Red meets white on world trade table

By Philippa Stevenson

Between the lines

The pig producers' timing could have been worse - they could have appealed for trade restrictions on imported pork during the upcoming Apec leaders' summit.

Instead, they waded in at almost as sensitive a time by choosing the week negotiations had reached fever pitch over New Zealand lamb exports to the United States.

The (red) Meat Board diplomatically said it would have preferred its (white) meat counterpart to have picked another time, stressing the issue was also about free trade.

Pig farmers may well be right. They may be up against it because Australian and Canadian industries, which get government handouts, are sending increased volumes of pork here and undercutting the price of the local product.

But a few more things could have been considered before they sought a temporary safeguard action, sounding like so many American sheep farmers protesting "the flood of imported lamb endangering our survival".

If there was anything rattling American bureaucrat's minds this weekend as we awaited the delayed decision on lamb it was probably the Australasian threat of taking recourse to the World Trade Organisation.

Yet the assistance given Canadian and Australian pig producers are green subsidies. They are WTO-sanctioned.

New Zealand cannot take the US to task for spouting free trade principles at large but practising protectionism at home, and argue that trade should be run by WTO rules, only to ignore those arguments for the sake of pig producers.

It may not be totally fair, but if it's WTO fair, that may have to be good enough for now.

Not all US sheep producers - especially large, efficient operations - agree with the appeal for trade restrictions against New Zealand. Neither does this country's largest pig farmer believe import restrictions are needed here.

Mainland Products, which includes the operations of the former Huttons Kiwi processor, says many producers need to get bigger and more efficient.

There is something to be said for the claim when the Pork Industry Board chairman can boast that in 1998 there was a rise in pork consumption but lament that "unfortunately some of the increase can be attributed to rising levels of imported product which accounted for 20 per cent of consumption".

The board knows that a high percentage of imports are frozen pork used in processed products while its industry is focused mainly on the fresh market.

Why else would the board, in the week it appealed for its safeguard action, continued to promote its product in the media with its message of "Mmmm ... it's got to be New Zealand Pork"?

There is plenty of room for action in the pork industry but not the restrictive kind the board is seeking.