Forest Practices Code needs
to implement worker training

y unveiling a new Forest Practices Code
on November 9, the B.C. New Democ-
rats have taken a large step towards
better forest management in the
province (see story page one). The Mike
Harcourt government is doing what
unionized workers have long called for.
It is putting in a legislated Forest Prac-

AMERICANS
ADDRESSED OUR
CONCERNS AND
LEFT OUR DIGNITY

ALL IN ALL, THE
RENEGOTIATIONS
WENT VERY

tices Code.

On its own and with previous rules and regula-
tions in place, the industry has been doing a much
better job in recent years. In some areas of the
province the industry has been very progressive in
changing the way things are done in the woods.

The Code will go a long way to reassure the public
that the industry's practices on public lands are be-
ing monitored intensively. After all, for the most
part, B.C.’s forests are public land and the govern-
ment has a major responsibility to ensure that

things are kept in line.

Most impressively the new Code will institute
heavy fines for violators. Companies may face

enalties of up to $1 million instead of the previous
$5,000 and may have their cutting rights revoked for

serious violations.

The threat of heavy fines may very well go a long
way to ensuring that the Code will be strictly ad-

hered to.

IWA-CANADA has long called for tough legislative
action in the woods. This call was especially strong
during the late 1970’s and early 1980’s when the So-
cred government of the day let the companies moni-
tor themselves in a period of “Sympathetic

Administration”.

The new Code will see a reversal of “Sympathetic
Administration,” and more Forest Service and Min-
istry of Environment staff out in the field.

Parts of the new Code will see new regulations for
the maintenance of biological diversity and a limita-

tion on the size of clearcuts.

The union has been told the new changes will re-
duce the AAC by about 3%. That will mean less
wood to log for union and non-union loggers. That is
a very significant takeaway, especially when we are
faced with upcoming reductions in the annual allow-
able cuts due to growing land use pressures.

Tf mishandled, the Code can mean more layoffs
and hardship for workers. If handled properly, there
can be new jobs created, with more employment with
labour intensive logging and silviculture practices.

Now is the time, if there ever was one, for the NDP
government to create new jobs in the forests in face
of declining harvests. It must have the political will

to do so.

The economic conditions are here now to create
jobs in the forests. Our old growth forests are like
gold. Lumber prices have sky rocketed and will re-
main high for the long term foreseeable future.

Therefore the industry and the government have
more slack now than they ever did, to create new
employment opportunities. Of course industry, left
to its own devices, will eliminate jobs, not make

them.

We believe that the Forest Practices Code is good
in principle. But we will wait to make our final
judgement when we see what new job training there
is for forest workers. Our members need that train-
ing to help enforce that Code and develop new skills
needed as the industry moves to intensively create

more jobs, not less.

Official publication of WA-CANADA

WELL...

INTACT.

Chretien government completely capitulates
as it breaks promise to renegotiate NAFTA

It’s been said on more than
one occasion that when push
comes to shove a Liberal is a
Tory. As predicted the new
Liberal federal government,
under the listless leadership
of Jean Chretien, has rapidly
and completely capitulated to
the full implementation of the
North American Free Trade
Agreement (NAFTA).

Tt has happened so quickly
and with such ease that their
appears to be a seamless con-
nection between the Liberals
| and the government of Brian

| Mulroney, who have rendered
| Canada’s sovereignty to U.S.
| interests.

Chretien is going to help push

through what Brian Mulroney

and his corporate backers
| wanted for Canada.

In reaction, the New Demo-
cratic Party has correctly
called the Chretien govern-
ment’s actions a continuation
of Mulroney’s legacy of cow-
ardice and deceit.

NDP trade critic William
Blakie said it all clearly. “The
great sucking sound predicted
| by Ross Perot as a result of
NAFTA . . . was revealed by
| the great sucking sound of
Jean Chretien as he ate all the
| promises that the Liberals
‘made on NAFTA during the
' election.”

One is a Canadian “declara-
tion” on energy sovereignty
which says we have the right
to our own energy resources
before guaranteeing supplies
to the U.S. in time of short-
ages. The other pages are
joint Canadian, U.S. and Mex-
ican statements on water
exports, anti-dumping mea-
sures, and subsidies.

After seeing the three page
agreement Prime Minister
Chretien said: “We have done,
in my judgement, much more
than most of the people said
we would. And in fact there
was no price we had to pay to
get it.” aS

Get what?

U.S. Trade Representative
Mickey Kantor said the three
page agreement “side deals”
don’t change NAFTA and that
the U.S. is not committed to
“any particular outcome” in
subsidy and anti-dumping
talks. So, yes Chretien’s at-
tempt to save face on his elec-
tion promises was and will be
useless for Canada.

As for energy Mr. Kantor
said: “The United States has
no doubt that Canada will
continue to be a fully reliable
energy supplier... None of
these (Chretien) statements
change the NAFTA in any
way.”

But if we look south of the
border the U.S. did slip in
some of its own changes to
NAFTA implementing legisla-
tion when President Clinton
was in the midst of his vote-
buying spree.

In legislation submitted to
Congress on November 3
there were changes to allow
the U.S. Senate to “clarify”

industry to use broader pow-
ers under U.S. law to chal-
lenge panel decisions.

The charges so alarmed
even Canada’s most ultra
right wing pro-free trade sup-
porter and lobby group, the
Business Council of National
Issues, that its leader Thomas
D’Aquino said that if Canada
“fails to persuade the (U.S.)
administration and the Con-
gress to abandon the . . . pro-
posals (it) will force the
Canadian business communi-
ty to reconsider its support
for Canadian participation in
NAFTA.”

A day after President Clin-
ton signed the legislation and
forwarded it to Congress,
Prime Minister Chretien said
his government would hang
tough on NAFTA renegotiation
and would refuse to go ahead
with the deal. Then two days
later Liberal Trade Minister
Ray McLaren said Canada
could get the changes it want-
ed without renegotiating the
NAFTA.

The changes the Liberals
wanted were none, because
we didn’t get any. The Canadi-
an public has been hood-
winked again. Unfortunately
the corporate media has not
pointed out that the Liberal is
the same as a Tory.

We don’t have a govern-
ment that will protect us. The
power of U.S. capital and in-
fluence in Ottawa is over-
whelming. Election promises
from Jean Chretien are mean-
ingless. As a federal govern-
ment, Canada has a collective
of push-overs as its represen-
tatives on the world stage.

Kantor says that Canada’s
water is covered under

RRY STONEY . . President | So what did Chretien get U.S. law on countervails un-
NorMAN GARCIA SNEILMENARD | letVicePresident | for Candia after US. Presi. der NAFTA. There is also lan- NAFTA. Chretien says it is not
Editor FRED MIRON ..2nd Vice-President | dent Bill Clinton went on a guage that allows trinational but itis.
WARREN ULLEY . . 3rd Vice-President | shameless vote buying binge NAFTA panel dispute deci- The U.S. has now got Cana-
5th Floor, HARVEY ARCAND . , 4th Vice-President | to get NAFTA through the U.S, sions to be appealed to U.S. dian resources held hostage
1285 W. Pender Street TERRY SMITH .. Secretary-Treasurer | Jegislature on November 17? courts. in the event of future short-
Vancouver, B.C. He got three pages of “side In fact to sell the NAFTA in ages. No other country has
V6E 4B2 agreements” not even worth the U.S. Mr. Kantor actually given away so much for so lit-
BROADWAY <> PRINTERS LTD. the paper they are written on. made a statement urging U.S. _ tle without even a fight.

LUMBERWORKER/DECEMBER, 1993/5