Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you’ll know that talk of changes to (elimination of?) supply management in Canada has recently heated up. Of particular note, delegates, politicians and the like are gathering in Hawaii right now to further hammer out details regarding a giant, international trade deal — the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP).
Interested parties (read: the U.S.) are demanding that Canada’s admission to the TPP is simple — it requires access to Canuck dairy, poultry and egg markets. Debates around the TPP have further deepened entrenched battle lines within Canadian agriculture markets — pitting the export dependent vs. the domestic market once again.
Which brings us to this week’s Thumbs up, Thumbs down question. (It’s a new weekly feature here at RealAgriculture. Suggestions for future topics are welcome!)
If (and we’re not saying it is) the ticket price to get in on the TPP ride is supply management, should Canada pay up?
Have your say, and leave your reasons in the comments, if you’d like.
Related:
- The Trouble with the TPP
- Canola Council launches social media campaign in support of TPP
- TPP participation is critical for Canada’s hog sector
Response from Twitter:
@realagriculture drinking powdered milk from china sold2me by a USA cong’rate is dangerous.Food sovereignty matters.
— Farming in Ontario (@RuralOntWoman) July 28, 2015
@RealAg_Debra @realag_lyndsey 3 ?’s Specifically what do we gain How will we deal with future COOL shenanigans How will SM be dismantled
— Jeff Nonay (@JeffNonay) July 28, 2015
@realag_lyndsey I would rephrase the question to ask, a greater cost to whom? if it is to give consumers greater choice for less, I say yes
— Adriana Vega (@VeggaCer) July 29, 2015
@realag_lyndsey a grain, pork and beef farmer should say yes, a dairy, poultry farmer should say no… Count the votes… Should be fair
— Franck Groeneweg (@FranckGroeneweg) July 28, 2015
Please register to read and comment.