As a massive farm bill makes its way through the U.S. Congress, meat producers in Saskatchewan and across Canada continue to be alarmed by the presence of Country of Origin Labelling (COOL) provisions in the legislation, regulations that the provincial government says is costing the Canadian cattle industry $1 billion per year.
COOL, first introduced in the U.S. in 2008, requires meat to be labeled as to where the animal was born, raised and slaughtered. Supporters say it provides invaluable information for consumers, while opponents argue the requirements impose unnecessary costs and violate free trade agreements. According to Paula Larson, a member of the Saskatchewan Cattlemen's Association and a producer in D'Arcy, an American producer could get as much as 20 per cent more by selling cattle identical to those she raises here in Saskatchewan.
The issue is one of price: American buyers of Canadian cattle face additional costs by having to ensure Canadian-raised cattle are kept separately from American cattle, even if they are identical in every other way. In many cases it's easier (and cheaper) to just buy American, a practice that Canadians are saying reeks of protectionism.
The refusal by U.S. lawmakers to remove COOL provisions from the farm bill was an expected disappointment for cattle producers in Saskatchewan.
"As an industry we are very, very disappointed," Larson said. "Personally I wasn't surprised [that COOL was kept in the farm bill], I saw it coming."
The disappointment in the continuation of COOL extends from producers all the way to government ministers.
"COOL legislation is simply a protectionist measure that has cost our producers billions of dollars and will continue to cause significant hardship to our industry," said Lyle Stewart, Saskatchewan's agriculture minister. "We will continue to do all we can to stand up for our producers and we encourage the federal government to move forward with retaliation."
That retaliation could include filing a protest with the World Trade Organization (WTO), though that process is lengthy and offers no certainty of success. In May 2013 the WTO ruled against the U.S. in a similar case after Canada and Mexico alleged the original COOL legislation violated free trade agreements. The WTO agreed and ruled in Canada's favour; in response, according to detractors, the U.S. did little more than change the wording of the law, not the intent.
"It will probably be at least a year before anything happens," Larson said of any action through the WTO. "Then they'll probably appeal everything. If there's going to be an immediate change, it has to come from the U.S."
The COOL regulations are a small part of a larger farm bill that is lurching through the convoluted legislative process in Washington. The House of Representatives passed the bill on Jan. 29 and it will now move to the Senate, where it is expected to pass as well.
Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), the Senate Agriculture Committee Chairwoman said, "the votes were not there" to repeal COOL, according to a report by Reuters. Frank Lucas, an Oklahoma Republican who serves as the House Agriculture Committee Chairman, said removing the labeling law would have threatened the passage of the entire bill.
There are still disagreements in Congress when it comes to the farm bill, but not on the specific issue of COOL. It's a disappointing and sobering realization for observers north of the border, and it's not likely to change anytime soon.
"There's nothing we can do except go through the processes and wait and see," Larson said.
"It's an unfair trade practice, that's all."
