It depends on where you get your news.
Check out these two versions of the same report by Andrew Panetta of Canadian Press.
As it appears in the National Post;
BUSAN, South Korea (CP) – Prime Minister Paul Martin used an international summit to lecture U.S. President George W. Bush over softwood lumber and castigate American protectionism as a threat to global trade.
The softwood scolding was as choreographed as it was public, delivered in a private chat with Bush, repeated in a four-country leaders’ meeting, then rehashed for reporters in both of Canada’s official languages at the 21-country Asia Pacific Economic Co-operation forum.
Martin warned that U.S. tariffs on lumber will give pause to smaller countries considering trade deals with Washington and stall globalization talks.
The leaders of Canada, the U.S., Mexico and Peru were discussing building a Free Trade Area of the Americas and knocking down barriers at the World Trade Organization when the prime minister interjected with a message to Bush.
“I told him, ‘The problem you Americans have is if you can’t agree with your best ally – Canada – and you have the same problem with Mexico, how are you going to convince the rest of Latin America that it’s a good idea?’ ” Martin later recalled.
“Look, if the higher good of the United States is to have a free trade agreement of the Americas or free trade here (in the Pacific Rim) people are going to look askance if those agreements – once signed – are not honoured.”
He cast the warning in the starkest possible terms: that softwood-style protectionism from the U.S. could actually halt the globalization movement.
“We’re not going to have free trade of the Americas if that’s the precedent that’s been established, we’re not going to have free trade throughout the Asia-Pacific if that’s what occurs. Nor indeed are we going to have a successful WTO round.”
At the meeting, Martin also raised climate change and drilling in the Alaska National Wildlife Reserve, two areas where he and Bush disagree. He made a point of twice noting during a press conference that he and Bush disagree over global warming.
|
A toned-down version Ottawa Citizen – it excludes mention of Martins “choreography”
BUSAN, South Korea�– Prime Minister Paul Martin used an international summit to lecture U.S. President George W. Bush about protectionism on softwood lumber Friday, labelling it a threat to global free trade.
In a four-country leaders’ meeting during the Asia-Pacific summit, Martin told Bush that U.S. tariffs on lumber send a warning to smaller countries considering trade deals with Washington. Martin intervened as the leaders of Canada, U.S., Mexico and Peru discussed building a Free Trade Area of the Americas and knocking down trade barriers at the World Trade Organization.
He argued that American behaviour in the softwood dispute runs contrary to its goal of liberalized trade.
“Look, if the higher good of the United States is to have a free trade agreement of the Americas or free trade here (in the Pacific Rim) people are going to look askance if those agreements – once signed – are not honoured,” is how Martin summed up his message.
“I told him, ‘The problem you Americans have is if you can’t agree with your best ally – Canada – and you have the same problem with Mexico, how are you going to convince the rest of Latin America that it’s a good idea?’ ”
He said U.S. softwood tariffs violate the spirit of free trade and leaders will be leery of liberalized trade if the Americans don’t honour the agreements they already have.
“We’re not going to have free trade of the Americas if that’s the precedent that’s been established, we’re not going to have free trade throughout the Asia-Pacific if that’s what occurs. Nor indeed are we going to have a successful WTO round.”
At the meeting, Martin also raised climate change and drilling in the Alaska National Wildlife Reserve, two areas where he and Bush disagree. He made a point of twice noting during a press conference that he and Bush disagree over global warming.
|
The rest appears to be worded identically. So, who made the changes and why?
And isn’t this trade diplomacy at its finest? By using softwood to castigate Bush publicly for the purpose of pre-election posturing at home Martin is certain to move the issue forward with the administration – right into the “round file”.
Odd timing, this escalation of rhetoric – except when you consider that Martin has more to gain politically in milking this dispute for the anti-American vote, than he does from negotiating a settlement.
PMPM demonstrates form over substance. What he should be signalling is an executive management ability to tackle a business problem – which is what this is. He is a weak manager.
Martin could have made that point in private and long before now. He’s obviously playing to a certain audience with the hope of picking up some support in the upcoming election. Too bad the Lie-beral’s only have two thirds of the ridings spoken for with candidates nominated to date and how many more MP’s will drop out to not seek their seat again.
Always with the Earnscliffe-staged photo-ops!
The Girlie-Man tries growing a set for the benefit of the sheep at home – pathetic!!
I really, really hate that little gobshite Paul Martin! It’s a good thing that he isn’t within reach of me or we would both be in trouble. Using anti-Americanism as a re-election tool is despicable, and so is he. May the fleas of a thousand camels inhabit his crotch! I should tell you how I really feel about him. WAKE UP CANADA!
he learned at the hands of another master Americam hater – Chretien . . . when you are weak at home, when you are vulnerable at home, blame the USA.
There will not be a sttlement of the issue as long as the Lieberals need a boogeyman to shore up domestic support.
Oh and by the way, we do subsidize all sorts of our products, including lumber. The stumpage rates are so low they are a subsidy, just like if you are one of the lottery winning dairy farmers with a quota – Supply Management just keeps out foreign competition.
And now Martin & the Lieberals are courting David Orchard – now there is freer trader !!!
Orchard as a Liberal? What a hoot. That’ll attract pink Tories who’d probably vote NDP before CPC. Am I the only one who is beginning to think there could be some back-room deals happening to discredit Gomery in the run up to Chretien’s court challenge? Having learned how connected to/ensnared by the Martin’s clique in Quebec, I’m no longer enamoured of the man given his transparent exoneration of Martin. But with Pelletier now a winner in the first challenge, who’s next? I suspect a widening circle of Chretien appointed judges will begin to encircle the Gomery/Martin camp.
Iron Lady,
The Federal Court was the only one to give the Liberals a kick in the ass this week.
The Public Accounts Committee all agreed that the Government Relocation Contract, held by Royal LePage, should be audited by the Auditor General. A motion was passed by the PAC to have the AG audit this contract. Should be worse than ADSCAM considering the value of the relocation contract.
oops! Should read”NOT the only one”
I’m really shocked that a politician would behave like this.
Especially near an election.
We’ll never know, either, whether there has been pressure put to bear on judges to overturn decisions based on who appointed them. I wonder what the Chretien-Martin feud has cost English-Canadian taxpayers over the years? The decisions made based on spite? Martin’s election call right after he took office, even though it was totally unnecessary. I’m sure if the CPC can get at the books, we’ll see a trail of money that leads right to the roots of their hatred for each other. Those aren’t election machines that are roaring to life; they’re shredders in Liberal MPs’ offices.
Fred the stumpage rates are not a subsidy, you have obviously never worked in forestry .News flash Fred, Congress has just repealed the “Byrd Amendment” that was used by the U.S. lumber lobby to initiate the countervail duties on softwood in the first place. Next week it goes to the Senate, which will be a close vote. The WTO ruled the “Byrd” illegal three years ago and the NAFTA panel has ordered the Commerce Department to drop the duties before the end of next week and to return the duties collected.
Agreed Shaken
“He is a weak manager.”
In business it’s generally agreed, the absolute worst way to diffuse a problem or create a solution.
Is to verbally admonish a business contemporary unexpectedly in public.
Which just so happens to be the exact same way Chretien informed the US that Canada would no longer back the Americans in the Iraq war.
What does diplomacy mean in french?????
I know there is no love lost between Cretin and Dithers. Maurice Strong is pulling the strings. Why doesn’t the MSM reveal Maurice to a narcoleptic Canada? He is the Wizard behind the curtain pulling Dorothy’s er, Paulie’s strings.
PMPM is playing this card in hopes that it will prove to BC’ers that he is really looking after us. He’s counting on BC to give him the extra seats he needs. Too bad he didn’t speak to Gordon Campbell yesterday before the Liberal (and ndp) MLA’s gave themselves a big raise. This may be counterproductive to the Liberal name in B.C.
PMPM is a manager not a leader. The last leader we had was Mulroney who did things: GST and NAFTA. He was vilified for leading. Leading means taking people where they would not otherwise go. Leading change causes anxiety. Canadians want stability. Meanwhile the world is not stable, it changes. India and China emerge to compete with us while Ottawa dithers and plans- centrally.
PMPM is not interested in softwood solutions. He�s only interested in how to get re-elected, when he�s elected he will not lead. We�ll feel comfortable, until India and China take over our production now sold to the USA, our only international customer, which PMPM embarrasses on the world stage.
Stewart, the Lie-beral’s/NDP’ers are one in the same,federally and in B.C., why do you think Earnscliffe opened offices in Victoria and Vancouver? This attempt at public humiliation of Bush by Martin won’t help the federal Lie-beral’s in B.C. and will only serve to further widen the rift between the Bush administration and the outgoing embarrasment of Lie-beral government we have in Ottawa. My bet is the Lie-beral/NDP in B.C. pay raise will get put aside, the nerve of those thieving bastard’s, eh?
Bruce,
Stumpage is a provincial jurisdiction and varies by Province. Depending on Province and stumpage system and crown tenure arrangements and entitlements (the vast majority of forests other than the maritimes is Crown owned) ,in some cases could be argued for or against confering subsidy. However Log export restrictions (varying again by province) and the billion dollars that federal Industry Minister (and former Canfor CEO) David Emersen is preparing to throw at the forest industry are undeniable subsidies. This 150 year old dispute will not go away until we privatize forests used for timber production and or at the minimum, free up log export restrictions. And, I have worked in the forest industry.
Earnscliffe probably thought Christy Clark would become mayor and the Lower Mainland would be the Liberals for the plucking. They miscalculated, but no doubt should the Libs get what they actually deserve – annihilation – then I’m willing to bet they have a bail-out clause that leaves taxpayers paying rent on property they won’t need.
John Chittick, I was referring to B.C. where stumpage rates are high enough, some think to high and B.C. also exports more softwood lumber than all other provinces combined. Log export restrictions are not a subsidy(B.C. exports way too many raw logs right now), just go ask Washington State about their restrictions.
The money Emerson and the Lie-beral’s are perparing to throw at the industry may be contrued by some as a subsidy, but I call it for what it is, an attempt at vote buying by a corrupt, morally bankrupt, ethically challenged and scandal ridden government. Besides, the money the Fibs are promising will never happen, because it’s just another Lie-beral election promise that’s not worth a racoon turd!
John Chittick, I also add that by the way talk you are probably a Yankee working for Weyerhauser in B.C., a company which has raped the private forest lands they aquired from MacBlo and shipped the logs south and are now in the process of selling their assets in B.C., real good corporate citizens, eh? British Columbia should have a blanket ban on raw log exports as does Washington State.
You’re trees cannot be Socialist Citizens of The State! Unlike, socialist citizens of the state, your trees have actual market value.
Tom Penn, Which of the fifty states are you referring to? The states currently held by Democrat’s?
Bruce
The only restrictions on Washington State log exports involve US federal lands which no longer (thanks to the ESA) contribute any significant volume. Private and State lands have no such restrictions. Try telling a Washington or Idaho sawmiller that the logs from southern BC that he is not allowed to pay 25% more for (average premium for export logs) than his northern competitors who ship past his yard on a daily basis, are not a subsidy!
The emotional and totally irrational opposition to log exports is a testiment to the success of brain-dead union politics. Why should the owner of timberlands (Crown or private) not receive maximun value for a product that takes 40 to 120 years to grow?
Isn’t it ironic that the same ideology that chains individuals to trees in the US will cut them down by the acre with no apologies in Canada?
So according to John and Tom, we should ship processing jobs from B.C. to the U.S., those two are retards. All provinces and territories in Canada should maximize the value of all raw materials before export, this makes economic sense and has nothing to do with unions or socialist’s.
Just because U.S. corporations have been out sourcing manufacturing to China doesn’t mean Canada should be shipping jobs to the U.S.
Look what happened with beef, a lot more processing capacity was built in Canada to handle Canadian beef instead of shipping live cattle to the states. A lot of good the beef ban did for you , eh?
I’ll bet if we can get Svend back in parliament he will turn that soft wood in hard wood pretty quick. I think it would be theraputic for his fragile esteem these days.
And for a laugh once in awhile visit:
http://dukemcgoo.blogspot.com
Bruce
This post started about the nature of subsidies. You lost that argument so, in addition to hurling personal insults, now you want to protect inefficient processing jobs.
Due to the high cost of log transport by truck, few sawmills would actually be affected in BC with no log export restrictions and in fact more coastal wood could come on stream as most coastal timber is currently uneconomical given existing conditions. The status quo will see more mill closures than if log export restrictions were lifted
So, for the potential protection of a few southern mills, namely Pope and Talbot (headquartered in Portland Oregon), you think we should favour the tariffs which punish the entire industry?
The WTO ruled the “Byrd Amendment” illegal, it has been repealed by Congress,it was the tool the American lumber lobby used to initiate the tariff’s.
The NAFTA panel has also ruled against the tariff’s and has ordered the Commerce Department to drop the duties and refund the duties collected. The “Byrd” has it’s last vote in the Senate next week, it will be close. Don’t rule out Bush intervening in the interests of free trade. How many logs get exported from the U.S. to Canada? Hmmm.
Although I’m retired now, I worked in the forest industry for years. What Bruce Randall says is correct – the Byrd Amendment is indeed illegal – but that’s about all Mr Randall is correct about. I would encourage readers to review what John Chittick has written. Why? Because he’s right about stumpage being a subsidy and, more important, he obviously knows the industry and understands it.
Humans are a result of global warming not the cause.
think glaciers. think ice age, think furs, think freezing your nutz off.
the earth wouldnt be supporting 5billion naked apes with glaciers all the way into Italy and South Dakota.—like the last one.
Bruce, Bruce, Bruce! You wrote
“John Chittick, I also add that by the way talk you are probably a Yankee working for Weyerhauser in B.C., a company which has raped the private forest lands they aquired from MacBlo and shipped the logs south and are now in the process of selling their assets in B.C., real good corporate citizens, eh”?
I’ve heard all that crap about raping the forests before except it was usually aimed at MacMillan Bloedel when I heard it. All at once MB, now that they are dead and gone, have become the “good guys” and suddenly it’s Weyerhaeuser and Brascan who are the evil-doers. Careful with your Yankee-bashing, Bruce. You’re starting to sound suspiciously like a Liberal …. even though I know you ain’t.
Byrd ammendment, raccoon turds what no spotted owl? So all these comments IS stumpage a subsidy or a tarriff? I’m in California we hardly have trees around so help me here. If your dumping lumber under cost to produce is it a subsidy. However if we are taxing per log to even out costs is that not a subsidy as well for us?
BCer, you worked in the forest industry in the U.S. and you’re American, why can’t you accept the fact that the WTO and the NAFTA panel have both ruled that British Columbia’s stumpage system is in no way, shape or form a subsidy, the same goes for the rest of the country. What will your argument be when the “Byrd” is gone and the duties are returned? Some of you Yanks just can’t take it when you lose and you’ve lost this one.
The Byrd Amendment only allows the proceeds of the tariffs to go to so-called “injured parties”. I hope it goes away! It has no effect on the allegations of subsidy. If you read the NAFTA rulings you will find that they are based mostly on obscure technicalities. Thats why the Americans choose to ignore it. Its not a “fair world” but if you want to sell unrestricted in their market you better have a clean house.
Over the last decade it might surprise you to learn that when it comes to net exports of “raw logs” to the US(why aren’t we as concerned with raw wheat, oil, coal, etc. exports?) that Canada is a net importer as often as an exporter. Your protectionist counterparts in the State of Maine cry foul that New Brunswick Sawmills take their “raw logs” as does BC from Alaska.
You can’t be a free trader and selectively single out one product that must, by the force of law be processed domestically. These policies cost far more jobs than they theoretically protect.
You know, Bruce, I’ve always wanted to do a count of how many cubic meters of our sawlogs go to the Americans and how many cubic meters of American (Alaskan) pulp logs come to our P&P mills. I believe the number would be very surprising. Also…….. me? An American? In your dreams. Born and bred right here.
The NAFTA panel ruling’s are based on obscure technicalities? Right, and the moon is made of cheese.
Sure BCer, compare pulp logs to saw logs, real good comparison. Which is worth more per cubic metre in value as a log and in value for jobs? Dah! You say you were born and bred here,that’s suprising, are you a cake eater that worked in a pulp mill? Or a log trader?
(Note to Bruce: Your arguments would go a lot further if you didn’t label anyone who disagreed with you a “Yankee” – especially if from their comments it’s pretty clear that person is in fact Canadian. I *am* an American and – like most Americans – know very little about this whole softwood mess – except that when any Canadian, including my husband, tries to explain it to me it always sounds like the stumpage thingy is a gov’t subsidy. At least in American terms. Maybe not to Canadians. BTW, don’t ever call me a “Yankee”, either – Americans from south of the Mason-Dixon line don’t cotton to that, it’s only been 140 years since the War Between the States. Handy hints from your friendly American in Edmonton.)
Thanks for the hint Meg Q, I wouldn’t want to offend a southern ladies sensibilities.
I think Bruce is a victim of his countries own propaganda!
Buddy, if you can’t get past your obvious penis envy of the US, you and the rest of your lefty buddies will destroy what little shred of dignity Canada has in this dispute.
If Canadians reward PMPM for his bluster and transparently thin bravado, then we’ve been looking in the wrong place for stumps. How resoundingly childish it is to define oneself in terms of negatives: I am Canadian, that is, I am anti-American. Yawn.
Does PMPM think Central, South and Latin America are not aware of the status of this dispute? Of course they are. So, who is tha audience for this shadow-boxing? It is the insecure Canadian: “I don’t know what I am, but I sure know what I’m not, eh”.
More accurate would be “I am Canadian, therefore, I am in favour of inviting cultures that shoot each other at churches, ladling out of the Indian gravy train, siphoning off the top of contracts awarded to buddies, putting the lives of our uniformed at risk in inadequate equipment while the efite fly their chauffeurs across the pond on private jets, manufactured by their loan forgiving aerospace pals in Montreal, and every other kind of corruption and misadventure – as long as I get to feel superior and smug”.
The real effect of re-electing the Liberals is to make plain what it really means to be Canadian: “I am Unprincipled”.
Bruce, John et al, I believe too that the stumpage fees are in fact a subsidy. However, for NAFTA to work, isnt it incumbent upon all sides to follow the rulings of the NAFTA panel that decided this issue? If not, what is the purpose of the agreement or the panel?
Would it not be wise in this situation, for the US to return the money and then put up a fight against these subsidies?? What say you?
hey bruce Randall
On Wednesday, Nov.16, 2005 , the Commerce Department said it will meet the Nov.23 deadline to comply with the NAFTA panel order that the U.S. drastically cut it’s duties on Canadian softwood lumber. The panel is calling on the Commerce department to all but eliminate punitive duties that average more than 16%.
This will also mean that the duties collected will have to be returned, because they were collected illegaly.
The “Byrd Amendment” should also be repealed before Nov.23, 2005.
As long as the fundamentals of public forest land ownership along with whatever politically contrived system is employed to collect stumpage and restrict log access is up against a country where the Crown was kicked out over 2 centuries earlier and whose timber industry depends (like most of the civilized world), on private property, this dispute will continue. Visit bcpf.org for more info.
Thanks for being the establishment strait guy, Bruce. You are in good company – Fed and Provincial Liberals, NDP, industry / union lobbiests, soccer moms, Council of Canadians, etc.
Sorry John, your wrong, better try that again. I don’t keep company with any that you’ve listed, except soccer moms.
Help Kate. rescue us. This thread is boring and off in stumpage land.
About the articles. Martins’ a player and each paper seems to decide how to make him pay for it or support his tricks.
Since Alexander Panetta gets criticized at times for being tough on Martin and the Liberals, it is likely that the Post’s version is nearest to hers and the Citizen edited heavily.
I don’t know the user rules or contracts on CP stories or if CP is something that all member papers have equity or shares…but can they doctor to fit their agenda?
I guess one could argue forever the merits or demerits of the soft wood dispute. What really worries me is the way the federal liberal party can manage the media in our country. For any nation to thrive and prosper a free and impartial media is a basic requirement. We just don’t have that in Canada and our grandchildren will pay the price. I hope that they can forgive us for letting this mess happen.
Yes, I’ll agree with you here, Steve. The post is about media presentation of the facts – and though I did mention the softwood issue, it wasn’t in the context of who is right or wrong (as with most of these, the probabilities are heavily weighted towards both), but the more important issue remains this:
Paul Martin just threw a billion dollar bone to the lumber industry because wants them to stay on the sidelines while he ramps up the Bush bashing.
It’s cheap, it’s shoddy, it’s going to hurt everyone in the export business over the long run – and so f*cking typically Canadian.
We agree.
I try not to let it happen again.
Keeps the echo down.