Battle against COOL will heat up in 2014
Livestock groups oppose U.S. meat labelling law
The battle against a controversial U.S. meat labelling law will heat up in 2014, as Canadian cattle and hog producers take their fight to the courtroom, the legislative boardroom, and the halls of the World Trade Organization.
For Canadian livestock groups — who say they lose more than $1 billion annually as a result of COOL, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s mandatory country-of-origin labelling program — the year ahead will be pivotal.
In late 2013, U.S. meat-packing giant Tyson Foods announced it would no longer accept animals from feedlots north of the border and there are fears there may be other ripple effects throughout the industry if COOL is not repealed.
“The last thing we want to see in the cattle industry is more concen- tration in the packing industry in North America. So that would be a concern for everyone, that this could actually lead to closures,” said Dennis Laycraft, executive vice-president of the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association.
The newest version of COOL, which was approved by the U.S. government in May but came into effect in November, requires meat products to be sorted, packaged and labelled separately depending on where the animal was born, raised and slaughtered.
Some U.S. companies, such as Tyson Foods, have said they can’t afford the extra processing costs while others are limiting their handling of Canadian cattle to specific days of the week only.
Laycraft said as a result, Canadian cattle prices are already lower than they should be. He said the price impact for Canadian cattle producers could reach $50 to $100 per head as the issue drags into 2014.
However, industry groups are hopeful 2014 could be the year they make a breakthrough on COOL, which has been in effect in some form since 2008.
Right now, U.S. legislators in Washington are in the process of drafting a new Farm Bill, and Canada — along with U.S. meat and livestock groups that also oppose the labelling rules — hope to dial up the pressure.
“We continue to call on the United States to fix COOL once and for all through the upcoming Farm Bill,” said federal Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz in an emailed statement. “Our Government remains committed to taking whatever steps may be necessary, including retaliation, to achieve a fair resolution.”
In the past year, Ritz has met with U.S. lawmakers in Washington, Chicago and elsewhere to warn of pending Canadian sanctions if COOL is not repealed. In June, Ritz published a list of U.S. products for which Canada is now seeking WTO permission to impose retaliatory tariffs.
Alberta Agriculture Minister Verlyn Olson — who will travel to Oklahoma City on Friday, in part to lobby delegates at the State Agriculture and Rural Leaders Conference — said he believes some U.S. politicians are getting the message.
“I’m hearing that from a number of people I’ve talked to. The threat of retaliation makes it real,” Olson said.
Still, he warned that securing a repeal of COOL within the new U.S. Farm Bill is far from a done deal.
“Within the Farm Bill, there are something like 30 issues and a number of those issues are probably more dominant in some people’s minds than mandatory country of origin labelling,” Olson said.
If they can’t succeed using political avenues, COOL opponents are also willing to use legal ones.
On Jan. 9, a U.S. appeals court will hear arguments from a coalition of North American industry groups, including the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association, who were denied their original request last year for an injunction blocking COOL.
In addition, Canada has al- ready submitted its written arguments for a WTO challenge, and an oral hearing in Geneva is expected to begin Feb. 18. However, the WTO process is a lengthy one — a panel decision would likely not be made until the end of summer or early fall, and then discussions would take place about what level of retaliation might be appropriate.
Darcy Fitzgerald, executive director of Alberta Pork, said the waiting is frustrating.
“We’re doing the boy scout thing again. We’re waiting and trying to play by the rules and go through the WTO, but in the meantime it just keeps costing us more and more,” said Fitzgerald.