Nick said:

> With all due respect, Australia and New Zealand (I'll presume to speak for
> both, though some might say there are a few differences :)) are simply
> asking for the same sort of market access that the US expects and generally
> receives from us.

But live animals?  Like Bees?

What live animals can ANYONE ship to NZ?
Are any of them are accepted with zero inspection, based
solely on the word of the shipper that they are "disease free"?

That's what is being proposed for bees in the cases at hand.
Blind trust.  Live animals.  No port-of-entry inspection possible.
None even considered as "statistical samples".

Can any beekeeper on the list, or any bee inspector offer
any possible support of such an approach?

> The issue is restrictions on trade based on matters other than
> sanitary and phyto-sanitary, restricting trade because of
> non-technical reasons.

Well, here's the problem.  The US appears to not really have a
"biosecurity policy".  We need one, or we need a better thought-out
one than what we have.  My suggestion is to adopt a mix of Europe's
approach and... >>New Zealand's<< approach.

     Elegant, huh?
     Your own rules on imports are applied to you for your exports.
      One must admit that New Zealand has quite a good policy.
      Sounds fair to me!

In their own words, New Zealand:

  "?will incorporate a level of precaution in its import risk analyses
  to account for uncertainty.  What constitutes sufficient scientific
  evidence will need to be decided on a case-by-case basis depending
  on the degree of uncertainty and the severity of potential harm.
  Where biosecurity risk management measures are adopted in
  situations where there is not sufficient scientific evidence necessary
  for a comprehensive analysis of risks, MAF Biosecurity Authority will
  take appropriate steps to seek the additional information necessary
  for a more objective assessment of risk and review the measure
  accordingly within a reasonable period of time."

  http://www.maf.govt.nz/biosecurity/pests-diseases/risk-policy.htm#2.5

I want the US to adopt EXACTLY New Zealand's posture, and learn
from their well-thought out and conservative approach.  Except for the
part about "sufficient scientific evidence", because that's just plain silly.

I also like Europe's "Precautionary Principle", and think everyone should
adopt it as the de-facto standard interpretation of the overall WTO guidelines.

http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/com/cnc/2000/com2000_0001en01.pdf

> Down here, we regularly hear of the US's respect and regard for free trade,
> trade that is not manipulated or managed by unfair subsidies, dumping,
> protectionism and the like.

I would not expect any beekeeper to listen to any such posturing
hot air.  From anyone.  We all want hard facts, not chest-pounding.
We should also abandon politics and national pride (except for when
the Olympics are on, or the World Cup is on.)

> On the basis of that, we are expected (by both our government and the US)
> to accept things such as the grapes that Trevor referred to.

Your OWN government?  Sounds like you need to speak up.  I don't ever expect
to be subjected to insults or criticism by someone for what I say and do in an
attempt to influence my own country's policies, and I would never make the same
mistake about your actions.

Why not just organize a consumer boycott so that anyone who tries to import
grapes from the US gets stuck with several metric tons of rotting grapes he
can't sell?  Do that once or twice, and "WTO rules" won't matter, 'cause no one
will ORDER any.

> Me?  I'm a reluctant supporter of many of the concepts of free trade,

I'm not sure that "bio-sanitary standards" can work for live animals.
Steel, yes.  Plastics, yes.  Maybe veggies.  But live animals?
Hard to fumigate a live animal shipment.  They die.

> given the US's intransigent and bullying behaviours.  I'm a supporter because
> we are being obliged to play by those rules that have been to a great extent
> imposed/supported by the US.

I'll ignore the unfortunate choice of adjectives, but I'm not sure
that free trade really ever works, since no matter what, someone,
somewhere is going to try to use "biosecurity" as leverage to achieve
a blatantly protectionist and anti-competitive agenda.  Flags don't
matter to these types, they are just greedy.

So the problem is greedy people who want to manipulate their own government
to either sell, or block competition.  It may wrap itself up in "science", and
"WTO rules", but under it all, I see only naked greed.

> I'm a supporter as long as we all play by those rules.
> I'm kind of tired of being told we have to accept US goods
> under these rules while being put into 30 year loops by the US while they
> 'consider' the issues we have raised regarding our own possibilities for export.

Well, I don't know the whole history, but it sounds like that for 30 years,
you have been trying to sell bees to someone who has no need or use
for them, and sees no "reward" to justify the "risk".

        jim