US Refuses our Lumber but wants our Water

[August1991]

Canada is in secret talks with the United States that could lead to the bulk export of water south of the border, Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion charges.

"The pressure coming from our American friends to remove Canadian water to help their problems with the shortage of fresh water is very strong," Dion told a news conference yesterday.

"There is a strong lobby for that. We should be strong to resist that."

Toronto Star

Why is that Dion (and Layton etc) are angry if the US wants to buy our water and yet Dion (and Layton etc) are also angry if the US refuses to buy our wood? It seems that whatever the Americans do, don't do, want to do - or refuse to do, the Americans are wrong.

And what is it with the word "bulk" that frightens everyone? Can we sell bottled water to Americans? If we sell Americans wood in small firewood satchels, or as Christmas trees, is that OK?

----

There's a broader domestic political agenda here. Dion is trying to paint himself into the NDP/English Canadian nationalist/no truck with the Yankees corner. Will it be a vote-getter for him?

"Americans for us are friends and allies but not a model," Dion said.

"Since Mr. Harper became Prime Minister and his government took power, the distinction between a model and a friend has been lost.

"It seems that increasingly the partnership is catering to the Bush administration's interests and Canadian interests are being ignored."

Trudeau learned early that English-Canada doesn't like a federal PM who kowtows (faire la courbette) to the Americans. Chretien played that card and now Dion seems to be trying to play the same card. Trudeau was an astute card player. Chretien was just a loud-mouth who had no opposition.

Dion would be wise to seek his own counsel.

Edited August 19, 2007 by August1991

[Riverwind]

And what is it with the word "bulk" that frightens everyone? Can we sell bottled water to Americans? If we sell Americans wood in small firewood satchels, or as Christmas trees, is that OK?

Once we start selling bulk water to the Americans we can never stop - even if it creates huge hardship to Canadians. For that reason we must insist that bulk water is not a tradeable good.

That said, if the Americans were desperate enough to accept deals that would allow Canada to unilaterally shut down the exports at any time in the future because circumstances change then it might be worth considering.

Edited August 19, 2007 by Riverwind

[jdobbin]

And what is it with the word "bulk" that frightens everyone? Can we sell bottled water to Americans? If we sell Americans wood in small firewood satchels, or as Christmas trees, is that OK?

The word "bulk" could include Lake Ontario. An American company, if forbidden from drawing bulk water from Lake Ontario by pipeline, could sue Canada for denying it a business opportunity. They could then assess the entire value of the water in the lake as a "beverage."

This is why people are afraid of bulk sales. I know some in Quebec still have a dream about damming up James Bay to export water to a thirsty south but once that genie is out of the bottle, companies could sue for the right draw whatever water they can for export with no thought to supply.

[Riverwind]

companies could sue for the right draw whatever water they can for export with no thought to supply.

I am not certain this is exactly true. Truely desperate environmental problems might sway the tribunal in the government's side. However, the onus would be on the government to prove that the restrictions are justified which is a rediculous burden.

There other problem is the the nature of the great lakes: there water can never be replaced if it is shipped out of the watershed.

[Riverwind]

companies could sue for the right draw whatever water they can for export with no thought to supply.

I am not certain this is exactly true. Truely desperate environmental problems might sway the tribunal in the government's side. However, the onus would be on the government to prove that the restrictions are justified which is a rediculous burden.

There other problem is the the nature of the great lakes: there water can never be replaced if it is shipped out of the watershed.

[Riverwind]

companies could sue for the right draw whatever water they can for export with no thought to supply.

I am not certain this is exactly true. Truely desperate environmental problems might sway the tribunal in the government's side. However, the onus would be on the government to prove that the restrictions are justified which is a rediculous burden to place on the government.

There other problem is the the nature of the great lakes: there water can never be replaced if it is shipped out of the watershed.

Choosing not to sell something at any price is a basic premise of capitalism. If Canadians don't want to sell water then they should not be expected to.

[jdobbin]

I am not certain this is exactly true. Truely desperate environmental problems might sway the tribunal in the government's side. However, the onus would be on the government to prove that the restrictions are justified which is a rediculous burden.

There other problem is the the nature of the great lakes: there water can never be replaced if it is shipped out of the watershed.

We have already faced this type of lawsuit in the past.

http://www.aidc.org.za/?q=book/view/155

The discovery today that a U.S. company intends to sue Canada over a British Columbia decision to ban bulk water exports has revealed another gaping hole in the North American Free Trade Agreement, says the Council of Canadians. Sun Belt Water, Inc., of Santa Barbara, has filed notice of intent to submit a claim against Canada under Chapter 11 of NAFTA, for stopping exports of billions of gallons of fresh water from British Columbia to California.

"The B.C. government acted to protect a natural resource, but under NAFTA they have to pay for that privilege," says Maude Barlow, chair of the Council of Canadians. "If our government has any hope or intention of preserving Canada's fresh water as a publicly-owned and controlled resource, it has to plug the holes in NAFTA now or risk sinking with the ship. The push to privatize water is on. If Canadians want to maintain control of their fresh water, we must demand that the federal government act - beginning with a moratorium on all bulk water exports and facing the truth that NAFTA is a bad deal."

[Riverwind]

We have already faced this type of lawsuit in the past.

The question is not whether somebody would try to sue - the question is whether the tribunal would rule in their favour. Trade restrictions can be justifed on environmental grounds but the onus is placed on the government to prove that restrictions are justified.

[jdobbin]

The question is not whether somebody would try to sue - the question is whether the tribunal would rule in their favour. Trade restrictions can be justifed on environmental grounds but the onus is placed on the government to prove that restrictions are justified.

Those are the type of restrictions that might be threatened by by any re-negotiation on bulk sales.

[Drea]

The question is not whether somebody would try to sue - the question is whether the tribunal would rule in their favour. Trade restrictions can be justifed on environmental grounds but the onus is placed on the government to prove that restrictions are justified.

They (America) does not understand the concept of "publicly owned".

Just like they don't understand the concept of "crown land" and when they had a problem with our stumpage fees (money paid TO the govt BY the forest companies) they called it a subsidy TO forest companies.

The same will happen with our water.

Water is the next big commodity and we had better make sure our supply is securely in the hands of Canadians (the lot of us - the "public". )

[Borg]

When we offer up water we will offer up sovereignty.

Borg

[Wilber]

When we offer up water we will offer up sovereignty.

Borg

I don't know, for the most part fresh water is a renewable resource. Most of it falls out of the sky and eventually, that which isn't used either evaporates or finds its way into one of the worlds oceans. Oil, gas and minerals are not renewable but we have no problem with selling them to foreign countries.

Edited August 19, 2007 by Wilber

[margrace]

No water apparently is not renewable it is a disappearing resource. You can live for a month without food but without water only three days. Watch out for the bafflegarb denying this. Like some posters some people believe all for one, themselves and the rest can die of thirst.

[Borg]

I don't know, for the most part fresh water is a renewable resource. Most of it falls out of the sky and eventually, that which isn't used either evaporates or finds its way into one of the worlds oceans. Oil, gas and minerals are not renewable but we have no problem with selling them to foreign countries.

To a certain extent you are correct. However - it can be removed at a rate faster than replenishment. Witness the desertification of the southern U.S. of A.

Sign over rights to water and we will see water disappear.

Some day it will happen - either by signature or by force.

It is an area of "vital interest".

Borg

[Riverwind]

I don't know, for the most part fresh water is a renewable resource. Most of it falls out of the sky and eventually, that which isn't used either evaporates or finds its way into one of the worlds oceans. Oil, gas and minerals are not renewable but we have no problem with selling them to foreign countries.

When we run out of oil and minerals we can always find something else to make money doing since land is still mostly useable. If we run out of water we are screwed.

[Wilber]

No water apparently is not renewable it is a disappearing resource. You can live for a month without food but without water only three days. Watch out for the bafflegarb denying this. Like some posters some people believe all for one, themselves and the rest can die of thirst.

It is not a disappearing resource, it is being renewed all the time. It is being used at a greater rate than it is being renewed in some parts of the world but it is definitely not disappearing. Just ask those who are getting hit by Hurricane Danny. It ain't raining salt water. Canada has a small population and the majority of the worlds fresh water. There is no way we will be able to hoard it while the rest of the world increasingly goes thirsty. We will have to try and ensure its use by others doesn't drastically effect our environment.

[Drea]

The point is that we need to maintain control of it. The worst thing that we could do is sell it off to the highest bidder (privatize it). I freely drink water from the tap and want to keep it that way for many generations. What would happen if our watersheds were sold off to private companies? Would the private corporation allow logging in the watershed? (they are in it for the money after all) What could us private citizens do if the corporation decided to do this? At least with public ownership we have some semblance of control over it.

[B. Max]

No water apparently is not renewable it is a disappearing resource. You can live for a month without food but without water only three days. Watch out for the bafflegarb denying this. Like some posters some people believe all for one, themselves and the rest can die of thirst.

There is no more or no less water on the earth than there ever was. I thought you were a disciple of Al Gore. If the water is disappearing then we don't have to worry about the sea rising twenty feet.

[bush_cheney2004]

There is no more or no less water on the earth than there ever was. I thought you were a disciple of Al Gore. If the water is disappearing then we don't have to worry about the sea rising twenty feet.

Excellent observation.....Al Gore will save us! Or the USA can desalinate every drop from the rising oceans.

[Drea]

And Bangladesh just flooded. Why don't the people simply stick their faces in the water and drink it? It's water after all innit?

Because it is not drinkable. There is a lot of water on earth but not all of it is potable. We (Canada) happen to have the world's largest supply of potable fresh water. You can literally stick your face in it and drink.

[bush_cheney2004]

We (Canada) happen to have the world's largest supply of potable fresh water. You can literally stick your face in it and drink.

Even when it is frozen?

[B. Max]

Excellent observation.....Al Gore will save us! Or the USA can desalinate every drop from the rising oceans.

Void of a rational thought process, the left runs from one perceived crisis to the next in a fit of frenzy like a chicken with its head cut off.

[Drea]

Anything rational to add to the topic there boys?

Got a problem with Canada protecting it's watersheds? Discuss it.

But you cannot, so you simply resort to what you know best -- insults. The debating technique of "insult 'em" does nothing for your position on the topic it only makes you look like idiots.

[B. Max]

Anything rational to add to the topic there boys?

Got a problem with Canada protecting it's watersheds? Discuss it.

But you cannot, so you simply resort to what you know best -- insults. The debating technique of "insult 'em" does nothing for your position on the topic it only makes you look like idiots.

How are we protecting it by watching run past our front door and out into the ocean.

[Drea]

We can protect it by not selling it off to private enterprise. By making sure no (or very limited) logging activity occurs in the watershed.