92 



THE CANADIAN FREE 

 TRADE AGREEMENT 

 AND AMERICAN 

 AGRICULTURE 



Studies by NFU of readily available data relating 

 to current trade practices with Canada under 

 the CFTA, clearly show that NFU has not been 

 "crying wolf." In fact, NFU believes the 

 information contained in this report is shocking 

 enough that it warrants a congressional hearing. 



A Blow to Agricultural Producers 



Many of the National Farmers Union's 250,000 

 family farm members have been victimized by 

 the Canadian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA). 

 In fact, many sectors of American production 

 agriculture have been adversely affected. Facts 

 and figures contained in this report highlight and 

 detail the unfair practices which have caused 

 NFU and its members grave concerns since the 

 inception of the CFTA NFU has aired these 

 concerns on numerous occasions as Canadians 

 have manipulated the CFTA to their advantage 

 on a regular basis. It is precisely these unfair 

 practices which regularly occur under the existing 

 CFTA that cause NFU to adamantly oppose the 

 North American Free Trade Agreement 

 (NAFTA) in its current form, and to oppose the 

 direction which the talks on the General 

 Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GAIT) are 

 headed. 



The U.S. continues to lose farmers at the rate of 

 2 percent per year, after having lost a quarter of 

 a million farmers in the last decade. 

 Furthermore, farm incomes have eroded to the 

 degree that the average farm family earned a 

 mere $5,742 in on-farm income in 1990. Canada 

 has also experienced lower commodity prices, as 

 well as a loss of farmers along with the decline in 

 the economic health of rural communities, which 

 naturally follows. 



The CFTA is often used as a model for the 

 development of agreements such as NAFTA and 

 GATT. In reality, the CFTA should be used as 

 an example of what to avoid in new agreements. 

 NFU contends that the good points of the 

 CFTA have been or will be weakened in NAFTA 

 and GATT, while the errors contained in the 

 CFTA will be even more detrimental to 

 American family farmers. 



Benefits of Canadian Free Trade 

 Agreement Proving to be One- 

 sided 



The Manitoba (Canada) Co-operator," reported 

 on September 9, 1992, that, "The United States 

 was Canada's fourth largest grain customer last 

 year, importing 1.8 million metric tons of 

 Canada's six major grains and oilseeds." The 

 article went on to say that "imports of Canadian 

 grain were up 38 percent from the 13 million 

 metric tons purchased by the U.S. the previous 

 crop year." Canadian Grains Minister Charlie 

 Mayer was quoted as saying, "I think this is 

 evidence that the Free Trade Agreement with 

 the United States has worked and worked quite 

 welL Our agricultural exports to the U.S. in the 

 last three years are up about 30 percent" 



Mayer's next quote is far more telling: "WHEN 

 YOU THINK ABOUT IT, THATS PRETTY 

 GOOD. THE AMERICANS ARE THE 

 LARGEST EXPORTERS OF GRAIN IN THE 

 WORLD. WE BUY VIRTUALLY NOTHING 

 (no grain) FROM THEM. OUR BORDERS 

 ARE VIRTUALLY OPEN (with barley the 

 only exception).* 



Farmers Union would have to agree with 

 Mayer's Canadian perspective of the CFTA. The 

 CFTA has worked quite well for Canada. When 

 one considers that the article went on to say, 

 "Wheat (excluding durum) was the single largest 

 grain imported by the U.S. from Canada last 

 crop year...a 100 percent increase over the 

 previous year," one should be 

 able to understand why NFLTs producer 

 members do not share Mayer's satisfaction. The 

 figures Mayer used in the article do not 

 constitute a "bump in the road"— they are a 

 trend. 



-1- 



