Thank you for that list. I think most of them apply to supply-managed industries, and are obviously always a concern not only to me but to the Minister of International Trade, who often has to handle these trade issues in his portfolio.
On the poultry imports, I know I have had requests from the poultry industry that they would like us to use article 28 when it comes to dealing with these poultry imports, especially when it comes to the 13% rule and so on that applies to the poultry imports. There are several problems with that.
Article 28 is a sledgehammer of an instrument to use on trade policy. Governments have always been very reluctant to use article 28. Ours was the first government since I've been in Parliament, in many a year, to use article 28 to reclassify milk protein concentrates. We've started that initiative, as we promised the dairy industry we would. Our application has gone in to the WTO. We're expecting comments from them on that. But it is a pretty serious step when governments use that. We're prepared to use it. We're doing that, and we're following through on our commitment.
Article 28 doesn't apply to the United States. We have a NAFTA agreement that covers our trade arrangements with the United States, so much of the concern of the poultry industry is concern about U.S. imports, and that's a different issue from article 28. It can't be handled the same way. It's not a matter of reclassifying it under article 28, because it just doesn't work the same way.
So while I understand their concern about that, it can't be handled, in our opinion, the same way. Also, with the quantity of imports on the poultry side, as I do on whether it's beef imports, poultry imports, or you name it, I encourage farm organizations to sit down together with these panels the trade minister has put together to give their input into that decision-making process.
As we debate this and figure out what the right levels of import are, I encourage the poultry industry to sit down on those committees that have been put together by the international trade minister to get their input in on that, and that's the most effective way to influence the process.
My understanding is that the change is roughly 0.6%. I believe the difference on the imports this year over last year is less than 1%, and I don't think that's a draconian amount. Again, if they want to influence things moving forward, then the best way to do that is to sit on the panel and give advice to the Minister of International Trade, so that when all of us get together to make those decisions they're part of that process.
On the dairy side and chocolate milk, I've been of course seized with a couple of other issues on the dairy side lately, one of them being the use of article 28 and making sure that we get.... CFIA's been busy pulling out the lines of milk protein concentrate, how much we've imported, getting those numbers down pat. Also, there's the whole idea of milk compositional standards, which is another issue, and they're ensuring we have that process in hand and that we're moving ahead with it as well.
I have had correspondence on the chocolate milk concerns, as I have on other things from the dairy industry, but frankly, I've been working primarily on those first two issues, the article 28 and the compositional standards. We've been consulting with stakeholders and doing our part to make sure that proceeds properly.
The other issues, and I know there's always a series of issues.... We meet regularly with the Dairy Farmers of Canada, with the processors, and others to determine what's the best path forward, but right now I think we'd best get these first two things in order. That has been the priority of the milk industry, and I think that's what we need to get done first.