Canadian naval ships will be built on the North Shore for the first time in decades if the Liberals form the next federal government, according to party leader Michael Ignatieff.
Of course he can do that, he's a politician, he can lie, cheat and steal with the best of them. The only thing lower than a politician is a bottom feeding, scum sucking lawyer, come to think of it, there ain't really no difference between the two.
I�m not really surprised that this has been promised to Vancouver, in all honesty, since it is one of the major Liberal strongholds (alongside Montreal and the Toronto area), although I do question the wisdom of the decision (although I�m not so bold as to say he�s wrong, since I�m not expert on this). While it�s nice to speak of balance on this one specific point, if we look overall these bids would take away from what has been promised to Nova Scotia for closing on a year now, in the form of something like at least 20 billion dollars through to 2040. The question on which area could use projects to push economic growth would tend to lead me to think that the Maritimes, especially the once renowned Halifax harbours, as well as those in Montreal, could make better use of the money, as they too once created sizeable amounts of vessels during the wars. I personally would prefer to see the Conservatives plan go ahead, since it does sound like it might be more viable and cheaper to go through those shipyards overall and (as far as I know) they have not had the labour problems. Plus, if this is an attempt to balloon out to other things beyond the Navy contract, I�d have to wonder if the Asian shipyards would not be more of a hindrance in that regards than what could potentially be faced in Montreal and Halifax � they were a problem for a revival attempt on a smaller scale in the late �90s.
When I look at this overall, it feels more like the Liberals want to subsidize the Vancouver shipbuilding facilities further, since other industries across the country sound to be doing better or because of better chances at profitability/preparedness are overall cheaper. I�m not sure how I feel about subsidizing across the board when we could focus on the industry which has the best chance of profitability to ensure it gets a nice corner in the market, or becomes better established and updated for further contracts down the road by focusing the money on those projects.
I also do question Ignatieff�s ending comment about NDP, Green and former PC to go under the same name. Being left means liberal, not Liberal. If people would rather support NDP or Green policy decisions over those of the Liberal party, then they should have the chance to vote for those parties they are interested in. I know a lot of the previous Liberal voters who left for the Conservatives felt that the Liberals were pushing more and more to the left, and I don�t think that polarizing our politics further was a good idea. Under Ignatieff, we haven�t really seen a concerted push to get back closer to the center after Dion determinedly moved the party closer to the position of the NDP and Green. I don�t know if this was an attempt to try and create a united left, but I feel doing so, even if it was only perceived by voters, made more people leave for the Conservatives than those that came back to the Liberal party from the NDP or Green. This ironically makes me remember about an older Filibusters comic, when a LPC boat with a massive leak to the Conservative party had its crew going ballistic over a smaller leak towards the NDP and Green. I get that he did it because he needs the votes, and some Vancouver (and even Toronto ridings, I believe) ridings have been increasingly slipping towards the NDP over the past few years, but I�d rather he cooperate more with the other parties rather than get a plurality of seats and ignore them. We used to have a lot more negotiation than we do now, and I�m hoping eventually the leaders will have to clue in that they will have to begin going back to that rather than kicking more than half the bills out of parliament entirely. �Course, this is horribly idealistic of me.
On the other hand, I do appreciate his response in regards to Iran, and while I wish the Liberal party would be as adamant as the Conservatives have been towards improving ties with central and south America too (we do have some new FTAs down there, after all) it does not hurt to be on good terms with China. They are an incredibly quickly growing power, and while I�d prefer to see more trade with the South American nations we have just signed FTAs with, and encourage such relationships to grow a lot faster, I don�t think we have much choice in also trying and diversify our trade portfolio further to including the Chinese � we are far too dependent on the US for trade, and we really need to reduce our overall dependency on a single neighbour. No nation should be in such a position but, unfortunately, our geography has kind of nailed us there. It seems most people have been getting a lot of tunnel vision when it comes to China too, not only in potential diplomatic ties with other nations but also when it comes to internal problems which people seem more and more willing to ignore, but maybe that�s just me being a bit paranoid. In my opinion, ties to developing countries in general are important, and while China is one we cannot overlook the potential to be building our relationships with a lot of other developing nations � I really wish there was a Canadian politician who was a bit more broad in regards to our diplomacy with them in general, but it looks like the voices on that issue are either intensely focused on one party or feebly mouthing the words. I�m not saying China should not be a priority � I�m saying that we have a lot of other nations which should be getting attention as well. This is a general problem with all of the parties. I�d expand more but I�d likely go on a bit of a ramble.
It makes sense to me. Why build everything on the East Coast?
�Of course we will,� Ignatieff said in an interview with the North Shore News. �We need balance. There are shipyards in Atlantic Canada. There are shipyards on the St. Lawrence and there are shipyards out here. We need a balanced program in terms of long-term stable employment on both coasts.�
I say spread the jobs around. It'll probably be something like the Halifax contract, where the ships were built in a number of shipyards (although all of them were built on the East coast I believe).
I do find it rather hypocritical though that just yesterday the Liberals were bitching about patronage and here they are proposing pork barrel projects to Vancouver.
How dare he favour Canadian companies! They should be built by the lowest bidder in Singapore or Gdansk! If Western Canadians want work they can clearcut Grouse and Seymour and ship the raw logs to China!
The washington marine group owns several shipyards on the west coast including victoria sipyards which just built 9 training vessels for the Navy, as well as they recently won the contract to update and overhaul our submarines. The west coast yards are just as capable as the east coast yards and probably 10 times as busy and 20 times more efficient.
Herbie you are too sarcastic for your own good sometimes, dont give the LPC anymore ideas
iggy is not a lawyer
So he just acts like one?
When I look at this overall, it feels more like the Liberals want to subsidize the Vancouver shipbuilding facilities further, since other industries across the country sound to be doing better or because of better chances at profitability/preparedness are overall cheaper. I�m not sure how I feel about subsidizing across the board when we could focus on the industry which has the best chance of profitability to ensure it gets a nice corner in the market, or becomes better established and updated for further contracts down the road by focusing the money on those projects.
I also do question Ignatieff�s ending comment about NDP, Green and former PC to go under the same name. Being left means liberal, not Liberal. If people would rather support NDP or Green policy decisions over those of the Liberal party, then they should have the chance to vote for those parties they are interested in. I know a lot of the previous Liberal voters who left for the Conservatives felt that the Liberals were pushing more and more to the left, and I don�t think that polarizing our politics further was a good idea. Under Ignatieff, we haven�t really seen a concerted push to get back closer to the center after Dion determinedly moved the party closer to the position of the NDP and Green. I don�t know if this was an attempt to try and create a united left, but I feel doing so, even if it was only perceived by voters, made more people leave for the Conservatives than those that came back to the Liberal party from the NDP or Green. This ironically makes me remember about an older Filibusters comic, when a LPC boat with a massive leak to the Conservative party had its crew going ballistic over a smaller leak towards the NDP and Green. I get that he did it because he needs the votes, and some Vancouver (and even Toronto ridings, I believe) ridings have been increasingly slipping towards the NDP over the past few years, but I�d rather he cooperate more with the other parties rather than get a plurality of seats and ignore them. We used to have a lot more negotiation than we do now, and I�m hoping eventually the leaders will have to clue in that they will have to begin going back to that rather than kicking more than half the bills out of parliament entirely. �Course, this is horribly idealistic of me.
On the other hand, I do appreciate his response in regards to Iran, and while I wish the Liberal party would be as adamant as the Conservatives have been towards improving ties with central and south America too (we do have some new FTAs down there, after all) it does not hurt to be on good terms with China. They are an incredibly quickly growing power, and while I�d prefer to see more trade with the South American nations we have just signed FTAs with, and encourage such relationships to grow a lot faster, I don�t think we have much choice in also trying and diversify our trade portfolio further to including the Chinese � we are far too dependent on the US for trade, and we really need to reduce our overall dependency on a single neighbour. No nation should be in such a position but, unfortunately, our geography has kind of nailed us there. It seems most people have been getting a lot of tunnel vision when it comes to China too, not only in potential diplomatic ties with other nations but also when it comes to internal problems which people seem more and more willing to ignore, but maybe that�s just me being a bit paranoid. In my opinion, ties to developing countries in general are important, and while China is one we cannot overlook the potential to be building our relationships with a lot of other developing nations � I really wish there was a Canadian politician who was a bit more broad in regards to our diplomacy with them in general, but it looks like the voices on that issue are either intensely focused on one party or feebly mouthing the words. I�m not saying China should not be a priority � I�m saying that we have a lot of other nations which should be getting attention as well. This is a general problem with all of the parties. I�d expand more but I�d likely go on a bit of a ramble.
I say spread the jobs around. It'll probably be something like the Halifax contract, where the ships were built in a number of shipyards (although all of them were built on the East coast I believe).
I do find it rather hypocritical though that just yesterday the Liberals were bitching about patronage and here they are proposing pork barrel projects to Vancouver.
current-events-f59/liberals-lash-out-at-startling-tory-patronage-t91245.html
If Western Canadians want work they can clearcut Grouse and Seymour and ship the raw logs to China!
Herbie you are too sarcastic for your own good sometimes, dont give the LPC anymore ideas