Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
07LIMA460
2007-02-16 17:34:00
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Embassy Lima
Cable title:  

SMALL FARMER GROUPS ALSO WANT TO RENEGOTIATE PTPA

Tags:  EAGR EAID ETRD BEXPC PE SNAR 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXYZ0020
PP RUEHWEB

DE RUEHPE #0460/01 0471734
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 161734Z FEB 07
FM AMEMBASSY LIMA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 4015
RUEHRC/USDA FAS WASHDC 1603
UNCLAS LIMA 000460 

SIPDIS

USDA/OCRA/OFSO
USTR FOR BENNETT HARMAN
AMEMBASSY BOGOTA
AMEMBASSY QUITO
AMEMBASSY LA PAZ


SENSITIVE
SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: EAGR EAID ETRD BEXPC PE SNAR

SUBJECT: SMALL FARMER GROUPS ALSO WANT TO RENEGOTIATE PTPA


UNCLAS LIMA 000460

SIPDIS

USDA/OCRA/OFSO
USTR FOR BENNETT HARMAN
AMEMBASSY BOGOTA
AMEMBASSY QUITO
AMEMBASSY LA PAZ


SENSITIVE
SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: EAGR EAID ETRD BEXPC PE SNAR

SUBJECT: SMALL FARMER GROUPS ALSO WANT TO RENEGOTIATE PTPA



1. (U) SUMMARY. With the U.S. Congress asking whether there should
be enhancements to the labor provisions of the PTPA, a minority
group of farm journalists, academics and small farmers have begun to
call for the renegotiation of the PTPA. Overall support among
Peruvians for the PTPA remains strong, yet these groups, some of
whom had been active opponents before the Peruvian Congress voted
79-14 last June to approve the PTPA, argue that the delayed
consideration of the PTPA by the U.S. Congress presents an
opportunity to correct "mistakes" made in negotiating the agreement.
Some have visited Members of the U.S. Congress and one of the
organizations, Conveagro, has written an open letter to the
Congress. As PTPA ratification is delayed, the Peruvian government
may see more vocal opposition to the current agreement from small
farmers. END SUMMARY.


PERUVIAN AG INTERESTS ARGUE FOR ADDENDUMS TO PTPA
-------------- --------------

2. (U) Recent press articles in farm journals and in mainstream
newspapers have begun urging the government to reconsider certain
agricultural agreements in the PTPA. With the PTPA's consideration
delayed in the U.S. Congress, some agricultural leaders and
academics believe that Peru has a second chance to correct its
"mistakes" in negotiating the agricultural section of the PTPA.

IF LABOR IS BEING LOOKED AT AGAIN, WHY NOT AGRICULTURE?
-------------- --

3. (U) Many of those calling for renegotiation had actively opposed
the PTPA during the Toledo Administration. This includes Luis
Zuniga, the president of small farmers group Conveagro and a member
of the President's APRA party, who lost his 2006 bid for a
Congressional seat. However, most critics of the agriculture
chapter admit that the overall PTPA benefits to Peru are so great
that they outweigh the agricultural drawbacks and that the country
should stand behind the agreement so that it is enacted without
delay. Nevertheless, with the recent media focus here on the
possible re-opening of the labor chapter in the PTPA, these contacts
also argue that the agriculture chapter should also be reconsidered.



COUNTERING U.S. SUBSIDIES
--------------

4. (U) Those arguing for renegotiation believe that critical
agricultural issues, such as excessive U.S. agricultural subsidies,
need to be addressed via an addendum to the agreement or a side
letter. They argue that subsidized U.S. agricultural products will
flood Peru's markets and ruin the Peruvian agricultural sector, and
that free access to Peru's markets for competing U.S. products must
be prevented. Specifically, they are trying to enlist support for a
side agreement or addendum that will allow protectionist measures to
remain in place so long as the United States maintains agricultural
subsidies. Others have also argued for permanent safeguards for
certain products, for delayed access to Peru's most sensitive
markets, and for a revision of intellectual property agreements in
the PTPA. These strategies seek to protect Peruvian farmers, mostly
small farmers - seen as the biggest losers in the PTPA - and
insulate them from the perceived distortions created by U.S.
agricultural subsidies.


5. (U) In a January 14 letter to the U.S. Congress, Conveagro
raised a number of concerns regarding PTPA and argued that the
agreement must be renegotiated to prevent "social conflicts" from
arising, which could then force those adversely affected by the PTPA
to migrate to the jungle regions and shift to coca production.
Conveagro states that the majority of Peru is opposed to PTPA and
that fairness dictates that the agreement be renegotiated to:
prevent the reintroduction of agricultural subsidies as permitted in
Article 2.16, delay tariff elimination until U.S. agricultural
subsidies cease, allow the application of safeguards during the
lifetime of PTPA as well as increase the number of sensitive
products that may be protected via safeguards, and allow Peru to
maintain its price band system.


6. (U) The Peruvian government has committed itself to pay
compensation to farmers displaced by key U.S. exports of wheat,
corn, and rice. However, opponents of the PTPA believe that the
promises of compensation for farmers will amount to little, if
anything at all. Contacts from the dairy sector as well as
agricultural leaders that were opposed to the agriculture chapter
during negotiations specifically noted that the proposed
compensation amounts continue to decrease.


7. (SBU) Officials within the Ministry of Agriculture's
Agricultural Planning Office have told us that compensation payments
would involve only a slight increase from the payments currently
being disbursed through SUNAT's (Peru's IRS) "formalization" program
for the sensitive products of cotton, yellow corn, and wheat. (The
GOP is paying producers to keep records of sales and other
transactions to assist them in better understanding the movement of
specific crops and, more importantly, to tax their sales.) The
officials noted that while a few other crops might require
compensation as well, the GOP could convert the expiring
"formalization" payments into compensation and that it already had
an effective payment infrastructure in place.

COMMENT
--------------

8. (SBU) Many, if not most, of those calling for renegotiation,
have opposed the PTPA from its inception. The current criticisms
may come as a result of uncertainty over compensation payments for
certain sensitive commodities, which could counterbalance the
potential adverse effects to Peruvian small farmers. Our Ministry
contacts have assured us that compensation will be available, yet
many in the agricultural sector still fear that the payments will be
inconsequential at best. Nevertheless, the increasing calls for
side letter agreements or addenda from the farm sector could still
delay the implementation of the PTPA. While it is unlikely that
President Garcia will agree to pursue additional addendums, the
agreement as a whole could face increased dissent domestically if
calls for agricultural revisions increase and Congressional
consideration of PTPA continues to be delayed. Should this occur,
the PTPA's chances for successful passage and implementation would
be further endangered. This prospect adds urgency to U.S.
Congressional consideration of PTPA for the Garcia Administration,
Peruvian exporters, and U.S. supporters of PTPA.
STRUBLE