Huge trade sanctions on US to come?

[15444]

I had heard (about a month ago) about the trade sanctions that Canada was considering to slap on the US, if Bush didn't make a verbal commitment to open the border on Nov 2nd. The reason given at the time was: 'a retaliation against the unfair trade practices of the United States.' Even though the fed's reasoning seems to following the 'anti-dumping' line now, I see their cause has not died. They are going to be asking Canadians over the next few months if they think the sanctions are a good idea and what they would like to add duties on too. Even at this time, this isn't a small list!

http://canadagazette.gc.ca/partI/2004/20041123-x/html/extra-e.html

[kato]

My first reaction to Canada putting trade sanctions on the US is that it poses almost the same scenario as mouse trying to bully an elephant. We are much better to work with the US and work out fair trade practices vs trying to through our weight around when we don't have enough clout to win any trade battle.

[cowman]

Well trust our idiots in Ottawa to always be a day late!
Bush has expressed a willingness to open up trade, so why not try to work with the man rather than make silly threats and meaningless posturing?
Does anyone really think we're going to whip the US into submission by being "tough" on trade issues?
Perhaps instead we need to be seen as co-operating more with them on other matters that seem to be of great importance to them? Like getting our homeland security and immigration policies more in line with theirs? And dealing with some of their other concerns about our country...like drugs(both legal and illegal)?
We may not agree with some of the things George Bush has done but we do need to realize America is the "show" and we are the bush leagues? We are joined with them at the hip and that is a fact of life.

[farmers_son]

Good post 15444. The Byrd Amendment certainly was encouraging U.S. producers to raise frivolous trade actions against importing countries such as Canada by distributing the proceeds of unfair tariffs on imported products directly to the American producer those imports were competing against.

"The effect of the Byrd Amendment is that U.S. companies that bring trade remedy cases stand to benefit not only from the imposition of antidumping and countervailing duties on competing imports, but also from direct payments from the U.S. government when those duties are disbursed. The Byrd Amendment, therefore, provides a double remedy that creates a trade distorting advantage to U.S. companies that compete against Canadian and other exporters."

Canada has two options: the application of a 100 percent surtax on imports of selected products from the United States and/or the suspension of the injury requirement for the application of border measures on dumped and subsidized goods originating in or exported from the United States. I am disappointed that there is not a third option, the restriction of Canadian exports of gas and oil to the U.S.

Canadians are not alone in wanting to see the U.S. take action on the Byrd Amendment as Brazil, Chile, the European Union, India, Japan, Mexico, and South Korea also are considering sanctions. This is not something that Canada can let continue or needs to barter something off in order to see remedied. We have the WTO ruling in our pocket and the Canadian government needs to be prepared to use it. The purpose of the WTO is to create fair trade rules so that small and medium powers can trade with super powers like the U.S. without fear of the mouse being trampled by the elephant. Since the WTO has ruled in Canada’s favour we are no longer the timid mouse, at least in regards to the Byrd Amendment, and we should not act as if we were.

[wd40]

Ever hear of David and Goliath. All you need is one right rock.

[Bez]

wd40

We have the rock - pick one:

oil / gas

Regards

Bez

[jensend]

under nafta us has full access to canada's oil and gas. we couldn't legally cut it off if we wanted. of course they don't play by the rules either.

[les]

WE maybe cant stop the oil/gas from going to the usa but I am sure we can stop giving them a drilling licence for each well they want to drill.Not that that will happen cause the alta. gov will loose too much money.I think we can slow down the eported amount of oil/gas.

[les]

stopping the issuance of drilling licences will devastate the economy of Alberta, not to mention putting hundreds of thousands of people out of work. The people who are employed in all areas of the oil and gas industry are not only Albertans but come from all areas of Canada.
Just think at what that huge drop in employment would do to the economy of most of this province. When people want to slam the door to US investment in the industry sector and the export of products to the US, I don't think they realize what the are suggesting. I live in an resource based community and I would hate to see what it would look like in a year if the businesses, recreation facilities, etc. only had the agriculture dollars to keep them going.
Sure we can leave the oil and gas in the ground, and give up all the things those commodities help provide for Albertans. Take a look at your local communities and see how many provincial grant dollars were provided to build or remodel community halls, recreation facilities etc. I for one would hate to have to try and raise the money that has been injected into communities all across the Province by having BAKE SALES !!! Without US involvement in our industry and their buying our commodities we would be one of the have not provinces instead one of wealthiest province in Canada.

[farmers_son]

I think emarld1 raises an important point. Canadians typically are unwilling to endure any pain therefore we, as a nation, tend to not make any gains. We have not really stood up for ourselves as a nation since WWII and it is starting to show.

The oil and gas option is not on the table and for certain we don't want to kill the goose that lays the golden egg. Still we all know that if we had not given away our oil and gas card through NAFTA and also gave away ownership of our natural resources to the Americans we would not be dealing with these trade issues. With our energy reserves we should be as powerful and as wealthy as the Saudis. Instead we are lumped in with countries such as India and South Korea. Our industries are harassed by U.S. protectionists like we are nobodies, little more than third world peasants yet as a nation we control some of the world’s largest energy reserves. It is a disgrace. We export gas and oil to the Americans yet our farmers can barely afford to pay their heating bills and put gas in the pickup.

How many Canadians does it take to turn off a tap? Answer: none because it would hurt them in the pocketbook and the Americans own the tap. Emrald1 is right but it is a sad statement on our nation. We need to stand up to the Americans and say we are mad as hell and we aren’t going to take it any more.
But we know that is not going to happen, is it.

[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.