has cut the number of food-safety inspectors in this country.
[ http://canadians.org/blog/harpers-recor ... at-exports ]

In various campaign blogs over the past six years, the Council of Canadians has talked about the ongoing dispute between the Harper government and the United States at the WTO over these rules.

In May 2009, CBC reported, "The [labelling] legislation, which was implemented in the U.S. on an interim basis in September [2008] and became full law in March [2009], requires meat processed in the U.S. but made from Canadian livestock to be labelled as Canadian rather than simply North American as has been the case to date. ...The legislation requires country-of-origin labelling on beef, pork, lamb, chicken, goat meat, wild and farm-raised fish and shellfish, perishable agricultural commodities, peanuts, pecans, ginseng and macadamia nuts. ...The law is aimed at helping consumers protect their health by avoiding foods from countries experiencing food-borne illnesses.” [ http://www.cbc.ca/m/touch/world/story/1.822345 ]

In October 2009, the Globe and Mail reported, "Trade Minister Stockwell Day said that he has asked a WTO dispute settlement panel to determine whether U.S. country-of-origin labelling rules impose 'unfair and unnecessary' costs on Canadian farmers. ...Exporters warn that such rules are conspiring to make the Canada-U.S. border thicker, undermining long-standing ties within integrated industries." [ http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-o ... le4215071/ ]

Then in May 2011, Reuters reported, "[In a confidential interim ruling], the WTO has ruled against some U.S. labeling regulations for meat sold in supermarkets, saying they discriminate against foreign suppliers..." That report noted, "The case highlights a growing trend toward subtle trade barriers -- including standards on health, safety or consumer information -- that can hit demand for imports. The ruling is expected to spur similar cases around the world where exports worth billions of dollars are being slowed by such standards, some of which are designed specifically to galvanize local consumer loyalty."
[ http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/ ... FL20110526 ]

And by March 2013, the U.S. government had revised its COOL program to bring it in line with the WTO decision in 2011 (upheld at the appeal stage in 2012) that the rules were too onerous and violated the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade. But the U.S. revisions strengthened requirements for the labelling of meat, which the Harper government denounced as even more discriminatory.

Yesterday, the Canadian Press reported, "Canada and Mexico have defeated the United States’ meat labelling rules at the World Trade Organization, winning a final appeal that could pave the way to retaliatory sanctions. If the U.S. wants to avoid a broader trade war, Monday’s decision means it might have to drop its insistence on special grocery-store labels that identify whether beef and pork were born, raised and slaughtered in the U.S. ...Business groups in both countries mostly celebrated the WTO decision. ...The Obama administration says it's working with lawmakers to find a legislative fix."
[ http://www.citynews.ca/2015/05/18/count ... de-ruling/ ]

To read commentary on this issue from our ally the U.S.-based Food and Water Watch, please click here:
[ http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/food/consumer-labels/ ]

and here:
[ http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/pressr ... consumers/ ]

- -

Further reading

Canada to challenge US food labelling law at the WTO (October 2009 blog)
[ http://canadians.org/node/5104 ]

Where's the beef from? (May 2011 blog)
[ http://canadians.org/node/7348 ]

Canada protests while U.S. consumer groups celebrate revised meat labelling policy (March 2013 blog by Stuart Trew)
[ http://canadians.org/node/4561 ]

Tags: WTO
[ http://canadians.org/tags/wto ]

Brent Patterson's blog
Political Director of the Council of Canadians
[ http://canadians.org/blogs/brent-patterson ]