By:Michael J. Knell
Says industry offers too little evidence of injury

OTTAWA — The Canadian International Trade Tribunal will not investigate whether the rapid rise in imports of furniture from China has done material harm to the domestic industry, saying the industry hasn’t provided enough information to support an inquiry.

In October, the Canadian Council of Furniture Manufacturers asked the CITT to recommend that safeguard measures be put in place for a three-year period to give the industry time to adjust to a new furniture trading environment.

“It’s not that there’s no evidence, it’s that there’s not enough information for the tribunal to determine if it’s a properly documented complaint, and those are legislative requirements,” said CITT Secretary Helene Nadeau.

In a letter to Vincent Routhier, counsel to the CCFM, Susanne Grimes, acting secretary to the CITT said the Tribunal only investigates complaints on behalf of producers “of goods that are like or directly competitive with goods originating in the People’s Republic of China,” and that the CCFM’s complaint covered too broad a spectrum of product.

“The tribunal finds that the complaint which covers ‘residential furniture’ does not provide the necessary information to comply with … the CITT Act,” the letter said. “Specifically, the complaint fails to provide sufficient support for or detail of the facts with respect to the allegations of market disruption or the threat of market disruption to domestic producers for each of the classes of like or directly competitive goods included within the range of goods identified in the complaint.”

Grimes noted that the data provided by the CCFM was based on three broad divisions of upholstery, case goods and metal furniture. “The tribunal is of the opinion that these categories appear to be too broad to meet the requirements of like or directly competitive goods,” she wrote.

The letter seems to indicate that while the CCFM can provide sufficient information for one category — upholstered chairs and seats — it can’t do so for other specific product categories, and that the CITT won’t proceed until it is satisfied that the case can be made across the board.

“You have to compare apples to apples and oranges with oranges,” Nadeau said, adding this doesn’t mean the issue is dead. “This doesn’t mean that another complaint can’t be made.”