Mr. Speaker, for more than 17 years the politically influential U.S. softwood lumber industry has sought action by the U.S. government to restrict Canadian access to the U.S. lumber market. On that point the member was right.
The hon. member, however, may be unaware that Canada won the last softwood lumber dispute with the U.S. in 1994, so we are not lap dogs.
It was this defeat and the subsequent threat by the U.S. industry to file a new countervailing duty case that gave rise to the softwood lumber agreement. The industry and provinces wanted to avoid another long and costly legal battle with an uncertain outcome, hence their advocacy and support for the 1996 softwood lumber agreement with the U.S.
Let me assure the hon. member that the government is very concerned with actions by the U.S. customs service to reclassify lumber products that are currently exempted from the softwood lumber agreement. We are sparing no effort, as was stated by the minister, to counter these reclassifications.
To bring the hon. member up to date, last week Canadian and U.S. officials held a meeting under the softwood lumber agreement dispute settlement mechanism. We outlined our objections to the U.S. proposal to reclassify rougher headed lumber. Moreover, we have already signalled our intention to raise this reclassification at the World Customs Organization.
The hon. member likely knows that we are already challenging the U.S. customs reclassification of drilled studs at the World Customs Organization.
Let there be no misunderstanding. The government will vigorously oppose all attempts by the U.S. to expand unilaterally the coverage of the softwood lumber agreement.