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

Made in Canada

fedup2 said:
Every item of clothing that I have on is labeled with the country of origin.
<snip>
Give your friends and neighbors a chance to support your product Rod. Label it so they know what the hell they are buying, just like everything else in that store!
Click to expand...

I hate the disagree (wait, no I don't :)) but your shirt is not labelled with the country of origin, as it applies in the COOL case. With the COOL law as it stands, your shirt, if it was made out of cotton grown in the USA but was processed and made in Taiwan, then its a Product of the USA. Is it? What if that shirt falls apart after 2 washings? Was it the inferior US cotton that did it? Or the shoddy Taiwanese workmanship in processing and sewing the end product?

Current "Product of" laws are designed to reflect that processing of a raw product is where 99% of issues arise. All COOL is going to do is mask that with layers of smoke and mirrors.

Rod
 
I have some time to waste until the memorial service starts today and you had me curious. Now its my turn to disagree. I just looked at 18 shirts & could not find one that was not labeled with the country in which it was made!
It did not state where the cotton was grown or where the thread was made, or the dye & the rest of the things people use to over complicate things. It stated made in: and listed the country. Pretty simple!
------------------------

A little addition. If you type Made in Canada clothing in your search engine, you will find a list of clothing companies & other manufactures you might wish to support.
Here is a little something that might and should upset you.
http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/420872
Yes, it happens way to many times here also! Seems like the definition of pride changes when it comes to sweat shops and the cheapest bidder!
 
Fedup now you seem to get it. By excample of your shirts. Where is the beef made? The USA unless it is imported processed. Do you see the crux of the problem with the program. I have no problem putting a canada label on processed beef going from canada to the US as long as it is done in canada.. Where i do have a problem is that in the US your processors and the USDA are allowed to label something as canadian when canadians are not involved in the process. But that is life. Someone other than a canadian using the good name of canadian beef when it could contain negligent levels of canadian beef. The MCOOL program does not ditinguish between 2 commodities live cattle and BEEF. The proposed canadian labeling changes accounts for this as well, with product of canada and made in canada. What if a montana steer is bought by a alberta feedlot fed up here and slaughtered up here? What do you think the label should be?
My hope is that the US consumer discovers that the canadian label equals a premium product and start paying for it as such.
In addition the canadian program is not cherry picking, when the new rules are implemented they apply to all ag. produce not certain commodities or specific segments of the food chain ie) only retail produce. Take a look at the discussion paper for the proposed rule changes and explain to me how it isn't more logical and cost efficient than COOL.
 
A little addition. If you type Made in Canada clothing in your search engine, you will find a list of clothing companies & other manufactures you might wish to support.
Here is a little something that might and should upset you.
http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/420872
Yes, it happens way to many times here also! Seems like the definition of pride changes when it comes to sweat shops and the cheapest bidder!
Click to expand...

If that picture is an example of the Canadian Olympic uniform- they definitely will stand out....As the UGLIEST dressed....YUCK!!!!
 
fedup2 said:
I have some time to waste until the memorial service starts today and you had me curious. Now its my turn to disagree. I just looked at 18 shirts & could not find one that was not labeled with the country in which it was made!
Click to expand...

Thats what I'm getting at though. With TODAY'S origin laws, the place where that shirt was made shows up on the label, irregardless of where the raw material comes from. A made in Taiwan shirt is labelled Made in Taiwan, no matter where the cotton came from.

With the COOL bill that you guys are attempting to pass, and the COOL stuff that Canada is looking at, the origin of the raw material needs to be put on the label. My arguement is that the origin of the raw materials really doesn't matter, but rather where those materials are processed that really counts. Under the new legislation, that Made In Taiwan shirt will say Product of the US if it has US cotton in it. Doesn't seem quite right does it? So if that shirt fails because of shoddy workmanship, what does the consumer blame? The US cotton? The Taiwanese workmanship? The Chinese buttons? The Indian thread?

I got no problems with Made In Canada being on a label, I actually love to see it, but its genuinely got to be Canadian. A Canadian calf thats fed out, finished and processed in the US (or Taiwan, or China) is NOT a Product Of Canada.

Rod
 
Rod
I got no problems with Made In Canada being on a label, I actually love to see it, but its genuinely got to be Canadian. A Canadian calf thats fed out, finished and processed in the US (or Taiwan, or China) is NOT a Product Of Canada.
Click to expand...

And its my understanding under the just passed M-COOL- it won't be labeled Product of Canada--If it was born in and came from Canada- but ended up slaughtered in the US-- it will be labeled Product of the USA and Canada...

This law fills in those loopholes that you are complaining about....

Just like I see some textile products now labeled- Made in Honduras with cotton/fabric from the USA.....
 
DiamondSCattleCo said:
fedup2 said:
I have some time to waste until the memorial service starts today and you had me curious. Now its my turn to disagree. I just looked at 18 shirts & could not find one that was not labeled with the country in which it was made!
Click to expand...

Thats what I'm getting at though. With TODAY'S origin laws, the place where that shirt was made shows up on the label, irregardless of where the raw material comes from. A made in Taiwan shirt is labelled Made in Taiwan, no matter where the cotton came from.

With the COOL bill that you guys are attempting to pass, and the COOL stuff that Canada is looking at, the origin of the raw material needs to be put on the label. My arguement is that the origin of the raw materials really doesn't matter, but rather where those materials are processed that really counts. Under the new legislation, that Made In Taiwan shirt will say Product of the US if it has US cotton in it. Doesn't seem quite right does it? So if that shirt fails because of shoddy workmanship, what does the consumer blame? The US cotton? The Taiwanese workmanship? The Chinese buttons? The Indian thread?

I got no problems with Made In Canada being on a label, I actually love to see it, but its genuinely got to be Canadian. A Canadian calf thats fed out, finished and processed in the US (or Taiwan, or China) is NOT a Product Of Canada.

Rod
Click to expand...

Calling the country where the product is processed the origin of that product has heck of a lot of problems. I still have to laugh at the idea of "Canadian Orange Juice".
 
Still reading the proposed comments, (43 pgs) seems they are trying to cover these situations! Going to be a lot of exclusions! Processed foods will not be labeled nor products that have been substantially transformed.
These are just proposed comments, & I don't know if they are the latest up to date or not.
----------------------------------------------------------

To address the concerns raised by the
commenters, AMS has chosen to define
a ''processed food item'' utilizing a 2-
step approach. First, a retail item
derived from a covered commodity that
has undergone a physical or chemical
change, causing the character to be
different from that of the covered
commodity is deemed to be a processed
food item. Examples include oranges
that have been squeezed and made into
orange juice, a fresh leg of pork that has
been cured and made into a ham,
peanuts that have been ground and
made into peanut butter, or flesh of a
fish that has been restructured and
made into a fish stick. These retail items
have undergone a physical or chemical
change such that they no longer retain
the characteristics of the covered
commodity and thus consumers would
not use the items in the same manner as
they would the covered commodities.
-------------------------------------------------
The following might answer some of your questions Rod & Question

As such, products that have
been substantially transformed by a U.S.
processor generally are not required to
bear a country of origin declaration.
Similarly, under current FSIS policies
and directives, imported meat and meat
products that are further processed in
the United States are not required to
bear country of origin declarations on
the newly produced products or
subsequent products made from them as
these products are now considered to be
domestic.

------------------------------------
I am just picking out parts of the comments that we have discussed. You will have to read the whole thing yourself.

However, AMS
recognizes that to label products of an
animal that was only born in country X,
but raised and slaughtered in the United
States solely as ''Product of country X''
does not reference the significant
production steps that occurred in the
United States. Therefore, under this
proposed rule, products that were
produced in both a foreign country and
the United States would be labeled at
retail as being imported from the foreign
country and also for the production
steps that occurred in the United States.
For example, pork products derived
from a pig that was born in country X,
raised and slaughtered in the United
States would be labeled as ''Imported
from country X, Raised and Slaughtered
in the United States.'' Alternatively,
products may also be labeled to
specifically identify the production
step(s) that occurred in the country
other than the United States if the
animal's identity was maintained along
with records to substantiate the origin
claims. For example, products derived
from a pig that was born and raised in
country X and slaughtered in the United
States could either be labeled as
''Imported from country X, Slaughtered
in the United States'' or ''Born and
Raised in country X, Slaughtered in the
United States.'' AMS invites further
comment on the use of alternative terms
for the term ''slaughtered.''
AMS also recognizes that in some
cases, an animal will undergo
production steps in two or more foreign
countries prior to entering the United
States for additional processing or a
final process such as slaughter. In these
cases, the meat products derived from
an animal that was born in country X,
raised in country Y, and slaughtered in
the United States would be labeled at
retail as being imported from country Y
and for any production steps occurring
in the United States. For example, if a
calf was born in country X and raised
in country Y before being imported for
slaughter in the United States, the
resulting meat products derived from
this animal would be labeled as
''Imported from country Y, Slaughtered
in the United States.''
 
Looks like Canada is going to get serious with this COOL- and truth in labeling for their consumers.....


Public Consultations Opened on Food Labelling in Canada



James Bezan - Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food

Farmscape for May 26, 2008 (Episode 2855)

Canada



The House of Commons Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food expects its report on the labelling of food products to form the basis of discussions aimed at revamping the definition, "Product of Canada."



Earlier this month the House of Commons Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food completed public hearings which examined concerns related to the definition, "Product of Canada" in food labelling and it's scheduled to present its recommendations next week.



Meanwhile the Prime Minister has opened public consultations to gather input on planned changes to the definitions of "Product of Canada" and "Made in Canada."



Standing Committee chair James Bezan suggests, by focusing strictly on those two definitions, changes could be made within a matter of weeks after final decisions are made.



I think that we'll probably see things happen here over the next few months.



There's no doubt that we have to give industry time to adapt to the new guidelines and to changes their labels.



Definitely most of the fresh produce and red meats and even poultry products are already in compliance with any changes that are going to come into place because they are 100 percent Canadian.



The bigger concern is going to be what happens with processed food products and essentially how you deal with these imported concentrates of apple or orange juice coming from China or South America or India and then are reconstituted here and then are called "Product of Canada."



That is where it's going to take a little bit of time to allow industry to adapt their new labels and get them into place, as well as some of the other food processors that are making frozen dinners or pizzas and things along that nature.



Bezan notes Canadians can participate in the public consultations by logging onto the web site, healthycanadians.ca, which will be accessible until June 11.



For Farmscape.Ca, I'm Bruce Cochrane.

*Farmscape is a presentation of Sask Pork and Manitoba Pork Council

Wonderworks Canada

farmscape.com
Click to expand...
 
:roll: :roll: :roll: Product of Canada not MCOOL. They ar4 not the same . But by all means go off on a rant because as long as you belive it its true, that is enough to substanciate it as fact in you mind :roll:
 
The solution is simple...keep your calves in Canada, raise and process them there...then sell the meat as a "Product of Canada". Most profitable if the rancher or rancher co-op owns the meat when sold.

Seems some guy named Kaiser has already figured this out!!!!!

:roll: :roll: :wink: :lol: :lol: 8)
 

Latest posts

Back
Top