

Currently released so far... 12553 / 251,287
Browse latest releases
2010/12/01
2010/12/02
2010/12/03
2010/12/04
2010/12/05
2010/12/06
2010/12/07
2010/12/08
2010/12/09
2010/12/10
2010/12/11
2010/12/12
2010/12/13
2010/12/14
2010/12/15
2010/12/16
2010/12/17
2010/12/18
2010/12/19
2010/12/20
2010/12/21
2010/12/22
2010/12/23
2010/12/24
2010/12/25
2010/12/26
2010/12/27
2010/12/28
2010/12/29
2010/12/30
2011/01/01
2011/01/02
2011/01/04
2011/01/05
2011/01/07
2011/01/09
2011/01/10
2011/01/11
2011/01/12
2011/01/13
2011/01/14
2011/01/15
2011/01/16
2011/01/17
2011/01/18
2011/01/19
2011/01/20
2011/01/21
2011/01/22
2011/01/23
2011/01/24
2011/01/25
2011/01/26
2011/01/27
2011/01/28
2011/01/29
2011/01/30
2011/01/31
2011/02/01
2011/02/02
2011/02/03
2011/02/04
2011/02/05
2011/02/06
2011/02/07
2011/02/08
2011/02/09
2011/02/10
2011/02/11
2011/02/12
2011/02/13
2011/02/14
2011/02/15
2011/02/16
2011/02/17
2011/02/18
2011/02/19
2011/02/20
2011/02/21
2011/02/22
2011/02/23
2011/02/24
2011/02/25
2011/02/26
2011/02/27
2011/02/28
2011/03/01
2011/03/02
2011/03/03
2011/03/04
2011/03/05
2011/03/06
2011/03/07
2011/03/08
2011/03/09
2011/03/10
2011/03/11
2011/03/13
2011/03/14
2011/03/15
2011/03/16
2011/03/17
2011/03/18
2011/03/19
2011/03/20
2011/03/21
2011/03/22
2011/03/23
2011/03/24
2011/03/25
2011/03/26
2011/03/27
2011/03/28
2011/03/29
2011/03/30
2011/03/31
2011/04/01
2011/04/02
2011/04/03
2011/04/04
2011/04/05
2011/04/06
2011/04/07
2011/04/08
2011/04/09
2011/04/10
2011/04/11
2011/04/12
2011/04/13
2011/04/14
2011/04/15
2011/04/16
2011/04/17
2011/04/18
2011/04/19
2011/04/20
2011/04/21
2011/04/22
2011/04/23
2011/04/24
2011/04/25
2011/04/26
2011/04/27
2011/04/28
2011/04/29
2011/04/30
2011/05/01
2011/05/02
2011/05/03
2011/05/04
2011/05/05
2011/05/06
2011/05/07
2011/05/08
2011/05/09
2011/05/10
2011/05/11
2011/05/12
Browse by creation date
Browse by origin
Embassy Athens
Embassy Asuncion
Embassy Astana
Embassy Asmara
Embassy Ashgabat
Embassy Apia
Embassy Ankara
Embassy Amman
Embassy Algiers
Embassy Addis Ababa
Embassy Accra
Embassy Abuja
Embassy Abu Dhabi
Embassy Abidjan
Consulate Auckland
Consulate Amsterdam
Consulate Adana
American Institute Taiwan, Taipei
Embassy Bujumbura
Embassy Buenos Aires
Embassy Budapest
Embassy Bucharest
Embassy Brussels
Embassy Bridgetown
Embassy Bratislava
Embassy Brasilia
Embassy Bogota
Embassy Bishkek
Embassy Bern
Embassy Berlin
Embassy Belmopan
Embassy Belgrade
Embassy Beirut
Embassy Beijing
Embassy Banjul
Embassy Bangkok
Embassy Bandar Seri Begawan
Embassy Bamako
Embassy Baku
Embassy Baghdad
Consulate Barcelona
Embassy Copenhagen
Embassy Conakry
Embassy Colombo
Embassy Chisinau
Embassy Caracas
Embassy Canberra
Embassy Cairo
Consulate Curacao
Consulate Ciudad Juarez
Consulate Chennai
Consulate Casablanca
Consulate Cape Town
Consulate Calgary
Embassy Dushanbe
Embassy Dublin
Embassy Doha
Embassy Djibouti
Embassy Dili
Embassy Dhaka
Embassy Dar Es Salaam
Embassy Damascus
Embassy Dakar
Consulate Dubai
Embassy Helsinki
Embassy Harare
Embassy Hanoi
Consulate Ho Chi Minh City
Consulate Hermosillo
Consulate Hamilton
Consulate Hamburg
Consulate Halifax
Embassy Kyiv
Embassy Kuwait
Embassy Kuala Lumpur
Embassy Kinshasa
Embassy Kingston
Embassy Kigali
Embassy Khartoum
Embassy Kathmandu
Embassy Kampala
Embassy Kabul
Consulate Kolkata
Embassy Luxembourg
Embassy Luanda
Embassy London
Embassy Ljubljana
Embassy Lisbon
Embassy Lima
Embassy Lilongwe
Embassy La Paz
Consulate Lahore
Consulate Lagos
Mission USOSCE
Mission USNATO
Mission UNESCO
Embassy Muscat
Embassy Moscow
Embassy Montevideo
Embassy Monrovia
Embassy Minsk
Embassy Mexico
Embassy Mbabane
Embassy Maputo
Embassy Manila
Embassy Manama
Embassy Managua
Embassy Malabo
Embassy Madrid
Consulate Munich
Consulate Mumbai
Consulate Montreal
Consulate Monterrey
Consulate Milan
Consulate Melbourne
Embassy Nicosia
Embassy Niamey
Embassy New Delhi
Embassy Ndjamena
Embassy Nassau
Embassy Nairobi
Consulate Naples
Consulate Naha
Embassy Pristina
Embassy Pretoria
Embassy Prague
Embassy Port Of Spain
Embassy Port Louis
Embassy Port Au Prince
Embassy Phnom Penh
Embassy Paris
Embassy Paramaribo
Embassy Panama
Consulate Peshawar
REO Basrah
Embassy Rome
Embassy Riyadh
Embassy Riga
Embassy Reykjavik
Embassy Rangoon
Embassy Rabat
Consulate Rio De Janeiro
Consulate Recife
Secretary of State
Embassy Suva
Embassy Stockholm
Embassy Sofia
Embassy Skopje
Embassy Singapore
Embassy Seoul
Embassy Sarajevo
Embassy Santo Domingo
Embassy Santiago
Embassy Sanaa
Embassy San Salvador
Embassy San Jose
Consulate Strasbourg
Consulate St Petersburg
Consulate Shenyang
Consulate Shanghai
Consulate Sapporo
Consulate Sao Paulo
Embassy Tunis
Embassy Tripoli
Embassy Tokyo
Embassy The Hague
Embassy Tel Aviv
Embassy Tehran
Embassy Tegucigalpa
Embassy Tbilisi
Embassy Tashkent
Embassy Tallinn
Consulate Toronto
Consulate Tijuana
USUN New York
USEU Brussels
US Office Almaty
US Mission Geneva
US Interests Section Havana
US Delegation, Secretary
UNVIE
Embassy Ulaanbaatar
Embassy Vilnius
Embassy Vienna
Embassy Vatican
Embassy Valletta
Consulate Vladivostok
Consulate Vancouver
Browse by tag
APECO
ASEC
AMGT
AFIN
APER
ACABQ
AORC
AEMR
AF
AE
AR
AGMT
AU
AY
ABLD
AS
AG
AJ
APCS
AX
AM
AMEX
ATRN
ADM
AMED
AFGHANISTAN
AZ
AL
ASUP
AND
ARM
ASEAN
AFFAIRS
AQ
ATFN
AMBASSADOR
AODE
APEC
ACBAQ
AFSI
AFSN
AO
ABUD
AC
ADPM
ADCO
ASIG
ARF
AUC
ASEX
AGAO
AA
AER
AVERY
AGRICULTURE
AIT
AADP
ASCH
AORL
AROC
ACOA
ANET
AID
AMCHAMS
AINF
AMG
AFU
AN
ALOW
ASECKFRDCVISKIRFPHUMSMIGEG
ACS
ADANA
AECL
ACAO
AORG
AGR
BEXP
BR
BM
BG
BL
BA
BTIO
BO
BP
BC
BILAT
BK
BU
BD
BRUSSELS
BB
BF
BBSR
BIDEN
BX
BE
BH
BT
BY
BMGT
BWC
BTIU
BN
CA
CASC
CFED
CO
CH
CS
CU
CE
CI
CM
CMGT
CJAN
COM
CG
CIS
CVIS
CR
CKGR
CHR
CVR
COUNTER
CIA
CLINTON
CY
CPAS
CD
CBW
COUNTERTERRORISM
CITEL
CDG
CW
CODEL
COUNTRY
CLEARANCE
COE
CN
CARICOM
CB
CONDOLEEZZA
CWC
CACS
CSW
CIDA
CIC
CITT
CONS
CL
CACM
CDB
CDC
CAN
CF
CJUS
CTM
CBSA
CARSON
CT
CLMT
CBC
CEUDA
CV
COPUOS
CTR
CROS
CAPC
CAC
CNARC
CICTE
CBE
ECON
ETRD
EIND
ENRG
EC
ELAB
EAGR
EAID
EFIS
EFIN
EINV
EUN
EG
EPET
EAIR
EU
ELTN
EWWT
ECIN
ERD
EI
ETTC
EUR
EN
EZ
ETC
ENVI
EMIN
ET
ENVR
ER
ECPS
EINT
EAP
ES
ENIV
ECONOMY
EXTERNAL
EINN
EFTA
ECONOMIC
EPA
EXBS
ECA
ELN
ETRDEINVECINPGOVCS
ENGR
ECUN
ENGY
ECONOMICS
ELECTIONS
EIAR
EINDETRD
EREL
EUC
ECONEFIN
EURN
EDU
ETRDEINVTINTCS
ECIP
ENERG
EFIM
EAIDS
EK
ETRDECONWTOCS
EINVETC
ECONCS
EUNCH
ESA
ECINECONCS
EUREM
ESENV
EFINECONCS
ETRC
ENNP
EAIG
EXIM
EEPET
EINVECONSENVCSJA
EUMEM
ETRA
ERNG
ETRO
ETRN
EINVEFIN
ICTY
IN
IS
IR
IC
IZ
IA
INTERPOL
IAEA
IT
IMO
IO
IV
ID
IRAQI
IEA
INRB
IL
IWC
ITU
ICAO
ISRAELI
ICRC
IIP
IMF
IBRD
ISLAMISTS
ITALY
ITALIAN
ILO
IPR
IQ
IRS
IAHRC
IZPREL
IRAJ
IDP
ILC
ITF
ICJ
IF
ITPHUM
INMARSAT
ISRAEL
IACI
IBET
ITRA
INR
IRC
IDA
ICTR
IGAD
INRA
INRO
IEFIN
INTELSAT
INTERNAL
INDO
ITPGOV
KWMN
KSCA
KDEM
KTFN
KIPR
KCRM
KPAL
KE
KPAO
KPKO
KS
KN
KISL
KFRD
KJUS
KIRF
KFLO
KG
KTIP
KTER
KRCM
KTIA
KGHG
KIRC
KU
KPRP
KMCA
KMPI
KSEO
KNNP
KZ
KNEI
KCOR
KOMC
KCFC
KSTC
KMDR
KFLU
KSAF
KSEP
KSAC
KR
KGIC
KSUM
KWBG
KCIP
KDRG
KOLY
KAWC
KCHG
KHDP
KRVC
KBIO
KAWK
KGCC
KHLS
KBCT
KPLS
KREL
KCFE
KMFO
KV
KFRDKIRFCVISCMGTKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG
KFTFN
KVPR
KTDB
KSPR
KIDE
KVRP
KTEX
KBTR
KTRD
KICC
KCOM
KO
KLIG
KDEMAF
KMRS
KRAD
KOCI
KSTH
KUNR
KNSD
KGIT
KFSC
KHIV
KPAI
KICA
KACT
KHUM
KREC
KSEC
KFRDCVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG
KCMR
KPIN
KESS
KDEV
KNAR
KNUC
KPWR
KENV
KWWMN
KWMNCS
KPRV
KOM
KBTS
KCRS
KNPP
KWNM
KRFD
KVIR
KTBT
KAID
KRIM
KDDG
KRGY
KHSA
KWMM
KMOC
KSCI
KPAK
KX
KPAONZ
KCGC
KID
KPOA
KIFR
KFIN
KWAC
KOMS
KCRCM
KNUP
KMIG
KNNPMNUC
KERG
KTLA
KCSY
KJUST
MOPS
MARR
MASS
MNUC
MX
MCAP
MO
MR
MI
MD
MK
MA
MP
MY
MTCRE
MOPPS
MASC
MIL
MTS
MLS
MILI
MAR
MU
MEPN
MAPP
MTCR
MEPI
MZ
MEETINGS
MG
MW
MAS
MT
MCC
MIK
ML
MARAD
MV
MERCOSUR
MTRE
MPOS
MEPP
MILITARY
MDC
MQADHAFI
MUCN
MRCRE
MAPS
MEDIA
MASSMNUC
MC
NZ
NZUS
NL
NU
NATO
NP
NO
NIPP
NE
NH
NR
NA
NPT
NI
NSF
NG
NSG
NAFTA
NC
NDP
NEW
NRR
NATIONAL
NT
NS
NASA
NAR
NV
NORAD
NSSP
NK
NPA
NGO
NSC
NATOPREL
NW
NPG
NSFO
OPDC
OTRA
OIIP
OREP
OVIP
OSCE
OEXC
OIE
OPRC
OAS
OPIC
OTR
OMIG
OSAC
OFFICIALS
OECD
OSCI
OBSP
OFDA
OPCW
ODIP
OFDP
OES
OPAD
OCII
OHUM
OVP
ON
OIC
OCS
PHUM
PREL
PGOV
PINR
PTER
PARM
PREF
PM
PE
PINS
PK
PHSA
PBTS
PRGOV
PA
PORG
PP
PS
PGOF
PL
PO
PARMS
PKFK
PSOE
PEPR
PAK
POL
PPA
PINT
PMAR
PRELP
PREFA
PALESTINIAN
PBIO
PINF
PNG
PMIL
PFOR
PUNE
PGOVLO
PAO
POLITICS
PHUMBA
PSEPC
PTBS
PCUL
PROP
PNAT
PNR
POLINT
PGOVE
PROG
PHALANAGE
PARTY
PDEM
PECON
PROV
PHUMPREL
PGOC
PY
PCI
PLN
PDOV
PREO
PGIV
PHUH
PAS
PU
POGOV
PF
PINL
POV
PAHO
PRL
PG
PRAM
POLITICAL
PARTIES
POLICY
PGOVSMIGKCRMKWMNPHUMCVISKFRDCA
PGGV
PHUS
PSA
PHUMPGOV
PEL
PSI
PAIGH
POSTS
PBT
PTERE
RS
RU
RW
RM
RO
RP
REGION
RSP
RF
RICE
RCMP
RFE
RIGHTS
RIGHTSPOLMIL
ROBERT
RUPREL
RELATIONS
ROOD
REACTION
RSO
REPORT
SENV
SNAR
SCUL
SR
SC
SOCI
SMIG
SI
SP
SU
SO
SW
SY
SA
SZ
SAN
SF
SN
STEINBERG
SG
ST
SIPDIS
SNARIZ
SNARN
SSA
SK
SPCVIS
SOFA
SAARC
SL
SEVN
SARS
SIPRS
SHUM
SANC
SWE
SHI
SYR
SNARCS
SPCE
SYRIA
SEN
SH
SCRS
SENVKGHG
TRGY
TSPL
TPHY
TSPA
TBIO
TI
TW
THPY
TX
TU
TS
TZ
TC
TH
TT
TIP
TO
TERRORISM
TRSY
TINT
TN
TURKEY
TBID
TL
TV
TNGD
TD
TF
TP
TFIN
TAGS
TK
TR
UNSC
UK
UNGA
UN
US
UNHRC
UG
UP
UNMIK
UNHCR
UE
USTR
UNVIE
UAE
UZ
UY
UNO
UNESCO
USEU
USOAS
UV
UNODC
UNCHS
UNFICYP
UNEP
UNIDROIT
UNDESCO
UNDP
UNPUOS
UNC
UNAUS
USUN
UNCHC
UNCHR
UNCND
UNICEF
UNCSD
UNDC
USNC
USPS
USAID
Browse by classification
Community resources
courage is contagious
Viewing cable 06OTTAWA2439, CRUNCH TIME COMING FOR SOFTWOOD LUMBER AGREEMENT
If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs
Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:
- The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
- The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
- The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.
Discussing cables
If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol). Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #06OTTAWA2439.
Reference ID | Created | Released | Classification | Origin |
---|---|---|---|---|
06OTTAWA2439 | 2006-08-15 17:48 | 2011-04-28 00:00 | UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY | Embassy Ottawa |
VZCZCXRO0940
OO RUEHGA RUEHHA RUEHQU RUEHVC
DE RUEHOT #2439/01 2271748
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 151748Z AUG 06
FM AMEMBASSY OTTAWA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 3474
INFO RUCNCAN/ALL CANADIAN POSTS COLLECTIVE IMMEDIATE
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHDC IMMEDIATE
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 OTTAWA 002439
SIPDIS
SENSITIVE
SIPDIS
STATE PASS USTR FOR AMBASSADOR SCHWAB, JOHN MELLE, JIM
MENDENHALL, AND SAGE CHANDLER
STATE FOR WHA/CAN
USDOC/ITA/IA/JTERPSTRA
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: EAGR ECON ETRD CA
SUBJECT: CRUNCH TIME COMING FOR SOFTWOOD LUMBER AGREEMENT
REF: OTTAWA 2321
¶1. (SBU) Summary: In his vigorous efforts to garner industry
support for the July 1 softwood lumber agreement,
International Trade Minister Emerson and other senior
Ministers met with top Canadian lumber officials in Toronto
on August 9 to hear their concerns about several of the
deal's provisions, but he warned that the agreement would not
be re-negotiated. While Emerson was publicly optimistic
after the meeting that there would be significant Canadian
industry support for the deal, he sought to put pressure on
the industry to "fish or cut bait" by setting August 21 as
the deadline for announcing its support. If sufficient
support is not forthcoming, the Minister indicated that the
deal would not go forward to get Cabinet approval for
Parliamentary action in September, thus killing the
agreement. Thus, this week is probably crunch time for the
future of the July 1 softwood lumber agreement.
¶2. (SBU) Because of their dominant position in Canadian
lumber, the reaction of the British Columbia companies will
be key in determining whether Emerson gets the significant
industry support he needs to recommend the agreement to Prime
Minister Harper and to Parliament. The areas of industrial
concern are pretty clear, but it is still uncertain whether
these can be addressed satisfactorily (or fudged up) in the
"clarifications" that Emerson is now discussing with the
industry, the provinces, and USTR. Despite the industry's
discontent, the Embassy believes that Emerson, with the Prime
Minister's strong support, is adamant that the industry must
choose between the July 1 agreement as written and a
continuation of trade conflict, uncertainty and litigation.
¶3. (SBU): Comment: The engagement, in the middle of the
summer Parliamentary recess, of the senior ministries in last
week's Toronto talks underscores the importance of the
softwood lumber issue for the Harper government. While
resolving the dispute is not on the government's formal list
of objectives, contacts have noted to us that it is crucial
both to improving Canada-U.S. relations and to demonstrating
the Harper team's ability to marshal business support behind
a major trade policy initiative. End comment and summary.
Toronto Meeting with the Industry
---------------------------------
¶4. (U) On August 9, International Trade Minister David
Emerson, Industry Minister Maxime Bernier, and Finance
Minister Jim Flaherty met in Toronto for two hours with
almost two dozen Canadian lumber executives to discuss
industry concerns regarding the U.S.-Canadian softwood lumber
agreement that was concluded by Emerson and USTR Susan Schwab
on July 1. After the meeting, Emerson told the press that he
was "optimistic" that Ottawa would get "significant" industry
support for the agreement by August 21, the date he said he
would decide whether to recommend to the Prime Minister and
Cabinet that the deal should be submitted to Parliament for
its approval after the end of the summer recess on September
¶18. Emerson warned that he would not move the deal forward
without significant industry support. The Minister described
the Toronto meeting as constructive, adding that he would
continue to meet with the industry, the provinces as well as
USTR in coming days to "clarify" wording and definitions in
the July 1 agreement in an effort to address industry
concerns, but he remarked pointedly that the agreement would
Qconcerns, but he remarked pointedly that the agreement would
not be opened for re-negotiation as some called for.
August 21 Deadline and Next Parliamentary Hearing
--------------------------------------------- ----
¶5. (SBU) We understand that Minister Emerson's August 21
deadline was dictated by the amount of time the GOC needs to
draft the legislation to implement the export tax component
of the agreement in time for Parliament's review in late
September. A senior advisor in the Prime Minister's office
opined that another reason for the date is that it's time for
the industry "to fish or cut bait." Perhaps coincidentally,
August 21 is also the date of the final hearing of the House
of Commons Standing Committee on International Trade that is
reviewing the July 1 agreement. At an earlier hearing on
July 31, Emerson stressed that "negotiations have ended,"
that if the July 1 agreement is rejected, there is no chance
that another one can be renegotiated for at least three
years, and that a fresh round of the litigation cycle would
be "ugly." Expected witnesses at next Monday's hearing
include the CEO of Domtar; senior officials from Canfor and
OTTAWA 00002439 002 OF 003
Weyerhaeuser; the Presidents of the British Columbia (BC)
Lumber Trade Council; the Ontario Lumber Manufacturers'
Association, and the Quebec Forest Products Council; and
attorney Elliot Feldman. The hearing would be an opportunity
for major industry players to present their definitive views
on the July 1 agreement.
¶6. (SBU) In recent days, the Embassy and the Consulates have
discussed Emerson's August 9 announcement with government and
industry contacts. Policy advisors in the Prime Minister's
office expect Harper to continue to support Minister
Emerson's refusal to re-open the July 1 agreement to
amendment, despite industry dissatisfaction with some of its
provisions. However, key contacts at industry associations
were split on whether the GOC will or will not receive
sufficient industry support in coming days to go forward with
implementing the agreement.
Optimists Versus Pessimists
---------------------------
¶7. (SBU) The "optimistic" view of industry observers is:
"The deal is absolutely essential not just for the industry,
but for Canada-U.S. relations and in order to demonstrate
that this government has the ability to complete an
international treaty. It won't be easy and there will be
lots of acrimony, but the stakes are high enough that many
parties will sign on to work the backrooms, persuade the
companies, and ensure that the Parliamentary vote on the
agreement is based on national interests rather than on party
lines." On the other hand, the "pessimistic" view believes:
"It will only take one company to scuttle this deal and there
are several that can do it. Some of those firms have an
interest in dragging out the dispute so that they can pick up
distressed assets from their failed competitors. This
industry has repeatedly shown that it just cannot speak with
one voice - the regional and business diversity is just too
great for that to be possible." There also seems to be a
split on the agreement depending on company size. Large
companies with interests in both the U.S. and Canada (e,g.,
Weyerhaeuser and Canfor) favor the agreement whereas some
smaller Canadian only companies do not.
The View From Quebec
--------------------
¶8. (SBU) In an August 14 conversation with our Consul
General in Quebec City, Guy Chevrette, President of the
Quebec Forest Industry Council, commented on the state of
play:
-- the Quebec lumber industry believes that it could reach an
agreement with the U.S. without much difficulty, but that the
BC industry is the real problem.
-- What Quebec is looking for is "souplesse" or flexibility
in three areas: 1) "circumvention" - the existing agreement
says that any changes to the "forest industry regime" under
the agreement are an infraction. In Chevrette's view, this
is an overly broad provision as there are some changes that
Quebec may need to execute that would have nothing to do with
softwood lumber, and such adjustments should not be seen as
an "infraction" of the July 1 agreement. He cited as an
example that the GOQ will need to address how it handles poor
quality lumber within the province. The Quebec industry does
not want needed changes in the province to be held hostage to
the softwood lumber agreement.
2) interpretive annexes - the Quebec industry feels that
adding interpretive annexes would give it the flexibility it
needs to sign off on the agreement. 3) the Quebec industry
Qneeds to sign off on the agreement. 3) the Quebec industry
wants a mechanism that would extend the 23 month limit of the
agreement for some additional months. For example, if one
side wanted to withdraw from the agreement, then it would
give that party 2-3 months to announce who would be members
of its delegation that would discuss the intention to
withdraw; then a few more months to file an intention to
withdraw; and so forth. The idea would be to draw out the
disengagement process by several months: "giving up a billion
dollars is a lot for an agreement that only lasts 23 months."
¶9. (SBU) Chevrette thought that BC in fact doesn't want an
agreement at all. They've got their pine beetle infestation
disease ravaging their wood, so they would prefer not to have
an agreement, and to flood the U.S. market with their
softwood instead. The Quebec industry will meet on August 18
to come to agreement on its position.
OTTAWA 00002439 003 OF 003
Ontario
-------
¶10. (SBU) According to Consulate General Toronto soundings,
the language on running rules - prospective versus
retrospective - and monthly quotas are problematic in the
July 1 agreement. Ontario's lumber producers are quite
concerned about the agreement's provision to divide Canada's
export quota into monthly allotments. Under the present
agreement text, if companies do not fulfill their share of
the monthly quota, the unused quota is lost and cannot be
carried forward. An Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources
official said that province's industry would prefer a rolling
quota over three months, for example, so that any lost
production in a given month could be made up in subsequent
months.
¶11. (SBU) While many contacts have either been silent about
what happened at the August 9 meeting or have been
unreachable, the Vice President at Abitibi said that
Emerson's meeting was "very productive, honest, and open."
Ontario Premier McGuinty told the Ambassador on August 14
that the BC industry's position will be key to determining
the Canadian industry's support of the July 1 agreement.
The Prairies
------------
¶12. (SBU) There has been little reaction to Emerson's
meeting from industry leaders in Manitoba, Alberta, and
Saskatchewan. The lumber industry in these provinces is an
important sector, but relatively small in the big picture.
In the past, these observers have said that they have no
choice but to "go with the flow" and support the positions of
the bigger players in BC, Ontario and Quebec. However, a
Conservative Alberta MP had a different take on the current
situation. He told the DCM that he heard that the lumber
industry in his province favored the status quo of endless
litigation over the July 1 agreement.
British Columbia
----------------
¶13. (SBU) A key Consulate Vancouver contact was pessimistic
about the outcome of the Emerson meeting. The industry in
the west is not on board with the July 1 agreement and
believes that the GOC is maneuvering the BC companies to kill
the deal and then have them take the blame. This outcome
would also avoid the deal becoming the subject of a
Parliamentary vote of confidence in the fall, which could
force a new election if the Conservatives lost. The BC
industry was told that their list of demands for
modifications in the July 1 agreement was too long and should
be shortened. At the August 9 meeting with Emerson, the BC
industry said it wanted: 1) a 12 month standstill; 2) running
rules (i.e., the border tax calculation on the date a lumber
order is placed versus when it actually crosses the border)
should be prospective rather than retrospective; 3) border
tax adjustments should be reviewed quarterly rather than
monthly; and 4) BC's coastal logging should not be subject to
a duty (in concert with the rest of the province).
Visit Canada's Classified Web Site at
http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/wha/ottawa
WILKINS