Govt must move strongly to rein in out-of-control Mandelson - Creed

Since EU Commissioner Peter Mandelson assumed the mantle of EU Trade Commissioner he has pursued a policy of liberalisation of world trade at the expense of EU agriculture. EU farmers are hammered by increasingly strict environmental regulations and EU induced red tape.


Meanwhile a halfhearted effort is made to ensure that Brazil adheres to the same conditions imposed on EU farmers. Recently the EU introduced a ban on imports of Brazilian beef on the basis of lack of proper traceability and other irregularities in beef production methods. This was for the optics and was a cynical ploy to give the impression that the EU was really serious about the irregularities in beef production. No sooner was the ban introduced than it was dropped.
The EU appears to have an agenda to wipe out beef and poultry industries in member states to ensure increased access to Brazilian markets for industry. As a quid pro quo Brazil can flood the EU market with cheap meat produced to low standards. To hell with health risks for the consumer. To hell with food security. It is time to remove Mandelson.

The EU is prepared to import beef from Amazonia. It has no scruples about the burning of the rainforests to facilitate an increase in Brazilian beef production. The resulting huge increase in CO2 from the burnings is of no concern to Mandelson. Has he never heard of the Greenhouse Effect? What hypocrisy.

Today FG spokesman Michael Creed issued the following press release. It is highly apposite:

During Dáil Statements on the WTO today (Thursday), Fine Gael Agriculture Spokesperson, Michael Creed TD, called on the Taoiseach and the Minister for Agriculture to rein in EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson, through establishing a special intergovernmental conference if necessary.
"There is a growing frustration at the fact Mr. Mandelson is acting significantly beyond his negotiating brief from the Commission. He should not be allowed to sell out the interests of European agriculture, and Irish beef producers in particular, to get a deal. It is the responsibility of the Taoiseach and the Minister to rein in Mr. Mandelson. If necessary let us have a special intergovernmental conference where a telling message can be sent to the EU Trade Commissioner.
"The issue of Brazilian beef, which is now available here again, arises in this context. If Brazilians want access to European markets then, in the context of the WTO, let us have non-trade issues on the agenda, such as animal health, that will ensure their products are produced to the standard European consumers expect and European producers have to meet.

EU Restrictions on Brazilian beef-unanswered questions

The EU's Food and Veterinary Office in its missions to Brazil has encountered chronic abuse of production standards as has an IFA delegation. The US, Australia, Japan and South Korea have banned all imports of beef from Brazil yet the EU has only introduced a partial ban. Why is the EU insisting on higher standards of traceability from its farmers than from Brazilian farmers?

The EU Commission appears to have an agenda to restrict production by indigenous farmers and to sell out on agriculture. The Commission is determined to increase access to the Brazilian market for manufacturing industry. As a quid pro quo it will allow access to Community markets for Brazilian beef.

The EU has lambasted the US on its emissions of Greenhouse Gases. Yet the EU Commission is prepared to accept imports of Brazilian Beef from ranches in Amazonia. These ranches have been created through the burning of the rain forests. This practice continues and is increasing CO2 levels in the atmosphere. Why has the EU Commission chosen to ignore damage to the environment caused by ranchers in the Amazon Basin?

Minister for Agriculture Mary Coughlan had refused to support a full ban on beef imports from Brazil. Then 24 hours before the EU announcement of a partial ban she called for a full ban. Why the about-turn?

Michael Creed the FG Spokesman on Agriculture has stated that "Brazil should face a total ban until it is meeting the production standards that Irish and European producers are obliged to meet and EU consumers are entitled to expect." In this he has been totally consistent unlike the Minister.

Al Gore and Global Warming Hypocrisy

Negotiations are deadlocked at the UN conference on global warming being held in NUSA DUA, Indonesia. At the conference Al Gore told delegates in a speech that “My own country, the United States, is principally responsible for obstructing progress here in Bali.” “Over the next two years the United States is going to be somewhere it is not now,” Mr. Gore said to loud applause. “You must anticipate that.” Gore is playing domestic US politics. He cannot resist a swipe at Bush and the Republican Party.

Gores approach is blinkered and hypocritical. China’s representative Su Wei said that there was absolutely no reason for China to do anything about its C02 emissions. He argued that China was a poor country with a large population and needed more time to develop economically. In essence the Chinese have told Al Gore to get stuffed. They realize that he is a wimp. The Russians and Indians are no more accommodating. If Gore were consistent he would have launched blistering attacks on China, India and Russia.

The EU is apparently unhappy with the US approach also and has threatened to boycott separate talks proposed by the Bush administration in Hawaii next month.This is a fine example of EU hypocrisy. The EU favours large scale importation of beef from Brazil. Expanding cattle herds in Brazil contribute to global warming. The Methane level increases. There has been large scale burning of Amazonian rain forests to make way for cattle ranches supplying the EU market. This increases CO2 levels in the atmosphere. Germany imports Russian gas. It cynically turns a blind eye to Russian excesses on the environment. At the EU conference it is a case of the kettle calling the pot black.