PM says softwood feud could imperil other trade fronts

CBC (canada) ^ | Oct 6, 2005

[proud_yank]

U.S. reluctance to live up to NAFTA rulings on softwood lumber tariffs and its efforts to protect domestic lumber producers against imports of Canadian softwood are "nonsense and a breach of faith," Prime Minister Paul Martin said Thursday.

Martin told a New York business audience "countries must live up to their agreements." He was referring to the North America Free trade Agreement (NAFTA).

"We have to recognize the NAFTA is a framework, not just for the trade of commodities, but for the trade of most goods and services. And for this to operate reliably we have to rely on the dispute settlement mechanism."

Ottawa has been frustrated since August over the refusal of the Bush administration to respect a NAFTA panel ruling ordering the return of $5 billion in tariffs collected under U.S. anti-dumping rules.

Americans pay more for lumber as a result of the tariffs, designed to protect U.S. lumber producers, and U.S. home construction costs are driven up.

Martin warned the U.S. that the ongoing lumber dispute is impairing Canada-U.S. relations, and could imperil trade on other fronts, including U.S. access to Canadian energy supplies.

He said the U.S. government has undermined the dispute-settlement mechanism in the free trade agreement, the same mechanism, he noted, that governs trade in energy. The U.S. is increasingly reliant on Canadian energy sources, which tend to be taken for granted south of the border.

Martin also hinted that other major and emerging markets, such as China and India, could displace the U.S. as priority markets for Canadian raw materials.

The prime minister's blunt comments embraced other Canadian irritants created by the U.S.

He criticized a U.S. plan to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for oil drilling, where he said environmental damage would far outweigh any modest increase in U.S. oil supplies.

[proud_yank]

What I find very interesting is comparing this article to the Globe and Mail article I also posted on the same subject. Notice the CBC version, and the underlying 'Bush's fault'. Whereas the Globe and Mail states the fact that this has been going on for 20 yrs, i.e. before Bush was even in office. Kind of an interesting bias.

As far as Martin's criticism of us opening ANWR,

1) If that is your concern, why are you threatening to cut off oil. All that will do is force us to open up more areas.

2) Canadian Freepers please correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the entire Canadian Artic open to oil exploration.

I find it odd that 'Environmentally Friendly' Canada is even at odds over lumber trade. That is precisely the type of industry that American leftist enviros want to close down entirely.

[GungaLaGunga]

HEAD FOR THE HILLS! The Canadians are getting a little perturbed!

[Alberta's Child]

Paul Martin may be a jack@ss, but Freepers who are familiar with this issue will tell you that he's absolutely right.

For the life of me, I don't know how the U.S. can possibly sign a trade agreement with a straight face -- considering its idiotic approach to this lumber dispute.

[MD_Willington_1976]

I worked for Schlumberger, Geco-Prakla, we were offered an exploratory 3D seismic job way up North in Canada...My friends father used to work up North making artificial islands for rigs...So they are looking/drilling etc up there...

Farthest North I worked was FT. Nelson BC...
http://www.google.com/maps?q=hotels+loc%3A+Fort+Nelson,+BC,+Canada&ll=59.955010,-122.695313&spn=47.812847,135.263672&t=h&f=l&cid=58806670,-122690386,10154179948781901018&hl=en

[headsonpikes]

Fort Nelson??

Bloody banana belt!

;^)

[proud_yank]

Paul Martin may be a jack@ss, but Freepers who are familiar with this issue will tell you that he's absolutely right.
For the life of me, I don't know how the U.S. can possibly sign a trade agreement with a straight face -- considering its idiotic approach to this lumber dispute.
True. But if this has been going on for the past 20 years. That was before NAFTA. How does that factor into the equation?? What is at the heart of this issue? The media doesn't really touch on that ever.

[proud_yank]

Ft Nelson, that has to be some pretty country up there. I know a number of people who have spent summers on rigs up in that area.

I wouldn't mind taking a job somewhere like that for a while, but would still prefer to go farther North!

[concrete is my business]

At the heart of it is the soviet style logging practiced by the British Columbia Ministry of Forests.

They are very "efficient".

Softwood lumber was originally left out of the Free Trade Agreement because of the inability of the negotiators to recognize BCs forestry practices as anything that is even close to free trade.

Over the years many changes have been made and now an agreement is close.

The Federal Liberals have always backed away from the table when an agreement is close (some log auctions to determine real prices), which leads me to believe the idea of American bullies at the trade table is very valuable to them.

Anti-Americanism is much more valuable to the Liberals than a settlement, as BC is not necessary to their maintaining power in Ottawa, while the anti-American Quebec vote is.

[Dr. Luv]

Softwood lumber IS part of the FTA. The NAFTA panel has ruled against us repeatedly on this issue. We are on the wrong side of this trade dispute and the Canadians are getting increasingly pissed off. How can we expect China to abide by trade agreements when we won't with our largest trading partner?

[concrete is my business]

The FTA was signed in 1989.

The Softwood Lumber Agreement was not signed until 1995 and it expired in 2001.

The two countries have been unable to reach consensus since then on a replacement agreement.

China is not involved.

[Dr. Luv]

Perhaps you are unfamiliar with the complicated rules by which Canada and the US negotiate trade. The softwood lumber dispute with Canada falls under NAFTA. It does so because we imposed a protectionist tariff back in 02.

U.S. law allows countervailing duties to be imposed only upon two conditions: that a foreign supplier is benefiting from subsidies, and U.S. producers are being injured, or threatened with injury, as a result. An inititial unanimous NAFTA ruling found that there was no injury or threat of injury. A more recent decision found that there was no subsidy.

For the fifth time, the NAFTA panel found that the calculations used by the U.S. Commerce Department to determine if Canadian lumber is subsidized are flawed.

On Aug. 10, a NAFTA Extraordinary Challenge Committee upheld a previous NAFTA verdict that found no threat of injury from Canadian imports. It also stipulated that the U.S. was required to refund the billions of dollars of duties that Canada had paid to date.

Although a NAFTA ruling carries the weight of law in Canada, the U.S. and Mexico, the Administration has failed to comply with its legal obligations to rescind the duties and return all duties paid out by Canadian firms.

We are wrong on this and we need to admit it, pay them back what we have taken and get rid of this tarrif (which alone adds an extra thousand dollars to the cost of an American home)

My point about the Chinese was a simple one (although sadly, you seemed to have failed to grasp it) we cannot lecture the Chinese about fair trading practices, when we don't trade fairly ourselves.

[concrete is my business]

I am very familiar with Canada-USA trade in lumber and have both imported and exported softwood.

I have watched the softwood dispute become the political bat that it is today and I do not see a resolution as it has become the tool of choice for the Federal Liberals at election time.

BC forest communities have paid way more than USA homebuilders.

Many of them are history.

They get "I'm sorry" from Ottawa and a small moving allowance deduction on their income tax return. sarc

BC Ministry of Forests is right now selling millions of board feet of beetle damaged trees and the lumber (which is structurally fine, it is just stained blue from the beetle) is at below market.

All the rulings in the world do not change the facts on the ground and one of those facts is the Americans have access to American courts in these disputes and not even the USA President can take that away, yet.

The Supreme Court might rule on this dispute one day but it would be much better to come to terms at the table, which is tough because Ottawa will not sit down.

Last week PM Paul Martin linked energy exports to this dispute and then denied that he did so.

Many people think he is just warming up Alberta for another federal government grab at the oil and gas industry.

I do not see a settlement anytime soon.

.

President Bush takes PM Paul Martins call on softwood lumber

[Dr. Luv]

I take it you think it is OK for us to screw our major trading partner and then lecture others about how they trade? Faulty logic my friend...

[concrete is my business]

Canada has hardly gotten screwed by the USA.

They have done very, very well under the FTA.

It is Ottawa that is responsible to Canadians in regards to the Softwood Lumber dispute.

[Dr. Luv]

Fascinating. You think it is Canada's fault that we're not living up to our trade agreements. You sound like the jihadis who claim it is our fault when they kill us. Twisted logic both...

[concrete is my business]

You are an idiot.

[1rudeboy]

Canada has hardly gotten screwed by the USA.

Yeah, that $5 billion is pocket change. /sarc

[Dr. Luv]

"You are an idiot."

That's the extent of your debating ability? That's the best you can do when someone points out the limitations of your intellect? Concrete might not only be your business, but more amusingly, it seems to be what's between your ears...

[Willie Green]

Paul Martin may be a jack@ss, but Freepers who are familiar with this issue will tell you that he's absolutely right.

No he's not, and neither are you.

[Alberta's Child]

No he's not, and neither are you.

Having dealt with this issue extensively for the last four years through research and both personal and business contacts on both sides of the border, I'll put myself up against anyone else here on FreeRepublic in any debate over it.

A nation that imposes a tariff on imported lumber from its primary trading partner while coping with a 50% increase in domestic lumber prices due to shortages brought on by military/rebuilding efforts overseas and hurricane recovery efforts is "stuck on stupid" and needs a collective head examination.