Trade minister Pierre Pettigrew has clearly staked out Canada’s highest priority for the new round of world trade talks.
“I can tell you that we are among many countries for whom the elimination of export subsidies and the substantial reduction of domestic subsidies are the top priorities in this round of negotiations,” he told the Senate agriculture committee Dec. 5.
Pettigrew said both the United States and the European Union will resist and that is why Canada wanted a broad negotiation at the World Trade Organization.
Read Also
Agritechnica Day 2: The future of tractor power, building quicker crop apps and large farms and tech
Agritechnica Day 2: The future of tractor power, building quicker crop apps with Syngenta and large farms and tech
“We need the WTO because at the multilateral table where we discuss many other sectors, if the Americans want to get some concessions on any particular sector, they will have to give up something,” said the minister.
He also acknowledged that while the negotiating mandate says the eventual goal is to phase out export subsidies, the EU is now claiming there is no such commitment.
Pettigrew said the Europeans will try to interpret the deal in their own way for domestic political reasons, particularly with an election looming in France. But the text is clear, he said.
“There is a commitment ‘with a view to phasing out export subsidies,’ ” said Pettigrew. “That is the commitment they have. They might try to water it down but their commitment is there and I can tell you one thing. Many of us will be reminding them of their commitment that night.”
However, the trade minister’s strong commitment to lower subsidies did not win the enthusiastic Senate reaction he might have expected.
Saskatchewan Liberal senator and farmer Jack Wiebe suggested farmers are being misled into thinking that once subsidies are cut, their price and market troubles will be over.
“We have left the farmer out there with the impression that if we are successful in eliminating the subsidies, the woes of the agricultural producer will be over,” said Wiebe, vice-chair of the committee. “The forces of supply and demand will take over.”
He suggested farmers will continue to seed wheat even without subsidies because that is what the land is best at growing.
“From a trade perspective, our government is moving in the right direction by eliminating those subsidies,” said Wiebe. “However, eliminating subsidies will not improve the condition of the farmer in our country, in the U.S. or in the European Common Market unless we find something else to do with the land that we now have under cultivation in all those countries.”
Saskatchewan Liberal Herb Sparrow said the end of subsidies would not mean better times or better prices for farmers and the government should recognize that.
“The minister of agriculture indicated that there is no more money available to the agriculture industry,” said Sparrow. “We have, therefore, a decision to make. We get out of the business of farming, particularly as it relates to cereals and grains.”
Pettigrew said that would not be his advice to farmers. He said he was more optimistic about the future of farming and the impact of subsidy reductions than the senator seemed to be.
“We will not have any farmers left by that time. That is the problem,” responded Sparrow.
“If you do not mind, I will still try to work hard at eliminating them just in case there is some benefit,” shot back a frustrated Pettigrew.
