Breaking The Deal That Never Was

TheLumbermanHideth
SoftwoodVille

(Updated to correct my original Freudian slip in which I called 'Accidental Deliberations' Accidental Liberations - sorry about that, especially because it is a very interesting site)



Now it's Ontario's turn according to this 'update' from the Globe and Mail the evening of June 12, 2006.

Ottawa — The Ontario government is warning it may withdraw support for the Canada-U.S. softwood truce if Ottawa can't solve two “deal breakers” that have arisen in the rush to seal a deal before the summer break.

And one of the things that really bugs their Natural Resources Minister Charles Ramsey is the following:

Ontario's second major concern is that the United States is pushing to divide Canada's export quota into monthly allotments, Mr. Ramsay said. If companies don't meet their monthly share of the cap, they would lose the unused quota room, unable to carry it forward.

In other words, as blogger 'Accidental Deliberations' so aptly points out:

So having successfully capped Canada's share of the U.S. market isn't enough: now the U.S. also wants to set caps within the cap, and ensure that Canadian producers can't make up for slow months or take advantage of positive market conditions. (Speaking of comical attempts at a straight face, keep an eye out for Bush's next admonition that the U.S. is trying to lead the way toward free markets.)

Sheesh.

Of course, right at the end, the Globe and (nolongerEmpire) Mail can't help themselves from saying:

Ottawa doesn't need Ontario's support to sign the final version of the lumber deal reached in April.

To which we respond to their press poodle Steven Chase, whose byline appears above the piece - what deal? Or, put another way, show us the evidence of a deal that has been made based on a single agreement agreed to by both sides.

After all, isn't that what a deal actually is?

.