His protectionist tendencies have won him accolades by many of his nation's cattlemen and condemnation by a larger contingent of people and trade organizations.
Certainly R-CALF's position on international trade can be outlined by a comment he made protesting the Trans-Pacific Partnership a few months ago. "My contention is that the TPP adopts the anticompetitive mantra of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) who argued in federal district court that “beef is beef, whether the cattle were born in Montana, Manitoba, or Mazatlán.”
To his way of thinking, beef from the U.S. is far superior to beef from any other part of the world and its reputation must be defended at all costs. The market Bullard wants to protect is substantial, too. In 2015, the U.S. imported $9.1 billion worth of beef with $7 billion from just three countries: Australia ($2.6 billion), Canada ($2.5 billion), and Mexico ($1.9 billion). Canada sent $1.3 billion worth of cattle and $1 billion worth of fresh or chilled beef to the U.S. last year.
Bullard doubled down on the defensive position he took with his objection to the TPP when he announced R-CALF's impending law suit challenging the legality of the U.S. beef checkoff program. A press release stated “The checkoff’s implied message that all beef is equal, regardless of where the cattle are born or how they are raised, harms U.S. farmers and ranchers and deceives U.S. citizens".
Asked for clarification of what appeared to be a direct attack on the quality of Canadian beef, he replied, "In the June 1, 2015 Global News article, 'Tainted lunch: Navigating gaps in Canada’s food safety system,' the author references a U.S. audit report that gave Canada’s meat inspection system the “lowest possible passing grade (“Adequate”) and found multiple instances where processing plants weren’t in compliance with safety regulations.” In a more recent audit report of Canadian meat plants, the U.S. found several weaknesses related to government oversight, sanitation and microbiological testing that “raise significant questions” about Canada’s meat safety system that will need to be addressed if Canada is to maintain equivalency with the U.S. system."
He emphasized one point about Canadian beef, saying "Importantly, U.S. law no longer requires Canada or any other country to have meat safety inspection systems that are at least equal to the U.S. system. This is because the U.S. lowered its food safety bar when it entered the World Trade Organization (WTO). Today, the food safety systems of Canada and other exporting countries need only be “close enough,” under the WTO-relaxed standard of equivalency. Thus, imported beef is allowed into the United States without being subjected to food safety standards that are at least equal to U.S. standards."
Making a broad overstatement not backed by facts but possibly designed to set the stage for the lawsuit, David Muraskin, one of the lawyers representing R-CALF, said, “At a time of alarming food recalls and concerns about the health and safety of the food we eat, that’s both irresponsible and troubling."
Rich Smith, executive director of Alberta Beef Producers, in an article published by Alberta Farmer, said “The description in the lawsuit is a gross misrepresentation of what the United States is doing with its checkoff funds, and it unfairly maligns production practices and standards in other countries, including Canada."
He dismissed Bullard's group as extremely anti-competitive, saying “R-CALF is an organization that opposes international trade, and it believes that international trade is bad for the cattle industry. That’s the perspective it’s taking in this action and that it’s consistently taken as an organization.”
North American Meat Institute President and CEO Barry Carpenter agreed with Smith, stating “For years, RCALF has demonized imported meat, the facts be damned. Their most recent lawsuit is a continuation of that xenophobia."
Bullard's prepared statement went well beyond questioning the quality of Canadian beef. He talked about an ESPN.com news report that warned NFL players that meat produced in China and Mexico may be contaminated with the banned substance clenbuterol. He was also concerned that the pesticide DDT, classified as a B2 carcinogen and banned in the U.S. since 1972, "is still used in certain cattle-producing regions around the world to control such diseases as malaria, including in South America, Africa and Asia."
"Thus" he warned, "as with clenbuterol, there is a higher risk that imported meat is derived from animals that have ingested this banned substance.
Adding another warning about the potential dangers of imported meat, Bullard said "In 2013, several U.S. consumer groups explained that nine veterinary drugs banned in the U.S. “due to human health concerns, particularly carcinogenicity and mutagenicity" were nevertheless being used elsewhere around the world. "Thus there is a higher risk that imported meat may contain residue from one or more of these banned substances.," he claimed.
The problem as he described it was a general lack of oversight by U.S. authorities leading to the possible importing of unsafe foods.. Singling out two South American countries, he said "Although Brazil and Argentina are now eligible to export fresh beef to the U.S., United States auditors have yet to certify any meat processing plants in either country as having food safety systems that are equivalent to those in the United States. Auditors found weaknesses in BSE mitigation procedures practiced by those countries as recently as 2014 and in 2016 they continue to find weaknesses with Brazil’s residue detection procedures. Nevertheless, in 2015 the U.S. imported 149.6 million pounds of pre-cooked beef from Brazil and 1.3 million pounds from Argentina. This suggests that beef imported from Brazil and Argentina is inherently less safe than U.S.-produced beef."
Carpenter stringently disagreed with Bullard's assertions and was adamant at sitting the record straight. "Here are the facts," he said. "The U.S. has strict border controls for imported meat products and to help ensure safety USDA conducts pathogen and residue testing. Countries that export meat to the U.S. must have equivalent inspection systems. The United States benefits from these equivalency agreements because they enable U.S. meat producers to export our products to other countries that treat our food safety and inspection system as equivalent."
In fact, Carpenter was speaking with direct knowledge of that equivalency. The North American Meat Processors Association, one of the integral groups that united to form NAMI recently, had spent much of the past decade working with both the U.S. and Canadian governments to insure equivalency of the rules and regs governing meat production and processing in both countries.
Carpenter accused R-CALF of relying on "half-truths and distortions" when talking about the quality of imported meat. "Some of the most egregiously false statement made by RCALF,: he said, are:
- RCALF claims that somehow the United States entry into the WTO affected the food safety standards applied to meat from countries that export here. That assertion is simply untrue. The U.S. food safety requirements for imported meat have not changed since the United States entered the WTO. The same rigorous rules imposed by federal statute remain in effect.
- CALF claims that Brazil and Argentina are now eligible to export fresh beef to the U.S., but that auditors haven’t certified their plants as having equivalent food safety systems. Again, RCALF is flat out wrong. APHIS has approved both Brazil and Argentina to export fresh beef, but FSIS has not completed their equivalence audit. As a result, Brazil and Argentina may presently export cooked beef only to the United States.
Carpenter said ”We remain confident in the federal meat inspection system and its ability to ensure meat imported into the United States has been processed under equivalent food safety standards. It is an affront to thousands of dedicated, highly trained FSIS veterinarians and food inspectors to suggest they are somehow negligent in their duties to assure a safe meat supply.
Source: Meatbusiness