FELDSTED: If host nations are dumb enough to subsidize operations, helping improve the profit margin, don’t expect a ‘thank you’ or future loyalty

What makes Prime Minister Justin Trudeau believe he can use tax dollars to bail out auto workers and not provide equal support to other workers caught in downsizing, restructuring or bankruptcies? When did equal rights become special rights?

More to the point, what is he doing to support thousands of Alberta oil patch workers caught in maelstrom of his chaotic energy and environmental policies? Why are they less deserving than Ontario auto workers? Of all people, the unemployed in the oil industry deserve consideration because they are victims of federal policies.

Actions have consequences, and his action have created massive unemployment and disruption of families and lives. What is he going to do about it?        

MEANTIME… from CBC Canada:

… the provincial government can't offer the company anything that would persuade it to keep the Oshawa plant and its 2,500 good-paying jobs, GM Canada president Travis Hester told the premier.

“'Is there anything we can do as a province, absolutely anything?”, a downcast Ford told a news conference Monday. "Asked him numerous times, and the answer was… “No, there's nothing. Basically, the ship has already left the dock.”

No bail out, no special tax concessions, no shared investment in new technology will keep the automaker's plant open.

"It blows my mind" said interim Liberal leader John Fraser. "It's a weak response, it's unconscionable" … the previous Liberal government (along with the federal Conservative government at the time) invested "billions and billions of dollars to save hundreds of thousands of jobs because we know how important the auto sector is to us."

This ‘analysis’, is nothing more than leftist hand-wringing over policies that have failed in the past. The analyst conveniently forgets that in 2008-09 the Conservative government of the day was in a minority position and opposition parties were screaming for an auto sector bailout to “save jobs”.

The current government just wrote off the bailout loans to Daimler-Chrysler … now we have GM chopping plants and jobs.

International giants have no loyalty to the nations they operate in. They are in business to make profits for shareholders. If host nations are dumb enough to subsidize operations, helping improve the profit margin, don’t expect a ‘thank you’ or future loyalty.  However, building a competitive, healthy, and reasonably regulated business environment will attract business.

If a business arrives offering to open, but demands tax breaks or other incentives to do business, run from the proposition; it is only there until it finds a competitor nation willing to improve on incentives.

We have no need to feed sharks when the sea is full of dolphins who only want fair treatment.

The notion that governments can cut deals with businessmen using taxpayer dollars as an incentive has proven to be inane. The Bombardier ‘black hole’ is a good example. Why does Standard Aero continue to grow and thrive without equivalent hand-outs?

Political interference in business is killing us.

Air Canada maintenance was moved from Winnipeg to Toronto for political purposes, not for service or other problems. There was also the fighter aircraft maintenance contract given to Quebec although Manitoba was low bidder.

The reason is that Ontario has 121 seats -- or 36% -- and Quebec has 78 seats -- or 23% --  of seats in the House of Commons (HOC). The other provinces have 140 seats -- or 41% -- of house seats, and are considered politically expendable.

I am more and more in favour of dividing Canada at the Manitoba / Ontario border, taking our 104 seats (31%) out of confederation and rebuilding the west. The alternative is to restructure the Senate into its constitutional four sections; Ontario (24 seats), Quebec (24 seats), East (30 seats), and the West (24 seats) along with the 3 seats in the Territories for a total of 27.

That would bring governance balance back to the regions, and counter the imbalance in the House of Commons … and that is precisely what the Senate was intended to do. A politically neutral Senate is key to the survival of Canada. It is legislatively possible and would require amendments to the Parliament of Canada Act which is within the powers of Parliament.

A politically structured Senate is not in the best interests of Canadians, as it simply extends the political imbalance of the Commons to the Senate.

John Feldsted

Political Consultant & Strategist

Winnipeg, Manitoba