A Senate proposal to switch to a voluntary U.S. country-of-origin labeling (COOL) system for beef, pork and chicken is “a risky strategy” that would not satisfy free-trade rules, says a top official of the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association. John Masswohl, CCA’s director of government and international relations, said U.S. packers were likely to continue to discriminate against imported livestock under voluntary COOL, just as they do under the current mandatory labeling system, by segregating animals and by refusing to buy them on some days of the week.
“We think they’re following a risky strategy here,” said Masswohl, referring to Sens. John Hoeven of North Dakota and Debbie Stabenow of Michigan, the lead sponsors of the voluntary COOL bill. The House passed a straightforward repeal of mandatory COOL, HR 2393, on June 10.
Senate Agriculture chairman Pat Roberts of Kansas favors outright repeal rather than the Hoeven-Stabenow approach. So does House Agriculture chairman Michael Conaway of Texas.
Hoeven and Stabenow say voluntary labeling will provide more information to consumers and help U.S. producers by distinguishing U.S. born, raised and slaughtered meat from imported meat in supermarkets. They say their plan is patterned on Canada’s voluntary system, so there is little risk of a WTO challenge. The World Trade Organization issued a final ruling against mandatory U.S. COOL in May. The case is now in arbitration, with Canada and Mexico asking for more than $3 billion in retaliatory tariffs.
During an interview, Masswohl said the Hoeven-Stabenow proposal was “quite different from what Canada has” because it would be more rigid and would be introduced at a point when meatpackers have created a trade-distorting system of separating U.S. livestock from foreign animals.
Backers of voluntary COOL for the United States believe a commercial decision by a meatpacker to satisfy a customer’s request for meat from a specific country is different than a government requirement to label all meat. And there is skepticism that the volume of meat under voluntary COOL would distort the overall U.S. market of billions of pounds of red meat and poultry.
“I think it boils down to competition,” said Stabenow during a Senate speech. She said voluntary COOL “stands up for American consumers and American producers.” Hoeven said “it doesn’t make sense” for Canada to object to voluntary labeling. The senators say their bill is a reasonable way to settle the trade dispute. Canada has said the only way to avoid retaliatory tariffs is complete repeal.
Masswohl said Canadian cattle producers “have gone more to branding” programs, such as Canadian Beef and the voluntary “Product of Canada” is used much less. Brand programs also are used in the United States to identify identify the source of product.
The CFIA page for voluntary meat labeling is available here.