U.S. appeals WTO decision – again
Food in CanadaBusiness Operations Exporting & Importing Regulation Meat &Poultry Canada COOL country-of-origin labeling livestock Mexico World Trade Organization
Canada’s government says it’s deeply disappointed with the news that yet again the U.S. is appealing the WTO’s ruling on COOL
Ottawa, Ont. – The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative has appealed the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) decision on COOL.
In October, the WTO rejected the U.S.’s amendments to its original COOL – Country of Origin Labeling – rules requiring labels on packaged meats to identify where the animals were born, raised and slaughtered.
For more, read “WTO rules on the U.S.’s amendments to COOL”.
The WTO sided instead with Canada and Mexico, saying COOL puts those countries’ livestock at a disadvantage.
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada issued a statement, saying it was “deeply disappointed with the U.S. decision to appeal.”
The statement from Ed Fast, minister of International Trade, and Gerry Ritz, the minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food goes onto say:
“Canada fully expected the U.S. to live up to its international trade obligations and comply with the WTO ruling, which reaffirms Canada’s long-standing view that the revised U.S. COOL measure is blatantly protectionist and fails to comply with the WTO’s original ruling against it.
“With this delay, the U.S. is yet again preventing both of our countries from enjoying the benefits of freer and more open trade and is hurting farmers, ranchers and workers in the United States and Canada.
“We are confident that the WTO Appellate Body in the compliance process will uphold the principal finding of the report: that the amended U.S. COOL measure discriminates against Canadian livestock. That finding marks another clear victory for Canada and recognizes the integrated nature of the North American supply chain.
“Our government will always stand with our farmers and ranchers, and we will take whatever steps may be necessary, including retaliation, to achieve a fair resolution.”
For more information on proposed retaliatory measures, click here.
Print this page