Lumber Deal May Not See Vote: Minister

Who in their right mind would support a deal that would see the United States have control over our forest policies?

Answer: no one.

But remember, Harper is a neo-con.

'Nuff said.

---
"and the knowledge they fear is a weapon to be used against them"

"The Weapon" - Rush

The same football, back and forth. Who believed it should and those who said it would, are now debating if it will. Emerson has his followers and then there are those who don't like getting the shaft. All in all, we can all go to bed knowing it never was to begin with. There was never any deal, just words to appease the mass's.

---
Expect little from life and get more from it.

There should be no deal. There should have been no negotiations. <br><br> The courts have consistently been on our side - even the American ones! The Conservatives by their very words and actions would have sold us out if not for some of the lumber companies and provinces making such a stink.<br><br> <blockquote>"Canada can now celebrate the most definitive and significant legal decision in the Canada-U.S. softwood lumber dispute. Three judges of the U.S. Court of International Trade (U.S. CIT) have issued a unanimous decision saying that the U.S. has no basis under U.S. law to impose duties on Canadian softwood lumber. The U.S. CIT decision makes it clear that the United States cannot defeat the judgment of a NAFTA panel by issuing a new ruling that supposedly responds to an adverse WTO decision." July 22</blockquote><p>---<br>If there was ever a time for Canadians to become pushy - now is the time - for time is running out on this nation called Canada.

It still remains to be said again even with this New Conservative Government that has stated they would govern differently that the matter of Canada/US relations the Canadian people have been the losers and their wishes for their country have rarely been followed by those entrusted to express those wishes.

It also demonstrates again that those we elect, who state otherwise, support US leaders that have an expressed clear interest in subordinating Canadian wealth and freedom to the needs and wants of the USA for their own personal political interests and personal gain.

When will Canada and Canadians get a Government with the guts and fortitude to stand up and defend our interests?

When will the Canadian Business elite, all so called loyal Canadians who have personal agendas for making and putting money into their own pockets and national/international loyalties to others other then to their own Country, communities and people's well beginning start putting the needs of Canada and Canadians first?

Or is Canada and Canadian's just another commodity to sell down the river for personal gain and advantage?


---
Perception is two thirds of what we perceive reality to be.

Difficult decisions are a privilege of rank.

If there is no deal (as Ron Whyte says and as many of us had guessed over the months), I guess the court decisions stand and should be enforced. Plain and simple.

That's what happens with an individual who gets ticketed for a parking violation and decides to fight it in court.

Why should this be different for corporations and governments?

What part of "NO" is it that the Americans cannot understand?

The most interesting aspect is the behavour of the BC government,switching sides as they're ordered by the major lumber companies. If the deal goes through it will devastate the industry even more by knocking out the smaller and value added producers.
============================


Liberal position on softwood changes ... again


Understanding the B.C. Liberal position on the softwood lumber agreement is a bit like trying to catch smoke with a sieve, Bob Simpson says.

You might think you have it, but then it just slips away.

The Liberals were in favour of the agreement between Canada before they opposed it. Now it seems they're in favour of it again.

Prince George - Omineca MLA John Rustad told the Prince George Citizen that the agreement, which Minister Rich Coleman championed in May before disavowing in July, is a good deal for British Columbia.

Simpson, the New Democrat Critic for Forests and Range, shakes his head at the latest change of position by the Liberals.

"They've got the deal surrounded, that's for sure," said Simpson, the MLA for Cariboo - North. "They support it on one side and oppose it on another. It's a good way of making sure they're on the winning side, I guess."

Rustad's reasons for supporting the deal may have something to do with the Liberal connections to Canfor, who have expressed support for the deal and who gave the Liberals nearly $150,000 in 2005. Rustad accepted $2,500 from Canfor for his own campaign in 2005.

"Canfor is the biggest operator in the interior and there's no question its opinions should be respected," said Simpson.

"But you can't look after the needs of your friends while ignoring the legitimate concerns of the rest of the industry."
============================================
Ed Deak.

I imagine the Libs originally supported the deal because it meant that the 5,000 jobs in the BC interior would be up and running again.

Then they opposed the deal when they found out the money was going to stay in the pockets of the forest companies and not do the province one bit of good.

Then they once again favoured the deal, because the forest companies have promised the create thousands of jobs once again, revitalizing the BC interior.

See how simple it is to undestand this apparent waffling. The BC Liberals are for the working man......

---
"We can have a democracy or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of the few. We cannot have both."
- Justice Louis Brandeis