There’s no doubt that the latest round of World Trade Organization negotiations have been on life support for some time.
WTO director Pascal Lamy is attempting to push the talks forward, but he is finding little support among member countries. And Canada’s federal agriculture minister Gerry Ritz has admitted he sees little chance of success.
There are major hurdles still to overcome.
Developing countries insist they deserve special protections to aid their economies. Meanwhile, developed countries make the point that the largest developing countries, India, China and Brazil, have made such progress lately that special protections are unwarranted.
Read Also
Petition launched over grazing lease controversy
Battle continues between the need for generation of tax revenue from irrigation and the preservation of native grasslands in southern Alberta rural municipality.
As well, with Republicans in control of the U.S. Congress, president Barack Obama is not likely to gain fast track authority. This would have enabled his administration to negotiate a deal, with Congress having the right to reject or accept the deal as whole without amendment.
Lacking fast track authority, negotiations with the U.S. lack credibility, given that Congress can attempt to change any aspect of the points being negotiated.
So although WTO member countries are being pressed to try once again to find compromises and come to an agreement, a deal appears further off now than it has anytime since the Doha Round agenda was signed in 2001.
Should farmers worry?
Western Canadian farmers are mainly exporters of the goods they grow. Any arrangement that gives them better access for foreign markets is bound to provide them more opportunities.
A key aspect of the Doha Round would target base subsides levels on agricultural goods. Since Canada’s subsidies are already below those that exist in the EU and U.S., further limits on allowable subsides would likely pay dividends for Canadian farmers.
As well, a strong WTO deal may serve to discourage countries from instituting protectionist measures during tough economic times.
On the other side of the equation, the WTO did threaten Canada’s supply management industries and the Canadian Wheat Board monopoly, even though our federal government vowed that those issues are not negotiable.
No matter what one thinks of the CWB’s monopoly or supply management, they are issues for Canadian farmers to decide, not foreign powers. If there is no WTO deal, this principle remains intact.
But if there is to be no WTO, the federal government must ensure the proper measures are in place on several other fronts.
Trade deals struck directly between Canada and other individual countries and trading entities must be a top priority. These direct country-to-country agreements help to mitigate the potential loss of a WTO deal.
Canada has already struck deals with Chile, the United States and Mexico and is in various stages of trade talks with many others.
In the end, the ultimate test for any trade deal is whether farmers are better off because of it. And there’s the rub.
Despite all the federal focus on increasing international trade and gaining access to international markets, there is no guarantee that increased trade will naturally improve farmers’ bottom lines.
Ensuring competitiveness among input suppliers, funding research and development, and a proper package of farm supports are also key.
So while western Canadian farmers could find much benefit in a WTO deal, it is only one part of a strategy for a healthy farm sector.
A government that continues to keep the WTO door open, while also seeking other paths, will give our farmers the best opportunities possible.
Bruce Dyck, Terry Fries, Barb Glen and D’Arce McMillan collaborate in the writing of Western Producer editorials.
