• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Japan Responds to Creekstones Lawsuit

agman

Well-known member
Japan says US suit won't change beef trade rules

Reuters

Thu Mar 23, 2006

By Aya Takada

TOKYO (Reuters) - Japanese Agriculture Minister Shoichi Nakagawa said on Friday beef trade rules between Japan and the United States won't be affected by a lawsuit filed by a U.S. firm against the U.S. government over mad cow testing.

Creekstone Farms Premium Beef LLC filed a suit earlier in the week against the U.S. Agriculture Department for refusing to allow the Kansas company to voluntarily test its cattle for mad cow disease.

The company wants to test all its slaughter cattle for the fatal disease, formally known as bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), so that it can prove to customers, especially in Japan, that its beef is safe.

In Japan all cattle slaughtered for food have been tested for BSE since October 2001 as a way of excluding infected animals from the food chain. After the central government dropped its blanket testing policy last August, all local governments have voluntarily continued universal testing to meet consumer demand.

Nakagawa said he understands Creekstone's eagerness to regain access to the Japanese market, which has been shut to American beef since January 20 when Japanese inspectors discovered banned spinal material in a shipment of U.S. veal.

The suspension came just a month after Japan partially lifted a two-year-old ban on U.S. beef imposed over mad cow disease fears. Before the ban, Japan was the top importer of U.S. beef, buying 240,000 tonnes valued at $1.4 billion in 2003.

But Nakagawa added that Japan cannot give preferential treatment to the company as the Japanese and U.S. governments have already set beef trade rules that do not require Washington to conduct universal testing on slaughter cattle for BSE.

"We don't deny their efforts to adapt themselves to the Japanese system at a high cost, but how can we make exceptions of them?" Nakagawa asked at a news conference.

Under the beef trade agreement between the two governments, U.S. companies must remove specified risk materials that could spread mad cow disease, such as spinal cords, from cattle of all ages before the meat is shipped to Japan. They also cannot export beef from animals older than 20 months.

USDA has opposed private BSE testing of cattle, saying it is too costly and cannot be justified scientifically.

But consumer groups in the United States and Japan have applauded the action by Creekstone and urged Washington to allow the company to test all its cattle for mad cow disease.

"We hope this case will eventually force the U.S. government to tighten its rules over mad cow testing," said Hiroko Mizuhara, secretary general of the Consumers Union of Japan.

Currently the USDA is drawing up plans to scale down its mad cow testing program that found two of the three U.S. cases of the disease, including one this month.

To press for the reopening of the Japanese market to U.S. beef, USDA will send a technical team to Japan for a meeting with Japanese counterparts next week. Nakagawa said the ministry has not yet set the date for a meeting with USDA officials.

Nakagawa also said he wants USDA officials to fully answer Japanese questions about the veal shipment before they move a step closer to a possible resumption of U.S. beef imports.

"I hope we can have a meaningful meeting to move us forward," Nakagawa told reporters.

Japan has said it could not allow imports to restart until Washington found the cause of the violation and took measures to prevent a recurrence.

The Japanese government, under fire from opposition critics who say it lifted its initial ban too quickly under U.S. pressure, is cautious about an early resumption of beef imports.

..................

Is there anyone who still does not see that Japan is playing a strictly political game? Even if Creekstone tests Japan will not take the beef. Also, how credible is it now that Creekstone previously implied Japan would buy tested beef? If only the USDA would let us test we could export to Japan. Who believes that now?
 

rkaiser

Well-known member
Think you really have something here don't you agman. This fellow is saying that the rules were drawn up. Drawn up by who. The packer led USDA that's who. Rules are meant to be changed, just as they were when the USDA changed them to include this SRM / 20 month crap.

Let's see what would happen if testing were brought to the bloody table. If you had a lick of sense, you might see that this could potentially change the rules once again.

Or you could follow the sceince that best serves the mutinational packers and their captive North American supply.
 

agman

Well-known member
rkaiser said:
Think you really have something here don't you agman. This fellow is saying that the rules were drawn up. Drawn up by who. The packer led USDA that's who. Rules are meant to be changed, just as they were when the USDA changed them to include this SRM / 20 month crap.

Let's see what would happen if testing were brought to the bloody table. If you had a lick of sense, you might see that this could potentially change the rules once again.

Or you could follow the sceince that best serves the mutinational packers and their captive North American supply.

If you say so Rk!!
 

Econ101

Well-known member
agman said:
rkaiser said:
As much sense as your OPINION agman.

If you say so!!!!

I will have to agree with rkaiser on this one, Agman.

If you remove the SRM on under 20 month cattle, does that mean they are bse free?

The Japanese want a little curteous bow and they get a little sabre rattling from the USDA. It will be any wonder at all that U.S. beef gets any real market share after the way they are treating the Japanese govt. and consumers.

Maybe you can get one of those Australian feedmills to grind up one of those Alabama mad cow calfs they buried on the farm so Australia has bse also. That would even up the playing field, wouldn't it?

Or you could just dig it up, grind it up, and ship it out as aged beef. Be sure to remove the SRMs. It was under 20 months age. It would fit the protocal, wouldn't it?

That is about how tactful the USDA has been with one of the most lucrative beef markets in the world.
 

agman

Well-known member
Econ101 said:
agman said:
rkaiser said:
As much sense as your OPINION agman.

If you say so!!!!

I will have to agree with rkaiser on this one, Agman.

If you remove the SRM on under 20 month cattle, does that mean they are bse free?

The Japanese want a little curteous bow and they get a little sabre rattling from the USDA. It will be any wonder at all that U.S. beef gets any real market share after the way they are treating the Japanese govt. and consumers.

Maybe you can get one of those Australian feedmills to grind up one of those Alabama mad cow calfs they buried on the farm so Australia has bse also. That would even up the playing field, wouldn't it?

Or you could just dig it up, grind it up, and ship it out as aged beef. Be sure to remove the SRMs. It was under 20 months age. It would fit the protocal, wouldn't it?

That is about how tactful the USDA has been with one of the most lucrative beef markets in the world.

I believe the point of the discussion is that at no time did Japan demand that we test all beef. Nor did they ever say they would accept tested beef. A beef trading company does not speak for the govenment. If so Japan would not have accepted the terms of the agreement they reached with the USDA.

The 20 month protocol was appropriate to get trade started as approximately 80% of our fed steer and heifer slaughter is under 20 months. However, I do agree there were enough errors made for all to share in the blame. That said, this process has been a politicized by Japan and their position has little if anything to do with accepted known science. Since many tariffs have been reduced through trade negotiations the new barriers are non-tariff, such as HMO grain, generally hiding behind the theme of food safety.
 

don

Well-known member
agman: That said, this process has been a politicized by Japan and their position has little if anything to do with accepted known science.

kind of like what the american govt. did with canadian beef. oh well, what goes around comes around.
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
If USDA allows a BSE testing protocol equal to Japan's protocol, would that not give the USA a strong WTO case against Japan?

If BSE testing under 20 month cattle is not "sound science", why is SRM removal for the same class cattle? Testing cattle at any time increases the data base...Creekstone's testing would provide a data base that there is no BSE in under 20 month cattle...IF "sound science" is correct!

Increase consumer confidence in the world's largest beef market and this becomes much less an issue. :wink:
 

Mike

Well-known member
Japan to rethink beef policy
14/04/2004 - Japan may be about to review its policy of testing all slaughtered cattle for mad cow disease, a practice Tokyo has asked Washington to adopt as a condition for resuming US beef imports. This is encouraging news for US meat processors, who only last month asked the USDA to give in to Japanese demands.

The daily Nihon Keizai Shimbun (Nikkei) said a government commission overseeing food safety would begin reviewing the current practice of testing all slaughtered cattle for BSE. A panel of experts is to meet later this month to discuss issues related to mad cow disease.

The government commission is reported to have invited a special adviser to the world animal health body OIE to speak on global issues related to BSE, and the Nikkei said it expected he would not be fully supportive of the blanket testing.

The US has been pressuring Japan to resume imports of American beef, halted since the discovery late last December of the United States' first case of mad cow disease. Talks have stalled over Japan's insistence that the United States follow its practice of a blanket test on all slaughtered cattle, or adopt an equivalent measure.

Washington however has refused to countenance such a move, saying that it would be too costly and not scientifically justified. However it is interesting to note that last month, a delegation of US beef processors demanded that the USDA given in to Japanese demands and begin testing all their slaughter cattle in order for them to be given a full bill of health.

However, chief veterinary officer Ron DeHaven described the industry's proposals as a means of reintroducing exports and not as a disease prevention or detection step. He said that testing all cattle was not justified because younger animals, which provide the bulk of the US beef supply, were "a population we would not expect to test positive".

However, he did indicate that the requests from meat packers were "actively under consideration". But with Japan reported rethinking its stance on compulsory testing, it is unlikely that the US will given in to Tokyo's demands.

The Japanese market as at the focus of the meat packers' attention. It was the number one market for US beef exports before an import ban was put in place following the discovery of BSE in the US. Tokyo's ban has cost the US beef industry an estimated $1 billion, while purchases from Australia have soared. A US trade delegation is due to visit Tokyo later this month to discuss the ban.

The Japanese market is highly lucrative and the country is currently running low on stocks. For example Yoshinoya, a nationwide chain that specialises in gyudon - noodles topped with strips of beef - said last month that its supplies of beef have run out, less than two months after the ban was imposed following the discovery of BSE in a cow in the state of Washington.

But the company's president, Shuji Abe, is quoted in the UK's Guardian newspaper as saying that he would not turn to Australia as an alternative supplier, as its beef "just doesn't meet the requirements for gyudon".

http://www.meatprocess.com/news/ng.asp?id=51364-japan-to-rethink
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Agman, "I believe the point of the discussion is that at no time did Japan demand that we test all beef. Nor did they ever say they would accept tested beef."

The article you posted doesn't support that comment.

Let me point out once again that getting beef in Japanese stores is not the end goal - getting beef in Japanese homes is. Any strategy that concentrates on placing beef in the stores and not the homes is misguided, and that is the strategy the USDA has taken and Agman supports. Everything we have seen from the consumers alludes to no trust in our product. Consumer confidence is our battle, simply putting our product in front of them does not address this. Testing is the single largest tool we could use to regain that confidence and spur some actual sales.

Let packers test, and let the consumer decide. Isn't that how business in a free enterprise system is supposed to work? Where do these liberal ideas of government controlling product availability come from?
 

Mike

Well-known member
Beef exports ride on a double standard - Monday, Jan. 19, 2004


SUMMARY: Let's hope Japan, largest foreign buyer of U.S. beef, proves more open-minded than America.

Key to prosperity for Montana's massive livestock industry is a speedy resumption of beef exports, which pretty much shut down following discovery, last month, of a Holstein in Washington infected with mad cow disease. Although 90 percent of the beef produced in America is consumed within our shores, the 10 percent that's exported is important. Exports not only generate $3 billion annually, but they also use up some of our nation's excess capacity to produce beef. Without exports, there'll be a glut of beef competing for a spot on your dinner table. Beef eaters might find some bargains at the butcher's, but beef producers would see profits plummet.
*
"It is difficult to overstate the danger that the loss of these markets poses to an industry worth $175 billion," Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., wrote, along with Republican colleague Larry Craig of Idaho, in a letter to Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman.

Some 43 countries banned U.S. beef immediately after the case of mad cow disease, also known as bovine spongiform encephalopathy or BSE. Of those countries, by far the most important is Japan. It's the world's largest importer of U.S. beef, buying about $1 billion a year worth of it.

The challenge of persuading the Japanese to lift their ban is twofold. American producers must convince Japan that U.S. meat-safety standards are adequate. And they also have to sell the Japanese on a double-standard. Indeed, while U.S. officials lobby Japan to lift its beef ban, the United States continues to ban imports of Japanese beef. Japan never exported very much beef to the United States - or anywhere. But now, the United States allows none.

Japan had a case of mad cow disease in 2001. Japanese consumers reacted harshly. Beef consumption there dropped dramatically and hasn't recovered. To calm public fears, ensure meat safety and save their domestic beef industry, Japan instituted the world's strictest testing requirements. Every cow slaughtered for human consumption in Japan is tested for BSE, and the results are checked before the meat is processed. By contrast, just 20,526 of nearly 36 million cattle slaughtered in the United States last year were tested for the disease. And, as we learned last month, the results of U.S. testing for BSE isn't available for weeks, long after the meat goes to market.

With the United States saying - by maintaining the ban on Japanese beef - that Japan's safeguards remain insufficient, American beef producers may find Japan skeptical of U.S. safeguards. Indeed, the newspaper Asahi Shimbun, in its English version, noted the other day, "It is Š difficult for the United States, whose tests are not nearly as comprehensive, to push Japan to resume imports of U.S. beef."

Difficult? Perhaps impossible. "Japan's demands on testing are very reasonable," Asahi Shimbun declared in an editorial last week. "Japan tests every cow for BSE before the animal is slaughtered and insists it will not lift the ban on American beef unless the United States takes the same step for all cattle processed for export to Japan."

"If it's safe enough for you and me," the head of the Montana Stockgrowers Association told one of our reporters in Helena earlier this month, "it should be safe enough for our export partners." Perhaps so. But let's not be surprised if reopening export markets proves more difficult than telling foreign consumers, "It's safe enough for us."
 

Mike

Well-known member
Blossoms over beef: The ban remains the same
By Richard Hanson April 2004

TOKYO - Spring cherry blossoms have a short shelf-life.

That was particularly clear last week as the United States and Japan celebrated the 150th anniversary of the signing of a historic Treaty of Amity and Commerce. As the springtime pink and white petals fell in Washington, so did a stillborn secret diplomatic effort by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) to break an impasse over Japan's ban on imports of US beef, imposed last December after a case of mad-cow disease (bovine spongiform encephalopathy or BSE) was discovered in the US.

In a secret letter - which turned out to be not all that secret - to Japanese Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Yoshiyuki Kamei, US Secretary of Agriculture Ann Veneman decided to take a more conciliatory approach to ending the BSE-related ban on beef. "Dear Minister Kamei," Veneman wrote, "Greetings from Washington, where the cherry blossoms are resplendent this week - thanks to a gift from your government nearly one hundred years ago."

It was a nice try, but on Friday Kamei turned down - "rejected" being too undiplomatic a term - the proposal made to him in the March 29 letter from Veneman. The proposal: "End the impasse over BSE trade restrictions and return to more normal trading patterns," she wrote.

As part of this move, the US proposed to jointly ask the Paris-based World Organization for Animal Health (OIE), an international body, to serve as a venue to break the deadlock over Tokyo's ban. The US also set out a time frame that would bring about a first step by April 9, with further steps to set up a panel of experts by April 14 and to convene a meeting for questions before April 26 in an agreeable location; the panel would provide responses to the agreed-upon questions by April 30.

Failure fated from the start
A combination of things assured failure from the start, in what can be described both as a sad lack of any sort of coalition in Japan and an appreciation for how annoyed Japanese government officials have been with the handling of the BSE problem by US officials.

At the end of January, when the second meeting between the two sides was held in Tokyo, the United States and Japan parted with the US side saying it would present proposals at the next meeting to address Japan's concerns, which included demands that the US test cattle for BSE at the same or equivalent levels as they are tested in Japan, where all beef cattle for slaughter are put to the test. More recently, Japan imposed strict controls on what are called specified risk materials (SRMs), such as meat cuts near the spinal cord, where mad-cow disease often lurks.

The US government has rejected such extreme measures for its domestic market, on the grounds that it has not proved to be good science in coping with the spread of the disease. The point, however, is that testing of this nature is government policy in Japan, where the test-all regime helped to restore consumer confidence in beef after a series of mad-cow-disease outbreaks.

Two months passed after the January meeting before the letter arrived on March 29. During that time the USDA concentrated on matters such as negotiating a partial lifting of Mexico's ban on US beef. Mexico is the second-largest importer of the product, while Japan is by far the largest and most lucrative market for US beef.

But while the lifting of Mexico's ban was meant to reassure Japan of the quality of US beef, Japan's confidence in the USDA's arguments was weakened by other developments, in particular a criminal investigation into the handling of the first US case of BSE, which was discovered in a small town in Washington state.

A secret letter that wasn't all that secret
Since the March 29 letdown, things have begun to go wrong, and quickly.

First, it was apparent that the letter to Kamei was not all that secret, which is a big mistake in dealing with the Japanese government bureaucracy. In addition to Japan's Ministry of Agriculture, the USDA saw to it that copies of the letter were delivered to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MAFF), the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare, and the Food Safety Council (in the Cabinet Office).

Naturally, these four organizations would be part of any response regarding the beef-imports ban, having participated in the January meeting with the USDA in Tokyo. What that meant was that the Veneman letter could not be kept a secret for long. By last Thursday, at a regular MAFF press conference, a reporter asked about the letter.

The vice minister of agriculture, Mamoru Ishihara, replied to the questions saying that the United States had proposed approaching the OIE. He also said he regretted that the US had not followed up directly on the talks with Japan, which were left hanging as a result, and he indicated that the government was reviewing the request but was intending to reject the proposal.

It is unclear how the press received word of the letter so quickly, but according to some officials, the journalists who asked the questions and who knew about the letter may have been coached by officials who opposed the OIE proposal, the inclusion of which did in fact kill the idea and lead to Japan's rejection.

Meanwhile back in Washington, Secretary Veneman showed anger in responding to the press reports. "We are disappointed that the Japanese response to our proposal was conveyed through the press instead of engaging in constructive dialogue about the merits of the proposal," she said.

But for now, what's done is done. Another proposal has fallen flat and it seems the impasse will remain. And between the US and Japan, the cherry blossoms given to Washington nearly a century ago are the only thing that will be blooming any time soon.

(Copyright 2004 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact [email protected] for information on our sales and syndication policies.)
 

PORKER

Well-known member
Sounds like the Guy on the OLD Ranchers.net;;;;;No TEST no Sale :"Japan's demands on testing are very reasonable," Asahi Shimbun declared in an editorial last week. "Japan tests every cow for BSE before the animal is slaughtered and insists it will not lift the ban on American beef unless the United States takes the same step for all cattle processed for export to Japan."
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
PORKER said:
Sounds like the Guy on the OLD Ranchers.net;;;;;No TEST no Sale :"Japan's demands on testing are very reasonable," Asahi Shimbun declared in an editorial last week. "Japan tests every cow for BSE before the animal is slaughtered and insists it will not lift the ban on American beef unless the United States takes the same step for all cattle processed for export to Japan."

"At the end of January, when the second meeting between the two sides was held in Tokyo, the United States and Japan parted with the US side saying it would present proposals at the next meeting to address Japan's concerns, which included demands that the US test cattle for BSE at the same or equivalent levels as they are tested in Japan, where all beef cattle for slaughter are put to the test."

But Agman said Japan never demanded testing :shock: . Somebody doesn't have the facts they claim they do. :cry: Who are we to believe? :roll:
 

Mike

Well-known member
JAPAN: April 26, 2004


TOKYO - Japanese Agriculture Minister Yoshiyuki Kamei said last week that Japan was sticking to its demand that the United States check all slaughtered cattle for mad cow disease as a prelude to resuming imports of U.S. beef.


Senior Japanese and U.S. officials will meet in Tokyo on the weekend to discuss how to normalize beef trade between the two countries, suspended by Japan after the discovery of a single case of mad cow disease in Washington state in December.

"It is important not to harm the confidence of consumers," Kamei told reporters after a Cabinet meeting.

"With regards to imported U.S. beef, the measures equivalent to those conducted in domestic beef need to be applied."

Japan, which has had several cases of the brain-wasting disease - formally known as bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) - tests all cattle destined for market.

So far, Washington has refused Tokyo's demand that all cattle be tested, saying there is no scientific justification for such a costly measure.

Senior Japanese officials from the foreign ministry, agriculture ministry and health ministry will meet with a U.S. delegation led by Agriculture Undersecretary J.B. Penn.

Kamei said the specific agenda for the meeting had not been decided, but both the United States and Japan were expected to exchange ideas on how to resolve the situation.

Japan is normally the top buyer of U.S. beef and the four-month ban has halted purchases that last year amounted to nearly $1.4 billion.

The USDA reiterated this week that it would stand by its decision to prohibit Kansas-based meat packer Creekstone Farms Premium Beef from independently testing for mad cow disease so it could resume sales to Japan.


REUTERS NEWS SERVICE
 

Mike

Well-known member
Japanese reaction to BSE proposal irks US officials

Robert Roos * News Editor

Apr 2, 2004 (CIDRAP News) – US officials this week proposed that the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) be called on to help resolve the US trade dispute with Japan over bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). But Japan, to the chagrin of US officials, reportedly plans to reject the proposal.

Japan wants all US cattle to be tested for BSE before it will lift its current ban on imports of American beef. The ban was imposed after the first American BSE case was discovered in December.

In a Mar 29 letter to Japanese authorities, US Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman proposed a joint American-Japanese technical consultation with the OIE to address scientific issues related to the import ban. But ensuing news reports from Japan said Yoshiyuki Kamei, Japan's agriculture minister, planned to reject the idea.

In response, Veneman and US Trade Representative Robert B. Zoellick expressed dismay in a statement issued yesterday. "We are disappointed that the Japanese response to our proposal was conveyed through the press instead of engaging in constructive dialogue about the merits of the proposal," they wrote. The statement again urged Japan to agree to a consultation with the OIE.

In the Mar 29 letter, Veneman proposed that the United States and Japan agree on a list of defined questions to pose to a panel of OIE experts. She recommended that the panel be asked to determine the appropriate laboratory definition of a BSE case, with reference to the relative importance of screening and confirmatory tests. She also suggested that the panel be asked to define "specified risk materials"—cattle tissues most likely to carry BSE infectivity—in light of the risk levels in the United States and Japan.

"Our agreement on these items should improve public confidence in our food safety systems and provide a basis for the resumption of trade," Veneman wrote.

In their statement reacting to reports that Japan would reject the US proposal, Veneman and Zoellick said Japanese authorities "have continued to insist" on testing of all cattle and removal of SRMs as conditions for lifting the beef import ban.

"International experts, as noted in the recent report of the international scientific panel that reviewed the U.S. system, agree there is no scientific basis for 100% testing," the statement continued. "The most appropriate path at this point is for the scientific experts at the OIE to consult and agree upon measures that are based on science."

The OIE would be willing to follow an "aggressive timetable" in addressing the issue, Veneman and Zoellick wrote. They added, "We have submitted our system and measures to scrutiny by international experts and see no reason why Japan should be reluctant to do likewise."

The US Department of Agriculture announced plans Mar 15 to expand BSE testing from about 20,000 cattle last year to 200,000 or more this year. The department promised to test as many as possible of the estimated 446,000 cattle considered to be at increased risk for BSE, though this would still be a small fraction of all the cattle slaughtered each year.

Japan began testing all its cattle for the disease after the first Japanese case was discovered in 2001. Japan has had 11 BSE cases so far, according to the OIE.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Japan says test cattle for mad cow disease

Apr 21, 2004 12:00 PM
By Doreen Muzzi Farm Press Editorial Staff

United States officials say they are disappointed in Japan's continued insistence that all U.S. cattle be tested for bovine spongiform encephalopathy, more commonly known as BSE or mad cow disease.

In an April 1 statement, Agriculture Secretary Ann M. Veneman and U. S. Trade Representative Robert B. Zoellick said, “Japanese Ministry of Agriculture authorities have continued to insist that testing of all animals and removal of specific risk materials are conditions for entry of U.S. beef products into the Japanese market. International experts, as noted in the recent report of the international scientific panel that reviewed the U.S. system, agree there is no scientific basis for 100 percent testing.”

After the first North American case of BSE was discovered in Canada in May of 2003, Japan began asking U.S. packers to verify that U.S. beef products were not made from Canadian cattle. Japan later shut its doors to U.S. beef entirely in reaction to the discovery of a cow in Washington state that tested positive for mad cow disease.

Japanese trade officials have also told U.S. cattlemen that Japan isn't likely to re-open its borders to U.S. beef until they are assured that U.S. beef products are from U.S. cattle only because the North American countries are too intertwined.

Last month, administration officials asked Japan to consider bringing the two countries together in a joint technical consultation with the World Organization for Animal Health on the issue of bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or BSE.

“Much has been learned in recent experiences with BSE and scientific consultations are warranted to enable trade in beef and beef products to resume. We have shared with all of our trading partners the results of our extensive investigation into BSE, including our aggressive response to an international panel of experts' recommendations,” Veneman and Zoellick said.

Both U.S. officials agree that the most appropriate next step is for the scientific experts at the World Organization for Animal Health to consult and agree upon measures that are based on science. “We have assurances that they would commit to an aggressive timetable to review a commonly accepted definition of BSE and related testing methodologies as well as a common definition of specified risk materials,” Veneman and Zoellick said. “We have submitted our system and measures to scrutiny by international experts and see no reason why Japan should be reluctant to do likewise.”

In addition, Veneman and Zoellick say they are “disappointed” that the Japanese response to the United State's proposal was conveyed through the press instead of Japan engaging in constructive dialogue about the merits of the proposal. “We urge the government of Japan to agree to an OIE (World Organization for Animal Health) consultation and to assure that its measures are consistent with its international commitments as a member of the World Trade Organization,” they say.

e-mail: [email protected]
 

Mike

Well-known member
Agman:I believe the point of the discussion is that at no time did Japan demand that we test all beef.


Response:
In an April 1 statement, Agriculture Secretary Ann M. Veneman and U. S. Trade Representative Robert B. Zoellick said, “Japanese Ministry of Agriculture authorities have continued to insist that testing of all animals and removal of specific risk materials are conditions for entry of U.S. beef products into the Japanese market. International experts, as noted in the recent report of the international scientific panel that reviewed the U.S. system, agree there is no scientific basis for 100 percent testing.”

What say you agman?
 
Top