Court orders U.S. to repay all softwood lumber duties

[normanchateau]

The reality, despite what you believe in that head of yours, is that it costs significantly less in Canada (due to government intervention) to cut down a tree than in the US. That's unfair competition and tariffs are acceptable.

Did you even read the first post in this thread or the link in that thread?

The point is that last month the US Court of International Trade ruled that Canadian lumber was not subsidized and ordered all of the illegal duties returned to Canada. Assuming you are a Canadian, why would a Canadian take the side of the US lumber lobby rather than the side of a US court? Do you think the US court is incompetent for siding with Canadian lumber producers rather than the US lumber lobby>?

[bradco]

"Ok... so when do we address that we unfairly compensate our lumber industry with ridiculously low stumpage fees"

Really it is not meant to be a subsidy to improve the industries international competiveness. It is just a different system than the states use. Under our system the logging companies have to provide services to the government on the land that US companies don't. The argument is it isnt a subsidy but rather payment for services rendered to the government (forest management servies). The use of stumpage fees over the american auction system is considered to be a way to counter problems of market power and potential over exploitation. The need for this in Canada and not the US comes out of the difference between the industries in each country. In the US most lumber comes from privately owned plantations while in Canada the lumber comes from public land and needs to be subjected to natural forest management. One is a private land model the other is public. Realistically you cant have the same systems in two entirely different models. Why courts have ruled it is not a subsidy is because the "subsidy" is said to be equal to the forest management services rendered. The US continues to argue that it doesn't, mainly because of lumber companies lobbying. Since this is pretty much a never ending disagreement it is in the best interests of both countries to negotiate a settlement.

"and it's the environment and Canadians that pay for Quebec and BC's lumber industries"

It is likely that our current system is better for the environment than an American system would be. As I said above our systems are chosen because different land ownership models exist in our countries. Neither ours or the American system would be compatible in the other country.

"Wow Fig, you should know that NAFTA has nothing to do with the debate, softwood was a special exclusion from the treaty."

While softwood lumber is not included I think there are rules governing tariffs and NTB's...could easily be wrong though. Either way there are WTO rules to be followed.

"The reality, despite what you believe in that head of yours, is that it costs significantly less in Canada (due to government intervention) to cut down a tree than in the US"

NAFTA, WTO and US courts have said otherwise. Chopping down the tree costs less but forest companies have to provide forest management services that increase their costs.

"Canadian money should be in the hands of those Canadians who earned it, not the Canadian government.

The Harper government thinks otherwise."

Ya well thats not a realistic option here. Its either the export tax or an American tariff. Take your pick from those two cause thats all that is going to be on the table, ever.

"to find out what some owners of softwood lumber companies think"

You need to understand that the Canadian softwood lumber industry is very heterogenous. This is why you dont see a successful lumber lobby group in Canada. Companies in each province have totally different interests so of course some will be speaking out. Overall though the agreement is whats best for the industry and the aggregate welfare.

The big thing is that the agreement gives stability. It guarantees market share for Canadian companies and takes off the tariff so money stays in Canada, thats a good thing. Unfortuantly people refuse to see past all the rhetoric on all sides and understand the issue better.

[normanchateau]

You need to understand that the Canadian softwood lumber industry is very heterogenous. This is why you dont see a successful lumber lobby group in Canada. Companies in each province have totally different interests so of course some will be speaking out. Overall though the agreement is whats best for the industry and the aggregate welfare.

The agreement is not what's best for the industry. Ask the Montreal-based Free Trade Lumber Council. They'll happily tell you. Rather, it's the best deal that Harper and Emerson could get from the US lumber lobby. And it's a deal similar to the one that Emerson advised the Liberal government to turn down when he was a Liberal cabinet minister.

[bradco]

You need to understand that the Canadian softwood lumber industry is very heterogenous. This is why you dont see a successful lumber lobby group in Canada. Companies in each province have totally different interests so of course some will be speaking out. Overall though the agreement is whats best for the industry and the aggregate welfare.

The agreement is not what's best for the industry. Ask the Montreal-based Free Trade Lumber Council. They'll happily tell you. Rather, it's the best deal that Harper and Emerson could get from the US lumber lobby. And it's a deal similar to the one that Emerson advised the Liberal government to turn down when he was a Liberal cabinet minister.

"it's the best deal that Harper and Emerson could get from the US lumber lobby"

That is by defintion the best deal for the lumber industry. We wont win by dragging this out through the courts for years. The US administration isnt going to change their opinion and the US lumber industry isnt going to die overnight. Of course its not what is the absolute best agreement for the industry but its the best they can do.

"Ask the Montreal-based Free Trade Lumber Council"

playing politics, thats what lobby groups do. I repeat though that lumber companies in Canada have very different interests depending on which province they come from. Anyways it is a negotiated settlement and neither side is happy with it.....which is a sign that its a fair deal.

"Emerson advised the Liberal government to turn down when he was a Liberal cabinet minister."

which was a mistake. I wonder if things were different under the Liberal government.....maybe he was pressured into advising this or knew this was the advice that they wanted to hear.

[hiti]

Indepth Softwood Lumber Dispute

Reading through the history of this dispute it appears that Canada would have won this one, especially seeing as how Bush got sidelined last week to a lame-duck leader. If only Harpo hadn't bent over for Bush and gave him $1 billion Canadian lumber producers would have a better deal.

In fact this deal is not final yet as it hasn't made it's way through the House and Senate yet.

I liked the way Paul Martin thought......... move the lumber west to China.

[scribblet]

You don't know that, most probably they would not have won it, and would continue incurring massive lawyers fees etc.

Again childish name calling doesn't add anything to the debate.

[bradco]

Indepth Softwood Lumber Dispute

Reading through the history of this dispute it appears that Canada would have won this one, especially seeing as how Bush got sidelined last week to a lame-duck leader. If only Harpo hadn't bent over for Bush and gave him $1 billion Canadian lumber producers would have a better deal.

In fact this deal is not final yet as it hasn't made it's way through the House and Senate yet.

I liked the way Paul Martin thought......... move the lumber west to China.

Interesting read. Pulled out two quotes:

"The Alberta Forest Products Association says the clause allowing either country to end the deal after three years undermines its value."

"The Quebec Forest Industry Council said it was not ready to support the deal, citing worry about the escape clause."

Looks like a lot of the worry about the deal was it wasnt secure enough. This leads one to believe the deal itself was good as these lumber groups wanted to ensure it lasts!

The government responded and negoitated concessions to make it harder for the US topull out. Thats listening to the industry and negoiating in good faith all rolled into one. Beats just endless whining that was coming from the NDP and Liberals. And coming from someone who will never vote Conservative I think that means something.

"how Bush got sidelined last week to a lame-duck lead"

Bush isnt the likely opposition. It is Congress/Senate who are most influenced by the lumber lobbyists, and thats regardless of their party affiliation. The election changes nothing.

[normanchateau]

The agreement is not what's best for the industry. Ask the Montreal-based Free Trade Lumber Council. They'll happily tell you. Rather, it's the best deal that Harper and Emerson could get from the US lumber lobby. And it's a deal similar to the one that Emerson advised the Liberal government to turn down when he was a Liberal cabinet minister.

"it's the best deal that Harper and Emerson could get from the US lumber lobby"

That is by defintion the best deal for the lumber industry. We wont win by dragging this out through the courts for years. The US administration isnt going to change their opinion and the US lumber industry isnt going to die overnight. Of course its not what is the absolute best agreement for the industry but its the best they can do.

It's the best deal that they could get within the artificial deadline that they imposed on themselves. Had they waited until the US Court of International Trade ruled, as the court did last month, that all the illegal duties must be returned to Canada, the deal could very well have been better. The Cons were far too hasty in my opinion.

[mcqueen625]

The following story appeared in the Business Section of the Vancouver Sun on October 14, 2006, two days after Harper signed and implemented the "deal" which betrayed the softwood lumber industry.

"Court orders U.S. to repay all $5.3 billion in softwood duties

A U.S, court on Friday ordered the Bush administration to pay back all of the $5.3 billion US in duties collected from Canadian lumber companies, one day after Ottawa voluntarily implemented a negotiated agreement that leaves $1 billion of that money in the hands of the Americans.

The belated legal victory in the softwood dispute provides "absolute vindication" that the U.S. duties were illegal and that Canadian lumber is not subsidized, opponents of the negotiated settlement said.

The U.S. Court of International Trade ordered the refund after having already found the duties were illegal."

Here's the link:

http://www.thenextagenda.ca/story/2006/10/19/133951/26

It makes one wonder why Harper was in such an extraordinary hurry to sign the deal given that the court was about to provide its ruling the next day.

Was it worth bringing David Emerson into the cabinet just so he could assist in Harper's betrayal of the softwood lumber industry?

Are you really naive enough to think that the U.S. lumber lobby wouldn't appeal this decision? Had the Harper Conservatives not settled this contentious issue it would be festering for years to come. If the Liberal's had gotten back into power we would still be putting up with morons insulting our largest trading partner, and we have already witnessed how effective that tactic was on many issues in getting them resolved. The reality is that the vast majority of Canadian's do not hate the U.S, just because they are the U.S. That priviledge is reserved for the members of both the Liberal and the NDP Parties.

[normanchateau]

If the Liberal's had gotten back into power we would still be putting up with morons insulting our largest trading partner, and we have already witnessed how effective that tactic was on many issues in getting them resolved.

Bullfeathers on both counts!!

Have you forgotten that Paul Martin permanently ended the political career of anti-American Carolyn Parrish by removing her from the Liberal caucus?

What has Stephen Harper obtained from the US that demonstrates his approach has been more effective? He failed to get the U.S. to change their policy on passports. And Conservative cabinet minister Emerson wasn't able to get a significantly better softwood lumber deal than Liberal cabinet minister Emerson.

[bradco]

"It's the best deal that they could get within the artificial deadline that they imposed on themselves. Had they waited until the US Court of International Trade ruled, as the court did last month, that all the illegal duties must be returned to Canada, the deal could very well have been better. The Cons were far too hasty in my opinion."

First of all, in the long string of favourable judgements this one more would have a negligible effect on the agreement. Second, US lumber would want to appeal it so things would get prolonged. It is necessary to sooner or later say enough is enough and get a settlement.

"And Conservative cabinet minister Emerson wasn't able to get a significantly better softwood lumber deal than Liberal cabinet minister Emerson."

Its not really about getting a better deal but having the intelligence to get the deal and sign it. Dragging on the rhetoric, partisan politics and legal battles was not in our best interest.

"What has Stephen Harper obtained from the US that demonstrates his approach has been more effective? He failed to get the U.S. to change their policy on passports"

Passport issue is a sensitive issue because it has to do with national security. After 9/11 national security policies are not going to be reversed. The difference is the conservative government went to the US and were able to negoiate , get an extension and work towards better solutions, instead of whining and criticising. Dont get me wrong I dont like the Bush administration one bit but whining and criticising is not how you conduct foreign relations, if you want solutions.

I attended an event with Ambassodor Wilkins who was asked if working with the new government has been better. He obviously tried to tiptoe this question but basically said that there is more willingness, mututal trust etc from both sides now which makes it possible to negoiate. The Liberals had no interest in negotaiting....they wanted to use Canadian-American relations and dislike for Bush as a partisan politics tool....which is quite clearly not in our best interest

[normanchateau]

"What has Stephen Harper obtained from the US that demonstrates his approach has been more effective? He failed to get the U.S. to change their policy on passports"

Passport issue is a sensitive issue because it has to do with national security. After 9/11 national security policies are not going to be reversed. The difference is the conservative government went to the US and were able to negoiate , get an extension and work towards better solutions, instead of whining and criticising. Dont get me wrong I dont like the Bush administration one bit but whining and criticising is not how you conduct foreign relations, if you want solutions.

So what exactly has Harper achieved that demonstrates an effective approach?

[bradco]

"What has Stephen Harper obtained from the US that demonstrates his approach has been more effective? He failed to get the U.S. to change their policy on passports"

Passport issue is a sensitive issue because it has to do with national security. After 9/11 national security policies are not going to be reversed. The difference is the conservative government went to the US and were able to negoiate , get an extension and work towards better solutions, instead of whining and criticising. Dont get me wrong I dont like the Bush administration one bit but whining and criticising is not how you conduct foreign relations, if you want solutions.

So what exactly has Harper achieved that demonstrates an effective approach?

Well there was an extension I believe....I think the current plan was to have it come into effect awhile ago (which it would have if Martin was in charge). They are currently still meeting to try to come up with solutions...we'll have to wait and see if anything comes from it. The difference is they are actually meeting....trying to do something....whining and crying about it would accomplish nothign for sure. Im hoping that the American security cards are sent out to all americans or the charge is very small. What matters for our economy is that yanks come up here I dont really care if Canadians dont go down there....doesnt inconvience me either cause I already have my passport which has been mandatory for flying into each others country for awhile (I dont drive anywhere )

[normanchateau]

"What has Stephen Harper obtained from the US that demonstrates his approach has been more effective? He failed to get the U.S. to change their policy on passports"

Passport issue is a sensitive issue because it has to do with national security. After 9/11 national security policies are not going to be reversed. The difference is the conservative government went to the US and were able to negoiate , get an extension and work towards better solutions, instead of whining and criticising. Dont get me wrong I dont like the Bush administration one bit but whining and criticising is not how you conduct foreign relations, if you want solutions.

So what exactly has Harper achieved that demonstrates an effective approach?

Well there was an extension I believe....I think the current plan was to have it come into effect awhile ago (which it would have if Martin was in charge). They are currently still meeting to try to come up with solutions...e'll have to wait and see if anything comes from it. The difference is they are actually meeting....trying to do something....whining and crying about it would accomplish nothign for sure. Im hoping that the American security cards are sent out to all americans or the charge is very small. What matters for our economy is that yanks come up here I dont really care if Canadians dont go down there....doesnt inconvience me either cause I already have my passport which has been mandatory for flying into each others country for awhile (I dont drive anywhere )

In other words, in terms of results, Harper has been no more effective than his predecessors in dealing with the US.

The US Congress did extend to 2009 the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative deadline for travel to and from Canada, Mexico, Central America, South America and the Caribbean because US authorities were unprepared for the earlier deadline. If you have evidence that this was Harper's doing, please present the evidence. I'm sure it will come as a huge surprise to the Mexican government as well as to the numerous US Congressmen who lobbied for an extension on the grounds that the earlier deadline would have a major negative impact on US border communities neighbouring Mexico and Canada.

[hiti]

Another loss for Steve and his southern buddies. Court nixes U.S. lumber group bid

Steve you didn't have to bend over for Dubya and then give him $1 billion for the privilege of getting scr**ed.

Quote: WASHINGTON — The U.S. lumber industry has lost its bid to have NAFTA's dispute settlement system declared unconstitutional.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit yesterday dismissed the case against a vital part of the North American free-trade agreement on what U.S. lumber companies described as a technicality.

Canada has won a string of NAFTA rulings in a dispute over Canadian lumber.

[normanchateau]

Another loss for Steve and his southern buddies. Court nixes U.S. lumber group bid

Steve you didn't have to bend over for Dubya and then give him $1 billion for the privilege of getting scr**ed.

Even US courts have now ruled against the US lumber lobby. Good thing Stephen Harper gave the lumber lobby that billion of our money. They can use those funds to keep fighting us in US courts. Now they a billion to fight us with our own dollars in future. Brilliant move Harper. It'll cost you votes in BC. No wonder Harper is now more than 10 points behind the Liberals in the latest BC poll.

[madmax]

Another loss for Steve and his southern buddies. Court nixes U.S. lumber group bid

Steve you didn't have to bend over for Dubya and then give him $1 billion for the privilege of getting scr**ed.

Even US courts have now ruled against the US lumber lobby. Good thing Stephen Harper gave the lumber lobby that billion of our money. They can use those funds to keep fighting us in US courts. Now they a billion to fight us with our own dollars in future. Brilliant move Harper. It'll cost you votes in BC. No wonder Harper is now more than 10 points behind the Liberals in the latest BC poll.

Well, I don't know about BC but I was at a trade show in Ontario, and I had been under the impression that Harper got the best deal he could. However, many in the industry don't have alot of good things to say about the deal or the conservatives based upon their rush to deal for the sake of a deal. I do know that Northern Communities have been hit hard by this, and It's unlikely he will grow seats in the area, but the general opionion of this trade show was that Harper Sold out, just to say he resolved it. Many just shook their heads in complete disgust.

[normanchateau]

Another loss for Steve and his southern buddies. Court nixes U.S. lumber group bid

Steve you didn't have to bend over for Dubya and then give him $1 billion for the privilege of getting scr**ed.

Even US courts have now ruled against the US lumber lobby. Good thing Stephen Harper gave the lumber lobby that billion of our money. They can use those funds to keep fighting us in US courts. Now they a billion to fight us with our own dollars in future. Brilliant move Harper. It'll cost you votes in BC. No wonder Harper is now more than 10 points behind the Liberals in the latest BC poll.

However, many in the industry don't have alot of good things to say about the deal or the conservatives based upon their rush to deal for the sake of a deal. I do know that Northern Communities have been hit hard by this, and It's unlikely he will grow seats in the area, but the general opionion of this trade show was that Harper Sold out, just to say he resolved it. Many just shook their heads in complete disgust.

Poor David Emerson. When he was a Liberal cabinet minister and the US lumber lobby offered him a similar deal last December during the election campaign, he recommened to Martin that it be turned it down. When Conservative cabinet minister Emerson went to Harper with the deal, Harper decided that it was the best deal that Canada could get so he took it and sold out the Canadian industry. Now the Canadian lumber industry is paying more in export duties than they paid in illegal US duties and the US still gets to keep a billion dollars in illegal duties. US courts ruled that the billion should be returned to Canada but that happened AFTER Harper hastily signed the deal so we'll never see the money.

Emerson must wonder at times why he accepted Harper's bribe.

[August1991]

Even US courts have now ruled against the US lumber lobby. Good thing Stephen Harper gave the lumber lobby that billion of our money.

US lumber lobby? Or Canadian lumber lobby?

Norman Chateau, look me in the face, and tell me honestly that Canadian lumber producers lost that money and not new house buyers in the US.

Who paid the money, the $1 billion? Americans or Canadians?

Because of these tariffs on softwood lumber, ordinary Americans paid a high price for a new house. We Canadians tried to help them but their Congress prevented us.

The $1 billion is not ours, it's theirs.

[normanchateau]

Even US courts have now ruled against the US lumber lobby. Good thing Stephen Harper gave the lumber lobby that billion of our money.

Who paid the money, the $1 billion? Americans or Canadians?

The $1 billion is not ours, it's theirs.

Really?

"MONTRÉAL, Nov. 15 /CNW Telbec/ - Abitibi-Consolidated Inc. today confirmed receipt of approximately US$225 million, pertaining to softwood lumber duty deposits made by the Company since 2002. The funds were transmitted to the Company through an agreement with the Export Development Corporation (EDC) of Canada."

I wonder why Abitibi-Consolidated received back their lumber duty deposits if they never paid those deposits to begin with?

And why is the Export Development Bank of Canada returning duty deposits to Canfor?

And why is 4 billion of the 5 billion in illegal duties returning ? If US consumers paid that 1 billion to build their homes as you claim, who owns the other 4 billion?

And why did the US Court of International Trade rule as follows on October 13, 2006 if the money was not ours:

"On October 13 the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) made it official: the Canada-U.S. softwood lumber dispute is over. Canada won. The tariffs and duties imposed by the U.S. on Canadian lumber exports are illegal. The U.S. must pay back every cent of the $5.2 billion collected from Canada since May 2002.

Unfortunately, Canadians will not be cracking out the champagne any time soon. The court’s ruling doesn’t matter because Stephen Harper’s government has already volunteered to lose the dispute. Instead of holding on just a few more months to finally reap the full returns of Canada’s successful legal fight before North American Free Trade Agreement panels, the World Trade Organization and U.S. courts, the Harper government locked Canadian lumber producers into a one-sided deal with George Bush.

In its ruling, the CIT justices recount the story of Canada’s impressive and successful legal challenges. In actions at the WTO, NAFTA and finally the CIT, Canada won round after round, appeal after appeal. The Americans’ legal avenues were cut off one by one. Back in April, following the defeat of U.S. “extraordinary appeals” of NAFTA rulings, it appeared that justice would finally prevail. The U.S. would be forced to concede at last that that there is no threat of injury to U.S. lumber producers from Canadian imports, nor is our lumber unfairly subsidized merely because the Crown owns most of our timber rights.

But then, along came the Harper-Bush deal. Instead of the clear, precise legal determination that flowed from the CIT verdicts, Canada was locked into a deal that capped at 34 per cent our share of the U.S. market, even though other countries are still allowed to ship unlimited amounts of duty-free lumber to the U.S.

While the CIT ruling means there is no basis for claiming Canadian companies receive subsidies, the Harper-Bush deal gives the U.S. oversight of Canadian provinces’ forest laws.

According to the Vancouver Sun’s Gordon Hamilton: “Friday’s court ruling is being viewed by most players as the ultimate irony rather than a chance to kick-start the legal battle again.”

And the deal is already biting in Canada. Last week at least ten wood processing plants closed on this side of the border, throwing out of work some 2,500 Canadians. “This is insanity,” says Russ Cameron of the Independent Lumber Remanufacturers Association, a man with an obvious gift for understatement. “We just gave away a billion dollars and subjected ourselves to a border tax. It doesn’t make a lot of sense. What we have done is rejuvenated the coalition, given them half a billion dollars for when we have to fight the next round.”

[scribblet]

Even US courts have now ruled against the US lumber lobby. Good thing Stephen Harper gave the lumber lobby that billion of our money.

US lumber lobby? Or Canadian lumber lobby?

Norman Chateau, look me in the face, and tell me honestly that Canadian lumber producers lost that money and not new house buyers in the US.

Who paid the money, the $1 billion? Americans or Canadians?

Because of these tariffs on softwood lumber, ordinary Americans paid a high price for a new house. We Canadians tried to help them but their Congress prevented us.

The $1 billion is not ours, it's theirs.

Good thing we got the deal considering there was no deal under the previous gov't. Ignore the spin its out of control LOL

[Charles Anthony]

And why is 4 billion of the 5 billion in illegal duties returning ? If US consumers paid that 1 billion to build their homes as you claim, who owns the other 4 billion?

That sounds like a politician's spin.

The U.S. consumers could have received more Canadian lumber and maybe at cheaper prices.

And why did the US Court of International Trade rule as follows on October 13, 2006 if the money was not ours:

To support the U.S. lumber firms. Why else??

The U.S. consumers are paying a LOT more for their lumber and it is to the advantage of the U.S. lumber producers to have a restricted market.

[normanchateau]

Even US courts have now ruled against the US lumber lobby. Good thing Stephen Harper gave the lumber lobby that billion of our money.

US lumber lobby? Or Canadian lumber lobby?

Norman Chateau, look me in the face, and tell me honestly that Canadian lumber producers lost that money and not new house buyers in the US.

Who paid the money, the $1 billion? Americans or Canadians?

Because of these tariffs on softwood lumber, ordinary Americans paid a high price for a new house. We Canadians tried to help them but their Congress prevented us.

The $1 billion is not ours, it's theirs.

Good thing we got the deal considering there was no deal under the previous gov't.

So are you saying that Liberal Cabinet Minister David Emerson was wrong to advise Paul Martin to turn down this deal when it was presented to him in December, 2005?