The Hook

kissing Canada goodbye

Actually I kissed it goodbye after the 1988 free-trade election. And I was right, the governments of Mulroney, Chretien and Martin did indeed destroy what Canada was.

Frank, I fought against that

Frank, I fought against that phoney free trade crap at the time, and still have a filing drawer of papers on the subject.

All the horror stories we predicted with the coming of the FTA have come true, and then the NAFTA, which topped the crime wave.

But all is not lost yet, as I found out many times in my life, when I escaped certain death in totally hopeless situations.

History has some very interesting and often funny ways to change direction overnight.

There's a Latin proverb : DUM SPIRO SPERO.
As long as I breathe, I hope.

Ed Deak.

Illigitimus Non Carborundum Est

As in, "Don't Let The Bastards Get You Down".

Fiat and Frank. I tried my best to fight the FTA and have a story about it you may find of interest.

I was a faller for many years and also built many log homes. I had to fight tooth and nail for every log and in 1974 bought a small quota from R.W. Henry Mills in Penticton when they shut down. It was only 25 truckloads a year but it took a year for the approval for the "quota transfer" to make it accross the Minister of Forests (or should I say Minister of Sawmills) desk.

Even though the quota was tiny in the big scheme, it gave me the same status as any other "established licensee". I got all the same notices from the BC Forest Service regarding changes to regulations (different than legislation) that all licensees (but not the public) were regularly sent.

I ran, as an independent, against Bill Bennett in the provincial election of 1983. As an Independent, on a Timber platform. I mention this only so you know that I really took this seriously and thought I could make a difference. And I think I did.

The first battle of the Softwood wars began when Reagan was in his first term. He was able to have the International Trade Commission sweep it under the rug.

As a Canadian and a BC logger I was astonished and appalled by the arguments that "won" that first round. The bumpf churned out by COFI (Council of Forest Industries but known by independent loggers as the Council of F@#$%$%% Idiots) were
1/ Canada came by her forest resources by sovereignty. It did not as a nation buy forests and then sell them for less than the cost. Canada could thereby give away her forest resources free of any charge whatsoever and not technically contravene the US Countervailing Duty laws.
Summary: Canada can give her timber away if she so chooses.
2/ Canadian Timber was "Generally Available". As in "For example, the steel and rubber sectors might not presently have a need for timber, but if that were to change, access to the resource would be available to them"

What a crock - the BC Govt had entered into agreements, not conveying rights to harvest "public timber" (it belongs to you and me as citizens of the province) to private enterprises. The contracts are all in the "Name Of Her Majesty The Queen". Help you understand why the phrase "Crown Timber" is still in our lexicon?

I'd be happy to expand on these elemental points, but TKALST, USD CVD law was young at the time of SW 1 and the framers had not been very explicit. This changed between rounds one and two, when rulings on carbon black from Mexico and tin from Morocco set precedents.

FTA/NAFTA Cont

I'm not sure this site will allow me to tag several submissions to complete the thoughts but try here .....

A congressman from Florida, Sam Gibbons, had brought forward a bill in the US Congress that was going to further strengthen CVD law. He told me that although Florida produces a lot of timber, (nearly as much as BC on an annual rotation) he hadn't fully understood the Softwood issue until he compared it to another big constituency, Florida-based shrimp fishermen. They were complaining that when they wanted to go fishing, they had to pull into a Chevron or Exxon fuel facility and pay market price for their fuel. However, when they got back to the dock to sell their shrimp, their prices were being undercut by Mexican boats which didn't have to buy their fuel, but got it free at Pemex platforms in the Gulf.

Durning his campaign for leadership of the PC Party, Brian Mulroney was dead against free trade. As he told an audience in Thunder Bay, it was "never".

Same lines came out of his mouth when he was running to be our PM.

Within a month of his election he came out to BC for a session with the "Captains" of our forest industry. they were nervous. The American complainants had launched the second round, had new lawyers, and new legislation backing up their claims.

They proposed that Canada enter into free trade talks with the US, and get Softwood off the front burner.

So Mulroney sang Irish Eyes with Reagan, then did a complete 180 from his leadership and election campaigns. All of a sudden free trade was our salvation.

But Reagan no longer had the prestige and weight he had carried in his first term. He was bombarded with Contra-Gate and Ollie North's adventures. He was a dead lame duck. Nevertheless he asked for authority from the US Senate Finance Committee to negotiate a fast-track trade deal with Canada.

I sat in on that hearing and saw Donald McDonald, a former Liberal cabinet minister who had been advocating for free trade with the US, bobbing about on the front bench waiting for the green light and had been invited to his following press conference.

But the Finance Committee turned Reagan down. Their letter, signed by 11 of the 20 members was polite and "Without Prejudice" but they insisted that "Softwood was a separate and outstanding matter that had to be dealt with by itself and they were not willing to let it get rolled into a "fast track" deal.

FTA/NAFTA Cont

It's important to note that a "fast track" deal is one that is negotiated between the executive branch and the foreign gov't, then approved or rejected as a package. Congress get's no opportunity to tinker with any clasues or provisions. It's take it or leave it.

So Reagan got shot down (and Thumper, as Donald McDonald was known, seemed crushed and agast at the decision - his press conference was cancelled) but what was Mulroney to do? He'd already done one 180. How could he go back to the Canadian public, and what would he tell them?

He'd rolled the dice in a gasme with huge stakes and lost.

Was he now going to go back to Canadians and say "I rolled the dice to try and protect our lumbering behemoths but it didn't work. I thought I could get softwood off the front burner with this deal but its not going to happen, so now I am, again, dead against free trade"?

No, he was now committed and put Pat Carney and Simon Reisman on the file to see what they could salvage.

The US lumber interests got a written promise from Reagan (I have a copy of the letter) that softwood would be dealt with outside the FTA.

Don't get me wrong - I am not aginst level playing fields, but when you go into a negotiation for dishonest reasons, and get caught with you pants down, the other side is going to play serious hardball.

But our Captians of industry did not give up.

Even though article 2011 of the FTA specifically exempted Softwood Canada came back, when Clinto was in his first term and the FTA was expanded into NAFTA, and guess what - the softwood clause was dropped. Basically the Lawyers for the US Timber industry dropped the ball and didn't notice their clients exemption was written out of NAFTA. but it didn't hold them back and they brough softwood 3, then 4.

4 was settled by a deal Bush's boy's cooked up to help make Harper look good. But if you look a it, that deal proves the old saw that an economist is but a blind man in a dark room looking for a black cow that isn't there. Harper, our first real "economist PM" signed a deal where the lower the price, the higher the tax. Go figure.

Nuff said for now. Hope I haven't bored you but you raised a subject I still have very strong feelings about.

Peter Griffiths