babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » national news   » Harper falls in line behind U.S. interests

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Harper falls in line behind U.S. interests
Cameron W
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10767

posted 16 September 2006 09:07 PM      Profile for Cameron W   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
This is a very good article.

This means that major provincial forestry policy changes have to go through the US for approval.

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/westview/story/3667863p-4240686c.html

quote:

FROM THE WINNIPEG FREE PRESS

Harper falls in line behind U.S. interests

Wed Sep 6 2006

FRANCES RUSSELL

PRIME Minister Stephen Harper is moving at warp speed to integrate
Canada's security, defence and foreign policies with the U.S. and
shred our competitive advantage over the U.S. in lumber and wheat.

Days before Ottawa bludgeoned Canada's lumber industry into the
deeply flawed softwood lumber agreement, The Vancouver Sun published
the details of a "leaked" letter from the Bush administration to the
U.S. lumber lobby. In it, the American administration confirmed that
its objective was to hobble the Canadian industry for seven years.
Nor does it end there.

Fully $450 million of the $1.3 billion in illegal duties the
Americans will get to keep will grease re-election wheels for
protectionist Republicans facing tough fights in upcoming midterm
congressional elections. Canada's timber industry will thus be forced
to subsidize an ongoing, illicit, attack on itself. All with the
explicit consent of the Canadian government.

There is more. When the industry balked, the Harper government used
intimidation -- a now-familiar tactic of our new prime minister. On
Aug. 4, The Globe and Mail quoted a senior government official
warning that opponents "... should prepare themselves for the
consequences of rejecting it and might want to start contemplating a
world where Ottawa is no longer in the business of subsidizing
softwood disputes."

The softwood deal is trade managed of, by and for the American lumber
lobby. A supposedly sovereign nation signed on to an unprecedented
clause requiring provinces to first vet any changes in forestry
policy with Washington.

Ignored in all the hype about "how thankful we should be that
Conservatives get along so well with Americans" is this reality.
Canada tossed away a significant victory, won, not before the useless
North American Free Trade Agreement panels, but from the U.S. Court
of International Trade. On April 7, it ruled U.S. duties on Canadian
softwood were illegal.

This is the second time a Conservative government has snatched defeat
from the jaws of victory on the lumber file. (snip)

It's said the beaver bites off its testicles when threatened. If
true, the beaver is certainly an apt symbol, if not for Canada,
certainly for a succession of governments which, when faced with
ceaseless bullying, react by carving off pieces of the nation.



From: Left Coast | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 16 September 2006 09:45 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Softwood lumber deal, with the emphasis on "soft"
From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
siren
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7470

posted 16 September 2006 09:52 PM      Profile for siren     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
What's the Matter with Kansas?
From: Of course we could have world peace! But where would be the profit in that? | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
a lonely worker
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9893

posted 16 September 2006 11:02 PM      Profile for a lonely worker     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Disgraceful. It's time we scrap NAFTA while we still have at least a bit of a coutnry left.
From: Anywhere that annoys neo-lib tools | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 16 September 2006 11:14 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Steve Harper IS the invisible hand in "What's afta NAFTA? - Part Duh!".

[ 16 September 2006: Message edited by: Fidel ]


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Phred
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9457

posted 17 September 2006 07:17 PM      Profile for Phred     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
No kidding we should tear up the NAFTA agreement...after that shakedown of a softwood lumber deal... something has to give!

I mean first softwood... then what? EVEN if we are right.. we still don't win!

What kind of JACK shit is that?!


From: Ottawa | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
Outcast
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13175

posted 17 September 2006 08:18 PM      Profile for Outcast     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Regrettably, I don't think the Canadian people will ever awaken from their slumber to demand that the government abrogate these trade treaties.
The nation is just too apathetic as a whole.

From: on the fringe of society | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged
a lonely worker
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9893

posted 17 September 2006 09:24 PM      Profile for a lonely worker     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
You'd be surprised. NAFTA is still extremely unpopular with many people here in Ontario and I suspect in many other places.

Chretien got a landslide campaigning against it. After he did nothing, no one has raised it again. The first large party that takes this issue on will score big gains and will be able to say that they truly "Stand up for Canada".

It definitely would be a wedge issue and would create major vote splits on the right between the neo-cons and neo-libs.


From: Anywhere that annoys neo-lib tools | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
West Coast Greeny
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6874

posted 17 September 2006 11:09 PM      Profile for West Coast Greeny     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by a lonely worker:
Chretien got a landslide campaigning against it. After he did nothing, no one has raised it again. The first large party that takes this issue on will score big gains and will be able to say that they truly "Stand up for Canada".

*raises hand* Oooo! Over here!!!

Toronto Star article from late August

quote:
The Green party voted in favour of pulling out of the North American Free Trade Agreement at its convention this weekend and May bluntly declared it was because the agreement is no longer working for Canada's best interests, especially on softwood lumber.

C'mon... I HAD to do that.


From: Ewe of eh. | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
kropotkin1951
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2732

posted 18 September 2006 11:30 AM      Profile for kropotkin1951   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
It's about time.

NDP Critic on Softwood Lumber

Yes and I agree that the NDp should campaign on abolishing it outright instead of tinkering with it.

[ 18 September 2006: Message edited by: kropotkin1951 ]


From: North of Manifest Destiny | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
otter
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12062

posted 18 September 2006 11:44 AM      Profile for otter        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
What we really need is less talk about scraping nafta and more mobolization of action to do so.
From: agent provocateur inc. | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged
West Coast Greeny
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6874

posted 18 September 2006 09:44 PM      Profile for West Coast Greeny     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Well... yeah otter.

The thing is that the first step to registering popular support to scrap/revamp NAFTA is to actually start talking about it. From what I understand (and the rest of you older people know 1st hand), there was a long stretch of about 10 years where no party (outside of the Can. Action Party) and very few prominent politicians were advocating the revoke of NAFTA.


From: Ewe of eh. | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
a lonely worker
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9893

posted 18 September 2006 10:41 PM      Profile for a lonely worker     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
WCG, I am glad the Greens came out against NAFTA, although I have my doubts about their sincerity considering May's past:

quote:
She worked for the Conservatives, in fact, in the late 1980s, and made a splash last spring when she paid public tribute to Mulroney as the "greenest" prime minister at a big award dinner in Ottawa, attended by Harper.

(from the same article you sourced).

Still, there is energy and I hope it will stiffen the resolve of other parties to finally get it.

I hope the Greens do make gains because the environment needs all the help it can get.

The Greens and social democrats / socialists are natural allies in virtually every country with a PR system. Unfortunately the Canadian version of the party is more interested in misquoting the "left" and having ex-Tories try to take down environmentally strong NDPers (Marilyn Chrley for example). This is what pisses me off more than anything else about them. If the environment is paramount, use your best candidates against a big oil conservative or a right wing Liberal. Don't target your fellow travellers.

Hopefully May will stop this disgusting trend. Time will tell and the proof will be which riding she chooses to run in.


From: Anywhere that annoys neo-lib tools | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
Erik Redburn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5052

posted 18 September 2006 10:48 PM      Profile for Erik Redburn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Technically the Greens under MAy now want to "renegotiate" NAFTa for better terms, like the NDP does. Eliminate chapter eleven etc.
From: Broke but not bent. | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca