| WASHINGTON, May 23 /PRNewswire/ -- Sugar industry
representatives today urged a House committee considering a
Latin American trade agreement, known as the Free Trade Area
of the Americas or FTAA, to utilize instead the multilateral
World Trade Organization (WTO) to address disciplines in sugar
trade.
Jack Roney, Director of Economics and Policy Analysis for
the American Sugar Alliance, told members of the House
Agriculture Committee, ``Only a comprehensive approach will
restore the world sugar price to a level that reflects the
actual cost of producing sugar, and that means addressing the
rampant market distortions governments employ in the only
comprehensive forum available in trade negotiations today, the
WTO agricultural negotiations now underway in Geneva.''
Roney was accompanied by Jackie Theriot, President of the
American Sugar Cane League, based in Thibodaux, Louisiana. The
American Sugar Alliance is a national coalition of growers,
processors and refiners of sugarbeets, sugarcane and corn for
sweetener, based in the Washington area.
Roney said that since 1986, the U.S. sugar industry has
endorsed the goal of ``genuine, multilateral free trade in
sugar ... We are ready, willing, and able to compete with
foreign farmers on a level playing field.'' He made a point of
noting, however, ``We cannot endorse free trade at any cost,
nor do we endorse unilateral disarmament of U.S. agricultural
policies. Progress toward free trade must be made on a fair,
genuine and comprehensive basis.''
Roney gave five reasons why the U.S. sugar industry is in
favor of reserving sugar for WTO disciplines:
- FTAA countries already dominate U.S. sugar imports.
Twenty-two of the 41 countries that share in the U.S.
sugar import quota are FTAA countries. They enjoy
essentially duty-free access at the preferential U.S.
price.
- The sugar industries of FTAA countries are likely to be
overrun with subsidized Brazilian sugar. Brazil has
quintupled its sugarcane production since 1975, and
recently became the world's leading sugar producer and
exporter. Brazil has done so with the aid of an estimated
$3 billion per year in ethanol subsidies, strategic
currency devaluations, debt reduction programs, low
environmental and labor standards - including the
widespread, deplorable use of child labor - and still
other subsidies. Other governments in the Americas know
that without removing the Brazilian subsidies, Brazilian
sugar will simply swamp the U.S. and other FTAA markets.
- Sugar is not included in most bilateral and regional
agreements because of the distorted nature of domestic and
export markets for sugar and because of a wide range of
border control issues. There are 124 regional trade
agreements worldwide, and most of them exclude sugar.
- Increased potential for import-quota circumvention.
Bilateral and regional trade agreements have tended to
foster the creation of schemes for blending dump market
sugar with products that are not subject to import quotas
and shipping these concoctions throughout the free trade
area.
- The U.S. sugar market is already oversupplied, and does
not need any additional foreign sugar through the FTAA.
Urging caution in approaching sugar trade negotiations,
Roney said, ``We must ensure that commitments in one region do
not make achieving results in other regions difficult or
impossible. This is not an issue when dealing with trade
distortions on a comprehensive basis in the WTO. ... The U.S.
sugar industry strongly recommends that, within the framework
of the FTAA, sugar be reserved for much needed, and more
far-reaching, disciplines in the multilateral, WTO
context.''
For more information on U.S. sugar policy, visit http://www.sugaralliance.org
. |