New TFW rules are politics, not good policy

Today, Federal Immigration Minister Jason Kenney announced that the Government of Canada was tightening the rules for companies wishing to use Temporary Foreign Workers (TFWs) in their businesses.  I found out about this when Joan Crockett, another Calgary MP, tweeted:       Now, this isn’t the only change to the regulations. Kenney also announced: …

View full post

On the Extremism that breeds Terrorists

In recent days, North America has again faced the terror of mass violence (Boston), and the threat of mass violence (Southern Ontario).  The response of law enforcement in the United States following the Boston Marathon bombing was commendable and effective.  Unfortunately, the need to lockdown the city of Boston for nearly 24 hours is a horrible …

View full post

Crash Course

While I normally write about politics, I sometimes write on education.  Today I would like to point out a great series of Youtube videos that are very funny and educational (even if I’m generally knowledgeable in the subjects).  Crash Course is hosted by the vlogbrothers, John and Hank Green, and puts subjects like World and …

View full post

Balancing Alberta’s Books

The Province of Alberta has put out a website so Albertans can take a crack at balancing the books.  I decided to take a crack.   Now let me give you a little history.  Twenty years ago, when I was at the University of Calgary, I lived through the Ralph Klein / Jim Dinning era …

View full post

Alberta Health Services has too much management

Today, I discovered the organization chart for Alberta Health Services.  It can be found here: http://www.albertahealthservices.ca/org/ahs-org-orgchart.pdf Egads!!! Look at all the people with the title Vice President, Senior Vice President, Executive Director, and similar titles!  Now I recognize that AHS has over 90,000 employees and operates many facilities across Alberta.  But the ration of such …

View full post
New TFW rules are politics, not good policyOn the Extremism that breeds TerroristsCrash CourseBalancing Alberta’s BooksAlberta Health Services has too much management

Apr 29 2013

New TFW rules are politics, not good policy

Categories:

Business, Canadian, Economics, Politics

by

Today, Federal Immigration Minister Jason Kenney announced that the Government of Canada was tightening the rules for companies wishing to use Temporary Foreign Workers (TFWs) in their businesses.  I found out about this when Joan Crockett, another Calgary MP, tweeted:

 

 

JoanTweet

 

Now, this isn’t the only change to the regulations. Kenney also announced:

  • Employers will also have to show they have a training and recruitment plan to transition to an all-Canadian workforce.
  •  temporarily spiked a pilot project that provided accelerated labour market opinions
  • new fees for labour market opinions and foreign worker permits

Here is the problem.  Alberta and Saskatchewan have unemployment rates below 5%.  Considering the welfare state in Canada and the lack of market forces in education to drive young people towards the jobs the economy is creating, 5% unemployment is essentially full-employment.  There are lots of people who choose not to work, and many more who have failed to gain the skills the economy is demanding.

Is there significant unemployment in other parts of Canada?  Yes, but this isn’t going to fix that.  This will simply increase the cost of doing business in Alberta and Saskatchewan.  Unless the government also makes it more attractive for the unemployed in Ontario, Quebec or Atlantic Canada to move west (i.e. by making it less attractive to be on the dole).

But the bigger problem is that the education system in Canada has failed miserably to respond to the market.  We continue to flood the market with university graduates with worthless liberal arts degrees, while we continue to be short of accountants, engineers, and skilled tradespeople.

The old TFW program had a rule that stated that companies could pay TFWs no less than 85% of the prevailing wage for a job in Canada.  This margin was intended to consider that the cost of finding and importing foreign labour was nontrivial, and that the total cost of hiring a TFW would not exceed the cost of employing a Canadian.   With the new rule, TFWs will cost substantially more than Canadians – except that there are not enough Canadians willing to do the work.  Companies will still need TFWs – but they will be forced to go through a more expensive and lengthy LMO process to hire them – but they will hire them.  And this will drive costs for business up by 15-25%.

In some industries, this will destroy the economics of the business.  Major capital projects, which are extremely sensitive to capital costs, labour costs and time will suddenly look less attractive.  Those dollars, instead of being invested in Canada, will move elsewhere.

Now you might ask why the Government of Canada would do such a thing – damaging the very businesses that the Conservative party supposedly is friendly with.  The answer is obvious.

In recent weeks, the Royal Bank of Canada got into some PR trouble when it admitted to planning to outsource jobs to an Indian subcontractor, and was using the TFW program to help transition the work out of Canada.  This did not go over well in suburban Canada, and the Conservatives are particularly sensitive to this at the moment because of the supposed appeal of Justin Trudeau to those same voters.

The problem is, these policies won’t help those voters get jobs.  It will damage the competitiveness of Canadian business and drive up unemployment.   Political foolishness.

Canada needs leaders like Margaret Thatcher, who actually stood for something other than simply attaining power.  I thought Stephen Harper could be that guy.  I was wrong.

FYI – I’ve sent this directly to Minister Kenney to express my displeasure.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Related articles
Enhanced by Zemanta

Tags: , , ,

3 comments

Apr 22 2013

On the Extremism that breeds Terrorists

Categories:

Education, Freedom, History, Politics, Religion

by

In recent days, North America has again faced the terror of mass violence (Boston), and the threat of mass violence (Southern Ontario).  The response of law enforcement in the United States following the Boston Marathon bombing was commendable and effective.  Unfortunately, the need to lockdown the city of Boston for nearly 24 hours is a horrible consequence of security that almost means the terrorists have at least partly, and very temporarily, stopped the freedom that exists in western nations.

Many commentators and politicians have commented.  Justin Trudeau came at it from the viewpoint of a liberal apologist who believes in cultural relativism – asking us to consider the reasons why the terrorists acted before convicting them in the court of public opinion.  I, of course, think this is a foolish statement because the problem is not what our society has done to these people but how these people have been indoctrinated.

The cultural relativist viewpoint is utopian.  It assumes that all cultures and societies have the same underlying moral views, particularly on human rights and the value of human life, and that they can objectively and fairly evaluate situations.  However, this is demonstrably untrue.    And it is particularly untrue when a subset of a society has had their religion hijacked by leaders who, for political reasons, are inciting their followers to violence.

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , , , ,

1 comment

Mar 01 2013

Crash Course

Categories:

Education, History, Science

by

While I normally write about politics, I sometimes write on education.  Today I would like to point out a great series of Youtube videos that are very funny and educational (even if I’m generally knowledgeable in the subjects).  Crash Course is hosted by the vlogbrothers, John and Hank Green, and puts subjects like World and US History, Biology, Ecology, Chemistry and English Literature into 10 minute (or so) videos where the host (John does Humanities, Hank does the Sciences) talk quickly and humorously.  A Canadian graphics studio, ThoughtCafe provides a lot of the visuals for the videos and they just add to how effective and funny these are.  I can’t wait for them to do Mathematics and Canadian History (come on @realjohngreen!)

While some people may find the pace a little fast, and the coverage of the subject somewhat superficial, it does make the subjects interesting and might actually entice someone to go learn more.   Go, watch them, learn and enjoy.  I was entertained while I was educated.

And don’t forget to be awesome!

This post has no tag

1 comment

Feb 06 2013

Balancing Alberta’s Books

Categories:

Business, Canadian, Economics, Education, Politics, Provincial

by

The Province of Alberta has put out a website so Albertans can take a crack at balancing the books.  I decided to take a crack.   Now let me give you a little history.  Twenty years ago, when I was at the University of Calgary, I lived through the Ralph Klein / Jim Dinning era that fixed Alberta’s finances, largely through reduction in government spending and getting the government out of the way.  While there was much gnashing ot teeth amongst students at the U of C (including then Students Union President Naheed Nenshi) about government abdicating it’s responsibilities, I got my hands on the University’s line item budget and identified a significant number of places where money was being spent that clearly was not contributing to what I thought University was for.  I learned about the lavish benefits that unionized staff received and spending supporting supposedly endowed galleries.  When we published this in our student paper we were vilified by the general student community and some of the administration.  I became a big supporter of less government spending.

I was disappointed by the Government’s current efforts to educate Albertan’s on where the money goes.  The website, budgetchoice.ca, sets you up by asking you to set the bitumen price for royalties, then provides a bunch of options on cuts.  However, most of these cuts are TINY.  They give options about cutting 3-5% of spending on education and health care, cutting a few million from agricultural support.  I selected a bitumen price $5 below the 2012 average (which is safe), and then went through and selected essentially ALL of the cuts on offer and still had a deficit of $0.7 Billion.  The cuts on offer total up to under $2 Billion out of a budget of nearly $40 Billion.  We can cut a lot more than that.

Then the website offers up tax increases on business, income taxes, sales taxes and health premiums.  Here, the tax options are not tiny – they are BILLIONS of dollars in extra revenue.

The message the government is trying to sell is that we have a revenue problem, not a spending problem.  But Alberta already earns more per capita than any other province and spends far more per capita than any other province.   Premier Redford is wrong.  Alberta has a spending problem.  A massive problem.

The premier should change the budget choice website to publish a line-item summary of where the $39 billion dollars went in 2012.  Not just per government department, but by program in each department.  Expose how much is spent on administration.  Expose how much of a program to help “the poor” or disabled actually gets to them.  Let us debate the real spending by showing it to us.   I cannot believe that there isn’t billions in waste in a $39 Billion budget.   And places where the private sector and competition could drive costs down (such as education and health care).

 

This post has no tag

1 comment

Feb 05 2013

Alberta Health Services has too much management

Categories:

Economics, Politics

by

Today, I discovered the organization chart for Alberta Health Services.  It can be found here:

http://www.albertahealthservices.ca/org/ahs-org-orgchart.pdf

Egads!!! Look at all the people with the title Vice President, Senior Vice President, Executive Director, and similar titles!  Now I recognize that AHS has over 90,000 employees and operates many facilities across Alberta.  But the ration of such titles to staff seems high compared to my experience with large firms in the private sector.  In the private sector, titles containing the word Executive or Vice President are usually considered to be “executive management”, and their compensation structure, although perhaps not personal details, are often reportable to regulators such as the SEC or OSC.  But not at AHS…  The compensation “policy” is public, but it pretty much says NOTHING.  Also, the reports on performance indicators show that their performance has not been “great”, but we have no idea how that affects their compensation.

If I was trying to balance the books in Alberta, AHS looks like a place where there are a LOT of opportunities.

 

This post has no tag

1 comment

Jan 27 2013

What are they teaching our kids?

Categories:

Education, Freedom, History, Politics

by

I have children, and one of them is now old enough to be learning serious subjects in what was once called “Social Studies”, or “History and Geography”, depending on your age.   Today it is all lumped together with Language Arts (what I remember as English) into a morass called “Humanities”.  I think you get my attitude on this.

I have been frustrated that my teenager cannot named the ten provinces of Canada, let alone label them on a map.  Or know when they joined the confederation. She doesn’t know the US states or which ones seceded in 1861.  She probably can’t label a map of Europe, even if you let her ignore the little states.  But I don’t think this is her fault.  This is the fault of the education system that some time ago decided that rote learning was a waste of time.

I was driven to write this blog entry based on my latest frustration with what they are teaching in “Humanities”.  They have learned “all about Tiananmen Square” and the protests there in 1989, according to my daughter.  She was explaining that people were protesting because they didn’t have political freedoms or freedom of expression.  I asked her two questions:  In what city is Tiananmen Square located? and Who’s portrait hangs over Tiananmen Square?  She could answer neither of these questions.  She knew Tiananmen Square was in China, but had either not been paying attention or was never told it was in Beijing.  What I thought was worse was that anyone was trying to teach about the struggles between communist totalitarianism and liberty in China without any mention of Mao and his little red book…  After I told her that the portrait was not “some guy”, but was Mao Zedong, she swore she had never heard that name at school.  Further, there had been no discussion of the fundamental ideology underpinning the totalitarianism that Mao espoused.  They were simply told that the students were protesting a lack of freedom and were crushed for it.   I also asked if she understood whether things had changed in China since then.  She said she had no idea.  Once again, I must question what are we teaching our kids?  The events in Tiananmen Square are important, but how can you understand them without the history, ideology and even knowing that from a political freedom perspective, very little has changed in China in the 24 years since.

If you know a teacher or have kids in the schools in Canada, watch carefully.  They aren’t learning what you learned.

This post has no tag

4 comments

Dec 17 2012

On Guns, Society and Mental Illness

Categories:

Education, Freedom, History, Politics, The Law

by

This past weekend caused us all to recoil in horror from the events in Newtown, Connecticut.  And it didn’t take long after the mass shooting was over and the death toll was tallied that the various political commentators began to attempt to justify their vision for America (or Canada, or wherever they live).

First, others have effectively pointed out that all of the mass killings that have occurred over the last fifteen years or so have occurred in places with moderate to strict gun control laws, and sites that are specifically declared to be “gun-free zones”, like schools, military bases, camps or hospitals.  Many, on the left have argued that more gun control would reduce these events, but it seems odd that it hasn’t worked to date.   Madmen will find away.

Others, have raised the idea that the increase in violence on television and in video games is driving the increase in mass killings.   However, there has been no causative link between such activities.  Just as there is no causative evidence that those who actually experience violence in war become mass killers once they are back in civil society.

There has been some, mostly from the right, discussion of mental illness as a cause, and in my mind it clearly is a key to this problem.  Many of the mass killers (who did not have other motives, such as the Fort Hood gunman) show a tendency to be bipolar, depressed, or suffering from some other mental illness.  All exhibit the behaviours of a sociopath or psychopath, notably the lack of empathy with others.

Now let us look at the history.  Many western nations, including Canada and the United States, “closed the asylums” in the 1970s.  Many have claimed this was done as a cost-cutting measure – but that doesn’t hold water.  The 1970s was not a time when governments in western nations were trying to cut costs – they were just beginning to borrow like madmen themselves.  The decision to close the asylums was very much a sociopolitical move.

In the post-war socialism that permeated civilization, moral relativism was ascendant and individualism was frowned upon.  We were told not to apply our own “moral views” on others, not to judge the capabilities of others and to be more accepting.  When I was in primary school, the children with developmental disabilities, chromosomal anomolies and those that we now all autistic were still segregated from the general school population.  But as I grew up, I saw the impact of the “reintegration” of such individuals.  Some worked out well – many with Down Syndrome (Trisomy 21) were able to integrate in, and we learned they had something to offer society.  However, some others did not integrate as well.

Worse, as we “trained” society to be more accepting, people became less willing to call out those who don’t fit in.  If you had a child who exhibited antisocial behaviours, lack of empathy (beyond that of a normal adolescent…), or you came to know someone like that you were expected to “accept” their differences.  The rejection of individualism that went along with the moral relativism built on this view that we are all “equal” and that these differences can only benefit society.  If we are unwilling to identify differences and made judgements then we are less aware of the risks these people can pose.  How does someone who is recognized (by someone) as having a mental illness get a permit for a firearm?  Because no one is willing to single them out.

Should we reopen the asylums and lock up anyone who suffers from a mental illness?  No.  But we should reopen them with a focus on those who are truly disturbed, are dangers to society at large.

And on the topic of gun laws – has anyone noticed that in places where guns are commonly carried by some of the population that such violence doesn’t occur?  Perhaps we should train educators and give them access to the firepower necessary to halt a madmen and reduce the damage they can do?

I don’t have the answer.  But I don’t trust government not to try to control us further without any recognition that their good intentions often don’t lead to the outcomes they are dreaming about.

Related articles
Enhanced by Zemanta

This post has no tag

8 comments

Dec 01 2012

Conflicts of Interest

Categories:

Canadian, Freedom, Politics, The Law

by

Recently, Toronto mayor Rob Ford has been ordered out of office by the courts due to his actions regarding the use of public funds City letterhead to raise money for a football team, and more importantly taking part in the council vote on whether or not he did anything wrong.  At the trial, it was pretty obvious that Ford had flouted the laws regarding conflict of interest, and behaved as if he was “above the law”.  While I like Rob Ford for his candid speech, and his dislike of bureaucracy and the ridiculous rules that come from it – this is one place where the rules make sense.   Misuse of public funds and fFailing to recuse yourself from situations where you have an interest, or even the appearance of an interest, must be done to avoid corruption.

I have edited the prior paragraph based on comments from two of my readers.  These are the dangers of listening to the MSM – I got the impression from television reports that public funds were available – why else would they make such a big deal of it….  oh yeah, “they” hate Rob Ford…

While the Toronto situation was over a relatively small sum of money and it was really the problems of failing to recuse himself that got him in trouble, here in Alberta we have what should be a much bigger story.

Premier Alison Redford has three bad news stories for her party and leadership, all of which relate to questions of honesty, influence and conflict of interest:

  • First, the PC party received essentially 30% of their funding during the last election campaign from a single donor, Daryl Katz.  Beyond all the debate over whether his donation was legally split between multiple donors, or whether the maximum legal donation limit is too high – the problem is that this creates the impression of undue influence on decisions involving the donor and the Provincial Government.  The federal government has largely solved this by banning corporate and union donations and limiting individual donors to a small sum.  What Katz and the PCs have done may be perfectly legal as per the letter of the law, but the impression it gives is not good.
  • Second, the PC party received donations from Lynn Redford, sister of the current Premier, which were then expensed back to her employer, Calgary Health Region (a subsidiary of Alberta Health).  Lynn Redford continues in an executive capacity with Alberta Health Services as a vice president.  Under the law, it appears pretty clear that the public sector is banned from spending money to support political causes – for obvious reasons of conflict of interest.  It would seem that expensing money she spent on political fundraisers or donations falls afoul of these regulations, although the government is trying to pass legislation prevents investigations more than 3 years before the present, which would protect Lynn Redford’s actions.  One question I would have for the tax authorities:  If Lynn Redford donated money to the PC party in 2005 and expensed the donations/spending – she should not have been eligible to claim any tax deduction.  The question is, did she also claim the deduction?  I haven’t seen her tax returns, so I don’t know – but this might be another route to investigated if any wrongdoing occurred.
  • Finally, the premier herself, while Justice Minister, appears to have been a key decision maker in selecting the law firm where he ex-husband and friend, Robert Hawkes (son of former PC MP Jim Hawkes) is a partner.  This law firm will likely reap millions of dollars in fees in the province’s attempt to sue the tobacco industry for selling a legal substance that the province also taxed (you can tell I what I think of such lawsuits).  Ms. Redford and her party have tried to state that Ms. Redford worked within the rules, and that there was a committee you made the recommendation and even to say that the final decision was made by her successor as justice minister.  But the fact is that while she was justice minister, she was the head of the team that decided that the province should pay her friend and ex-husband, via his partnership in the law firm.  They have also tried to hide behind the letter of the regulation that does not call out ex-spouses, only current spouses and family members.  But Hawkes was a close friend of Ms. Redford as well.  He was a key member of her transition team when she became Premier.  Of all the wrong doing in the Alberta government, this one is most heinous because it shows the contempt that Alison Redford has for the people of Alberta and their tax dollars.  She thinks that if the rules are written carefully and she dances around the edges of said rules she is “clean” and cannot be accused of breaking the law then she is ok.  I would argue that she may very well be right that no one could prosecute in the courts – but the impression of a conflict of interest here is more serious than the silly fiasco Rob Ford got himself into over a few thousand dollars.

To conclude, I agree with the WIldrose and NDP MLAs who have called for Ms. Redford to step aside.  She should resign and the PCs should find a new leader.  Further, following the announcement just months after re-election that they have changed their minds about government spending and think debt financing of capital projects is a good idea (let’s push off the payment to a future government, eh?) a new election where such items are up for debate should be called.  But let’s fix the political financing rules first…

Related articles
Enhanced by Zemanta

This post has no tag

4 comments

Jul 25 2012

The problem of evil

Categories:

History, Politics, The Law

by

I didn’t intend on writing about the events in Aurora, Colorado – I also wasn’t sure I could add anything to the discussion.  Then I found that  S.E. Cupp pretty much wrote was I was thinking:

Evil is difficult to deconstruct. It’s unpredictable and manifests in unimaginable ways, often more horrifying than anything fiction could invent. And evil acts are nearly impossible to prevent: Holmes is hardly the first psychopath to wreak havoc on our shared sense of security. He won’t be the last, either….

…

Our political institutions try to make sense of senseless evil by, again, looking to hand down broad and indiscriminate punishments, and promising more oversight, better regulations and increased transparency.

…

But the debate over gun control that inevitably stirs after a tragedy like Aurora is just as ineffective at dealing with unmitigated evil.

That’s because evil will find a way.

Read it all.

This post has no tag

6 comments

Jul 24 2012

On Alberta, BC and the Northern Gateway Pipeline

Categories:

Economics, Politics

by

British Columbia Premier Clark this week made waves by saying that her government’s support for the Gateway pipeline would depend on BC obtaining it’s “fair share” of the benefits of the pipeline – and she made it clear this was not a demand on Enbridge, but on the government of Alberta.  Many have of course taken this to mean that BC is asking for a portion of the royalties that Alberta collects on it’s resources, and Clark has done nothing to disavow this.  Therefore, we can take it as true.

Alberta Premier Redford has rebuffed this, properly, as each province has it’s resources and royalty structure and the free movement of goods across the country needs to be upheld.

If Ms. Clark thinks this is a good idea, perhaps Ms. Redford should demand a retroactive share of all the natural gas royalties that BC has collected on the gas that has been pipelined to market via Alberta over the last 40 years.

Related articles
Enhanced by Zemanta

This post has no tag

5 comments

Older posts «