|
|
Negotiated
Settlement
Current Status:
On April 27, 2006, Canada
and the United States agreed to a
Basic Terms sheet laying out the
framework for an agreement.
On July 1, 2006, Minister
Emerson and United States Trade Representative Schwab initialled a final
legal text in Geneva.
On August 16, 2006, Premier
Gordon Campbell pledged the government of British Columbia's support
for the 2006 softwood lumber agreement (details).
For more information about
the new Softwood Agreement please check our main
Softwood Lumber webpage.
Chronology of Events
Leading to the Current Status:
·
July 1 2006:
Canada and the United States initial a final agreed text.
·
April 27 2006:
Canada and the United States sign a basic terms agreement.
·
July
2005: The
United States tabled an export tax based proposal for settlement.
·
March
2005: The
Canadian government presented an initial proposal for a negotiated solution
to the US (Details).
·
March
2005: The
Federal Government named former Bombardier chief Paul Tellier and Gordon
Ritchie, one of the architects of the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement, to
the negotiating team.
·
February
2005: At
the instigation of Grant Aldonas of US Department of Commerce, talks
resumed in February and March. With the departure of Grant Aldonas on
March 31, USTR became responsible for the file.
-
December 2003/January 2004
Interim Measure discussions (quota):
On December 6, 2003 Canadian
and US negotiators reached a tentative agreement to end the Canada-US
softwood lumber dispute. The U.S. Coalition for Fair Lumber
Imports supported this proposal. British Columbia and other
provinces had several concerns about the proposal, especially whether
it truly provides a road map to free trade. In January 12, 2004
meetings, the federal Minister of International Trade, Jim Peterson,
raised the issue with U.S. Commerce Secretary Don Evans and U.S. Trade
Representative Robert Zoellick. The proposed agreement included
a quota on Canadian softwood lumber entering the United States.
The federal government posted principles that it will follow in making
initial quota allocations as well as information about the operation
of a possible export control regime. These "Quota
Allocation Principles" can be found on the International Trade
Canada website (Details).
The Canadian government consulted with provincial governments and
industry about the proposed agreement.
- US Policy Bulletin: The US worked with Canadian
governments and industry to develop a policy bulletin. The
policy bulletin outlines changes to provincial forest policies that
would result in the countervailing duty (CVD) being revoked. A
final draft was released for comment on June 18, 2003 and the comment
period closed on August 22, 2003. A final policy bulletin was
not released. (draft
Policy Bulletin)
- Summer 2003 Interim Measure
discussions (quota): On May 23, 2003 the federal Department of Foreign
Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT) gave the U.S. Department of
Commerce a proposal for an interim agreement that led to a series of
negotiations. On July 24, 2003 the Canadian and US federal
governments jointly forwarded a proposal for an interim agreement
based on reintroducing a quota system for Canadian lumber entering the
U.S. The quota would replace U.S. duties while long term reforms
in provincial forestry policies are being implemented under the Policy
Bulletin process. However, the negotiations stalled in late July
when the U.S. Coalition for Fair Lumber Imports imposed a new series
of conditions.
- 2001/2002 Interim Measure
discussions (export tax): Starting in the fall of 2001, the U.S. and
Canadian governments held discussions to determine whether possible
policy changes could lead to a durable resolution of the softwood
lumber trade dispute. The B.C. government was engaged in these
talks, along with the federal and other provincial governments.
These talks broke off on March 21, 2002. Canada and the U.S.
were unable to agree on the rate of the proposed transitional export
tax, and issues related to provincial forest policy changes. In
addition, the U.S. did not accept Canada's proposal for binding
dispute resolution by an independent third party.
|
