[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Barrister]

Vancouver and Halifax were awarded the shipbuilding contracts.  I cant tell you how happy this makes me.

Let me guess - Quebec will not be happy.

No, another reason.

I wondered about your pre-edit post...

[Neil]

Why Vancouver?  That's enemy territory just as much as Quebec.

I agree.  Clearly the shipbuilding contract needed to go to Manitoba.

Are there no shipyards in Ontario or New Brunswick?

[Malthus]

Vancouver and Halifax were awarded the shipbuilding contracts.  I cant tell you how happy this makes me.

Let me guess - Quebec will not be happy.

No, another reason.

This wasn't my guess as to why you are happy. 

[Jacob]

No, another reason.

My guess is that it's one or more of the following:

1. Good for the local economy.
2. Good for some of your local clients, maybe even directly resulting in more work for you.
3. You have investments in the relevant companies.

[Neil]

Probably some dastardly lawyering reason.

[viper37]

Vancouver and Halifax were awarded the shipbuilding contracts.  I cant tell you how happy this makes me.

Let me guess - Quebec will not be happy.

MIL Davie...   

But the government is of course pissed off it goes elsewhere.

[Maximus]

Good for Halifax.

And the Irvings I guess.

[crazy canuck]

No, another reason.

My guess is that it's one or more of the following:

1. Good for the local economy.
2. Good for some of your local clients, maybe even directly resulting in more work for you.
3. You have investments in the relevant companies.

A little from column 1 and a little from column 2; probably a little from column three given the fact that a lot of companies will benefit and so the chances are my investments will as well.


Halifax got the contract with the bigger number but I think Vancouver got the better contract despite the lower dollar amount for the following reasons;

1) A good chunk of the value of the military ship contract (which Halifax got) is attributable to the cost of the weapon systems that will be installed on the ships.  The production of those systems will be carried out in the US.

2) All the work on the non-military ships (which Vancouver got) will be done here (although some materials might be sourced elsewhere but I am not sure about the details of that.

3) The Vancouver contract requires the development of infrastructure for a variety of ship types which give those shipyards the ability to bid on a range of other nonmilitary contracts to build ships for other countries which provides the possibility for construction beyond this contract.


A couple points come out of this.  First, the Provincial government last year to contract with a shipyard in Germany to build three ferries looks pretty silly now.  Second, it will remain to be seen whether the union is reasonable with its wage demands so as to allow for the possibility for the newly invigorated shipyards to bid competitively for work beyond this contract or whether 30 years from now British Columbians will wonder what happened to their ship building industry.

[Jacob]

Hey CC - it seems my misgivings about the Harper Conservatives and immigration were spot on: http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/10/20/canada-to-accept-fewer-relatives-of-immigrants/

Of course I expect you'll now tell me that it's sound policy to restrict family class immigration (and we'll disagree on that), but before the election you were dismissing my worries that the Harper Conservatives would do what they're doing now as fear-mongering. It turns out that it wasn't.

[Grey Fox]

Secret agenda! You have been warned before, yet we were ignored.

[Neil]

Wait a minute.  Why would we want old immigrants?  If they can't work, what good are they and why are they coming here?

[crazy canuck]

Of course I expect you'll now tell me that it's sound policy to restrict family class immigration (and we'll disagree on that), but before the election you were dismissing my worries that the Harper Conservatives would do what they're doing now as fear-mongering. It turns out that it wasn't.

I am pretty sure the first time this was brought up I argued that restricting family class immigration was a good idea and you disagreed.  I also dismissed your worries about some neferious secret agenda and I still do.

On the first point I think it is sound public policy to have a kind of means test for family reunification so that there can be some support for the family members from their own family once they arrive.  I dont see much sense in having immigrants arrive who will immidiately become a net burden.

On the second point - your allegation during the election that there was some secret agenda - how is this policy statement any proof of that?

[Jacob]

During the election I said that I was worried Harper was going to restrict family class immigration. That was my explicit and specific worry - I brought out an article that talked about how the minority Conservatves had slowed down processing of family class immigrants and which questioned the Harper agenda on that issue.

That got dismissed as propaganda and fear mongering aimed to turn the immigrant vote against the Conservatives at election time. I was worried it was not, but rather the indication of deliberate (but underpublished) policy. It turned out I was correct.

Now of course I expect (correctly as it turns out) to be told that it's a good idea and was established Conservative policy all along.

[crazy canuck]

Yeah, the Cons would be well advised to reduce wait times and red tape for family reunification - cracking down on criminal immigrants will not lose them votes (it isn't as if granny is likely to carry on a crime spree).

Well, CC assures me that keeping granny out for longer is sound fiscal conservative policy and thus desirable.

I said I could see the economic arguments both ways.  what I objected to was characterizing this issue as a matter of social conservativism  rather than simply having the system run better.  After all if you put all resources into family reunification how are we going to get the numbers we need to keep our economy growing?  Its an ecomic policy at its core.

Jacob, it appears my memory is more correct.

[Jacob]

Jacob, it appears my memory is more correct.

We're thinking of different parts of the conversation:

On two political points and one superficial one, Harper earns my opposition... the Harper government's "streamlining immigration" has seriously and directly harmed my family. My recent rightward drift towards small c conservatism/ pragmatic business oriented small l liberalism hasn't really stopped - I got a house, I'm getting older and crankier - but because of this I can basically never ever support the Conservative Party of Canada.

On a quick google search I am not sure what changes you are referring to Jacob.  all I found were changes to worker permit applications coming into effect on April 1.

As you stated there has always been a lengthy delay for the family reunification categorie.  I am not sure what policies have been implemented that are any better or worse in that regard.

Vancouver immigration specialist Richard Kurland has uncovered an Immigration Canada report showing the government is aiming to cut by 40 per cent the number of offshore parents and grandparents permitted into Canada this year.

Some recent articles:

http://www.theprovince.com/Cuts+family+reunification+visas+upset+Asians/4255890/story.html
http://communities.canada.com/vancouversun/print.aspx?postid=742140

Ok, so it looks like there hasnt actually been any policy change.

Which is probably exactly why this issue has recieved the kind fear tactics it has.

To be fair, you did speak of it in turns of resource allocation and so on, but you also dismissed my concerns (related to the article I posted) as being a response to fear tactics.

In any case, whether or not the processing of family class immigrants slowed down under the Harper minority gov't, as alleged in the article that prompted the discussion on languish, I was right to be concerned about how a Harper government would deal with the issue after a majority. Turns out their response to dealing with the long queues for family class immigrants is simply to let fewer people join it, rather than increasing the processing speed. Thus my concerns were ultimately well founded - the Harper government means that it will make it less likely that my kids will grow up with their maternal grandparents around.

But yeah, I understand that the counter argument to my concerns is that they're not important and can thus be dismissed, rather than that they're unfounded and can be dismissed.

At least, however, I hope we can agree that the Conservative government is acting directly against my interests, and that that conclusion is based on the facts not fear mongering or misunderstandings.