Nov 21
Wild Ride! you ain’t seen nothin yet!
‘Wild ride’ ahead, carmakers tell Ottawa
Here is the first shot! Attempting to threaten our Politicians! If we didn’t get “gouged” so much when we bought a car, then our cost of living would go down and maybe the cost to manufacture cars in Canada!
Chicken and the egg here!
November 21st, 2007 at 5:02 pm
“Auto-industry representatives called on Ottawa to take several steps immediately to help the industry, including… simplifying border crossings” (except for Canadians buying cars in the US).
November 21st, 2007 at 10:15 pm
I feel for those who make a living here in the auto manufacturing sector. I grew up in Windsor and know many people directly affected by both the surge in the Canadian loonie and the gradual consumer shift towards imports. The article is quite correct about where Canada now stands in terms of being the highest-cost jurisdiction to operate. Any advantage we once had with the low dollar and global health-care have now evaporated for the first time in our history. However, even with the high dollar, Canada would still be a lower-cost jurisdiction than the US were it not for the huge concessions that the Big3 US autoworker unions agreed to this year that essentially allowed the big 3 to lower their US production costs from $75+ per hour down to roughly $55 per hour. This compares to the big 3’s canadian production costs of roughly $70 per hour. Meanwhile, the non-unionized foreign automakers are manufacturing their product here for roughly $48 per hour. It does not take a rocket scientist to see that something serious has to be done if we are to stop the bleeding in our domestic auto manufacturing sector. Perhaps some form of government subsidies would help as they have with our neighbours to the south but the big 3 canadian autoworker unions will undoubtedly need to shoulder some of the burden when their contract negotiations come up for renewal next year, as their brothers to the south have had to do this year. Political posturing from the canadian unions suggesting that they would never accept the US formula will not only cement canada’s position as the place to avoid to build cost-effective vehicles but it will also lead to a further erosion of their sector and their members’ livelihoods.
I know that many of my friends and family that work in the auto industry (both retail and manufacturing) would love to point to cross-border vehicle shopping as a big reason for their woes but this was not a made-in-canada problem. Domestic vehicle sales have been hurting for years in both Canada and the US as savvy shoppers were moving towards the more reliable imports, most of which incidentally are now manufactured in canada and the US. So regardless of which side of the border we choose to buy that domestic or import vehicle, they are still manufactured in the same place. Buy a vehicle here that was manufactured in the US or buy one in the states that was manufactured here in canada and the net result is that someone still has to make that vehicle, regardless of who buys it and from which country. If we truly want to support our domestic auto industry then we’d need to put protectionist legislation in place to that effect that would run contrary to the principles of free trade. Canada has arguably been a net beneficiary of free trade so I really don’t think that such a regressive attitude towards cross-border shopping would be a very popular one.
It will be interesting to see how the government responds to the automakers’ plea for help.
November 22nd, 2007 at 11:54 am
CORRECTION NEEDED:
http://www.carswithoutborders.com/2007/11/21/what-does-mr-cannon-really-mean/
Nov 21
What does Mr. Cannon really Mean?
Tag: Politicians — Robert Lamb @ 10:45 am
The link “http://www.cbc.ca/national/latestbroadcast.html” is inappropriate as it links to the entire current Nov 21 one hour CBC Nightly News when the importation story was on the Nov 20 newscast. What the link should be is:
http://www.zshare.net/video/5059554b928151/ where the story is limited to the importation issue
November 23rd, 2007 at 8:15 am
Auto mfrs who prohibit their US dealerships from selling Canadian manufactured cars to Canadians are making sure there will be layoffs in Canada. If Transport Canada would only get out of the auto standards business and simply accept FMVSS114 the gouging of consumers and layoffs of auto workers would be avoided. What would happen to auto sales in Canada if prices dropped to US levels, private imports would drop to the 40,000 to 50,000 level, consumers, dealers and their employees would benefit. CMVSS114 in its present form is grossly distorting the Canadian auto market to the detriment of all Canadians. Lawrence Cannon Minister of Transport must address this by redeploying the bureaucrats to Defense where they are needed. Then assign one clerk to photocopy FMVSS standards, change the “F” to a “C” and Canada will have standards that will work in the real world.
November 24th, 2007 at 10:33 pm
Dear dreyfus, couldn’t have been said any better!
November 27th, 2007 at 12:32 am
Please people, when you purchase your vehicle down there, stay down there. Boo hoo hoo…I can’t move my vehicle out of my drive way.
Serves you right. Glad you saved your money . Now live with the problems.
November 27th, 2007 at 10:13 am
Why should i weep for American car manf’s? They are gouging me, the car that is in buffalo is the same one i could drive here, so why am i paying 30-50 percent more for it in Toronto?
I hope all these manufacturers in Canada, fold up shop. Why do we need Honda Canada, GM Canada, Ford Canada, or BMW Canada gouging us? They can go to hell. I don’t mind going south to purchase a new car, how long does it take to drive down to Buffalo?
The savings alone are worth renting a limo and driving there in style.