Crime and punishment

It's hard to disagree with Jack Layton's take that the softwood lumber capitulation is nothing short of a crime. But at least from the Globe and Mail's coverage, even Layton has missed what may be the worst part of the tentative agreement:

The remainder (of the duties collected to date) (lesser of 20% or US $1 billion) will be split evenly between members of the Coalition and jointly agreed initiatives.

I presume there can be little doubt that the "coalition" refers to the Coalition for Fair Lumber Imports, which has been pressuring the U.S. all along not to live up to its NAFTA obligations, and which for obvious reasons is one of the few groups that seems truly happy with the proposal.

It would be bad enough for any of the money to be kept by the U.S. government or used for purposes other than a return to Canadian producers. But it's all the worse if the effect of the agreement is not just to reward the U.S. for obstructionism generally, but to hand up to half a billion dollars to the obstructionists themselves for their trouble.

And it's not as if it's only Canada who's seen a problem with payments to groups such as CFLI. After all, the WTO ruled three years ago against the legality of the Byrd Amendment which allows for distribution based on trade obstruction, and Congress finally repealed the law last year. Which makes the payment to CFLI one which would properly be considered illegitimate under the laws of either country involved.

But then, the legitimacy of the U.S.' process doesn't matter as long as Canada is willing to sign away its right to defend its interests. Based on the Cons' agreement both to ludicrous restrictions on Canadian industry and to the protection payments to CFLI, it looks like Harper is a willing party to the crime. And that means that it'll be up to Canadian voters to impose the proper sentence on Bush's willing accomplice.