U.S. politicians call for formal softwood talks
Updated Tue. Feb. 14 2006 11:34 PM ET
Canadian Press
WASHINGTON — Americans are calling on Canada to finally sit down for formal talks on softwood lumber, saying they hope it'll be the first order of bilateral business for the new Conservative government.
"All of us hope for a new beginning with Canada,'' said Oregon Senator Gordon Smith, who chaired a subcommittee hearing on the bitter dispute and called for a shared North American market that abides by similar rules.
Officials made it clear, though, they still believe Canada unfairly subsidizes its lumber and they wouldn't rule out more litigation if necessary.
"My mills can compete against other mills,'' said Smith, whose state is a major lumber producer.
"But they can't compete with the Canadian government. It's that simple.''
Where we stand now is unacceptable,'' added Senator Olympia Snowe of Maine.
"Our persistence has been outmatched by the Canadians ... There is a wrong that needs to be righted.''
Susan Schwab, the deputy U.S. trade representative, said her boss Rob Portman has already been in touch with his Canadian counterpart David Emerson to say officials are ready any time to talk.
Canada broke off formal negotiations last July, after the United States ignored a key free trade ruling that backed Canada and called for the return of some $5 billion Cdn in lumber duties to Canadian companies.
But Emerson, who jumped from the Liberals, has faced accusations in Canada he torpedoed a softwood deal before the Jan. 23 election while the party was waging an anti-U.S. campaign.
The proposal was reported to have called for Washington to reimburse some 75 per cent the penalties in return for concessions like export quotas in Ontario and Quebec.
There was no mention of any informal talks Tuesday.
But Frank Lavin, an undersecretary in the U.S. Commerce Department, said while the United States is keen to sit down, it will continue to uphold its interests, in court and out.
Officials have not ruled out an appeal of the panel decision under the North American Free Trade Agreement.
Softwood penalties are now at about 10 per cent, about one-half of what they once were. But Lavin said no one should mistake that for a trend and they could rise the next time the department conducts a review.
Bill Kluting, of the the Western Council of Industrial Workers, said each country should appoint a top-level envoy who has the power to negotiate a binding agreement by this September.
"These special envoys would have the power to place limits on Canadian imports, especially when demand and prices in the U.S. are low.''
"This is when we get hurt the worst,'' said Kluting, who estimated more than 10,000 U.S. mill workers have been forced from their jobs since 2001 because of Canadian imports.
Kluting was also demanding Canada impose a stumpage fee system over time and said the envoys should be given wide discretion over the use and disbursal of penalties currently held by U.S. Customs.
But Barry Ruttenberg, of the National Association of Home Builders, said the United States should abide by the NAFTA ruling and cut lumber tariffs that needlessly add more than $1,000 US to the cost of a home.
Besides, more than five million U.S. workers in housing and related industries that use softwood, far more than those who work strictly as lumber producers.<
Restrictions on Canadian softwood actually do little for the industry, because "the vast majority of the domestic timber supply is unsuitable for framing walls in homes,'' he said.
"Canada's spruce and white pine is a different species that is far better suited for wall-framing because it is less likely to bend, crack or warp.''
Steve Swanson, chairman of the U.S. lumber coalition fighting Canadian imports, said Canada is "addicted'' to subsidies and U.S. penalties should be doubled again before negotiations are renewed.
"All we're asking for is to let the markets decided where the lumber is, not governments,'' he said, adding the pain of declining markets should be felt equally on both sides of the border.
"This issue would disappear the day that Canada made reasonable, transparent and enforceable commitments to end their unfair trade practices and allow open and competitive markets for timber and logs.''
The Coalition for Fair Lumber Imports is challenging the constitutionality of NAFTA's dispute-resolution mechanism.
Updated Tue. Feb. 14 2006 11:34 PM ET
Canadian Press
WASHINGTON — Americans are calling on Canada to finally sit down for formal talks on softwood lumber, saying they hope it'll be the first order of bilateral business for the new Conservative government.
"All of us hope for a new beginning with Canada,'' said Oregon Senator Gordon Smith, who chaired a subcommittee hearing on the bitter dispute and called for a shared North American market that abides by similar rules.
Officials made it clear, though, they still believe Canada unfairly subsidizes its lumber and they wouldn't rule out more litigation if necessary.
"My mills can compete against other mills,'' said Smith, whose state is a major lumber producer.
"But they can't compete with the Canadian government. It's that simple.''
Where we stand now is unacceptable,'' added Senator Olympia Snowe of Maine.
"Our persistence has been outmatched by the Canadians ... There is a wrong that needs to be righted.''
Susan Schwab, the deputy U.S. trade representative, said her boss Rob Portman has already been in touch with his Canadian counterpart David Emerson to say officials are ready any time to talk.
Canada broke off formal negotiations last July, after the United States ignored a key free trade ruling that backed Canada and called for the return of some $5 billion Cdn in lumber duties to Canadian companies.
But Emerson, who jumped from the Liberals, has faced accusations in Canada he torpedoed a softwood deal before the Jan. 23 election while the party was waging an anti-U.S. campaign.
The proposal was reported to have called for Washington to reimburse some 75 per cent the penalties in return for concessions like export quotas in Ontario and Quebec.
There was no mention of any informal talks Tuesday.
But Frank Lavin, an undersecretary in the U.S. Commerce Department, said while the United States is keen to sit down, it will continue to uphold its interests, in court and out.
Officials have not ruled out an appeal of the panel decision under the North American Free Trade Agreement.
Softwood penalties are now at about 10 per cent, about one-half of what they once were. But Lavin said no one should mistake that for a trend and they could rise the next time the department conducts a review.
Bill Kluting, of the the Western Council of Industrial Workers, said each country should appoint a top-level envoy who has the power to negotiate a binding agreement by this September.
"These special envoys would have the power to place limits on Canadian imports, especially when demand and prices in the U.S. are low.''
"This is when we get hurt the worst,'' said Kluting, who estimated more than 10,000 U.S. mill workers have been forced from their jobs since 2001 because of Canadian imports.
Kluting was also demanding Canada impose a stumpage fee system over time and said the envoys should be given wide discretion over the use and disbursal of penalties currently held by U.S. Customs.
But Barry Ruttenberg, of the National Association of Home Builders, said the United States should abide by the NAFTA ruling and cut lumber tariffs that needlessly add more than $1,000 US to the cost of a home.
Besides, more than five million U.S. workers in housing and related industries that use softwood, far more than those who work strictly as lumber producers.<
Restrictions on Canadian softwood actually do little for the industry, because "the vast majority of the domestic timber supply is unsuitable for framing walls in homes,'' he said.
"Canada's spruce and white pine is a different species that is far better suited for wall-framing because it is less likely to bend, crack or warp.''
Steve Swanson, chairman of the U.S. lumber coalition fighting Canadian imports, said Canada is "addicted'' to subsidies and U.S. penalties should be doubled again before negotiations are renewed.
"All we're asking for is to let the markets decided where the lumber is, not governments,'' he said, adding the pain of declining markets should be felt equally on both sides of the border.
"This issue would disappear the day that Canada made reasonable, transparent and enforceable commitments to end their unfair trade practices and allow open and competitive markets for timber and logs.''
The Coalition for Fair Lumber Imports is challenging the constitutionality of NAFTA's dispute-resolution mechanism.