Huge trade sanctions on US to come?

[farmers_son]

I always look at the glass as being half full, and I think in this instance we are better with a half full glass than one that is upside down. We take a lot of things for granted in this province. I know that we who live in some of the wealthier municipalities in Alberta take things for granted, I have certainly had a wake up call in that regard over the past few years of travelling across the province and spending time in many municipalities that would give their eye teeth for significan resource assessment so they could maintain their roads to a better standard, or build some new recreation facilities etc. So we in Alberta need to realize that yes, maybe we have sold our resources off for less than top dollar, but a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush, and we have to admit that we do have the bird in hand as far as royalties go and continued investment in our industry. How many Albertans would invest in the oil and gas industry to the extent that the US has ???? I agree it is not the best situation but its a lot better than the alternative which is long term pain !!

[farmers_son]

Are we benefitting from American investment in our resources or is the benefit simply having the resources under our province?

Should we tolerate unfair American policies such as the Byrd Amendment because we need their investment? Do we need their investment?

Should our natural resouces be a tool that are used to gain a trade advantage for Canada beyond the value of the actual oil and gas or should energy simply be another resource to be exported like beef and lumber.

Lots of questions, sorry no answers really. It does seem we sell ourselves short. We are not a bananna republic but a member of the G8 and holder of one of the major energy reserves in the world. I do not think we should turn off the taps but I wonder how things would be different if the Americans were concerned that we might. These trade disputes with live cattle, softwood lumber, salmon, wheat would not be happening.

I look at the glass as half full myself but I wonder if we are getting full value for the water in that glass. Not talking about financially but we aren't we giving away the political and international power that comes from being one of the worlds energy leaders?

[farmers_son]

I agree that we are not getting the best value for our product but unfortunately we dealt that away many times over...so how in the world can any Canadian government try and reopen trade talks and get a better deal for us????

[cakadu]

What may be more important to the Americans than any energy reserves, is what is coming out of the tap and in that glass that you are looking at.

We did not protect the water under the NAFTA agreement either, which is why there are some huge claims being fought and going to be fought over water.

Without water, none of us will survive let alone any industries.

[cakadu]

It will be interesting to see what our new Environment Minister's position is regarding water.

[carebear300]

Well said Emerald!!!!!!!! I agree entirely lets hope this is what happens.

[carebear300]

I read in the Edmonton Journal today that the Premier is going to join the other Premiers at a dinner with the President. Lets hope HE doesn't say anything obnoxious !!!!

[cakadu]

You likely got a better chance of shutting everyone else up.

[cakadu]

Unfortunately it seems that way doesn't it ? Hopefully his new Chief of Staff can keep him in check !!!

[farmers_son]

This from CNN News today. For an American perspective on the Byrd Amendment see:
http://edition.cnn.com/2004/US/11/26/wto.sanctions.ap/index.html

WTO slaps punitive taxes on U.S. exports... Escalation of trade dispute could cost $150 million per year

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The World Trade Organization imposed penalties Friday on a host of U.S. exports, escalating a trade dispute the Bush administration has struggled to defuse by unsuccessfully urging Congress to repeal legislation aimed at protecting American [interests].

The administration signaled it would accept the penalties in the short term, but also warned that the United States would aggressively protect its own trading interests...

The value of the sanctions hasn't been determined, but trade officials estimated them at more than $150 million a year. That compares with the $2 billion in sanctions the EU threatened in its successful bid to force the United States to lift illegal tariffs on foreign steel last year.

The 2000 law, known as the Byrd amendment for its main backer, Sen. Robert Byrd, a Democrat of West Virginia, lets the U.S. government fine foreign companies that it judges to be selling goods in America at below-market prices. The revenue is paid to U.S. companies to help them better compete.

[Products other than steel] on the list of sanctions include U.S. cod, apples, glassware, cigarettes, mobile homes, textiles and heavy machinery made by companies such as Caterpillar Inc., based in Illinois -- the home state of House Speaker Dennis Hastert. The products, say EU officials, were chosen because they are produced in politically important parts of the United States, and the new duties "could help Congress focus its mind on compliance," said former EU trade spokeswoman Arancha Gonzalez, who stepped down this week.

But overwhelming Senate support for the Byrd amendment makes changes unlikely.