Conservative policy position supporting cabotage in Canada

[YYCAME]

I was surprised to read that the Conservative Party policy position on air travel in Canada supports trying out foreign airlines operating select domestic routes. It would certainly shake up the industry. I cut and pasted the relevant section from https://cpcassets.conservative.ca/wp-co ... f7a575.pdf

65. Increasing Airline Choice for Canadians
In close partnership with provincial/territorial governments, airport authorities across the country, and
industry partners, the Conservative Party will both introduce and actively promote a new framework for
increased domestic & foreign airline competition in Canada, including experimentation with cabotage
on a trial basis on select routes.

[digits_]

Date: september 9 2023. I suspect that position will likely have changed based on recent events.

[‘Bob’]

Right now the Conservatives are struggling to understand how what how they might lose an election that was surely in the bag a few weeks ago.

Alberta Premier Daniel Smith asked Trump to pause tariffs—not because it would be good for Canadians as a whole—but because it would bolster Conservative support. You can’t make this stuff up.

Now the Conservative brain cell is struggling to comprehend a world without Trudeau and carbon tax and it’s coming up empty.

They will simply copy paste cabotage onto their new scaffolding (calling it a platform is ridiculous) and the few that actually read it are the types that want $99 fares everywhere.

[goldeneagle]

Date: september 9 2023. I suspect that position will likely have changed based on recent events.

It's been part of the conservative official policy documents for a long time. Feel free to be delusional and think 'they wouldn't actually do that', but one only needs to look south and see how fast a newly emboldened government goes about implementing the policies in published documents, even those where all the voters were thinking 'they would not actually do that'.

A freshly elected PP government will end up sitting across the table from American counterparts discussing tariff regimes, and you can bet your last dollar, those Americans have read the documents, so they will push on this one, and PP will sell the airline industry down the river in exchange for a concession on oil.

[DanWEC]

A couple of points on this-

That note has been in the platform for likely close to 10 years, if not more. They've always supported the idea, but I don't think it has any teeth, since, as stated, after discussions with the industry (Aka, airlines and unions, etc) it would likely get shot down. We'd be one of, if not the only, country in the world that would allow cabatoge under all but the strictest and occasional circumstances.

Also, who would want to operate here? It would be a money-losing proposition. That sort of plan is only for things like new market penetration for brand development, expansion, etc in other businesses. Doesn't apply here. Once subject to our economic operating environment and margins, no US-based airline would bother.
So, it's entirely a non-starter aimed at trying to grab the vote.

Now, what I say next might make some people mad, but I think it's very, very important to us and directly relevant to our industry;

98% of the professional pilots in Canada are union. We've also been fighting out of a hole for years and years, and don't want any backslide.
As much as I loathed, reviled, and despised JT and his detached, incompetent version of the Liberals, the PC's would be multitudes worse for all of us as a labour group as a whole.

PP has endlessly voted anti-union, pro-scab, etc, and who are we? Union, for better or worse.

We talk about the economy, gas prices, etc. But lets look a little more tangibly and closer to home- In no world under the PC's will we suddenly experience a substantial reduction in living expenses. At very best maybe a small income tax cut that likely won't even apply to the majority of us making middle class wages. What would affect more would be things like, oh.... taking massive concessions because of back-to-work legislation. I think a $50-$100k annual wage deficit has been affecting us all far more than a couple grand a year on taxes. Carney is already talking about taking the party more centre-right, and his moves on the capital gains and the consumer side of the carbon tax are welcome. We'll see. Trust will be a very hard fight for these guys after JT.

The big takeway here is, don't forget who was in power March 2012, when Lisa F'ing Ratt legislated AC pilots back to work (Along with CP, etc...) and caused the largest non force-majeure decline in all Canadian pilot conditions in our history. As an aside, I believe Harper ran the country well, (Yet PP is no Harper) but that gut-punch was the worst thing to happen to our vocation. Yes, that has now been deemed unconstitutional, but I don't think for a second that in a time when we're still fighting for gains simply in order to reach the global baseline, labouring under a union-unfriendly government opposed to every move, would be productive in the slightest. Quite the opposite.

Such is the way of Canadian politics too often. Who will be the least worst?

[goldeneagle]

Also, who would want to operate here? It would be a money-losing proposition.

Actually, it wouldn't. What you will see is an operation like Delta switch up a few pairings. Instead of SLC->YVR->SLC, that pairing will become SLC->YVR->YYZ with a layover to YYZ->YVR->SLC. Then another would become SLC->YVR->YYC->YVR->SLC. Same could be done with flights currently arriving in YYC, extend them up to YEG or over to either YVR or YWG.

The large American outfits will simply add a few point to point segments to cream off the money making routes, and leave the rest to die along with the airlines currently serving them.

Then look at Alaska, they currently fly Q400 SEA->YVR and SEA->YLW. I can see that morphing into SEA->YVR->YLW->YVR->SEA. They would also likely look at extending one leg out to YXS.

Out east I think we would see plenty of flights currently arriving in YYZ getting another segment added to go on out to YUL, and cream off that route.

You are correct, the economics to 'set up shop' in Canada wont work for them, but, the economics of adding a few segments to existing flights works easily, and worst case cost increase is a few folks overnight in hotels on pairings that used to be single day turns.

Like I said early, gonna be a bunch of folks saying 'they will not actually do that', and the way you find out, elect them. But if they are elected, and follow thru on the platform, dont come crying here about losing jobs and Canadian airlines goiing bankrupt, because the official platform says, that's what they are gonna do, and it's what folks are voting for if they elect the PP government.

Can see lots of crying online these days, US farmers that voted for the red team who promised to cut all funding thru various ag programs, round up all the illegals working on those farms and ship them off, which they actually started doing. Now those same farmers are crying because they are gonna go broke, thought 'they wont actually do that'.

Folks have to go read the platform, and believe it when they say that's what they will do given the opportunity. If you livelihood depends on cabotage laws, then the conservative platform should scare the be-jesus out of you.

[cdnavater]

Also, who would want to operate here? It would be a money-losing proposition.

Actually, it wouldn't. What you will see is an operation like Delta switch up a few pairings. Instead of SLC->YVR->SLC, that pairing will become SLC->YVR->YYZ with a layover to YYZ->YVR->SLC. Then another would become SLC->YVR->YYC->YVR->SLC. Same could be done with flights currently arriving in YYC, extend them up to YEG or over to either YVR or YWG.

The large American outfits will simply add a few point to point segments to cream off the money making routes, and leave the rest to die along with the airlines currently serving them.

Then look at Alaska, they currently fly Q400 SEA->YVR and SEA->YLW. I can see that morphing into SEA->YVR->YLW->YVR->SEA. They would also likely look at extending one leg out to YXS.

Out east I think we would see plenty of flights currently arriving in YYZ getting another segment added to go on out to YUL, and cream off that route.

You are correct, the economics to 'set up shop' in Canada wont work for them, but, the economics of adding a few segments to existing flights works easily, and worst case cost increase is a few folks overnight in hotels on pairings that used to be single day turns.

Like I said early, gonna be a bunch of folks saying 'they will not actually do that', and the way you find out, elect them. But if they are elected, and follow thru on the platform, dont come crying here about losing jobs and Canadian airlines goiing bankrupt, because the official platform says, that's what they are gonna do, and it's what folks are voting for if they elect the PP government.

Can see lots of crying online these days, US farmers that voted for the red team who promised to cut all funding thru various ag programs, round up all the illegals working on those farms and ship them off, which they actually started doing. Now those same farmers are crying because they are gonna go broke, thought 'they wont actually do that'.

Folks have to go read the platform, and believe it when they say that's what they will do given the opportunity. If you livelihood depends on cabotage laws, then the conservative platform should scare the be-jesus out of you.

That’s just fear mongering, under the current environment can you honestly believe that a conservative government would give an advantage to an American company?
As for previous assertions that costs won’t come down, possibly not but that won’t be the fault of the Conservatives, that will be the individual companies capitalizing on reduced cost maximizing profits. If the government removes the entire carbon tax, individual and industrial, those companies will just likely keep there widget prices the same, increasing profits.
You don’t have to look to far for a great example, Carney removes consumer carbon tax, approximately 17 cents per litre, since then the fuel has gone up about 17 cents per litre in most regions, coincidence, not likely but they(greedy corporate bastards) will always find a way to keep or increase profits and don’t really care about perceptions!
It’s generally a one way street but under the Liberals, costs for everything has skyrocketed and is not going back but can we afford them to continue to rise at the pace we’ve seen? Carney only removed the tax but not the legislation and can immediately after taking office reinstate them or increase them, that is definitely not worth the risk to me!

[DanWEC]

So, the question remains, do you vote for a party who's past leadership we're angry at, or the one that will force you back to work and make you the lowest paid pilots in the world?

I've voted for every party at different points, and I personally beleive that I (And again, I, not anyone else, you vote how you vote.) will vote for who has the most direct and immediate effect on my own life. Canada is made up of all sorts of groups and demographics which will all be affected differently by party mandates, and should vote according to what helps them the most- not for other causes or red herrings. That's how we get proper representation.

[goldeneagle]

That’s just fear mongering, under the current environment can you honestly believe that a conservative government would give an advantage to an American company?

It'll all be about what happens at a negotiating table, and yes, I do believe that a conservative government will sacrifice the airlines to save the auto plants and oil patch. Why would I believe that? because it's in their platform documents.

If there is one thing folks should have learned from the current environment, when politicians have documents stating what they intend to do after winning a control of government, believe those documents, and ignore them at your own peril.

[YYCAME]

I would argue that the fact it's a year+ old doesn't really matter. If voters like myself want to be informed we go to read the actual party platform on their website instead of Facebook and any responsible party would keep their platform conversations current when gearing up for an election this year. I'm just disappointed because in some of the sound bites from Poilievre it sounded like the Conservatives were becoming more supportive of labour and protecting Canadian jobs. Just not my job I guess. Not that I would trust Carney not to do the same with his background but at least they aren't posting about their plan to do it yet.

[digits_]

any responsible party would keep their platform conversations current when gearing up for an election this year.

Oh I absolutely agree. It's a shame they can't keep it more current. Especially when so much is changing rapidly in these last past months. I think a lot of people are wondering 'how will you deal with the US tariffs'. A clear policy on that would very valuable to informed voters.

Sadly, I haven't witnessed any campaigns, from any party really, in the last 10 years that targeted informed voters. It's all about out of context sound bites or vilifying the opponents. Such a waste of marketing budget. Let's hope this year will be different.

[cdnavater]

So, the question remains, do you vote for a party who's past leadership we're angry at, or the one that will force you back to work and make you the lowest paid pilots in the world?

I've voted for every party at different points, and I personally beleive that I (And again, I, not anyone else, you vote how you vote.) will vote for who has the most direct and immediate effect on my own life. Canada is made up of all sorts of groups and demographics which will all be affected differently by party mandates, and should vote according to what helps them the most- not for other causes or red herrings. That's how we get proper representation.

So, you’re voting on the possibility in three year you might get legislated back to work because the Ratt did it 15 years ago, disregarding the fact that liberals interfered with and forced binding arbitration on several groups recently.

[tsgarp]

Date: september 9 2023. I suspect that position will likely have changed based on recent events.

It's been part of the conservative official policy documents for a long time. Feel free to be delusional and think 'they wouldn't actually do that', but one only needs to look south and see how fast a newly emboldened government goes about implementing the policies in published documents, even those where all the voters were thinking 'they would not actually do that'.

A freshly elected PP government will end up sitting across the table from American counterparts discussing tariff regimes, and you can bet your last dollar, those Americans have read the documents, so they will push on this one, and PP will sell the airline industry down the river in exchange for a concession on oil.

…and Carney will destroy the airlines with carbon taxes, so pick your poison…

[Inverted2]

Just make us the 51st and get it over with. Liberal voters can go to Greenland or flee to the UK or Ireland like Rosie O’Donell and Elen Degerate.

[Dry Guy]

Ask yourselves, if the Liberals lose, will Carney hang around to be the Leader of the Opposition? Thought not.

[DanWEC]

So, the question remains, do you vote for a party who's past leadership we're angry at, or the one that will force you back to work and make you the lowest paid pilots in the world?

I've voted for every party at different points, and I personally beleive that I (And again, I, not anyone else, you vote how you vote.) will vote for who has the most direct and immediate effect on my own life. Canada is made up of all sorts of groups and demographics which will all be affected differently by party mandates, and should vote according to what helps them the most- not for other causes or red herrings. That's how we get proper representation.

So, you’re voting on the possibility in three year you might get legislated back to work because the Ratt did it 15 years ago, disregarding the fact that liberals interfered with and forced binding arbitration on several groups recently.

A- Recent actions have been taken after striking and apparently reaching impasse. PC's wouldn't have let it go anywhere near that far, and haven't in the past. PP was already quoted saying he would have legislated the longshoreman back to work long before the situation was resolved.
B- The attitude towards our unions by the PC's havn't changed. PP's aforementioned statement proves that. If we weren't in a union industry I might lean a different way, but we are, and I'd rather not be negotiating under them.

[Bingo Fuel]

The Conservatives have no actual plan. Want proof? Go to their own website:

https://www.conservative.ca/plan/

Fill out the survey, then see what their plan looks like. Try it and see.

[altiplano]

Liberal fear.

The Tories do have a plan, they've been articulating it for 2 years. When they are elected we are going to learn about just how bad it has actually gotten under the Liberals, who after nearly 10 years still don't have a plan and have shown us that they are incapable of executing. All Carney has done is flip flopped and assumed Conservative policy on things from GST on homes to carbon taxes to income taxes. Reforms the Liberals were voting AGAINST only a few months ago.

This country is on the brink of becoming a failed state. If we put Carney in, it's a certainty.

And how much do you really know about Carney and his Brookfield dealings? Things like the $1.2B in Qatari money paid to the Kushners and Trumps for long term real estate leases? Or the $250M to Musk for a share in his Twitter acquisition? Or their interests in keeping Canadian resources in the ground?

Or how about Carney's alignment with an organizational that advocates for mass immigration into this country, 100 million by 2100. What do you think that will do to Canadian wages and GDP per capita? We'd be third world.

Carney's and Brookfield's interests do not lie in the prosperity of Canada or Canadians. He is a global financial elitist, his actions, his dealings, his own interests support their continued ascension and gain - NOT OURS.

[pelmet]

Posters on this forum make me laugh. The vote for destructive liberal/NDP policies and scream that the conservatives ordered AC workers back to work yet the liberals basically told AC workers to go back to work and not strike. Then they complain that the conservatives allowed foreigners to work at a few Canadian airlines and vote destructive liberal and NDP. Then the liberals approve foreigners to work at Encore.

Give it up and end the destruction caused by this government. Carney is more obsessed about the climate than trudeau. It will lower the standard of living of canadians even more.