It seems they just can’t help themselves. The Cairns Group, a collection of 18 medium-sized food exporters who campaign for trade liberalization and subsidy reductions, cannot seem to end its fixation on the European Union as the Great Satan of food trade distortions.
The Americans get a pass.
Blame it on the Oceanic factor.
Last week at Banff, Canada hosted the 21st meeting of the group, which started with 14 at Cairns, Australia in 1986.
The world has evolved in the years since the Cairns Group was formed. At its inception, the 1980s export subsidy war was starting and the EU was the clear culprit and target.
Read Also
Agriculture ministers agree to AgriStability changes
federal government proposed several months ago to increase the compensation rate from 80 to 90 per cent and double the maximum payment from $3 million to $6 million
During the last world trade negotiations, Cairns said it was a “third force” but the EU considered the group a stalking horse for American attacks on the European subsidies and protections.
Since then, the Europeans have done what was required of them by the last trade deal. They continue to throw billions of dollars into production-distorting farm subsidies.
The Europeans have developed a philosophy of “multifunctionality,” which means they pay farmers for the various benefits they bring to society, rather than for their production. The EU makes no secret of its intention to keep subsidizing its farmers, because it considers them a part of the social contract.
Meanwhile, the Americans promised in 1996 a phasing out of their rich and production-distorting farm subsidies and instead have paid record subsidies this year.
Last week’s Banff meeting offered Cairns members an opportunity to balance their approach, to condemn the Europeans for continuing to distort production and trade but to acknowledge that the Americans aren’t much better.
Some Cairns members, notably Canada, did include the Americans whenever there was criticism of production or trade-distorting policies.
But the official Cairns leader, Australian trade minister Mark Vaile, was having none of that balance.
He described the EU as a bloc “resisting reform” by trying to introduce food safety, animal welfare and rural welfare issues into trade talks.
Meanwhile, he praised the U.S. for supporting the goal of eliminating export subsidies and made little mention of America’s subsidy binge.
Vaile re-established Cairns credentials as a coalition willing to credit American words while ignoring actions.
Unstated in Banff, but also a basic Cairns belief, is that Canada is suspect because it supports both increased exports and continued defence of orderly marketing. This unbending support for free trade and no protection does a disservice to the credibility of Cairns, since most members do not fully support it.
Australia and New Zealand, blessed with the protection of hundreds or thousands of miles of ocean between their farmers and competitors, can take a holier-than-thou stance.
The message might be different if Australia shared a 4,000 kilometre border with the subsidizing E.U. Yet the Cairns countries seem prepared to allow a geographically protected island nation to articulate the agenda.
Most countries have a more complicated view of trade, subsidy and protection.
