It's time for payback: Tax those U.S. movies
Dalton Camp
STAR COLUMNIST
I have been thinking about John Manley - off and
on - and remembering his early promises, on
succeeding Lloyd Axworthy in our foreign affairs office, that he would be nice to
the Americans so they would know we value their friendship as much as we
value their business.
And I have been since wondering if Manley still has the same job at Fort Pearson?
Or is someone else now in charge, maybe Pierre Pettigrew?
Last week, Pettigrew accused the Americans of "bullying" Canada over the
softwood lumber business. This sort of talk, as I understand it, has not been
Manley's style in making nice to those folks down there, which is why I was
wondering what's become of him, if anything.
In these idyllic days of North American free trade, one would not expect Canada's
lumber industry to be hammered with a 19.3 per cent American import duty - or
tariff. This is retaliation for the fact that our lumber is more competitive than their
lumber: It is preferred by American consumers and it is more efficiently
harvested.
The U.S. tariff would cost our producers some $2 billion in duties, which would
be levied retroactively. The result will be shutdowns on smaller wood operations,
job losses for Canadians and higher prices for American consumers.
The Americans have also informed us they intend to lay charges against Canada's
lumber industry for dumping. As President George W. Bush said when arguing
against allowing Americans the right to sue their health-insurance providers for
malpractice - this looks like a lot of nice work for the lawyers.
Speaking as a member of the lay community - and not knowing a running board
foot from 10 knots an hour - I am trying to hold back the tears in the face of
these puzzling events.
It is true the American free traders have exempted the Maritime provinces' lumber
producers, but I suspect that's probably a legislative oversight, or dumb luck,
which is how the three Fundy Islands of New Brunswick, lying well south of the
international border, fell into Canadian hands: The Americans weren't looking.
Before Maritimers break out the champagne, they should make sure the
Americans are serious about giving them a pass.
But what to do about this off-the-wall, below-the-border definition of free trade?
First of all, I don't think it gets us far by calling the Great Neighbour bullies -
mere "sticks-and-stones," as we used to say. Think more of Bobby Kennedy,
himself a bruiser, who used to say, "Never complain, never explain. Get even."
Good advice. It has long been my view that the soft underbelly of the American
superpower is not its stealth technology or its missile inventory, but the movies.
The nexus of American hegemony is Hollywood. If you don't believe me, ask
Jack Valenti. During the free trade deliberations leading to the original treaty, the
Americans were obsessed with the need to make sure nothing was said or done
that might lessen their monopolistic control over the picture business.
What Pettigrew should do - if it won't upset Manley too much - is put a bill on the
order paper in the House that would place an 89.3 per cent (or more) "import
duty" on all films imported into Canada, except those whose language is other
than English (known as "Maritime Exemption"). Dumping charges to follow.
Pettigrew, speaking for Manley (if possible), would point out that his bill "reflects
the spirit of equal treatment" in that it is equally prejudicial to both the United
States' motion picture industry and that of New Zealand.
The Prime Minister also would write to his old bass-fishing friend G.W. Bush,
and explain Canada's move is in the interest of strengthening family values and
respecting the sensibilities and sensitivities of Canadians of all faiths, including
agnostics.
Besides any of this, Canada would move out ahead of the global cultural curve.
In an American news magazine, I read only last week that movies have become
passé, that their power to shock, offend and titillate was in deep decline, that seat
holders had now seen it all, as well as heard it all.
Hollywood is the last to know this, as it will discover when it tries selling tickets
to Survivor 38, at theatres in your neighbourhood.
Valenti, appearing at the World Court in The Hague, will point out that Canada's
proposed legislation will cost a lot of jobs.
But Pettigrew will riposte, saying the softwood tariff will cost many more jobs. I
intend to check out this plan with Barry Appleton, the famous trade lawyer, who
was saying, on the CBC, that while the softwood lumber tariff was unsporting of
the Americans, no one could do anything but complain to one body or another
and hope.
Assuming that we - meaning Pettigrew, Manley and I - get the go ahead for this
initiative, I hope the government will place a heavy subsidy on popcorn prices in
order to maintain sales over this difficult period when our theatres are going dark
and Americans are hanging their Christmas tree lights on cactus bushes.
thestar.com |
