From: marc@meadow.uucp (Marc Riehm)
Subject: Re: US-Canada Beer Dispute ... I thought it was over?
Keywords: canadian broadcast, usa federal, government
Reply-To: marc@meadow.UUCP (Marc Riehm)
Organization: Amdahl Canada Ltd., Software Development Center
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 23:09:59 GMT

In article <1992Jul23.215606.6377@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca> golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy) writes:

[previous discussion on Beer trade issues deleted]

>The Ontario levies probably will pass GATT scrutiny, but the US 
>doesn't want to go back to GATT and lose, they want to trying
>intimidating Ontario to remove the levies.  What the US government
>doesn't like is a floor price for beer (for health reasons) and
>a 10 cent environmental tax on cans...both which probably would
>survive GATT scrutiny.  This is nothing but more attempted
>intimidation by the US.

Don't tell me that that 10 cent levy by Uncle Bob was not protectionism at
its finest.  The Ontario government just found an alternative way to protect
Canadian jobs.  The timing of the move (just after GATT ruled against the
Canadian beer trade) makes it obvious.  And a floor price is _not_ fair: if
you want to impose a minimum price, then it should be done so indirectly by
increasing the tax against _all_ beers, so that the cheaper beers retain
a competitive advantage.

The Canadian beer system has been a pet peeve of mine for years.  It is
blatantly protectionist and enormously unproductive.  The consumer has been
supporting an inefficient system, which was designed to please unions and
management at the same time by virtually eliminating competition.  The
Ontario beer distribution system amounts to nothing more than institutionalized
price fixing.  It's high time the industry was shaken up!

>There has been a lot of harassment by the US...like US Customs ruling
>that Honda engines made in Maryville Ohio are not North American
>parts when put into Hondas assembled in Ontario...Canada being
>included in the US steel industries dumping claims against the
>rest of the world, the imposition of a tariff on Canadian softwood
>lumber for bogus reasons, a prolongation of the pork dispute that
>the binational dispute resolution panel ruled in Canada's favor,
>the claim that magnesium production in Quebec is unfairly subsidized
>by Hydro Quebec...the US is giving the FTA a bad reputation because
>they certainly are not living up the the spirit of the agreement
>with mostly bogus harassment of Canadian industry.  If the US doesn't
>back off with their protectionist attitude toward Canada, the deal
>could be in trouble after the next election.
>
>Gerald

I can't comment on all of these issues, but it wouldn't surprise me at all
if some of these claims were valid.  In particular, the magnesium production
may well be true; Quebec has tried to attract industry in the past by offering
Hydro below cost.  If that is not a trade subsidy, what is?

Canadians love to complain about unfair American trade practices.  But we
needn't look south of the border to find gross examples of it (anyone for
the farm marketing boards?).
-- 
Marc Riehm      Amdahl Canada Ltd., Software Development Center
                2000 Argentia Road, Plaza 2, Suite 300
                Mississauga, Ont.   L5N 1V8
marc@meadow.UUCP
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada