[Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: George H. W. Bush (1992, Book I)]
[May 20, 1992]
[Pages 799-804]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]



The President's News Conference With Prime Minister Brian Mulroney of 
Canada

May 20, 1992
    The President. I'm just delighted to have had this visit with Prime 
Minister Mulroney of Canada, welcoming him back to the White House.
    I think we covered an awful lot of ground in a short time. And just 
a couple of observations: I know that many are focusing on our trade 
issues, in particular on trade disputes. Well, that's natural. We've got 
this enormous, this immense trade that goes on between our two 
countries. And our bilateral trade has increased by $30 billion since 
the inception of the Free Trade Agreement in 1989 and now stands at a 
volume of nearly $200 billion. I believe that this trade is of enormous 
benefit to the two economies and demonstrates vividly the value of that 
Free Trade Agreement. And because of the large trade between the U.S. 
and Canada, there are bound to be some bumps in the road.
    We have existing mechanisms for dispute settlement. We are using 
them, including the FTA itself. And as a consequence, I can report that 
we're making progress in overcoming some of our recent problems. I told 
the Prime Minister, who forcefully presented Canada's case, that I would 
work with our administration to see that these disputes receive proper 
high-level consideration before they go to some form of action. I think 
this will help. But in any event, we discussed frankly the problems.
    We also talked about a wide range of international issues, including 
the coming summit, including the G-7. So we had a very good 
conversation. And in the Bush view, our administration view, this 
relationship between Canada and the United States is very, very 
important to the people of the United States of America.
    So, welcome back, sir.
    The Prime Minister. Thank you, Mr. President.
    As the President said, we had a very far-reaching discussion on a 
lot of subjects. I'd be happy to take whatever questions are 
appropriate.
    But I tried to focus on what our priority problem is at this point 
in time, and it's trade. And for some time, Canadians have been troubled 
and angered by the attitude adopted by some people in Washington on 
major trade issues. Rather than move quickly to resolve or prevent 
irritants, the tendency was to retaliate against Canadian products by 
threatening to impose demonstrably unfair penalties on Canadian imports. 
These actions create uncertainty for investors and exporters and 
undermine the fundamental intent of the Free Trade Agreement.
    The President has called me a number of times over the last few 
weeks, conscious of some of these difficulties that have arisen in a 
very complex and important trading relationship. We agreed at this 
meeting today to follow up on it. So we had a very constructive review 
of these issues.
    We both intend to raise the level of commitment to resolve and to 
reduce disputes, to give a higher level of attention in order to manage 
the relationship and these issues. The President and I are going to work 
personally to that end. We both recognize that healthy trade between us 
is vital to recovery. We are the United States' best customer by far, 
and the United States is ours. We can help each other in terms of 
economic recovery by reducing the temperature and getting rid of a lot 
of these irritants, rather

[[Page 800]]

than allow them to fester and grow to important status.
    For example, Canada's merchandise trade surplus was $3.1 billion in 
the first quarter, as announced this morning, the largest surplus since 
the second quarter of 1990, and for the first quarter, Canada's exports 
to the United States are up 8.8 percent from last year. As the President 
has pointed out, even in a difficult recessionary period, the growth in 
trade between Canada and the United States is up very impressively. That 
means jobs in the United States and jobs in Canada, and we have to keep 
that going.
    It was a very instructive and helpful meeting, and I thank the 
President and his advisers and counselors and Cabinet ministers for 
that.

Canada-U.S. Trade

    Q. Who are these mysterious ``some people''? Are you suggesting that 
the President himself may not know who in his administration, in your 
view, is discriminating against Canadian trade?
    The Prime Minister. I've already indicated, and you know full well, 
that a lot of the action is initiated by industry, by interest groups, 
by lobbying interests in isolation from some of the fundamental 
objectives of the Free Trade Agreement. And in some cases, as dispute 
mechanisms have pointed out, they may or may not have validity. 
Sometimes the United States wins; sometimes we win.
    What concerns me is not that. That's normal. What concerns me are 
demonstrably unfair matters being initiated and allowed to grow and 
fester when they should have been dismissed because the object of the 
Free Trade Agreement was to make it a model for the rest of the world or 
certainly a model for this hemisphere. And anything that vitiates that 
undermines the effectiveness of what is a very valid and helpful 
instrument for both of us. That's what I was talking about.
    Q. Mr. President, do you agree that we have not been fair?
    The President. I agree that when you have a trading situation that's 
as broad and as big as we have, there are bound to be some disputes. 
What we've agreed today is to be sure that we engage early on at proper 
levels to see that some of those disputes can be avoided. Some may not. 
Some may have to go to arbitration or to be adjudicated in legal 
manners. But I think we can do a better job of trying to avoid disputes. 
And that's what the spirit of these conversations were all about.
    Q. Is the trade agreement jeopardized by this dispute?
    The President. No. From our standpoint, we've got this agreement. 
I've cited for you the figures of advanced trade as taken place under 
the agreement. But what we've got to iron out are the differences, and 
they are overwhelmed by the common ground.
    If you're referring to the NAFTA, I don't believe so. I think we 
just had a report on our side from our very able Ambassador, Carla 
Hills, who filled us in, and I detected no pessimism at all from her.
    The Prime Minister. Helen [Helen Thomas, United Press 
International], from our point of view on that, we were very encouraged 
by the undertaking given today by the President to elevate the degree of 
attention that this trading relationship will receive in Washington by 
the administration. Oftentimes things get out of hand, but they tend to 
get less out of hand if the President is keeping an eye on it himself. 
That's what the President is going to work through his administration to 
make sure that they don't grow into the problems that they've become.
    Q. What about Murphy Brown?

[At this point, a question was asked in French and answered by the Prime 
Minister in French.]

    Q. Do you think Murphy Brown is a bad role model, sir?

North American Free Trade Agreement

    Q. Mr. President, will you be personally involved in the North 
American free trade agreement negotiations and talk to the Prime 
Minister about any barriers to completing those talks?
    The President. Oh, sure. But I'm not going to be the negotiator. 
We've got a very able, experienced team that knows far more about the 
detail than I know, and they 
have my full confidence. But I have

[[Page 801]]

such a relationship with the President of Mexico and the Prime Minister 
of Canada that they feel free to call me on these matters, and I feel 
free to call them. If we are needed to finalize these agreements, 
clearly, all of us want to be involved, all three of us.

Canada-U.S. Trade

    Q. Prime Minister, do you feel you've received the kind of 
assurances that will allow you to tell Canadians they will no longer be 
subject to the kind of action you yourself described as harassment?
    The Prime Minister. Well, we'll have to see. But I also mentioned at 
that time, as you'll remember, that I was satisfied that President Bush 
was a free trader and a fair trader. I've consistently mentioned that. I 
believe that the kinds of harassment that we've seen must stop. I think 
that the President understands that. He understands my concerns and has 
indicated that at the highest level he plans to work with Secretary 
Baker and Carla and Brent and others to make sure that this is conducted 
in such a way that it is brought to a halt, not to preclude valid cases 
from coming forward on both sides, not to prevent that but to make sure 
that things that ought not to go forward, don't.

``Murphy Brown'' Television Show

    Q. Let's get it over with, sir--Murphy Brown. [Laughter]
    Q. ----Vice President Quayle's criticism of Murphy Brown, and also 
his statement that a lack of family values led to the L.A. riots?
    The President. Everybody give me a Murphy Brown question. I've got 
one answer right here for you. [Laughter] What's your Murphy Brown 
question?
    Q. What's your answer?
    The President. What's the question? You're getting four different 
questions.
    Q. Do you agree that she's not a good role model?
    Q. Can a TV sitcom really influence a legitimate----
    The President. All right, are you ready for the answer?
    Q. Yes.
    The President. All right, this is the last Murphy Brown question.
    Q. Maybe.
    The President. This is the last Murphy Brown answer, put it that 
way. [Laughter]
    No, I believe that children should have the benefit of being born 
into families where the mother and a father will give them love and care 
and attention all their lives. I spoke on this family point in Notre 
Dame the other day. I've talked to Barbara about it a lot, and we both 
feel strongly that that is the best environment in which to raise kids. 
It's not always possible, but that's the best environment. I think it 
results in giving a kid the best shot at the American dream, 
incidentally. It's a certain discipline, a certain affection. One of the 
things that concerns me deeply is the fact that there are an awful lot 
of broken families. So that's really the kind of guidance I would place 
on that. I'm not going to get into the details of a very popular 
television show.
    Q. You're contradicting your Press Secretary.

Urban Aid Initiatives

    Q. Mr. President, the Senate has almost doubled the amount of 
emergency funds in the supplemental for American cities. Is that 
acceptable to you?
    The President. Which was it?
    Q. The Senate has virtually doubled the amount of money in the 
emergency supplemental for Los Angeles and other cities. Is that 
acceptable to you? And also, sir, have you ruled out anything in terms 
of financing the programs that you're talking about, particularly taxes?
    The President. We will be meeting this afternoon. I've appointed the 
Chief of Staff, who is already engaged with the leadership. I believe 
the meeting is going to be this afternoon with the leadership. I'm not 
familiar with what the Senate has done. There was one version of the 
bill that is unacceptable to us.
    But here's my view on what we ought to do: There are some things 
that we agree on with Congress, have nothing to do with how you pay for 
it, but there are some things that are well within the budget agreement 
that can be done and where both Congress and the executive branch has

[[Page 802]]

shown an interest. It is my view that we ought to focus on those. ``Weed 
and Seed'' is one; enterprise zones is another. My pitch to the leaders 
is, look, you've got your priorities over here, and we've got ours. But 
let's do something that will help the people not just in Los Angeles but 
people that need jobs in the inner cities.
    I'm still feeling that we have an opportunity to get it done that 
way. I can't comment on the Senate bill, except to say the one I saw 
yesterday, Kennedy-Hatch, is not acceptable to the administration, and 
we made that clear to the leaders. But let's get the common ground and 
try to do something to help people. Then we can have the debate and the 
votes and the countervotes as to whose plan, Senate plan, House plan, 
administration plan. I still think we can get it done that way.
    Q. What about taxes, sir? Have you ruled out taxes?

Thailand

    Q. Can you comment, please, on the situation in Thailand? Some 
people are comparing this to Tiananmen Square. As far as I know you 
haven't mentioned it yet. What is----
    The President. Well, we're very concerned about the instability in 
Thailand, very concerned about the violence that we've seen there, and 
we've made this position known to the Thais. In fact, our Ambassador had 
a meeting just yesterday with the Prime Minister on this. So let's hope 
that it calms down there.
    Q. [Inaudible]--says that you are personally involved in helping to 
get loan guarantees for the--[inaudible]. Were you, sir? And were you at 
the time aware of----
    The Prime Minister. I'll be happy to take these domestic questions 
at----
    Q. Murphy Brown was more important, sir?
    The Prime Minister. I didn't take Murphy Brown. Let me ask a 
question: Who is Murphy Brown? [Laughter]
    I'll be happy to answer it later, Joe [Joe Schlesinger, Canadian 
Broadcasting Corporation].

``Murphy Brown'' Television Show

    Q. Was it a mistake for Murphy Brown to portray an unwed mother in 
that show?
    The President. I told you. You must have missed what I said, Pat 
[Patrick McGrath, Fox News]. I said I've just taken the last Murphy 
Brown question and tried to put it in a serious context that I hope the 
American people can understand. That's it.
    Next for the Prime Minister here. We want fairplay here.

[At this point, a question was asked in French and answered by the Prime 
Minister in French.]

President's Approval Rating

    Q. Sir, I was just wondering, based on your own experience, have you 
been able to give the President any personal advice on how to handle 
this plummet in the polls that he's experienced recently?
    The Prime Minister. Jim [Jim Miklaszewski, NBC News], I remember a 
time when President Reagan was here. And there was a front-page story in 
the New York Times in August of 1987 that said, ``President Reagan's 
popularity has just plummeted to 59 percent.'' Right then I knew the 
difference between Canada and the United States; it's language. The word 
``plummet'' does not mean the same in Canada as it does in the United 
States. So from where I'm sitting in the polls, I'm seeking advice, not 
giving any. [Laughter]

Family Values

    Q. Mr. President, do you agree with the Vice President that a lack 
of family values helped lead to these riots in Los Angeles? And do you 
think the California welfare reforms could ameliorate this?
    The President. I think we'd have a much more stable environment 
everywhere in our country if we had more families, put it this way, if 
the kids had the advantages of two-parent households. It's not always 
easy. It's not always possible. But I really believe that is 
stabilizing. I think the decline in the family as this country's known 
it over the years is a discouraging factor, and I think it offers kids 
much less hope. I believe that if we had more stable families with a 
loving mother and father, and fathers taking their responsibility more 
seriously, that it would add to stability in the community, yes.

[[Page 803]]

Abortion

    Q. Mr. President, the heart of the question seems to be whether or 
not there should be an abortion if you don't have a father. Can you 
specifically address----
    The President. No, my position on abortion is well-known.
    Q. But the two are in conflict here because the producer of the show 
says, ``Well, then, you should ensure the right to abortion.'' Can you 
specifically address the main question?
    The President. I'm not going to get--I don't know that much about 
the show. I've told you, I don't want to answer any more questions about 
it. I just tried to put it in terms of--John [John Cochran, CBS News] 
was asking about my view on stability of the family, I think. But I just 
can't go into the details.
    Q. In this case, she chose to have a child and chose not to have an 
abortion. Do you applaud that?
    The President. Well, as you know, I don't favor abortion. And I 
think that opting for life is the better path.
    Q. Mr. President----
    The President. Prime Minister, got one for him?

Canada-U.S. Trade

    Q. Any progress this morning on softwood lumber?
    The Prime Minister. I indicated to the President that while we were 
encouraged by the reduction from 14.5 to 6.51, we still feel that this 
is a very unfair penalty on softwood exports from Canada that really do 
a lot of good for the United States. In fact, all that penalty is doing 
at the border is adding $1,000 or $2,000 to the cost of an average house 
in the United States, which is why the Governors in the Pacific 
Northwest are opposed to it. So what we're going to do is take this, 
under the Free Trade Agreement, under chapter 19, for resolution under 
the dispute settlement mechanism. I believe that Canada has a strong 
case and hopefully will win.

Spotted Owl Habitat Protection

    Q. President Bush, on the domestic side of the lumber supply issue, 
do you think that Secretary Lujan's alternative owl plan will help to 
reduce the shortage of lumber and to keep prices down?
    The President. I think one thing it will do is see that fewer people 
are thrown out of work. And that I think is very important to many, many 
thousands of families in the Northwest. And what effect that particular 
decision is going to have overall on price, I just can't say. Whether it 
increases supply enough that the price will go down or not, I just 
don't--I haven't seen an economic analysis of that particular decision.
    Q. Mr. President, what is your----
    The President. We need--it's his turn, the Prime Minister's turn.
    The Prime Minister. Okay, Hilary [Hilary MacKenzie, MacLean's 
Magazine]

Canada-U.S. Trade

    Q. Prime Minister, behind the trade dispute, is there a fundamental 
problem that Americans don't understand Canadian sensitivities on the 
trade issues?
    The Prime Minister. No, I don't think that. I think the answer is 
the one that the President and I have referred to, that what it needs is 
an upgrading within the administration. In regard to the care and 
concern of--look, this is the most important trading partnership. A lot 
of Americans think their best trading partner is Japan. Wrong. Others 
think it's Europe. Wrong again. It's Canada. And the beauty of the 
trading relationship with Canada, unlike many others that the United 
States has, is that this $200 billion a year at the end of the year is 
in rough balance. The Americans are not carrying a big deficit to speak 
of in their trade with Canada. This kind of very valuable relationship 
has to be nurtured and looked after and admired for what it is. 
Otherwise, it could go the wrong way.
    So it has nothing to do with Canadian sensitivities. It has a lot to 
do with upgrading this on the American side so that the American 
administration and people understand the importance of them not only to 
us but to them, and to use this as a model for trading agreements 
elsewhere in the world. I think it could be mutually beneficial.
    The President. Marlin has signaled that we have time for one 
question each, if that's agreeable, Mr. Prime Minister.

[[Page 804]]

    Q. Mr. President, are you worried about Ross Perot?
    Q. Mr. President. can you tell me if you believe that Canada has 
been harassed by decisions on trade cases brought by senior advisers, 
including the man who is now your deputy campaign manager?
    The President. I believe that we ought to look at the whole picture. 
And I believe that that enormous trading relationship has been marred by 
a very few number of disputes. And I can understand it when people feel 
very strongly on a deal, whether it's lumber or whether it's autos or 
whatever else it is that's contentious. I'm inclined to look at the 
whole picture and see it relatively free of dispute.
    But when there is a dispute, I can understand the passions being 
very high. We've got to try to avoid the disputes before they take 
place, and when they do take place, each side has every right to take it 
to adjudication.
    So I'm not going to try to characterize it, but when the Prime 
Minister feels strongly about something like that and tells me of his 
strong feeling, clearly I want to do what I can, working with our 
bureaucracy, see that any feeling of harassment is eliminated. We'll 
work to eliminate these, get rid of the disputes before they happen. But 
then, if they have to happen because we have diverse interests, we'll 
try to peacefully and harmoniously settle them.
    So that's the way--I can understand the passions on issues on both 
sides of the border. But I believe that we can, with this spirit that 
the Prime Minister has outlined here, minimize the chance for future 
disputes arising, and that's what I think is coming out of this meeting.
    So when he presents me with strong feeling, the view of Canada on 
some very contentious issue, I don't take offense; I say, ``Hey, let's 
try to work it out.'' And similarly, I expect that when we go forward 
with something we feel very strongly about, and there are recent cases 
there, the Prime Minister says, ``Well, let's see whether we can't 
resolve that.'' Sometimes they have difficulties in Canada. They have 
provincial governments; they have central government, and we try to be 
understanding of that.
    So I don't want to be standing here next to a good friend of the 
United States of America and a good free trader in some contentious 
mode. The meeting, albeit Brian Mulroney presents his case very 
forcefully--but I would simply say the meeting, as far as I'm concerned, 
some of it is let's find ways to avoid the disputes before they get to 
the point where one side or another feels harassment.
    The Prime Minister. David [David Halton, Canadian Broadcasting 
Corporation], final question.
    Q. Was there any discussion, sir, of the argument being made by some 
U.S. Senators that softwood lumber shouldn't even be allowed to go to a 
panel because it's exempted under the original FTA ruling?
    The Prime Minister. No, we didn't get into the details of it, David, 
beyond what the President and I have indicated. But given the fact that 
we think that 6.51 is still unacceptable, we're going to take it to a 
chapter 19. And as I say, on behalf of the softwood industry in Canada, 
we think we've got a strong case and a good case, and that's what the 
dispute settlement mechanism is for. And we think that we can carry it 
successfully.
    Thank you very much.
    The President. Thank you all very much. Thank you, Helen. It's a 
wonderful meeting. Thank you.

                    Note: The President's 128th news conference began at 
                        1:34 p.m. on the South Lawn at the White House. 
                        Several questions referred to remarks by the 
                        Vice President concerning the CBS television 
                        comedy series ``Murphy Brown,'' in which the 
                        title character, who was divorced, had a baby.