"We risk trade barriers"

There always were trade barriers and there always will be. The US is a known, persistent poor performer insofar as indirect trade barriers are concerned.

Australia has a valid reason for rejecting meat from countries that have experienced BSE.

No-one has agreed that any imported meat should be so labelled, including where it is used in other products. Not surprising really, who would opt for the imported pattie from Mackas?

As far as the Red Cross is concerned, it reckons that 50 years is a suitable time to ban prospective blood donors who were in the UK during the Mad Cow epidemic, but who have since shown no clinical signs of the disorder. Why is that?

Tony Abbott bloke you are no leader you say no to so much you would agree to if you ever got Rudd's job, I do not value your honesty you have none.

Well that's the pot calling the kettle black! I suggest you look inside your own leaders bag of lies before you go off accusing others.

Must take my hat off to you though, you never fail to sink the boot and put in a plug for Ruddy, do you! Always turning every thread into an attack on TA, while singing the praises of your might Krudd.

If you were not so 'brain washed' you may realise that Rudd, is a dudd! Must be something about the unions I think!

Now back on toppic
As for labelling, we already have p[roducts sold as 'made from local and imported ingredients'. I doubt this will change.

As for importing beef. I think every single shipment should be tested and cleared prior to leaving the country of origin.

I will bet the big 'M' will be rubbing their hands together.

Tested? How?

The USDA has never experienced any quirks of conscience for insisting on requirements that affect the whole of our stock, even before they reach the meatworks.

Likewise they have sent their own inspectors to enforce petty but costly requirements intended as trade embargoes concerning (say) the cladding of freezer walls.

Our politicians are innocents abroad and I think you might find that any question or contrary advice from our own scientists and primary industries departments, State and federal, is quashed without seeing daylight. Must be some good scotch and hanky panky available in overseas destinations.

Carrying coals to Newcastle is the m.o. of free(&@#$#) trade. I was talking to a butcher friend of mine recently about the importation of be(BSE)ef, and he pointed out that regional abattoirs, which used to provide local meat for local people, are being close because all the beasts are sent to the larger abattoirs and then packaged for export. Now if the result of this is a meat shortage in Australia, surely the sensible thing to do would be to keep it ourselves. I know all about the Australian-US FTA where American beef is sacrosanct, and the big bucks to be made from the Japanese market, but if our health is to be put in peril from cheap OS meat, then surely someone as educated as Tony Burke should be able to see that it is a bad move.
Anyhow, all this coal to Newcastle is contributing some huge percentage, I can't remember if it is 30% or 60%, of total carbon dioxide emissions (see Ann Pettifor(ed), real world economic outlook..(2003)) and oranges from Brazil, and beef from America make no sense when we can do it all here. Sheer madenss, but what's new.

Free Trade, even that awful bloke Simon Crean understands we need it, more than most.
This is more than lifting a ban.
It comes as a result of our free trade agreement with America.
This is the year such trade barriers are to be dropped.
One half of one percent, you can not turn that into a flood, it will not have much impact on the market.
Speak to a butcher here ,if you wish, rechtub is one, however in matters of international trade you can get better advice.
If we block a deal we signed, we can face great trade barriers, not just the Lamb to America one but even total farm products.
The potential for importing mad cow?
None.
We one day WILL get such an illness, maybe not this one but another, and it will be our farmers, screaming for a fair go, begging to again be able to export beef and maybe much more.
And PLEASE balance, not one farmer none, will not sell his beef, will get reduced payments if we agree to do what we said we would in this trade agreement.
Last oh boy how it fails to impress me,the idea our leaders industry and political are idiots.
The thought individuals know and only they, that we have been hood winked.
Both sides of Parliament now Rudd is agreeing to this deal said this is the year we do it, it will in fact be next but we have far better judges of what is good for us in the house than the henny Penny's here.

Cornflower
Our meat industry (export) is at the mercy of the buyers as we have no option other than to export all but 15 odd % of what we produce.

This is why we have to meet such strict guidlines, because our customers don't have to buy our beef. We are just lucky we have such clean meat.

Perhaps Belly is right. We may be caught between a rock and a hard place. If we say no, we stand to loose far more than we stand to gain.

I think the answer may well lie in the 'labelling' of imported meats, whereby consumers are well informed of what they are buying and, any manufaturer using imported meats must meet the labelling criteria in order to use/sell this product.

Perhaps there should be a law against the blending of local and imported goods in all food manufacturing, other than herbs and spices, as one must admit, it's a bit of a con this old 'made from local and imported ingredients' stuff.

Bacon and ham are fine examples with approx 90% of all bacon sold here being made from imported pork.