quote:

Originally posted by Moral Hazard we were in compliance with NAFTA, the US was not,

Wrong. The NAFTA panel ruled that Canada was illegally subsidizing lumber companies.

http://www.nafta-sec-alena.org/app/...%5Cua02030e.pdf

However, the U.S. also violated NAFTA by collecting duties (via the Byrd Amendment) in response to the illegal subsidy.

The issue was the amount of compensation due to U.S. companies, and the proper mechanism for distributing that compensation. That same NAFTA panel ruled that the U.S. tariff was too high.

In other words, the U.S. companies deserved compensation, but it's debatable whether $1 billion was the proper amount. Unless I see an econometric analysis to the contrary, this was the best deal we could have gotten.

___________________
Nathan Fake - Outhouse (Valentino Kanzyani Remix) || ID PLZ! PVD ID!!!
Disco and classical had sex while watching a sci-fi movie. Their child: trance.

quote:

Originally posted by ShadoWolf Unless I see an econometric analysis to the contrary, this was the best deal we could have gotten.

Correction, we got the best deal we could have gotten right now. A better deal can always be had, especially when you have the upper hand in the dispute as we did.... it just takes time and will. Apparently we were lacking the latter.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by RickyM you're just a shit version of Moral Hazard. At least he knows what he's talking about.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN lol, i love it when moral feels the need to lay the smack down

I'm glad Harper's getting them to pay back some of the money, but aren't we still losing like 1/5 of it or something?

Don't be too hard on me, I don't know too much about politics

___________________
Shut up and DANCE!!
House moves my body, Trance owns my soul, Progressive drives me wild

quote:

Originally posted by MarkT ^^^ exactly! the rationale seems to be that "any deal is better than no deal" and that's simply not true. x 100 if by "diplomacy" you mean "give up"...sure. Anyone can just concede to the other side...because that's exactly what Harper's gov't appears to have done. We didn't even get back all of the money that was ILLEGALY taken by the U.S....people think we should be celebrating getting a PORTION of OUR OWN MONEY back??? Concensus seems to be that the deal also heavily favours BC producers (and Quebec, to a lesser extent), while Ontario has had it's production capped at levels below the status quo, which will no doubt eventually mean lost jobs here. Thanks for standing up for all of Canada Mr. Harper...keep up the great work

agreed.....

the moment I heard the deal was struck - I was kinda glad - then sad and then mad.......

plus what "other shit" was discussed as part of why this deal was struck like this.....GOD ONLY KNOWS.....did Steve Harper sells Canada's soul for 4 Billon bucks.....only time will tell..

___________________
IF YOU GOT TRANCE IN YOUR PANTS WHIP IT OUT!!! IF NOT JUST WHIP IT OUT ANYWAY!!!

quote:

Originally posted by *~LiSa-LoO~* I'm glad Harper's getting them to pay back some of the money, but aren't we still losing like 1/5 of it or something? Don't be too hard on me, I don't know too much about politics

you are correct....however...it would be safe to assume that we would have never received all of what is owing.

Personally, I think Harper is trying to get on Bush's good side. Harper looks up to Bush and Harper will do anything to get approval from Bush.

quote:

Originally posted by ChemEnhanced you are correct....however...it would be safe to assume that we would have never received all of what is owing.

THat just blows my mind...it's like what's the point of even having laws if ppl who are "above the law" don't ahve to obey them?

___________________
Shut up and DANCE!!
House moves my body, Trance owns my soul, Progressive drives me wild

quote:

Originally posted by *~LiSa-LoO~* THat just blows my mind...it's like what's the point of even having laws if ppl who are "above the law" don't ahve to obey them?

Yeah, it's unbelievable that Canada was able to get away with its illegal subsidies to Canadian companies for so long. Many American lumber workers, especially in northern states, lost their jobs as a result. It's unfortunate that the U.S. had to take unilateral (and itself illegal) action to help its lumber industry survive. $1 billion may not be the proper amount of compensation... then again, it just might be.

___________________
Nathan Fake - Outhouse (Valentino Kanzyani Remix) || ID PLZ! PVD ID!!!
Disco and classical had sex while watching a sci-fi movie. Their child: trance.

looks like this may not be over after all...

from today's Toronto Star:

quote:

Ont. lumber groups sue over softwood May 16, 2006. 04:38 PM CANADIAN PRESS Two Ontario lumber industry organizations are seeking legal action to force a final ruling under the North American Free Trade Agreement that Canadian lumber is not unfairly subsidized. The Ontario Lumber Manufacturers Association and the Ontario Forest Industries Association said Tuesday they are filing actions in the U.S. Court of International Trade and U.S. Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia challenging the suspension by the Canadian and American governments of NAFTA panel proceedings on the issue. "The two federal governments have conspired to prevent Canadian private industry from finalizing a decision of a NAFTA panel for which we fought for four long years," stated Jamie Lim, president of the Forest Industries Association. The panel found Canadian softwood lumber is not subsidized, and ``that decision should be final and recognized," Lim said. "The United States does not want it recognized and, regrettably, the government of Canada has gone along." David Milton, president of the lumber makers' association, added that the governments are violating their NAFTA obligations because legally "there is no such thing as the suspension of a proceeding in NAFTA." The organizations note that despite the softwood lumber trade agreement announced by the two governments April 27 — ending highly punitive U.S. tariffs if import limits and prices are maintained — the Canadian lumber industry must continue depositing about $40 million a month in estimated countervailing duties. The NAFTA panel called for an end to this, Lim and Milton stated, but the two governments "are trying to avoid this legal decision by preventing the extraordinary challenge, launched by the United States, from going forward." The legal action by the two Ontario groups in the Court of Appeals in Washington contends that if the governments are right in refusing to appoint judges to an extraordinary challenge committee, NAFTA itself is unconstitutional because it violates U.S. property due-process rights. The other suit in the Court of International Trade serves notice on Ottawa that the associations will be seeking to compel arbitration, and sues the United States for failing to proceed with the extraordinary challenge as, the associations say, is required by NAFTA and U.S. law. The Ontario groups say the United States has continued with lumber-related litigation despite the announced framework agreement. "As long as there is no signed and final agreement, there is no agreement," stated Milton, "and we must protect our rights as much as the Americans are protecting theirs." Ontario Natural Resources Minister David Ramsay said he's concerned that the legal action "might be a complicating factor" for a Canada-U.S. deal that was supposed to eliminate all outstanding litigation involving the dispute. "It's probably not something that is, I suppose, desirable to get a conclusion to this deal," Ramsay said. "Ontario still stands by the deal as it's been structured right now and we'd like to see it finalized," he added.