If I remember correctly, during the English debates Elizabeth May proposed a "made-in-Canada" bill that would force the Government to only buy goods that were made in Canada.
Again, if I remember correctly Jack Layton and Gilles Duceppe agreed to support this. I don't think Stephane Dion did, and Stephen Harper didn't either.
Elizabeth May used an example of knifes for the military.
Harper responded that all major purchases are required to be made in Canada or have the equivalent value distributed through out Canada through regional economic initiative.
For example, we buy Boeing planes made in the States, so Boeing had to promise to build parts, other equipment etc throughout their operations in Canada. This policy allows the government to purchase what they need from the absolute best worldwide supplier, not necessarily the best (or only) Canadian buyer.
This policy is reasonable, fair, and balanced.
The only made-in-Canada policy sounds good on paper, but fails on two separate issues, quality and price.
Most goods manufactured in Canada will cost more, this means that the tax payer is required to fork over more money to buy goods, regardless of quality, suitability, or availability. The quality may be high, but not exactly what we need, or not available in sufficient quantities soon enough.
If Canada could compete on quality, price, quantity, suitability etc they would win.
The tax payer should not be expected to pay more for goods they can get cheaper elsewhere. This should be self-evident.
Agree or disagree?
5 comments:
I agree.
Consider that 30 cents of every dollar collected is consumed by the bureaucracy.
In order for the government to invest a dollar it must collect $1.43 from the taxpayer.
Price is a larger factor in the equation than one might otherwise expect.
Kelly
I think you misunderstood the context of the made in Canada comment. May referring to the coast guard ships being built in South Korea. Harper obviously would disagree with those ships being built in Canada. The reason for this is to build the same ships in Canada would cost 20+ times more because we lack the ship building facilities. Creating the nfrastructure required is not only costly but takes years to do. Sometimes it just makes sense to buy products else where. Often the government turns to local (Canadian) companies if they are able to supply the goods required. The leaders of the opposition all agreed to this lame plan because they really didn't think things through and they were trying to suggest that Harper was outsourcing work which could be done by Canadians. Understanding the complete picture shows the difference between true leadership and pretenders to the throne.
Just another fact that although Elizabeth May has good intentions, she's just stupid.
Actually, she's very smart. May realizes that most people don't know the ins and outs of procurement and that Harper doesn't have enough time to explain them during the debate -- so she looks pro-Canada and he looks mercenary -- getting the goods whereever, without thought to Canadians who are without jobs and could be building these things. It's a clever debating ploy -- make a sweeping statement for a good sound bite that requires a fairly long explaination which your opponent won't be given the opportunity to clarify.
Allan, she has also used the knifes as an example for her made in Canada plant.
The Canadian plant that used to make the knives is located in the riding she is running in.
Post a Comment