Oldtimer
Well-known member
frenchie":3bi83hwo said:Oldtimer":3bi83hwo said:Well getting back to the original topic of the thread .....
whats matter Ot truth hurts don,t it. Your wonderful testing program based on a flawed test.The sort of test that is only meaningful in Montana.
re MCOOL....Truth be known if the shoe was on the other foot .R-calf would be first in line to sue.
We've argued that point 10,000 times-- Saskartoon and mwj pull this change of subject every time their hineys are hanging out.... :roll:
I want to know why Canadians think they need to use FRAUD and DECEPTION and pass their beef/meat off as a US product in order to make it marketable...
Why do Canadians think they can't make a go of it unless they ride on the shirttails of the US cattlemen and live off the US teat?
This article makes it sound like Canadians have NO confidence in their product :roll: Makes it sound like unless they can continue to use fraud to pass it off to consumers as a US product it won't sell...Wanting to go back to the old status quo of riding on the US cattlemans shirttails....
Its hard to believe the outright arrogance of Canadian farmers/ranchers that think they should be able to tell US consumers how their meat products they buy in their own country should be labeled-- or what or how our US Congress can make laws in our country...
Canadians apparently have a guilty mind- because they seem to think this COOL law is aimed only at them-- but really is aimed at ALL the 40 countries the US imports meat/cattle from-- some of which like China, Asia, Mexico, etc. have terrible health and safety records on their imports...
When 90+% of US consumers are asking for this labeling (partly because of the Canadian BSE issue)- so that they can have an honest informed choice on the meat products they buy-- this CCA (AMI/Packer Puppets) move may create a backlash that creates much more harm and damage to the Canadian beef and cattle industry.....
He also said he has been talking with the big chain grocery stores to have more local and Canadian products on the shelves to try to help Canadian producers of all types.
"I understand that they're willing to provide it," said Mr. Norlock. "But customers have to keep encouraging them to buy local - and the customers always get what they want."
Sounds like what the CCA and Pork folks should be doing is working for their own Canadian M-COOL-- because no matter how loyal your customers are they can't buy what isn't labeled and they can't identify....
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Country of Origin Labelling under fire
Joyce Cassin
Local News - Monday, August 13, 2007
Northumberland Today - Ontario, Canada
Country Of Origin Labelling (COOL) isn't likely to help Canada's beef, pork and lamb industries with sales south of the border if the provision, part of the U.S. Farm Bill, gets congressional approval.
"And if this is proposed it will violate NAFTA and WTO agreements already in place," said Lianne Appleby, communications manager for the Ontario Cattlemen's Association.
Currently, Canadian livestock shipped to the U.S. and slaughtered there is marked as U.S. origin. But under COOL, which could take effect September 30, 2008, only animals born, raised and slaughtered in the U.S. would be considered of U.S. origin. All others would be labelled according to their true country of origin, regardless of where they are slaughtered.
"Beef products of Canada will be labelled as such, and that presents marketing challenges for Canadian beef," Ms. Appleby said.
As currently enacted, COOL would dramatically reduce U.S. market access for Canadian pork and beef producers, stated a release from the Canadian Cattlemen's Association (CCA), which is actively lobbying Ottawa to take action against COOL.
"COOL proposes that cattle must be born and raised in the U.S. to be labelled U.S.," said Ms. Appleby. "That creates cost problems for U.S. retailers/packers who are currently sourcing Canadian beef, as COOL may make it more expensive for them to continue sourcing cattle from here. The U.S. government has previously acknowledged COOL's benefits are small and it has no relation to either human or animal safety."
Canadian producers anticipate significant difficulties selling hogs and cattle to U.S. slaughterhouses that would seek to minimize the cost of tracking meat from foreign animals. Loss of the U.S. market would trigger an adjustment period in which hogs and cattle intended for U.S. export would instead be sold in the Canadian market, driving down Canadian prices to the detriment of all producers here, the CCA stated.
Ms. Appleby also said the law contravenes U.S. obligations to avoid unnecessary obstacles to international trade, to avoid materially reducing the value of imported products, to administer its laws uniformly and reasonably, and not to nullify or impair benefits that accrue to other parties under the World Trade Organization.
The cattlemen want Ottawa to issue a public statement on COOL's potential to violate both NAFTA and WTO agreements, begin expressing concerns with trade legislators in Congress, as well as with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and American trade representative.
Northumberland-Quinte West MP Rick Norlock said he is disappointed the U.S. is continuing on this track.
"It's my personal belief that this is just one more step in trying to close the border to Canadian beef and increase the price of their beef," he said.
Mr. Norlock said it's a "small minor roadblock" and they plan to work with the Canadian industry and other allies who would be negatively affected, if COOL passes.
He also said he has been talking with the big chain grocery stores to have more local and Canadian products on the shelves to try to help Canadian producers of all types.
"I understand that they're willing to provide it," said Mr. Norlock. "But customers have to keep encouraging them to buy local - and the customers always get what they want."
northumberlandtoday.com