Keep Us Strong WikiLeaks logo

Currently released so far... 97115 / 251,287

Articles

Browse latest releases

Browse by creation date

Browse by origin

A B C D F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W Y Z

Browse by tag

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
ETRD EAGR ETTC EAID ECON EFIN ECIN EINV ELAB EAIR ENRG EPET EWWT ECPS EIND EMIN ELTN EC ETMIN EUC EZ ET ELECTIONS ENVR EU EUN EG EINT ER ECONOMICS ES EMS ENIV EEB EN ECE ECOSOC EK ENVIRONMENT EFIS EI EWT ENGRD ECPSN EXIM EIAD ERIN ECPC EDEV ENGY ECTRD EPA ESTH ECCT EINVECON ENGR ERTD EUR EAP EWWC ELTD EL EXIMOPIC EXTERNAL ETRDEC ESCAP ECO EGAD ELNT ECONOMIC ENV ETRN EIAR EUMEM ENRGPARMOTRASENVKGHGPGOVECONTSPLEAID EREL ECOM ECONETRDEAGRJA ETCC ETRG ECONOMY EMED ETR ENERG EITC EFINOECD EURM EENG ERA EXPORT ENRD ECONEINVETRDEFINELABETRDKTDBPGOVOPIC EGEN EBRD EVIN ETRAD ECOWAS EFTA ECONETRDBESPAR EGOVSY EPIN EID ECONENRG EDRC ESENV ETT EB ENER ELTNSNAR ECHEVARRIA ETRC EPIT EDUC ESA EFI ENRGY ESCI EE EAIDXMXAXBXFFR EETC ECIP EIAID EIVN EBEXP ESTN EING EGOV ETRA EPETEIND ELAN ETRDGK EAIDRW ETRDEINVECINPGOVCS EPEC ENVI ELN EAG EPCS EPRT EPTED ETRB EUM EAIDS EFIC EFINECONEAIDUNGAGM EAIDAR ESF EIDN ELAM EDU EV EAIDAF ECN EDA EXBS EINTECPS ENRGTRGYETRDBEXPBTIOSZ EPREL EAC EINVEFIN ETA EAGER EINDIR ECA ECLAC ELAP EITI EUCOM ECONEFINETRDPGOVEAGRPTERKTFNKCRMEAID EARG ELDIN EINVKSCA ENNP EFINECONCS EFINTS ECCP ETC EAIRASECCASCID EINN ETRP EAIDNI EFQ ECOQKPKO EGPHUM EBUD ECONEINVEFINPGOVIZ ENERGY ELB EINDETRD EMI ECONEFIN EIB EURN ETRDEINVTINTCS EIN EFIM ETIO ELAINE EMN EATO EWTR EIPR EINVETC ETTD ETDR EIQ ECONCS EPPD ENRGIZ EISL ESPINOSA ELEC EAIG ESLCO EUREM ENTG ERD EINVECONSENVCSJA EEPET EUNCH ECINECONCS ETRO ETRDECONWTOCS ECUN EFND EPECO EAIRECONRP ERGR ETRDPGOV ECPN ENRGMO EPWR EET EAIS EAGRE EDUARDO EAGRRP EAIDPHUMPRELUG EICN ECONQH EVN EGHG ELBR EINF EAIDHO EENV ETEX ERNG ED
KMDR KPAO KPKO KJUS KCRM KGHG KFRD KWMN KDEM KTFN KHIV KGIC KIDE KSCA KNNP KHUM KIPR KSUM KISL KIRF KCOR KRCM KPAL KWBG KN KS KOMC KSEP KFLU KPWR KTIA KSEO KMPI KHLS KICC KSTH KMCA KVPR KPRM KE KU KZ KFLO KSAF KTIP KTEX KBCT KOCI KOLY KOR KAWC KACT KUNR KTDB KSTC KLIG KSKN KNN KCFE KCIP KGHA KHDP KPOW KUNC KDRL KV KPREL KCRS KPOL KRVC KRIM KGIT KWIR KT KIRC KOMO KRFD KUWAIT KG KFIN KSCI KTFIN KFTN KGOV KPRV KSAC KGIV KCRIM KPIR KSOC KBIO KW KGLB KMWN KPO KFSC KSEAO KSTCPL KSI KPRP KREC KFPC KUNH KCSA KMRS KNDP KR KICCPUR KPPAO KCSY KTBT KCIS KNEP KFRDCVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG KNNB KGCC KINR KPOP KMFO KENV KNAR KVIR KDRG KDMR KFCE KNAO KDEN KGCN KICA KIMMITT KMCC KLFU KMSG KSEC KUM KCUL KMNP KSMT KCOM KOMCSG KSPR KPMI KRAD KIND KCRP KAUST KWAWC KTER KCHG KRDP KPAS KITA KTSC KPAOPREL KWGB KIRP KJUST KMIG KLAB KTFR KSEI KSTT KAPO KSTS KLSO KWNN KPOA KHSA KNPP KPAONZ KBTS KWWW KY KJRE KPAOKMDRKE KCRCM KSCS KWMNCI KESO KWUN KPLS KIIP KEDEM KPAOY KRIF KGICKS KREF KTRD KFRDSOCIRO KTAO KJU KWMNPHUMPRELKPAOZW KEN KO KNEI KEMR KKIV KEAI KWAC KRCIM KWCI KFIU KWIC KCORR KOMS KNNO KPAI KBWG KTTB KTBD KTIALG KILS KFEM KTDM KESS KNUC KPA KOMCCO KCEM KRCS KWBGSY KNPPIS KNNPMNUC KWN KERG KLTN KALM KCCP KSUMPHUM KREL KGH KLIP KTLA KAWK KWMM KVRP KVRC KAID KSLG KDEMK KX KIF KNPR KCFC KFTFN KTFM KPDD KCERS KMOC KDEMAF KMEPI KEMS KDRM KEPREL KBTR KEDU KNP KIRL KNNR KMPT KISLPINR KTPN KA KJUSTH KPIN KDEV KTDD KAKA KFRP KWNM KTSD KINL KJUSKUNR KWWMN KECF KWBC KPRO KVBL KOM KFRDKIRFCVISCMGTKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG KEDM KFLD KLPM KRGY KNNF KICR KIFR KM KWMNCS KAWS KLAP KPAK KDDG KCGC KID KNSD KMPF KPFO KDP KCMR KRMS KNPT KNNNP KTIAPARM KDTB KNUP KPGOV KNAP KNNC KUK KSRE KREISLER KIVP KQ KTIAEUN KPALAOIS KRM KISLAO KWM KFLOA
PHUM PINR PTER PGOV PREL PREF PL PM PHSA PE PARM PINS PK PUNE PO PALESTINIAN PU PBTS PROP PTBS POL POLI PA PGOVZI POLMIL POLITICAL PARTIES POLM PD POLITICS POLICY PAS PMIL PINT PNAT PV PKO PPOL PERSONS PING PBIO PH PETR PARMS PRES PCON PETERS PRELBR PT PLAB PP PAK PDEM PKPA PSOCI PF PLO PTERM PJUS PSOE PELOSI PROPERTY PGOVPREL PARP PRL PNIR PHUMKPAL PG PREZ PGIC PBOV PAO PKK PROV PHSAK PHUMPREL PROTECTION PGOVBL PSI PRELPK PGOVENRG PUM PRELKPKO PATTY PSOC PRIVATIZATION PRELSP PGOVEAIDUKNOSWGMHUCANLLHFRSPITNZ PMIG PREC PAIGH PROG PSHA PARK PETER POG PHUS PPREL PS PTERPREL PRELPGOV POV PKPO PGOVECON POUS PGOVPRELPHUMPREFSMIGELABEAIDKCRMKWMN PWBG PMAR PREM PAR PNR PRELPGOVEAIDECONEINVBEXPSCULOIIPBTIO PARMIR PGOVGM PHUH PARTM PN PRE PTE PY POLUN PPEL PDOV PGOVSOCI PIRF PGOVPM PBST PRELEVU PGOR PBTSRU PRM PRELKPAOIZ PGVO PERL PGOC PAGR PMIN PHUMR PVIP PPD PGV PRAM PINL PKPAL PTERE PGOF PINO PHAS PODC PRHUM PHUMA PREO PPA PEPFAR PGO PRGOV PAC PRESL PORG PKFK PEPR PRELP PREFA PNG PGOVPHUMKPAO PRELECON PINOCHET PFOR PGOVLO PHUMBA PRELC PREK PHUME PHJM POLINT PGOVPZ PGOVKCRM PGOVE PHALANAGE PARTY PECON PEACE PROCESS PLN PRELSW PAHO PEDRO PRELA PASS PPAO PGPV PNUM PCUL PGGV PSA PGOVSMIGKCRMKWMNPHUMCVISKFRDCA PGIV PRFE POGOV PEL PBT PAMQ PINF PSEPC POSTS PHUMPGOV PVOV PHSAPREL PROLIFERATION PENA PRELTBIOBA PIN PRELL PGOVPTER PHAM PHYTRP PTEL PTERPGOV PHARM PROTESTS PRELAF PKBL PRELKPAO PKNP PARMP PHUML PFOV PERM PUOS PRELGOV PHUMPTER PARAGRAPH PERURENA PBTSEWWT PCI PETROL PINSO PINSCE PQL PEREZ PBS

Browse by classification

Community resources

courage is contagious

Viewing cable 06OTTAWA902, SOFTWOOD LUMBER: COMPANIES URGE RETURN TO TABLE

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.
To understand the justification used for the classification of each cable, please use this WikiSource article as reference.

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. #06OTTAWA902.
Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
06OTTAWA902 2006-03-29 13:01 2011-04-28 00:00 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Embassy Ottawa
VZCZCXYZ0008
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHOT #0902/01 0881301
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 291301Z MAR 06
FM AMEMBASSY OTTAWA
TO SECSTATE WASHDC 1944
UNCLAS OTTAWA 000902 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
SIPDIS 
 
PASS USTR FOR MELLE, MENDENHALL, CHANDLER 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: ETRD CA
SUBJECT: SOFTWOOD LUMBER: COMPANIES URGE RETURN TO TABLE 
 
REF: (A) OTTAWA 311; (B) VANCOUVER 358 
 
1.  (SBU) Summary:  Major Canadian softwood industry 
officials tell the Embassy that they are pushing the Harper 
government for a quick restart of lumber negotiations, and 
advising Canadian officials not to waste time trying to 
reach full consensus in the industry.  The officials 
understand that B.C., Ontario and Quebec are working with 
the Canadian government on the parameters of a deal.  They 
would like to see a long-term agreement that would avoid 
another round of disputes ("Lumber V") -- and expect a 
solution to the softwood lumber problem to be highly 
complex.  End summary. 
 
2.  (SBU) On March 24, Charge d'Affaires, Econ Minister- 
Counselor and Econ Officers met with officials from 
Weyerhaeuser, Canfor and Abitibi Consolidated (protect), who 
together represent a significant proportion of the Canadian 
lumber industry and have operations throughout the West, 
Ontario and Quebec, as well as in the U.S.. The company 
executives were in Ottawa to lobby Cabinet ministers in the 
run up to the March 30-31 Leaders' NAFTA Meeting in Cancun; 
they told us they are staking their hopes on the POTUS- 
Harper meeting to kickstart a new lumber negotiation. 
 
Message: Just Do It. 
------------------- 
 
3.  (SBU) The industry officials told us what they are 
telling Canadian ministers: we have a short window of 
opportunity, before the November 2006 U.S. Congressional 
election campaign and a Canadian Parliamentary election 
which could take place relatively soon, to conduct (in the 
words of Trade Minister Emerson) "swift and efficient 
negotiations" to reach a deal.  They are encouraged by a 
perceived moderation in tone among U.S. industry and 
consumer players at the recent Senate Finance Committee 
hearings and heartened by the US-Mexico settlement on 
cement, the other iconic NAFTA trade dispute.  Echoing 
earlier industry comments (reftel), they say that 
governments should not wait for full industry consensus on 
either side, and that the time for big industry 
consultations has passed.  Their companies are prepared to 
step back from day-to-day involvement in talks; in their 
view, governments should cut a deal and ignore the 
inevitable opposition from individual firms since no deal 
will satisfy everyone.  In their view the government needs 
to reach a settlement quickly because it cannot afford a 
renewed provincial schism among B.C., Ontario and Quebec. 
They believe the message is falling on receptive ears in 
Ottawa, although the new Harper government is still 
struggling with staffing issues. 
 
But Not At Any Cost 
------------------- 
 
4.  (SBU) Nevertheless, the forest industry officials 
stressed that there are limits to what industry will accept. 
Any deal has to recognize the current status quo, factoring 
in both the stronger Canadian dollar over the past two years 
and the "legal environment," (the results of the NAFTA 
dispute settlement process and ongoing litigation)   Also, 
any lumber deal cannot "discriminate against one province" 
(presumably meaning B.C.).  They also suggested (also a 
recurring theme) that U.S. industry would also have to 
become more realistic in its expectations for a deal. 
 
Where Are the Provinces? 
------------------------ 
 
5. (SBU) In response to a question about provincial 
politics, the industry executives said that B.C., Ontario 
and Quebec Premiers Campbell, McGuinty and Charest have been 
consulting closely and have made a joint approach to the 
federal government on elements of an acceptable agreement. 
Alberta, the fourth biggest lumber producer, still hasn't 
come to the table at the political level but Alberta 
come to the table at the political level but Alberta 
officials are participating in technical meetings. 
 
 
6. (SBU) The executives were somewhat defensive about the 
March 24 announcement by the Province of Quebec of new 
proposed aid to forest products companies of over 900 
million CAD in the next four years.  They argued, among 
other things, that forest operations in the U.S. in some 
cases receive similar support from state governments.   We 
took the opportunity to remind them that this package, like 
the previously announced Ontario and federal government 
assistance packages, made it more difficult to make the case 
for resolving the issue. 
Elements of a Deal 
------------------ 
 
7.  With the disclaimer that they have no "specific 
conclusion" on what a deal should include, the industry 
representatives floated various thoughts on the key elements 
of a settlement.  First of all, they expect any agreement to 
be quite complex, given the number of elements in play, but 
urged governments to avoid trying to "re-construct the 
forest sector." (Comment: this implies that wholesale 
changes in stumpage and other provincial practices would be 
unlikely to be on the table.  End Comment)  They would like 
to see a long-term agreement, e.g. at least seven years in 
duration, in order to allow Canadian firms to adapt to the 
structural shifts now underway in the industry and the 
looming effects of beetle kill in B.C.  They thought that 
some of the ideas floated during previous bilateral 
discussions last November should be revived, such as 
elements on market share and volume and some kind of a floor 
price mechanism that would avoid oversupply and wild 
downswings in price as housing starts fall in the U.S.  With 
regard to market share, one industry representative proposed 
that any market share percentage should be based on total 
imports into the U.S. lumber market rather than Canadian 
imports, giving the Canadians a chance to compete directly 
against Europeans and other new entrants that have snapped 
up U.S. market share.  On the touchy question of deposits, 
they only said cautiously that "something could be done." 
They clearly expect that a "large portion" of the deposits 
would eventually be returned to Canadian companies.  They 
also repeated the call for a binational panel to oversee the 
agreement. 
 
The Future of the Canadian Forest Industry 
------------------------------------------ 
 
8.  (SBU)  The industry representatives also offered their 
thoughts on the future of the Canadian industry.  Beetle 
kill (ref. B) is a critical problem for operations in the 
B.C. interior; existing mills will increasingly wind up 
being surrounded by dead trees and the cost of hauling logs 
from ever-more distant living stands will skyrocket. 
Everybody expects the forest products sector to be 
consolidated into fewer, bigger companies, but with a trend 
away from integrated forestry operations (because capital 
demands are "too significant") towards companies 
concentrating on specific product lines; e.g. spinoffs of 
pulp production, under pressure from fast-growing Southern 
Hemisphere imports.  For instance, Abitibi is developing a 
market niche in dealing with recycled paper.  Increasingly, 
Canadian forest producers see a future in the energy sector, 
possibly replacing lost pulp and paper exports with 
electricity exports to the U.S. market.  (Comment: Ontario's 
recent announcement that it will pay subsidized rates to 
alternative energy producers suggests that provincial 
officials, faced with serious structural adjustment problems 
in forest communities, are likely to encourage this 
development.  End Comment.) 
 
 
 
WILKINS