Since then, both sides have been able to claim some victories in various cases heard by WTO or North American Free Trade Agreement dispute panels, but Canada has shown little interest in resuming negotiations.
The latest appeal stemmed from a WTO panel report released on August 1 which found fault with how the United States had implemented a previous ruling against U.S. countervailing duties on Canadian lumber, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Trade Representative's office said.
The case also concerned how the United States calculates Canadian government subsidies when logs are sold from one Canadian producer to another, the spokeswoman said.
The dispute has strained trade relations between the United States and Canada.
Ottawa reacted angrily when Washington refused to scrap its lumber duties after a NAFTA panel ruled against them on August 10. However, a few weeks later, the WTO backed U.S. claims that imports of Canadian lumber threatened the U.S. industry.
The United States argues the only way to resolve the dispute once and for all is through negotiation.
"Litigation has obviously not proved to be an effective way to resolve this relatively small but highly disruptive agreement," U.S. Trade Representative Rob Portman said in an op-ed piece on Saturday in Canada's Globe and Mail newspaper.
"Canada's recent decision to cancel negotiations was unfortunate, particularly given that progress was being made," Portman said. "We are still waiting to see the Canadian counterproposal (to a U.S. proposal made in July). We are, and have been, ready to meet."
However the Canadian government continued to spurn the call. "Our current focus is on litigation, high-level political intervention and advocacy," Andrea Lanthier, a spokeswoman for Canadian International Trade Minister Jim Peterson said.
Portman noted Canada enjoys a record $139 billion trade surplus with the United States and the two countries are each other's largest trading partners.
Softwood lumber accounts for less than 3 percent of Canada's exports to the United States, and most of the trade between the two countries is dispute-free, Portman said.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/06/AR2005090600941.html
[Proofreader's note: this article was edited for spelling and typos on September 7, 2005]
Note: http://www.washingtonpo...

There are rulings from NAFTA that the duties are unfair (for Canada). There are rulings from the WTO that the duties are fair (for the US) because 'stumpage fees' are artifically low in Canada. There are rulings that the US incorrectly calculates the price of those stumpage fees, and the way they are calculated leads to the appearance that the stumpage fees are too low. There are rulings from NAFTA and the WTO that Canada was not dumping softwood in the US. . . .
Basically Canadian negotiators are saying that NAFTA trumps the WTO rulings, and there will be no deal if the collected duties are not returned, instead given as a subsidy to US industry under the 'Byrd amendment' (ruled illegal by the WTO).
Clear as mud?
---
"If you must kill a man, it costs you nothing to be polite about it." Winston Churchill
What I still don't understand is that in all 3 links I provided, both the USA and the Canadians are claiming victory in what appears to be the same WTO ruling. Is this really the same ruling, and someone is spinning for the media? Are there several WTO actions going on at the same time, or has someone mistaken a NAFTA ruling for a WTO? This part is still clear as mud.
Thanks again for explaining what you could, it's been helpful.
E
Ahhh! The former explains the latter. See that! Someone called me 'a voice of reason'.
See, the Yahoo and AFP articles state: "The US Trade Representative's office (USTR) said the WTO, in an interim decision, upheld a US trade panel determination "that dumped and subsidized imports of softwood lumber from Canada threatened to materially injure the US industry."
But the CTV article states: "The World Trade Organization sided with Canada and ruled that the U.S. has failed to prove some of its claims that certain softwood lumber exports have been unfairly subsidized."
Two articles are on the same WTO decision, just different parts of that decision. Dumping vs subsidizing, and that 'dumping' posed a threat to the US industry. If you go back a couple weeks, the NAFTA panel found exactally the opposite.
*This* is why this dispute has been going off and on for 20 or so years.
---
"If you must kill a man, it costs you nothing to be polite about it." Winston Churchill
---
"And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music." Friedrich Nietzsche
<br />
<a href="http://www.usembassycanada.gov/content/content.asp?section=can_usa&document=trade">http://www.usembassycanada.gov/content/content.asp?section=can_usa&document=trade</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/eicb/softwood/menu-en.asp">http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/eicb/softwood/menu-en.asp</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S.-Canada_softwood_lumber_dispute">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S.-Canada_softwood_lumber_dispute</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://archives.cbc.ca/IDD-1-73-787/politics_economy/softwood/">http://archives.cbc.ca/IDD-1-73-787/politics_economy/softwood/</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/HET/Softwood/">http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/HET/Softwood/</a><br />
<br />
<p>---<br>Perception is two thirds of what we perceive reality to be.<br />
<br />
Difficult decisions are a privilege of rank.<br />