VZCZCXRO2423
RR RUEHAG RUEHAST RUEHDA RUEHDF RUEHFL RUEHIK RUEHKW RUEHLA RUEHLN
RUEHLZ RUEHPOD RUEHROV RUEHSR RUEHVK RUEHYG
DE RUEHFR #1868/01 2831718
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 091718Z OCT 08
FM AMEMBASSY PARIS
TO RUEHRC/DEPT OF AGRICULTURE WASHDC
RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 4469
RHEHAAA/WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON DC
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHDC
INFO RUEHZL/EUROPEAN POLITICAL COLLECTIVE
RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 4470
RUEHRC/USDA FAS WASHDC
RUEHXQ/ALL EUROPEAN UNION POST
RUEHMRE/AMCONSUL MARSEILLE 2032
RUEHSR/AMCONSUL STRASBOURG 0612
RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA 2956
RUEHBS/AMEMBASSY BRUSSELS 6808

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 PARIS 001868 
 
SIPDIS 
 
BRUSSELS PASS USEU FOR AGMINCOUNSELOR 
STATE PASS USTR FOR MURPHY; 
USDA/OS/SCHAFER/CONNER; 
USDA/FAS FOR OA/YOST/JACKSON/ROSADO; 
OCRA/SALMON/ALEXANDER/SEIDBAND; 
ONA/RIEMENSCHNEIDER/YOUNG/DENNIS; 
OFSO/LEE/YOUNG; 
EU POSTS PASS TO AGRICULTURE AND ECON 
GENEVA FOR USTR, ALSO AGRICULTURE 
 
TAGS: ETRD EAGR SENV SOCI EU
SUBJECT:  France's Societal Preferences Trade Initiative - 
Discussion with "Friendlies" 
 
REFS: (A) Paris 1085; (B) Paris 1240 
 
PARIS 00001868  001.2 OF 002 
 
 
¶1.  (SBU) Summary:  French initiatives to incorporate societal 
preferences into European trade policy were the theme of a lunch we 
hosted with agriculture, econ and commercial counterparts from 
Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Brazil, The friendlies have  been 
watching recent developments with concern including  Ag Minister 
Barnier's memorandum to the Agricultural Council (REF B).  They , 
agreed that France's moves to impose socially-motivated EU 
production practices resulting in elevated production costs (e.g. 
animal welfare) on non-EU trading partners pose a challenge for the 
the trading system.  All also agreed on the need to continue the 
dialogue and explore avenues for collective action. The keynote 
speech at French-sponsored food safety conference several days later 
underscored the seriousness with which France is advancing this 
agenda.  End Summary. 
 
¶2.  (SBU) Invitees expressed concern about France's moves to 
incorporate societal choices into EU trade policy and to legitimize 
their recognition into international trade standards for food and 
livestock products.  Australia noted that they had addressed this 
concern in a 20-page agriculture advocacy document.  All noted the 
danger in making trade policy decisions on the basis of production 
processes instead of science-based standards for the end product 
itself.  There was general recognition that the GOF's initiatives, 
often cloaked in a mantle of superior moral authority, are a 
thinly-veiled attempt to protect costly domestic production. The 
group agreed that the topic should be raised more strongly with 
respective governments and that the "friendlies" dialogue should 
continue, with a view toward joint representations.  All further 
agreed to raise the issue with their representatives to 
international organizations, such as the OIE and OECD, where the 
subject is emerging. 
 
¶3.  (SBU) The attendees noted that France was effectively advocating 
its position, in light of world environmental and resource 
sustainability concerns.  The New Zealand rep further noted that, 
while she was concerned about the French initiative, many of these 
societal preferences are environmentally oriented and that New 
Zealand placed a high priority on environmental protection.  The 
parallel between legitimate and imagined SPS concerns was 
discussed. 
 
¶4.   (SBU) The Canadian rep remarked that this is a good time to 
address the issue with the Commission as its relationship with 
France is not particularly amicable (and also to buy time until the 
end of the French EU presidency).   He suggested polling Member 
States for their response to the French proposal (REF B) and 
collectively approaching the Commission to express our concerns. 
 
¶5.  (SBU) On October 3, France hosted a conference on health risk 
assessment in the context of food, animal and livestock imports into 
the EU. The keynote speech, delivered by a high level Ministry of 
Agriculture food safety official, focused on the French proposal, 
which the French seek to have adopted before the end of their EU 
presidency.  The abstract from the portion of the speech addressing 
societal concerns follows: 
 
Begin Quote: 
 
Eliminate distortions of competition and take better account of 
European health standards 
 
The Community preference consists in choices made by society in 
favour of a European food and agricultural production model, such as 
respecting animal welfare, or controlling health safety throughout 
the food chain "from the farm to the fork".  The objective is to 
retain the possibility of an enlightened choice for European 
consumers by ensuring them a high level of health safety.  With this 
in mind: 
- European standards should be promoted at international level; 
- Systems should be developed provide European consumers with 
 
PARIS 00001868  002.2 OF 002 
 
 
comprehensive information and to promote the specific features of 
European products. 
 
The main ambition of this strategy, one of the priorities of the 
French Presidency of the Council of the European Union, is to 
contribute to an ever high food safety guarantee for European 
citizens in a better globalized world.  It is part of a wider 
approach also addressing the need to protect our environment better, 
through the desired harmonization of sanitary and phytosanitary 
standards for example. 
To protect and promote our European food model, able to provide a 
high level of safety for the consumer, this issue needs to be put 
back on the agenda of discussions on international trade within the 
World Trade Organization. 
 
Encouraged by the support mustered from EU Member States, Michael 
Barnier has decided to continue discussions on the issue during the 
French Presidency of the Council of the European Union.  He has 
asked a task force to draw up more precise recommendations that may 
feature in the conclusions of the Agriculture Council at the end of 
the year.  End Quote 
 
¶6. (SBU) AgMinCouns had the opportunity to get reactions from 
Italian and British reps at the conference.  Both said that their 
governments were skeptical about the French approach to distortions 
in competition and were unlikely to back this component of the 
French proposal.  Both emphasized that it wasn't practical to think 
that the EU could translate its social choices into international 
trade policy and that they doubted the proposal would be adopted. 
 
¶7. (SBU) Comment:  Country team believes that Canadian idea of 
polling the Member States and then approaching the Commission 
collectively has some merit, particularly since there appears to be 
a healthy dose of MS skepticism.  We also agree that vigilance at 
the various IOs is called for, especially given France's proposal to 
put this topic on the WTO agenda. Further, a review of IO activities 
reveals that the FAO has been actively working on subject of animal 
welfare (http://www.fao.org /ag/ againfo/ home/ en/ news_archive/ 
2008_animalwelfare.html) and recently concluded a 2-day forum on the 
subject. The OIE has a conference in Egypt later in October 
(http://www.oie.int/ eng/ A_AW2008/ home.htm) at which animal 
welfare is on the agenda, while the subject of societal concerns is 
included in the current OECD Program of Work and Budget and has been 
raised as a possible subject for discussion at the 2010 OECD 
Ministerial. End Comment. 
 
 
STAPLETON