Knows No Bounds
Posts: 3,154 
July 14th, 2006, 03:45 PM
You could be right! It's interesting - and encouraging - to see the forest industry here displaying its backbone. We have lost so much to multinationals in the last ten years, it's almost difficult to conceive of a made-in-Canada backlash to American subterfuge. Yes, you could be right.
You could be right! It's interesting - and encouraging - to see the forest industry here displaying its backbone. We have lost so much to multinationals in the last ten years, it's almost difficult to conceive of a made-in-Canada backlash to American subterfuge. Yes, you could be right.
what green dots?
Posts: 3,157
July 14th, 2006, 09:17 PM
They've been flat out refusing to arrange loan guarantees all spring because of this deal. Unless they're ready to pass out pitch forks to go with that particular stack of political hay its too late now. For Steve, it'll be best to let parliament fall on the issue* (BEFORE the $marriage$definition$vote$) and hope Canada fails the IQ test.
* as much as Steve wants it to look like he's playing brinksmanship, because it involves a tax measure this will be a confidence vote whether he says so or not.
They've been flat out refusing to arrange loan guarantees all spring because of this deal. Unless they're ready to pass out pitch forks to go with that particular stack of political hay its too late now. For Steve, it'll be best to let parliament fall on the issue* (BEFORE the $marriage$definition$vote$) and hope Canada fails the IQ test.
* as much as Steve wants it to look like he's playing brinksmanship, because it involves a tax measure this will be a confidence vote whether he says so or not.
Knows Too Much
Posts: 2,004
Location: Proud to be in Alberta
Location: Proud to be in Alberta
July 14th, 2006, 11:31 PM
Being a Conservative supporter, I will also say that it appears to me that this issue was dealt with on a far more urgent and decisive issue than the Cretin and Martin regimes dealt with it.
Seriously, though, I would like to hear from people in the industry about their response to this issue. As a person with absolutely no connection to the lumber issue, I am hardly one to be making judgements.
Quoting
So, out of curiousity, how would you have handled this? I freely admit that SWL is not one of the topics I have an intimate knowledge of, so from my viewpoint and reading both US and Canadian responses, it seems to be that both sides are upset with this deal. This, as a self avowed layman in this area, would seem to indicate that this may have been the best deal we could get.
You could be right! It's interesting - and encouraging - to see the forest industry here displaying its backbone. We have lost so much to multinationals in the last ten years, it's almost difficult to conceive of a made-in-Canada backlash to American subterfuge. Yes, you could be right.
Being a Conservative supporter, I will also say that it appears to me that this issue was dealt with on a far more urgent and decisive issue than the Cretin and Martin regimes dealt with it.
Seriously, though, I would like to hear from people in the industry about their response to this issue. As a person with absolutely no connection to the lumber issue, I am hardly one to be making judgements.
what green dots?
Posts: 3,157
July 15th, 2006, 12:30 AM
Since the irony of this whole thing is, as the WTO rightly calls it, the "unfair advantage" is that our industry is premised on collective ownership of resources (ie. Socialism), personally I'm not at all opposed to a reasonable export tax as long as we're allowed to reinvest the funds directly back into green initiatives within the industry. But as soon as I heard the tax level was scaled to "market conditions" and calibrated to the post-Katrina peak in the market I knew it was whacked.
and if the rule of law really does matter a tinker's damn in Steve World, we should be getting back EVERY
SINGLE
PENNY.
Quoting
This was Emmerson's file BEFORE he changed his spots; that's why Steve grabbed him. Condescending Steve didn't do squat on this other than cave in for the photo op and assume voters will be too stupid to actually figure it out and the Liberals will be too chicken to call him on it in Parliament at roll call.
Being a Conservative supporter, I will also say that it appears to me that this issue was dealt with on a far more urgent and decisive issue than the Cretin and Martin regimes dealt with it.
Since the irony of this whole thing is, as the WTO rightly calls it, the "unfair advantage" is that our industry is premised on collective ownership of resources (ie. Socialism), personally I'm not at all opposed to a reasonable export tax as long as we're allowed to reinvest the funds directly back into green initiatives within the industry. But as soon as I heard the tax level was scaled to "market conditions" and calibrated to the post-Katrina peak in the market I knew it was whacked.
and if the rule of law really does matter a tinker's damn in Steve World, we should be getting back EVERY
SINGLE
PENNY.
Knows Too Much
Posts: 2,004
Location: Proud to be in Alberta
Location: Proud to be in Alberta
July 15th, 2006, 12:43 AM
Quoting
Since the irony of this whole thing is, as the WTO rightly calls it, the "unfair advantage" is that our industry is premised on collective ownership of resources (ie. Socialism), personally I'm not at all opposed to a reasonable export tax as long as we're allowed to reinvest the funds directly back into green initiatives within the industry. But as soon as I heard the tax level was scaled to "market conditions" and calibrated to the post-Katrina peak in the market I knew it was whacked.
and if the rule of law really does matter a tinker's damn in Steve World, we should be getting back EVERY
SINGLE
PENNY.
I too understood why Stephen got Emerson on board. What I don't understand is why the Liberals, or lefties, all of a sudden think Emerson is an idiot, when he, IMO, seems to be carrying on with the negotiations he was involved with. Listen, I am not too happy with a former Lib being part of the CPC government, but putting politics aside for a minute, I can see the benefit of having somebody who was very involved in this issue keeping the same file and keeping negotiations ongoing. The alternative, IMO, was starting over with a brand new person in a brand new portfolio. Seems to be Harper did what was best for Canada, on this issue, as opposed to what may have been best politically. If this is true, then the respect I have for Harper has increased. Partisanship is not necessarly always the best thing, and in this case, it appears Harper decided that what was best for Canada, as opposed to what may have been best for the CPC, took precedence.
Quoting
This was Emmerson's file BEFORE he changed his spots; that's why Steve grabbed him. Condescending Steve didn't do squat on this other than cave in for the photo op and assume voters will be too stupid to actually figure it out and the Liberals will be too chicken to call him on it in Parliament at roll call.
Being a Conservative supporter, I will also say that it appears to me that this issue was dealt with on a far more urgent and decisive issue than the Cretin and Martin regimes dealt with it.
Since the irony of this whole thing is, as the WTO rightly calls it, the "unfair advantage" is that our industry is premised on collective ownership of resources (ie. Socialism), personally I'm not at all opposed to a reasonable export tax as long as we're allowed to reinvest the funds directly back into green initiatives within the industry. But as soon as I heard the tax level was scaled to "market conditions" and calibrated to the post-Katrina peak in the market I knew it was whacked.
and if the rule of law really does matter a tinker's damn in Steve World, we should be getting back EVERY
SINGLE
PENNY.
what green dots?
Posts: 3,157
July 15th, 2006, 01:07 AM
* sigh *
because its the same damn deal the Martin government had been turning down all this time and word has it that now that they've had a chance to look at the details a growing list of players in the industry agree there were good reasons for holding out.
a Star reporter called that one within days of the floor crossing.
as in the deal stinks. its stunk then and it stinks even more now Emerson has Steve doing the dirty work for him.
Dirty work?
Emerson has ties to Domtar which is one of the biggest which makes it one of the most robust which means that in the case of a bad deal it gets a long term competive advantage in that they can sweat it out longer than those annoying competitors.
fresh legs could have walked into that portfolio with his or her eyes closed and been up to speed on the deal in a day. that's what the public service is for. what you need to keep the bigwigs in chairs for is to make sure the stuff that's NOT on the books carries forward.
* sigh *
because its the same damn deal the Martin government had been turning down all this time and word has it that now that they've had a chance to look at the details a growing list of players in the industry agree there were good reasons for holding out.
a Star reporter called that one within days of the floor crossing.
as in the deal stinks. its stunk then and it stinks even more now Emerson has Steve doing the dirty work for him.
Dirty work?
Emerson has ties to Domtar which is one of the biggest which makes it one of the most robust which means that in the case of a bad deal it gets a long term competive advantage in that they can sweat it out longer than those annoying competitors.
fresh legs could have walked into that portfolio with his or her eyes closed and been up to speed on the deal in a day. that's what the public service is for. what you need to keep the bigwigs in chairs for is to make sure the stuff that's NOT on the books carries forward.
