COOL repeal vote passes US House, Senate

Both the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate have voted to repeal country of origin labeling (COOL) laws involving the labeling of meats through the passage of a year-end funding bill that included language calling for the repeal of COOL.
The bill passed in the House with a 316-113 vote and in the Senate with a 65-33 vote.
Congress had been facing pressure to repeal COOL after the World Trade Organization (WTO) in May deemed the laws unfair and inconsistent with free trade obligations. Canada and Mexico challenged the U.S. COOL laws, saying they discriminate against beef and pork from the two countries. The two countries vowed to seek retaliation in the form of tariffs on U.S. goods, and the WTO on December 7 authorized Mexico and Canada to issue more than $1 billion in tariffs.
While a bill to repeal COOL was approved in the House of Representatives, the Senate never passed any COOL-related legislation until the funding bill that was approved on December 18.
The National Pork Producers Council (NPPC), which has been one of COOL’s most vocal opponents, recently drafted and sent to congressional lawmakers a letter signed by 248 other organizations urging the repeal of COOL.
NPPC President Dr. Ron Prestage said House Agriculture Committee Chairman K. Michael Conaway and Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Pat Roberts, both Republicans, were instrumental in getting the COOL language into the bill.
“America’s pork producers are grateful that lawmakers, particularly Chairman Roberts and Chairman Conaway, recognized the economic harm we faced from retaliation because of the WTO-illegal COOL law,” said Prestage. “I know tariffs on U.S. pork would have been devastating to me and other pork producers.”

Effort to repeal COOL resurfaces in US Congress

A move to repeal U.S. country of origin labeling (COOL) laws regarding meat products has resurfaced as part of the year-end funding bill. A vote on the bill is expected within days.
Congress has been facing pressure to repeal COOL after the World Trade Organization (WTO) in May deemed the laws unfair and inconsistent with free trade obligations. Canada and Mexico challenged the U.S. COOL laws, saying they discriminate against beef and pork from the two countries. The two countries vowed to seek retaliation in the form of tariffs on U.S. goods, and the WTO on December 7 authorized Mexico and Canada to issue more than $1 billion in tariffs.
While a bill to repeal COOL was approved in the House of Representatives, the Senate failed to pass such legislation. Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kansas, pushed for a similar bill to that one approved by the House, but it was never passed. Fellow ag committee member Debbie Stabenow, D-Michigan, proposed another piece of legislation that would make COOL voluntary. That legislation also stalled.
Roberts, in a press release, expressed hope that the bill which includes the repeal of COOL would be approved.
“For several years now, the writing has been on the wall that U.S. COOL requirements for meat were doomed at the WTO. Since its inception, I have warned that retaliation was coming, and I’m pleased American agriculture and businesses will escape these tariffs,” said Roberts. “With passage, American farmers, ranchers and small businesses will finally get the certainty they deserve from unnecessary trade retaliation.”
K. Michael Conaway, House Agriculture Committee chairman, said in a statement he was pleased to see the language about repealing COOL laws was included in the funding bill.
“By including this language, we will be back in compliance with our WTO obligations, avoid more than $1 billion in retaliation from Canada and Mexico, and prevent damages to our relationships with two of our top trade partners,” said Conaway.

WTO approves $1 billion in tariffs in response to COOL

The World Trade Organization (WTO) on December 7 ruled that Canada and Mexico can hit the United States with more than $1 billion in tariffs on U.S. goods in retaliation after the U.S. failed to repeal its country of origin labeling (COOL) laws.
The WTO issued the ruling nearly 6 months after it had considered the COOL laws, which require that meat be labeled with the country where the animal from which it was derived was born, raised and harvested. Mexico and Canada had issued a complaint with the WTO, stating that the COOL laws discriminate against Mexican beef and pork. COOL also has provisions affecting poultry and seafood.
The Canadian and Mexican governments had previously stated it would seek retaliatory measures, and upon receiving word that the WTO ruled those retaliatory measures can be pursued, Canadian authorities emphasized its continued desire to implement tariffs on U.S. goods.
“If the U.S. Senate does not take immediate action to repeal COOL for beef and pork, Canada will quickly take steps to retaliate,” Chrystia Freeland, Canadian minister of International Trade, and Lawrence MacAulay, minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, said in a joint statement. “Canada continues to work with our partners in the United States, and in the U.S. Senate, to urge the full repeal of the discriminatory COOL policy for beef and pork.”

US agriculture groups urge Congress to repeal COOL

While the U.S. House of Representatives in June approved a bill that called for the repeal of COOL, similar legislation in the Senate that was advocated by Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Pat Roberts did not gain approval.
Since learning of the WTO’s ruling, several agriculture groups have released statements urging the repeal of COOL.
"I am keenly aware that chicken and fowl could be at the top of the list for retaliation by Canada and Mexico, and that this labeling law continues to leave the door open for retaliatory action by other countries, too," said National Chicken Council (NCC) President Mike Brown.  "NCC supports legislative action that will bring U.S. laws and regulations pertaining to meat and poultry into full compliance with our international trade obligations.  NCC urges Congress to repeal the labeling provision for chicken, beef and pork now."
“America’s pork producers need congressional lawmakers to recognize the imminent harm our economy faces,” said National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) President Dr. Ron Prestage. “Retaliation has been authorized, and our exports to the No. 1 and No. 2 markets will suffer and so will U.S. farmers, business people and consumers. We need Congress to repeal the labeling provision for beef, pork and poultry now.”
The American Farm Bureau Federation stated that it supports country of origin labeling that meets WTO requirements, but added “the risk of retaliation by Canada and Mexico is too great. U.S. farmers and ranchers could suffer a serious blow if Congress does not act quickly.”

Canada prime minister-elect urged to not let up on COOL

The Canadian Pork Council is urging Prime Minister-elect Justin Trudeau to continue to put pressure on the United States to repeal its country of origin labeling (COOL) laws.
Trudeau, a member of the Liberal Party of Canada, defeated incumbent Stephen Harper, a member of the Conservative Party, during the October 19 election. He will be sworn into office in November.
In a press release, CPC stated that the U.S. must change its COOL laws concerning labeling on pork, beef and poultry products to “eliminate the discrimination which the WTO has found it imposes on Canadian pigs and cattle.”
Canada and Mexico have been in a long-standing dispute with the U.S. saying the country’s COOL laws violate international trade obligations. The World Trade Organization (WTO) on May 18 issued its final ruling, favoring Mexico and Canada.
Since that time, the U.S. House of Representatives has approved a bill that would repeal COOL, but the Senate has yet to pass any related legislation, despite urgings from Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Pat Roberts to do so. Other industry groups, including the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) and the North American Meat Institute (NAMI), have also pushed for the repeal of U.S. COOL laws.
With COOL still in effect, Canada and Mexico are seeking more than US$3 billion in retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods. The WTO is expected to issue a decision on the level of retaliation in December, according to NPPC.

WTO to hold COOL arbitration hearings

The World Trade Organization (WTO) will hold arbitration hearings September 15-16 to consider Canada and Mexico’s proposed retaliatory tariffs against the United States in the ongoing country of origin labeling (COOL) dispute. The hearings will be held in Geneva, Switzerland.
The two countries are seeking more than $3 billion in retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods, but the U.S. requested WTO arbitration and wants the WTO to lower the retaliatory tariffs to an amount just over $90 million, according to a press release from the North American Meat Institute (NAMI).
The hearings stem from a long-standing dispute between the three North American countries, with Mexico and Canada challenging U.S. COOL laws, saying they violate trade obligations and discriminate against Canadian and Mexican pork and beef. The WTO issued its final ruling, favoring Mexico and Canada, on May 18.
The U.S. House of Representatives in June passed a bill that would repeal COOL, but the Senate has yet to reach an agreement on legislation pertaining to COOL, despite urgings to repeal the labeling laws from Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Pat Roberts.
Several agricultural groups, including NAMI and the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) have advocated for the repeal of U.S. COOL laws.

US Senate ag committee chair proposes repeal of COOL

U.S. Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Pat Roberts has introduced legislation that would repeal U.S. country of origin labeling requirements concerning beef, pork and poultry meat.
The U.S. country of origin labeling (COOL) law requires meat to be labeled with the country where the animal from which it was derived was born, raised and harvested.  It also applies to fish, shellfish, fresh and frozen fruits and vegetables and certain nuts.
However, the World Trade Organization in May rejected an appeal by the United States of the international trade body’s October 2014 ruling that the COOL provisions on beef and pork discriminate against Canadian and Mexican animals that are sent to the United States to be fed out and processed. The WTO decision will allow punitive tariffs to be put on U.S. goods going into Canada and Mexico, which are asking for a combined $3.1 billion in retaliation. A WTO arbitrator now is determining the level of retaliation.
The U.S. House of Representatives in June approved a bill that would repeal COOL. The measure passed by a 300-131 vote.
Another bill was proposed by former Senate Agriculture Chair Debbie Stabenow. The Stabenow bill would have made COOL voluntary but not mandatory. Leaders from both Canada and Mexico stated that voluntary COOL was not a suitable solution.
The National Pork Producers Council (NPPC), which has been vocal about its support to end COOL, praised the legislation proposed by Roberts, R-Kansas, and said the proposal by Stabenow, D-Michigan, falls short.
“We’re grateful that Chairman Roberts recognizes that repeal of COOL meat labeling is the only move left, with retaliation from Canada and Mexico imminent,” said NPPC President Dr. Ron Prestage. “The United States had its day in court, and it lost. We’re in the sentencing phase now, and without repeal, a sentence of up to $3 billion soon will be imposed on our exports.”
“While we appreciate Sen. Stabenow’s efforts, we can’t support her bill because it would continue key features of a labeling regime that’s already been found to violate WTO rules. More importantly, it doesn’t satisfy Canada and Mexico, so it won’t stop retaliation, and we can’t afford to have our products restricted, through tariffs, to two of our top three markets. We don’t like it, Congress doesn’t like it, but the reality is that after four losses at the WTO, Canada and Mexico hold the cards.”
The North American Meat Institute (NAMI) also favors the Roberts proposal.
“We can’t afford to waste precious time debating proposals other than full and simple repeal.  Anything else jeopardizes important segments of the U.S. economy and ultimately our consumers,” said NAMI President and CEO Barry Carpenter.

Senate bill seeks voluntary country of origin labeling

Sen. Debbie Stabenow has proposed a bill that would make country of origin labeling (COOL) for pork and beef voluntary instead of mandatory.
The legislation proposed by the Michigan Democrat and member of the Senate agriculture committee, is seen as an alternative to repealing COOL. The U.S. House of Representatives on June 10 approved a bill that if signed into law, would repeal U.S. COOL laws.
Congress is trying to reach a solution to repealing the current COOL laws after the World Trade Organization (WTO) on May 18 ruled the laws unfair, siding with Mexico and Canada, who have challenged the laws saying they discriminate against Canadian and Mexican cattle and hogs.
Canada and Mexico have both filed with the WTO to seek more than $3 billion in retaliation. The U.S. subsequently asked the WTO for arbitration over the amount of damages Canada and Mexico claims have been caused by COOL.
According to an Agri-Pulse report, Stabenow stated: “COOL serves an important role for consumers and industry. However, the WTO has been clear that we must find a solution that is consistent with our international trade obligations. This proposal offers a viable alternative and I look forward to discussing it at our hearing and with my colleagues in the Senate as we work to come to agreement on a bipartisan solution.”
Stabenow is .a former Senate agriculture committee chairperson. Her successor as committee chair, Sen. Pat Roberts, has called for the Senate to follow the House’s lead and repeal the COOL laws.
K. Michael Conaway, chairman of the House agriculture committee, stated that he thinks Stabenow’s bill is a bad idea.
“Any conversation about a voluntary program must be preceded by a full repeal of COOL, as we have an obligation to our trading partners to come into compliance,” Conaway said. “ These labeling requirements are costly for producers, burdensome for the entire supply chain, and provide no quantifiable benefits for consumers. By leaving in place a host of federally mandated requirements, Sen. Stabenow’s bill still creates unnecessary compliance costs and prolongs this failed experiment. After four World Trade Organization rulings against the U.S. for mandatory COOL, it is time to abandon this program and ensure certainty in the marketplace.”
The Senate is scheduled to hold a hearing on COOL on June 25.

US asking WTO for arbitration over COOL damages

The United States has decided to ask the World Trade Organization (WTO) for arbitration over the amount of damages Canada claims has been caused by U.S. country or origin labeling (COOL) laws regarding pork, beef and poultry meat.
The WTO on May 18, ruled in favor of Canada and Mexico in the two country’s longstanding dispute with the U.S. over COOL, stating that the rules were unfair and discriminate against Canadian and Mexican pigs and cattle.
Canada and Mexico have filed with the WTO to seek more than $3 billion in retaliation, which prompted the U.S. decision to seek arbitration.
“Canada is disappointed that the U.S. is attempting to prolong the WTO process by requesting arbitration," Gerry Ritz, Canadian minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, and Ed Fast, Canadian minister of International Trade, said in a joint statement.
"The U.S. is out of options and retaliation cannot be avoided by drawing out this process. The chief economist for the United States Department of Agriculture has stated that COOL is costing the American industry alone some $2.6 billion (USD) annually. Canada is confident in our assessment that COOL is causing more than $3 billion in annual damages to the Canadian cattle and hog industry."
COOL has been opposed by U.S. industry groups such as the National Pork Producers Council.
The U.S. House of Representatives on June 10 passed a bill that would repeal the U.S. COOL laws, but the Senate has yet to vote on the matter. Sen. Pat Roberts, the chairman of the U.S. Senate agriculture committee, has pushed for the repeal of COOL.

US Senate ag committee chairman: COOL must be repealed

Pat Roberts, chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, is urging his colleagues to follow the House’s lead and approve a bill to repeal country of origin labeling (COOL).
The U.S. House of Representatives on June 10 approved H.R. 2393, which would repeal COOL, which includes labeling for pork, beef and poultry meat. The current COOL laws have been deemed unfair by the World Trade Organization in a dispute between the U.S. and its neighbors, Mexico and Canada.
Both Mexico and Canada have filed with the WTO to pursue retaliatory measures, which would amount to more than $3 billion. The WTO Dispute Settlement Body is to consider the request for retaliation on June 17.
“I applaud the House for its swift action to prevent retaliation from Canada and Mexico,” said Roberts. “My counterpart in the House, Chairman Mike Conaway, has done an incredible job leading a bipartisan and decisive charge to protect American agriculture. 
“I am continuing to take suggestions from my colleagues in the Senate for alternatives that meet our trade obligations. However, almost a month has passed since the WTO ruling was announced, and repeal remains the surest way to protect the American economy from retaliatory tariffs. We can sit here and let this happen. Or we can move. Let’s get a move on.”

4 reasons to repeal US country of origin labeling laws

The United States Senate needs to follow the lead of the U.S. House and approve a bill that would repeal country of origin labeling (COOL) laws, said Randy Russell, president of The Russell Group, an agricultural consulting firm.
Russell pointed out four reasons why the current COOL laws, which have been ruled unfair by the World Trade Organization (WTO) in a long-standing dispute between the United States and its neighbors, Canada and Mexico. The House on June 10 approved a bill to repeal COOL laws that affect labeling on pork, beef and poultry products, but the Senate has not yet voted on the matter, despite encouragement to do so from Sen. Pat Roberts, chairman of the Senate agriculture committee.
The reasons Russell believes U.S. COOL laws must be repealed are:
1. The economic costs of segregation – The heart and soul of the WTO COOL cost rests on the economic costs of segregation, said Russell. The tracking of livestock from birth to slaughter, segregating livestock and meat, and managing the supply chain throughout the entire system to ensure compliance with COOL laws places enormous costs on U.S. livestock producers and U.S. meat processors, Russell said. It also disadvantages Canada and Mexico by devaluing their livestock that is exported to the U.S., he said.
2. The burden of proof shifts to the United States -- Canada and Mexico have filed with the WTO to seek retaliation against the U.S. to the tune of more than $3 billion. Those requests will be heard by a WTO panel on June 17. Once retaliatory levels are formally established and implemented, Russell said, they will stay in effect until Canada, Mexico and the WTO are all satisfied, which shifts the burden of proof to the United States. “This means COOL is not just a Congressional matter, but we must satisfy Canada, Mexico and the WTO,” Russell said.
3. There are no viable alternatives -- “There is no silver bullet. There is no magical solution. There is no third way. There doesn’t appear to be any other option to solve this case,” said Russell. While there has been talk in Washington about establishing a provision for a North American label that includes a U.S. origin label option, Russell said that option is still in violation of the WTO ruling. Another option, for a general North American label, he says provides no meaningful information to consumers.
4. Retaliation is a COOL tax on U.S. goods -- Once retaliation for not repealing COOL begins, it represents a tax on billions of dollars on U.S. products, said Russell. This includes dozens of products, both agricultural and non-agricultural, to two of the United States’ “largest and very best customers.” Russell said in the first year of any COOL tax, it will equal 9 to 10 billion because it goes retroactive back to May 2013.
Russell was one of several speakers featured in The Next Shoe to Drop: COOL and the Threat of Trade Retaliation, a forum hosted by the Global Business Dialogue Inc. and the National Pork Producers Council.

US House OKs bill to repeal country of origin labeling

• 

  Roy Graber

  The U.S. House of Representatives has approved a bill that would repeal the current country of origin labeling laws.

  From WATTAgNet:
  The House of Representatives on June 10 approved a bill that would repeal the U.S. country of origin labeling (COOL) laws concerning pork, beef and poultry. The measure passed by a 300-131 margin, and now moves on to the Senate.
  The bill was introduced by House Agriculture Committee Chairman K. Michael Conaway, who has advocated for COOL’s repeal amid threats of retaliatory action from Mexico and Canada. Both countries had challenged U.S. COOL laws, saying they are unfair and discriminate against Canadian and Mexican beef and pork.
  The World Trade Organization (WTO) on May 18 ruled for the fourth time against the U.S. COOL requirements, which have been in place since 2008. The WTO decision was final and without the possibility of further appeal.
  Canada has filed a request for authorization from the World Trade Organization (WTO) to impose more than CA$3 billion (US$2.4 billion) in retaliatory measures against U.S. exports to Canada in response to U.S. COOL laws. Mexico is seeking US$653 million in retaliatory measures.
  “I am thankful for the support of my colleagues today in passing this common-sense, bipartisan bill that is a necessary targeted response to avoid retaliation from Canada and Mexico. Two of our top trading partners announced earlier this month their intention to seek more than $3 billion in retaliatory sanctions against U.S. exports. This would extend far beyond the agriculture industry and would hurt nearly every sector of the U.S. economy. H.R. 2393 will prevent retaliation and bring the U.S. back into compliance, and I urge my colleagues in the Senate to act quickly on this urgent matter,” said Conaway.
  Numerous companies and trade organizations, including the North American Meat Institute and National Pork Producers Council, have pushed for the repeal of COOL.

Canada: US House move to repeal COOL a good start

The U.S. House of Representatives’ June 10 vote to repeal country of origin labeling (COOL) has gained the attention of Canadian Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz, who is now urging the Senate to approve the bill and President Barack Obama to sign it into law, or else face retaliatory measures.
Canada and Mexico have been at odds with the U.S. concerning COOL, saying that such labeling is unfair and discriminates against Canadian and Mexican pigs and cattle. The World Trade Organization (WTO), after hearing multiple appeals from the United States, again on May 18 ruled the COOL laws that impact pork, beef and poultry unfair, with the ruling being final.
Canada on June 4 filed a request for authorization from the World Trade Organization (WTO) to impose more than CA$3 billion (US$2.4 billion) in retaliatory measures against U.S. exports to Canada in response to U.S. COOL laws. Mexico is seeking US$653 million in retaliatory measures.
Ritz, while encouraged by the House action to repeal the law, stands by his threat of retaliation if the Senate and president do not act.
“COOL must be repealed once and for all," said Ritz. "The administration and Congress know that COOL is costing thousands of American jobs and billions in economic harm to our highly integrated North American livestock industry.While this marks a positive step, the only way for the United States to avoid billions in retaliation by late summer is to ensure legislation repealing COOL passes the Senate and is signed by the president."

Canada seeks CA$3 billion in retaliation over US COOL

Canadian officials have filed a request for authorization from the World Trade Organization (WTO) to impose more than CA$3 billion (US$2.4 billion) in retaliatory measures against U.S. exports to Canada in response to U.S. country of origin labeling (COOL) laws.
Canada’s request is to be considered by the WTO Dispute Settlement Body on June 17.
On May 18, the WTO ruled for the fourth time against the U.S. COOL requirements, which have been in place since 2008, reaffirming Canada’s long-standing position that these measures violate the U.S.’s international trade obligations and discriminate against Canadian cattle and hogs. The decision was final and without the possibility of further appeal.
Canadian Minister of International Trade Ed Fast and Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz, in announcing the plans to seek retaliatory measures, said the damages to the Canadian livestock industry are estimated to be more than $3 billion annually, which is why Canada is asking for authority to impose retaliation measures up to that amount.
"The WTO has ruled that the United States is out of options and out of time," said Ritz. "The only way for the United States to avoid billions in immediate retaliation is to repeal COOL."
If WTO authorization is received, Canada will choose how and when to retaliate. Potential products and commodities that have been identified as targets include but are not limited to pork, beef and corn, a primary feed ingredient.


Mexico also seeking retaliation
Mexico has also been actively seeking an end to COOL, and will also seek retaliatory measures, according to a joint statement released by Ritz, Fast, Mexican Secretary of Economy Ildefonso Guajardo Villarreal, and Mexican Secretary of Agriculture Enrique Martínez y Martínez, Mexico is seeking authorization for over US$653 million in retaliatory measures.


Repeal of COOL stalled in Congress
COOL has also had its opponents in the United States, including the National Pork Producers Council, the North American Meat Institute, and House Agriculture Committee Chairman K. Michael Conaway.
Two days after WTO ruled against the U.S. in the COOL case, Conaway’s committee approved H.R. 2393, a bill that would repeal COOL. Ritz has since traveled to the U.S. to urge government leaders to swiftly repeal COOL, but the bill has not yet advanced past the committee. 

US House ag committee introduces bill to repeal COOL

• 

  Freeimages.com/morderska

  Legislation has been introduced in the U.S. that would repeal country of origin labeling laws on meat products.

  From WATTAgNet:
  The U.S. House Agriculture Committee on May 20 approved H.R. 2393, a bill to amend the Agriculture Marketing Act of 1946, by a recorded vote of 38-6. If the bill becomes law, it will repeal country of origin labeling (COOL) requirements for beef pork and chicken, while leaving the requirements for all other covered commodities intact.
  The legislation follows a decision made May 18 by the World Trade Orgainzation (WTO), calling the U.S. COOL rules unfair in the United States’ ongoing COOL dispute with Canada and Mexico.  It was the fourth time that WTO ruled against the U.S. on the matter. Both countries have threatened to retaliate if the COOL laws were not repealed.
  “This bill is a targeted response that will remove uncertainty and restore stability for the United States by bringing us back into compliance,” said House Agriculture Committee Chairman K. Michael Conaway. “We must do all we can to avoid retaliation by Canada and Mexico, and this bill accomplishes that through full repeal of labeling requirements for beef, pork, and chicken. I appreciate all the support from my colleagues on both sides of the aisle. We will continue working to get this to the House floor as quickly as possible to ensure our economy and a vast range of U.S. industries and the men and women who work for them do not suffer any economic implications of retaliation.” 
  A number of industry groups, including the National Pork Producers Council and the North American Meat Institute, have encouraged Congress to repeal the COOL laws.

WTO again rules against US in COOL dispute

The World Trade Organization (WTO) on May 18 ruled against the United States in a dispute concerning country of origin labeling (COOL) requirements for meat products. The most recent decision is the WTO’s fourth and final ruling concerning U.S. COOL laws, which had been repeatedly appealed by the U.S.
U.S. COOL laws have been the center of a long-standing North American dispute, as Canadian and Mexican officials have called the laws unfair and in violation of international trade obligations.


Canada reiterates threat of retaliatory measures
Canada has particularly been critical of U.S. COOL rules, and has repeatedly threatened retaliatory measures against the U.S. if the rules are not repealed.  In a joint statement issued on the day of the most recent and final ruling, Canadian Minister of International Trade Ed Fast and Canadian Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food Gerry Ritz, reaffirmed their seriousness about retaliatory measures.
“For the fourth time, the WTO has ruled against the United States’ COOL policy, reaffirming Canada’s long-standing position that these measures are blatantly protectionist and discriminate against Canada,” the ministers said. “The United States has used and exhausted all possible means to avoid its international obligations, damaging our highly integrated North American supply chain and hurting producers and processors on both sides of the border. Once again we call on the United States to cease this harmful policy and repeal COOL’s provisions against beef and pork, removing this unnecessary trade barrier. In light of the final ruling, and due to the fact that the United States has continued to discriminate against Canadian livestock products, Canada will be seeking authority from the WTO to use retaliatory measures on U.S. agricultural and non-agricultural products.”


US industry groups, government leaders urge swift corrective measures on COOL
While the governments and trade organizations in both Canada and Mexico have been against U.S. COOL rules, it also has had its share of opponents in the U.S., including House Agriculture Committee Chairman K. Michael Conaway, the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) and the North American Meat Institute (NAMI).
In a statement issued shortly after the ruling, Conaway said WTO’s ruling was expected, and he will push for quick action to resolve the issue.
"As retaliation by Canada and Mexico becomes a reality, it is more important now than ever to act quickly to avoid a protracted trade war with our two largest trade partners," said Conaway. "I have asked my colleagues on the agriculture committee to weigh in on resolving this issue once and for all during a business meeting this Wednesday in a targeted effort to remove ongoing uncertainty and to provide stability.”
NAMI also responded to the ruling, calling for a change.
“Any action other than repeal invites retaliation from Canada and Mexico that could cost the U.S. economy billions of dollars. We look forward to working with Congress to repeal COOL once and for all, so that the United States can comply with its trade obligations, avoid unnecessary retaliation against our products and restore our strong relationships with important trading partners,” stated Barry Carpenter, NAMI president and CEO.
The U.S. National Farmers Union (NFU), which has been more supportive of COOL rules, stated it still sees value in COOL, but a new agreement should be worked out between the three countries.
“As we have seen in other disputes, once decisions are handed down, WTO members often work together to find a solution that will work for them,” said NFU President Roger Johnson. “In this case, such a solution must involve continuation of a meaningful country-of-origin labeling requirement.”
Conaway will host a press conference regarding COOL on May 19 that includes a bipartisan group of congressional members, and various industry groups including NPPC.

Ireland COOL laws now cover poultry, pig meat

Irish Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine Simon Coveney is signing into law new rules to provide for country of origin labeling (COOL) on packaged meat products. The rules cover meat from poultry, pigs, sheep, and goats, and will add to the existing rules in place for beef.
The regulation introduces requirements on food business operators including processors, retailers and butcher shops to ensure that country of origin information is available to customers who purchase packaged meat products.
The minister commented: “This regulation is yet another step in providing even clearer and more detailed information to consumers with regards to the food that they purchase. Origin labeling has been in place for beef for many years now and has benefitted the consumer in being able to identify the origin of the products they purchase. This additional requirement to provide information on the origin of other meats to consumers is broadly consistent with the rules on beef and adds transparency for consumers.”
The EU regulation underpinning these rules covers pre-packed non-processed meat but does not cover ‘loose’ product, or non-pre-packaged meat. However the EU regulations provide that mandatory origin labeling may be extended to loose products by national rules, and Coveney indicated that his department is working with Ireland’s Department of Health to determine whether this can be done on the basis of existing primary legislation.
“Ireland has long been a supporter at EU level for practical information to be made available to the consumer when it comes to their choice of food purchases and the implementation of these rules is another positive step in that direction,” said Coveney.

Canadian ag leaders travel to US to urge end to COOL

Canadian Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz is leading an industry delegation to Washington, D.C., to reinforce Canada's position on United States country of origin labeling (COOL) laws to key industry coalitions and members of the newly elected U.S. House and Senate.
The delegation includes members from the Canadian Pork Council, the Canadian Cattlemen's Association, and the Canadian Meat Council.
According to Ritz, COOL continues to significantly disrupt the North American supply chain, create unpredictability in the market, and impose additional costs on producers on both sides of the border.
The World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2014 released its Compliance Panel report confirming that the U.S. COOL requirements for beef and pork are a breach of international obligations.
Canada, which has threatened retaliatory action if changes to the COOL law is not made, will continue to fully assert its rights to achieve a fair resolution, including seeking authorization to implement retaliatory measures on U.S. agricultural and non-agricultural products if and as necessary, Ritz said.
"Canada continues to call upon the U.S. to comply with the WTO ruling and eliminate COOL's discriminatory treatment against Canadian hogs and cattle. Our government will always stand with our farmers and ranchers, and we will not shy away from taking whatever steps may be necessary, including retaliation, to achieve a fair resolution."
Despite being urged to change the COOL laws by the National Pork Producers Council and the North American Meat Institute, the U.S. has appealed the WTO ruling on COOL.

European Parliament committee: Origin labeling needed on meat

Meat used in processed food should be labeled by country of origin, an Environment, Public Health and Food Safety European Parliament Committee has said, calling on the European Commission to come up with legislative proposals.
The committee has urged the commission to follow up its 2013 report with legislative proposals making it mandatory to state the country of origin of meat used in processed foods, in order to ensure more transparency throughout the food chain and better inform consumers.
Members of European Parliament (MEPs) also reiterated their concern over the potential impact of food fraud on food safety, consumer confidence and health, the function of the food chain and farm produce prices.
MEPs point out that the European Commission’s own report acknowledges that more than 90 percent of consumer respondents consider it important that meat origin should be labeled on processed food products. This is one of the several factors that may influence consumer behavior and help to restore confidence following the horsemeat scandal, the MEPs say.
In December 2013, the European Commission submitted a report to the European Parliament and the council on the likely consequences of making it mandatory to state the country of origin or place of provenance of meat used as an ingredient. It is thought that, depending on the EU Member State concerned, 30-50 percent of slaughtered meat is processed into meat ingredients for foodstuffs, mostly minced meat, meat preparations, and meat products.
The resolution will be discussed and put to a plenary session vote in February.

US appeals WTO country of origin labeling ruling

• 

  Anna Moderska

  The U.S. has appealed a WTO ruling that states the U.S. country of origin labeling law violates international trade obligations.

  From WATTAgNet:
  The United States on November 28 appealed a ruling by the World Trade Organization (WTO) that stated the U.S. Country of Original Labeling (COOL) law was in violation of international trade obligations. The COOL law requires that meat be labeled with the country where the animal used for the meat product was born, raised and slaughtered.
  The WTO in October ruled against the U.S., saying the law discriminated against Canadian and Mexican livestock.
  After the WTO made its ruling, organizations including the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC), American Meat Institute and North American Meat Association (NAMA) have urged Congress and President Barack Obama to fix the law so the U.S. would not be subjected to retaliatory sanctions and tariffs.
  However, other groups, such as the National Farmers Union, have supported COOL.
  Officials from Canada, who had earlier threatened retaliatory measures, expressed disappointment in the U.S. decision to appeal.
  “Canada fully expected the United States to live up to its international trade obligations and comply with the WTO ruling, which reaffirms Canada’s long-standing view that the revised U.S. COOL measure is blatantly protectionist and fails to comply with the WTO’s original ruling against it,” Canadian Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz and Canadian International Trade Minister Ed Fast said in a joint statement.
  “With this delay, the United States is yet again preventing both of our countries from enjoying the benefits of freer and more open trade and is hurting farmers, ranchers and workers in the United States and Canada. We are confident that the WTO Appellate Body in the compliance process will uphold the principal finding of the report: that the amended U.S. COOL measure discriminates against Canadian livestock. That finding marks another clear victory for Canada and recognizes the integrated nature of the North American supply chain.”

Australia looks at revamping country of origin labeling laws

• 

  Andrea Gantz

  Australian Pork Limited supports the country's House Agriculture Committee's efforts to revamp its COOL laws.

  From WATTAgNet:
  Australia’s country of origin labeling (COOL) laws are in serious need of an overhaul, according to the country’s House Agriculture Committee and industry group Australian Pork Limited.
  Proponents of reform say he laws as they stand are too vague, leaving consumers confused as to whether the products they purchase were made with Australian agricultural commodities or whether they were just processed in Australia. Whether the grain used for feed in animals such as pigs for pork remains another concern.
  Rowan Ramsey, chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, said the main aim of the reform is to provide better information to consumers so they can see the product in a store and know where it was made and where the contents came from. Under the proposed COOL reform, a label would say “made in Australia from Australian ingredients” would have to be at least 90 percent Australian ingredients and made in Australia.
  “We’re making the point that we have to separate the point of manufacture and the point of contents, because the current descriptors don’t do that,” said Ramsey. “So below that 90 percent level, then we have to once again use Australia as the country, ‘made in Australia from mostly local ingredients,’ and that would mean you’d need more than 50 percent Australian content on ingredients, and then the lower one again would be ‘made in … from mostly imported ingredients.’”
  Deb Kerr, spokesperson for Australian Pork Limited, agrees reforms are needed to eliminate consumer confusion and to help the Australian pork industry better move its products.
  ”The fact that we import 70 percent of hams and bacons means that our pork producers are facing competition from overseas produced pork who are lower cost producers. So consumers being able to clearly understand whether they’re buying Australian ham and bacon or imported ham and bacon is a really significant issue for us and for consumers,” she said.
  Ramsey added that another concern with COOL reform is that it not create significant trade barriers.
  In the United States, legislators are being urged to reform its COOL law, as the World Trade Organization (WTO) on October 20 ruled the U.S. was in violation of international trade obligations by discriminating against pigs and cattle from Canada and Mexico. Canada has threatened retaliation if changes are not made.