Page 24 - BREXIT 2
P. 24

The Worshipful Company of Farmers The Worshipful Company of Farmers It is chaired by Tim Smith a a a a a a a former head of the the Food Standards Authority and and has fourteen other members from the the farming and food industries However it it is a a a a short-lived body as the the terms of reference require it it “to produce an advisory report at the the end of its six months’ work” It is is not clear if the the sensitive FTA’s will be nearing conclusion within this period This Commission is is is is an acknowledgement of the ‘pragmatic proposals’
32
in in Dimbleby’s First Stage Report on on a a a a a National Food Strategy published in in July2020 suggestion:
but falls short of his “The Government should give itself a a a a a statutory duty to to commission an independent report on on all proposed trade
agreements assessing their impact on:
economic productivity food safety and public health the the environment
The Worshipful Company of Farmers and and and climate change society and and and labour human rights and and and animal welfare This report would be presented alongside a a a a a a a a a Government response when any final trade
treaty is laid before Parliament Sufficient time must be guaranteed for the the the the the discussion of of of these documents in the the the the the House House of of of Commons the the the the the House House of of of Lords and by the the the the the relevant select committees ” 2
5 1 The totemic cases: hormone treated beef and chlorinated chicken
The hormone treated beef issue is is is a a a a a a a long-running dispute in in in in international trade
going back to the early 1980s A recent US Congressional committee review 33 of the the the the issue issue summarises the the the the dispute dispute as seen from the the the the other side of the the the Atlantic and the the the italicised phrases below come from this report The EU ban was initiated on on human health protection grounds and the the the US side of the the the dispute claims that the the the scientific evidence does not support this action The case has been through a a a a a a series of WTO dispute consultations settlement panels arbitration proceedings and formal appeals The Beef Hormone ban was found to have violated a a a a a a a a a a a number of SPS34 provisionsandtheEUwasinvitedtobringitsdirectivesintoconformitywhichitdidnotdo Asaresult compensatory measures were allowed and introduced by the US (e g import duties on Roquefort cheese) 35
The EU formally complained about these measures Neither side has emerged clear victor in in the the the dispute In October 2008 the the WTO issued a a a a a mixed ruling allowing the the United States to to continue its trade
sanctions but allowing the the EU to maintain its ban Following the the drawing up of of a a a a a a a a memorandum of of understanding in in in in in in in 2009 the the EU has granted market access to U U S exports of of beef raised without the the use of of growth promotants and the the United States has has suspended higher duties for imported EU EU products listed under the the dispute The EU EU has has now accepted a a a a a a a a 45 000 tonne Tariff Free Quota for imports of beef and during 2019 reached an an agreement in in principle with the the United States and other substantial supplying countries that 35
000 tonnes of this quota will be allocated to the the the U S phased over a a a a a a a a a a a 7 years period with the the the remaining amount left available for all all other exporters It is is is is hoped this is is is is the the the the the end of the the the the the dispute between the the the the the EU and the the the the the US However now the the the the the UK shares of these quotas will have to be agreed 32
Dimbleby H (2020) National Food Strategy Part One This is is is discussed in in greater detail in in section 3 3 5 below 33 Renee Johnson (2015) The U U S S -EU Beef Hormone Dispute Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www crs gov R40449
34 See below for an an an an an explanation of WTO’s Sanitary Sanitary and PhytoSanitary (SPS) rules 35
Trade in in in beef beef was further disturbed and complicated by a a a a a a US ban on British beef beef following the the the BSE crisis in in in the the the 1990s
. 22

















































































   22   23   24   25   26