GrainsWest Fall 2017

39 / 48

BY GEOFF GEDDES
focus of any revised deal should be a har-
monized approach to health claims and
nutrition labels,” said Kurbis.
From an American wheat farmer
perspective, O’Connor sees positives for
all three countries in the agreement. “We
were all part of the TPP (Trans-Pacific
Partnership), and while the U.S. stepped
away from that, there were sanitary and
phytosanitary provisions that could be
incorporated in a revised NAFTA for the
benefit of all.”
HOPE AND HOMEWORK
While concerns remain, there is much
hope the right approach will bear fruit.
“Canada must do its homework and
come to the table with clear negotiating
objectives and desired results,” said Rice.
“We must be confident that we can forge a
modernized NAFTA, which will preserve
the North American market for another
20 years.”
While there was initial concern about
reopening NAFTA from producers on both
sides of the border, that may be chang-
ing. “As time has gone by, that concern
has been replaced with some optimism,
especially in light of the strong support for
the deal from the U.S. agriculture sector,
which universally endorsed it,” said Dahl.
“We can improve NAFTA, but we must
not do anything to impede trade or move
backward.”
In light of global activity on trade in
recent months, some feel that cautious
optimism is warranted. “If there is one
thing that has characterized trade-related
developments over the last year or so,
it’s the difficulty that even trade veter-
ans have in predicting outcomes,” said
Kurbis. Whatever that outcome may be,
Canada is hoping that when the smoke
clears, the only thing broken will be the
seal on the champagne to celebrate a job
well done.
A BRIEF HISTORY OF SUPPLY
MANAGEMENT
In a world where deregulation is
often the norm, Canada’s system of
supply management has been a point
of contention in international trade
negotiations.
It’s a system that is especially suited
for the dairy industry. When advances
in technology and farm management
led to a steep rise in farm production
in the late 19th century, the Agricul-
tural Stabilization Act was passed in
1958 to provide a minimum income
and a measure of financial security for
farmers. While the Canadian govern-
ment couldn’t afford to subsidize agri-
culture in the long run, it did the next
best thing by giving farmers the tools
to better negotiate with businesses and
gain a fair share of consumer dollars.
This was the impetus for supply
management, and though the reviews
are mixed, it has been increasingly
criticized as contrary to the principles
of fair trade and open markets.
That criticism has somewhat
impeded Canadian negotiators on
the world stage, most recently with
the TPP. Because countries like New
Zealand and the United States wanted
guarantees of major dairy concessions
from Canada that would affect our
supply management system, Canada
was largely an outsider to the negotia-
tions until late 2012.
Since then, the United States has
made it clear that the removal of trade
barriers against the American dairy
industry is critical to that country’s
participation in trade deals. Now
that the United States has withdrawn
from the TPP and asked to renegotiate
NAFTA, what this means for the fu-
ture of supply management in Canada
is an unknown. Will it be preserved at
the expense of other trade opportuni-
ties? Will it be abolished or modified,
and, if so, what will be the impact on
industries that rely on it like dairy,
poultry and egg production?
Stay tuned.
Photo:GovernmentofCanadaPrimeMinister Justin Trudeau visits the Lewis family farm in the Gray, Saskatchewan area. Under NAFTA, Canadian
grain farmers have enjoyed duty-free grain movement for almost 25 years, and do not want this to change.
Fall 2017 39