Often on the attack and rarely on the defensive, U.S. agriculture
secretary Ann Veneman came to Ottawa on May 3 to face a barrage of
criticism about American farm subsidies and the new farm bill.
In her wake, she left no doubt the world will have to live with the
effects of the farm bill for the next six years while the Americans
spend as much as they can within the allowable limits.
Grain Growers of Canada president Brian Kriz, who was one of a group of
Read Also
Alberta crop diversification centres receive funding
$5.2 million of provincial funding pumped into crop diversity research centres
trade-oriented farm leaders invited to meet the U.S. cabinet member,
said that puts the policy ball back in Canada’s political court to
bring in a trade injury compensation program for farmers.
“What Ann Veneman said is that we have to change things in the next
round, but they are going to keep the farm bill under (World Trade
Organization) limits, so don’t argue with us about that,” said Kriz.
“It gives us an out to work through the WTO, but it means we have six
years in Canada where we are not going to compete very well without a
similar program.”
Under pressure from opposition parties inside the House of Commons and
from farm lobby groups outside the House, agriculture minister Lyle
Vanclief said May 3 the government cannot match U.S. subsidies, but is
looking for ways to help.
“What we have to do is find ways to mitigate it and there are a number
of ways we’re looking at.”
He took every chance he could to turn up the volume of criticism.
“The (American) administration clearly has continued to demonstrate
that they’re protectionist,” he told reporters after delivering a trade
conference speech denouncing the American retreat from trade
liberalization.
“I think they are fast running up against the wall. They are losing
their credibility.”
Veneman, who was in Ottawa to meet Vanclief and to speak at the same
trade conference, rejected the criticism and leveled some of her own.
She heard Vanclief vow to take the U.S. to trade court if violations of
trade commitments or allowable subsidy levels are found.
“We have kept within our (WTO) commitments and we intend to continue to
do that,” Veneman replied.
She heard that Canadian Wheat Board minister Ralph Goodale had called
it a “foul and insidious” farm bill.
“I don’t think it’s very productive to talk … in those kinds of terms
that really inflame people,” Veneman replied.
She heard farm leaders and other critics complain that the new bill
sharply increases subsidy spending in the U.S.
Wrong, she said – it simply puts into legislation the levels of support
American farmers have been receiving in recent years through emergency
allotments.
Sharing the blame
As well, Veneman said Canada is not without fault when it comes to
trade protectionism.
“We continue to have difficulties with wheat trade, with the Canadian
Wheat Board. We continue to have difficulty with dairy trade. There are
protections in Canada as well. It’s not as if everybody else is without
fault.”
And she heard repeatedly that the U.S. has betrayed its trade
liberalization rhetoric and lost its credibility in WTO talks.
Veneman scoffed at the idea, insisting that the U.S. will push an
“aggressive” trade liberalization position at WTO talks.
