It's a challenging scenario. In the early to mid-nineties there was an anti-dumping agreement for apples. There was a minimum price. I believe it was $12.50 a pack carton for ten months of the year. I think in July and August the duty was removed.
Every period of time there would be a review of that dumping duty, and it was rescinded around 1995-96. The reason given was that there was no proof that dumping took place while the duty was in place. That's what the duty was to prevent. So it was sideways logic, but anyway, that's what was used.
In 1992 the Canadian apple industry had an opportunity to develop a national apple marketing agency with similar powers to dairy, chicken, and so on. Don't ask me how or why, but it was defeated by the growers and not put in place. It would have held import levels at a rolling five-year historical average. I've asked the question of politicians as to whether there'd be any hope of such a vote taking place again, because I would go on a national campaign to ensure that such a system was put in place.
The appetite of government to deal with dumping of agricultural commodities hasn't been there recently. In this grain corn ruling, it was very clear to most people that dumping was taking place. If we gathered statistics for eight or nine months.... Well, for the whole of 2004, the sale volume of Washington State apples went up dramatically, and the sale value went down dramatically. What does that tell you? It tells you that dumping was taking place. Could we prove it in a court of law? Well, we spent $30,000 to hire a lawyer to investigate it and decide whether it made legal sense to proceed. After the corn ruling, he just told us not to bother.
Washington State wised up and didn't dump last year. But for whatever reason, our return values did not increase in eastern Canada. They did in the west, but in eastern Canada the value that growers received for their apples from the 2005 crop was as low, if not lower, than when competing against the dumped crop from the year before.
I don't know if I've answered your question. We're not avoiding anti-dumping action, but it's left to the policy-makers of the day to decide whether it's something they are willing to support us in.