Many other nations take similiar actions to protect
their raw resources and ensure the most benefit is returned
to the country where the resources are found. Without such
legislation, countries would be open to the high grading of
the resources and their transfer, unprocessed, to the cheap
labor ghettos of the world.

The ramifications of the preliminary ruling are
immense. What would happen if the same principles were
applied to the export of logs? Our right to restrict the
Flow of raw logs out of British Columbia would be curtailed
or destroyed. One can only imagine the damage such a ruling
would have.

For the fishing industry, the ruling also flies in the
face of other recent agreements including the Law of the Sea
agreement and the Canada-U.S. salmon treaty.

Both documents have at their root the fundamental right
of the countries where the fish originate to reap the
benefits of those fish.

The Law of the Sea states that countries have the right
to precess ocean resources found within the 200 mile zone.

The benefits of the Canada U.S. Salmon Treaty were
predicated on the assumption that the fish would continue to
be processed in Canada. If this ruling passes, it draws into
sarious question the validity of such a treaty with the
United States.

We ended up at GATT because the United States wanted

access to Canadian raw fish resources. The appeal to GATT

oO

A

_