# ![](media/image1.emf){width="6.518055555555556in" height="1.45625in"}

# Release No. 0246.03

# 

# 

# 

# **United States Department of Agriculture**

> **Media Briefing by Secretary Ann M. Veneman**
>
> Thursday, July 10, 2003
>
> **SECRETARY VENEMAN:**
>
> "This is a very good turnout for this late in the day. We want to
> welcome you all here. This is J.B. Penn, our under secretary for farm
> and foreign ag services, for those of you who are not here all the
> time.
>
> "We wanted to have a moment to talk about this meeting today because
> we knew that there was a great deal of interest from the media in what
> is going on with Japan. So we thought that it would be a good
> opportunity to give you a brief.
>
> "This was a first meeting between myself and my counterpart. This is
> the third minister of agriculture from Japan since I have been in this
> position. And so it\'s not that we are just meeting for the first time
> this late in the administration, but rather that he just started his
> position in April. We met with his predecessor in January and then, of
> course, we were in Japan with the predecessor before that, last July.
>
> "So this was a good opportunity to get acquainted, to discuss some of
> the issues that we have on the table. He will be meeting here with
> Ambassador Zoellick tomorrow, and in Canada on Saturday with Minister
> Vanclief.
>
> "We talked first for a considerable amount of time about the Doha
> Development Agenda and the fact that the time is growing near towards
> Cancun, and it\'s the time that we need to make progress in these
> negotiations. We reviewed our respective positions on the Round, and I
> specifically emphasized to the minister that we needed to make
> significant progress in all of the areas on the table in the Agenda,
> including domestic supports. Commercially significant market access is
> something that we care very much about, particularly when it comes to
> Japan, where they have, as you know, still very high tariff levels on
> a number of their products, and of course export subsidies, which we
> didn\'t spend a lot of time discussing but was certainly mentioned as
> a priority.
>
> "Again, we talked about the need to begin to come together as
> negotiating parties as we move closer to Cancun. And I think it\'s
> certainly\--while we reached no agreement on issues, we both agreed on
> the importance of these negotiations and the importance of the Cancun
> meeting.
>
> -more-
>
> "We then discussed the beef safeguard issue, which is an issue that\'s
> very important to our cattle producers. We urged them not to impose
> the safeguard, and discussed the fact that the only reason this beef
> safeguard is even being triggered is because it\'s based upon last
> year\'s export numbers. And those went way down because of the BSE
> situation that they had in Japan last year, reducing the overall
> levels of import, therefore creating this year a move by which the
> safeguard was more likely to be triggered at a lower level. So as
> exports have increased and consumer confidence has come back, this has
> created the situation that we have.
>
> "And finally, we talked about the BSE situation with Canada and I
> reviewed for them all that we\'ve done in the review process, in the
> investigation and cooperating with Canada in our country.
>
> "So it was a very full discussion, but obviously not enough time to
> discuss anything in much detail. As I said, it was primarily a
> get-acquainted meeting, a first meeting that we\'ve had between us,
> and we agreed at the end that we look forward to working closely
> together on these and a number of other issues as we go forward.

## "So with that\--

> **MODERATOR:** We\'ll go to questions now. Again, if you\'ll wait for
> the microphone, and then state your name and your news organization,
> we would appreciate that. Bill?
>
> **QUESTION:** Bill Tomson, OsterDowJones. The minister, Mr. Kamei,
> said just a few minutes ago outside that Japan was still concerned
> about the safety of U.S. beef because of Canadian cattle here in the
> United States, but they did just recently postpone a deadline for us
> to change how we export. Have you offered them any new assurances, any
> new safety provisions? Or will you soon?
>
> **SECRETARY VENEMAN:** "Well, in this meeting we did not get into that
> kind of specific. I used this meeting primarily to review progress to
> date, what we have been doing, what Canada has been doing, the risk
> analysis, how we\'ve been working with OIE. But obviously we will
> continue. We\'ve had many discussions with the Japanese at technical
> levels. We\'re going to continue discussions at all levels and address
> the concerns that they\'ve raised. We do very much appreciate the fact
> that this market has remained open to U.S. beef. It\'s a very
> important market to us. It\'s our largest export market. We have a
> safe beef supply in this country. And I think that we can certainly
> reassure the consumers in Japan that there is no risk from the export
> of products going into Japan. I don\'t have specifics for you at this
> point."
>
> **QUESTION:** Henry Champ of the Canadian Television Network. You said
> that you can assure the Japanese of the safety of the American beef
> product with a closed border. But if the border was open between
> Canada and the United States, would you be able to make that same
> assurance to the Japanese that you are satisfied that the Canadian
> beef here is a safe herd and the Japanese have nothing to fear?
>
> **SECRETARY VENEMAN**: "I have every confidence that the investigation
> that the Canadians have done has been thorough. It has been reviewed
> by an international scientific body. And there is no reason to believe
> that there is any food safety risk with Canadian beef. I think that
> the consumers in both of our countries have shown that they have
> confidence in our food safety systems.
>
> -more-
>
> Demand for beef both in the U.S. and in Canada since this incident has
> remained strong, it\'s remained steady. There has been no dropoff in
> demand, unlike what happened in Japan when they had the finding and a
> loss of confidence in the food safety systems, consumers throughout
> North America have shown strong confidence in the safety of our food
> and, I think, with very good reason"
>
> **QUESTION:** Paul Singer with the Chicago Tribune. Do you at this
> point foresee that there will be changes in our systems for either
> labeling beef or for the surveillance for BSE, in order to assure
> Japan or our other trading partners?
>
> **SECRETARY VENEMAN:** "We are looking at a whole range of options
> right now, and I\'m simply not at liberty to discuss what may or may
> not happen. It\'s all theoretical at this point. I can tell you that
> we have had all of the experts in BSE working on these issues. We\'ve
> been working with the OIE, we\'ve been working with our Canadian
> counterparts, our Japanese counterparts, looking at all of the
> possible actions that we may or may not take and the kinds of risks.
> As you know, this government engaged in a very comprehensive risk
> assessment with regard to BSE in a proactive way that we released in
> November of 2001. We would call it the Harvard risk assessment. That
> continues to be our guide in terms of assessing the risk from this
> incident and how we should move forward from here."
>
> **QUESTION:** Richard Cowan from Reuters. Was there anything that the
> Japanese minister said as far as requests, that you hadn\'t heard
> before, that he was making for the U.S. government on its beef
> products, and did you hope to make more progress in the meeting, and
> are you disappointed that didn't happen?
>
> **SECRETARY VENEMAN**: "I would say no, I don\'t believe there were
> any new requests. We did not negotiate the issue of BSE today. As I
> said, I primarily used the opportunity to review all of the
> involvement, all of the actions that we\'ve taken---the cooperation
> with Canada, the risk assessment and science-based reviews that were
> going on, the investigation, and so forth. But as far as actually
> discussing next steps or what might be done, that was not done in this
> meeting. I think that continues to be discussed at a more technical
> level below the ministerial level. But we certainly made it clear that
> we believe this situation has been very appropriately handled
> throughout North America."
>
> **QUESTION:** I am **\[inaudible**\] with Kyoto News. Japanese
> Minister Kamei said that he told you that Japan would launch the
> safeguard based on the law. Do you consider any countermeasures
> including retaliatory option or bringing the case to WTO?
>
> **SECRETARY VENEMAN**: "Well, I think if indeed the safeguard is
> implemented, we will look at all of our options. And as I said, we
> strongly urged that the safeguard not be instituted, again primarily
> because this is an issue that came from a unique situation of a drop
> in consumer demand which was temporary due to the BSE find."
>
> **QUESTION**: My name is Bill \[inaudible\] with the Global Mail in
> Canada. I believe I\'m correctly quoting you, that you said a few
> minutes ago that there is no reason to believe that there\'s any food
> safety risk with Canadian beef. If that is the case, then is the
> closure of the border dependent on something else?
>
> -more-
>
> **SECRETARY VENEMAN:** "I think it\'s important to recognize that we
> have not opened up to any other country that has had BSE to this
> point. And we\'ve been very thorough in our review. We recognize how
> integrated this market has been, but there are comprehensive reviews
> that are ongoing, given the uniqueness of this situation and given the
> fact that it was an isolated case, and trying to take all of these
> things into account and then overlay what is the proper level of risk.
> So all of that is being taken into account and I really can\'t tell
> you any more than that at this point in terms of what the next steps
> will be."
>
> **MODERATOR:** Do you have a follow-up?
>
> **QUESTION:** If I could. Thank you. If I could just follow up
> briefly. Will those remaining steps\-- maybe I\'ll put it this way:
> It\'s become something of a commonplace in this administration to
> refer to time frames as \"weeks, not months\" or sometimes \"months,
> not years.\" Can you even in that kind of order of magnitude give me
> some idea of how long that process might take?
>
> **SECRETARY VENEMAN**: "I really can\'t at this point. I just
> am\--I\'m not in a position at this point to give you any time frames.
> It is\--again, we are very actively engaged in this issue. I speak to
> Mr. Vanclief, my counterpart in Canada, very frequently. We\'ve
> discussed all aspects of this. And I think it\'s important to
> recognize that there are a lot of complicating factors in this issue
> that make it difficult. And so we continue to review all aspects."
>
> **QUESTION: \[Inaudible\],** Washington Trade Daily. You said that you
> and the minister agree that Cancun is an important meeting for the
> Doha Round. Does Japan agree that agricultural reform is important?
>
> **SECRETARY VENEMAN:** "Well, actually, it\'s interesting, because the
> minister today talked a lot about internal reforms that they\'ve been
> making within their own agriculture policy. And in fact, we haven\'t
> yet had a chance to verify this, but he indicated to us that they now
> are\--their AMS is now 20 percent of their permitted level of support
> under the Uruguay Round Agreement. Again, I\'m not stating that as
> fact; I\'m only stating it as something that he told us today. Due to
> their reforms, which he indicated were more market-oriented-based,
> less price-support-based than they have been in the past, that he did
> indicate to us in trying to describe some of the agriculture policy
> reforms that they\'ve been undergoing in their country over the past
> months."
>
> **QUESTION:** Secretary, you say that you can't provide a timeframe
> today, but is there not a point at which, because the U.S. and
> Canadian industries are so integrated that it\'s causing a lot of
> problems for the U.S. industry in terms of not having a place to go
> and buy their calves and other issues . When does that crunch come for
> the U.S. industry?
>
> **SECRETARY VENEMAN:** "Well, as you indicate, the industries are very
> integrated. We have a very integrated market. And obviously there are
> economic consequences in both countries. And we\'ve certainly heard
> from many who are being impacted.
>
> -more-
>
> At the same time, these are issues that we have to go through in a
> methodical way to determine, again, what is the appropriate action
> given, you know, the standards that we have, the food safety
> regulations, the precedent we\'ve had for BSE. And so all of this has
> to be taken into account."
>
> **MODERATOR:** We have time for one more question. Sally?
>
> **QUESTION:** Sally Schuff, Feedstuffs. Madam Secretary, as a point of
> clarification, can you tell us did Minister Kamei announce today that
> he planned to impose the beef safeguards?
>
> **SECRETARY VENEMAN:** "Well, he indicated that that was the direction
> they were moving in, and we strongly urged that they not impose it.
> But he indicated that it appeared that it would be triggered based
> upon their law."
>
> \#