Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,151
|
Post by Neil on Jan 2, 2008 15:16:19 GMT -8
. IF WE DON'T USE "THAT" FERRY DON'T YOU BELIEVE IT COULD HAVE AN IMPACT. When 99.9% of the public will use it... no, I'm afraid there would be no impact from the tiny few who won't. For years I refused to go to MacDonald's after reading a book about what kind of corporate citizen they often were. I'm not aware of my actions having a great effect on their bottom line. But, hey, if you feel true to your principles by not riding the new boats, by all means, go for it. Personally, I'm pretty certain that a boycott by the few of us who might feel strongly enough to do so will have no effect on where BC Ferries builds their next ships, so I'll be getting on the most convenient ferry, 'Coastal' or not. And, bmac... we can get your point- even without all the caps.
|
|
|
Post by ruddernut on Jan 2, 2008 17:05:27 GMT -8
They're part of the public infrastructure. Boycotting them is useless. It makes about as much sense as refusing to ride the Canada Line because the trains are made in Korea instead of by Bombardier.
If you want to voice your disapproval, stick it to the politicians who allowed it at election time.
|
|
|
Post by Hardy on Jan 2, 2008 17:16:14 GMT -8
In a time and place of being a GLOBAL economy, I find the sentiment of the seed of this thread to be very narrow minded. The scope of looking at the Coastals not being built in BC stirs emotional issues to be sure. However, FIND ME THE LOCAL SHIPYARD THAT PUT IN A COMPETITIVE MONETARY BID AND DELIVERY/TIME/COST GUARANTEES ...
Now before we go and put the cart before the horse again, or re-hash thousands of words which have already been typed on this topic, let's please go back and read the COUNTLESS messages that have been composed and read on the topic.
Value for money, cost efficiency, build-time expediency etc have all been covered. Lack of a competing bid, lack of numbers of skilled local labour ...
Bmac: do you shop at Walmart at all? Do you buy any imported goods whatsoever? Please buy only Vancouver-made socks -- instead of $6.50 for a 10-pack of Chinese white sports socks, you will be paying $14.00 for a single pair.
Don't get me wrong, I know your heart is in the right place, and Neil, same with you - but look at the realistic view of things. Neil, while quite vocal (verbose?) on his support for local jobs and building at home, has come to see how this has played out in the grand scheme of things. I too would have preferred had the ships been built right here, IF we could have done it for the SAME COST/TIME/ETC ... but we are not able to. Regardless of why the shipbuilding industry in Western Canada has been driven into the ground, it is not viable to build vessels on this scale under the current conditions.
And Bmac, I wish you the best with your boycott - but - if you have any sailing delays while waiting on built-in-BC boats, or due to mechanical issues on sub-par equipment that was mis-spec'd or force-fed by political payola, please don't post about them: you cannot have your cake and eat it to!
|
|
|
Post by ruddernut on Jan 2, 2008 19:03:52 GMT -8
I wonder if there's a way BC and Washington State can pool together to build a shared state-of-the-art shipbuilding facility in the area that can rival the Germans?
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Jan 2, 2008 19:08:32 GMT -8
I'M NOT FROM A SPECIAL INTEREST GROUP JUST AN INDIVIDUAL WHO WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE LARGEST FERRY FLEET IN THE WORLD HAVE THEIR EQUIPEMENT BUILT IN THE AREA WHERE THEY DO BUSINESS. NOT UNLIKE THE FOREST INDUSTRY SENDING RAW LOGS SOUTH TO U.S, MILLS WHILE OURS GO UNMANNED. IF WE DON'T USE "THAT" FERRY DON'T YOU BELIEVE IT COULD HAVE AN IMPACT, I MAY HAVE TO WAIT AND HOUR OR LEAVE AN HOUR EARLIER TO SEND A MESSAGE, REALLY NOT A GREAT HARDSHIP. Another effective strategy would be your personal-vote in the May 2009 provincial election. Not only your vote is involved, but you can lobby / publicize / campaign for this cause, and get others to vote your way too. The root of the "offshore newbuild" issue is in the Provincial Gov't....and you have the power to change that. Now's the time to start the build some momentum. Gary Coons, NDP MLA & ferries-critic is an occasional poster on this forum. You can look him up, and I'm sure he'd be interested in developing more grass-roots protests to use the ferries-newbuild as an election-issue. MacDonald's Federal Gov't was defeated by the impact of the " Pacific Scandal" which was also transportation-related.....so scandals or just a revolt-against-policy can topple governments.
|
|
|
Post by Scott (Former Account) on Jan 2, 2008 19:09:46 GMT -8
I like the pictures that Kevin Stapleton has taken / shown for the new Super C's - Coastal - but why hasn't he been able to do the same for the BC built ferry? Is the yard stopping him? Yes, they probably are. There was some information released saying that if you do not have prior clearance from WMG and do not have a key role in the project to stay away from the ship as you would not be allowed to board. I'M NOT FROM A SPECIAL INTEREST GROUP JUST AN INDIVIDUAL WHO WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE LARGEST FERRY FLEET IN THE WORLD HAVE THEIR EQUIPEMENT BUILT IN THE AREA WHERE THEY DO BUSINESS. In a perfect world I too would like to see BCFS build their ships here in BC. However, we are not capable of building ships of this size with the speed and technological standards that have been set by the worlds largest shipbuilders, such as Flensburger. When you factor in the lengthy warranty, set cost with time guarantees, performance guarantees, delivery, the fact that BCFS gets the rights to this design and the superior fit and finish of these ships, it is a pretty darn good offer for BCFS and BC taxpayers. None of the BC shipyards can offer guarantees to this extent. If we had the time to wait 3 years for these ships to be built, I would love to see it go to a group of BC shipyards. However, we need quality ships immediately... ==== ==== ==== Oh, BCFS is technically the second largest ferry operator in the world after Stena Lines...
|
|
|
Post by Hardy on Jan 2, 2008 20:10:43 GMT -8
I wonder if there's a way BC and Washington State can pool together to build a shared state-of-the-art shipbuilding facility in the area that can rival the Germans? It is not just the Germans. Perhaps the most prolific shipbuilders are located in Asia, due to the cost of labour and cost of materials/shipping. While it would be ideal to have a state-of-the-art shipbuilding facility, the cost benefit of it would be hard to realize. We are already do far behind the curve on it, that you would pound endless dollars into it for a questionable return. Playing catch-up on a stage this big is hard. I would much rather see the time and effort be put into getting better at what we can do -- smaller specialized newbuilds and refits. While not as glamorous, it takes a whole lot less risk and cost to go this route. I mean no slight whatsoever against those skilled craftsmen that are on the west coast, but the lack of these large-scale projects means that we cannot practice those skills. And, in a chicken-egg way, without having a reputation for it, it is hard to get any contracts to do it. Add in government boon-doogling which has hamstrung the industry, and you have a heck of an uphill battle, even if the industry had the stomach for it in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by Hardy on Jan 2, 2008 20:24:03 GMT -8
Another effective strategy would be your personal-vote in the May 2009 provincial election. Not only your vote is involved, but you can lobby / publicize / campaign for this cause, and get others to vote your way too. The root of the "offshore newbuild" issue is in the Provincial Gov't....and you have the power to change that. Now's the time to start the build some momentum. While I agree that we should be focusing the blame where it should be, I disagree that all of it should be directed against Victoria. Granted, past administrations (and this one to some extent, although cloaked by the "privatization" of BCFS...) have boondoogled the industry into the state of disrepair that it is, but not all of the blame goes to the government. Unions are strong and staunch supporters of VARIOUS governments (not just the NDP as is the most common misconception), and even if they are not PRO-one government, you can BET your bottom dollar that they have insiders and lobbyists that will find a way to get the ear of whatever government is currently in power when it comes time to open up the PORK BARREL and FEED THE PIGS AT THE TROUGH. Make no mistake about it - NDP, Liberal, Green, SoCred or elsewise, the unions have ways to make their power felt, mainly indirectly (which is the strongest way usually!). The universal language of MONEY talks in all dialects. The biggest impediment is that governments are governments, not businesses. Lawyers and politicians can take a successful company and bankrupt it in NO TIME. If you had a skilled business person running the government, things would be a lot different than they are. That being said, governing and politicking are not nearly as easy as we sometimes perceive them to be and there are several subtle nuances that are lost on most of us. Shipbuilding is just going to be one of those things that is never going to be huge in Canada. Do we need to go any further back than the money that the Feds pounded into City Class Frigates and all the propping up that have been given to Quebec-based shipyards? Rather than open up this hornet's nest or stir too many other pots, why don't we all just reflect on why it is that there are people (and areas) that are specialized in one thing or another and that not everyone (everyplace) can be a Jack of All Trades? Small example of this: I am a delivery guy (and mover) - I have been for over 21 years; I think I am good at what I do, mainly because I have done it for so long and learned a lot of things, first-hand and from other seasoned pros. I have delivered big heavy awkward stuff to SPORTS STARS that say to me "Geez, you made it look so easy getting my $"ridiculously overpriced" xxxyyyzzzz into my $MILLIONS home." To which I reply, "Yup, but I can't skate/kick/throw/run worth a damn. You are the hockey/soccer/basketball/football star and I am the delivery guy...." And that is the truth -- I deliver ... I dabble on the internet and have a lot of firsthand computer knowledge. I can't throw a 30yard TD pass, I cannot play the piano, I cannot captain a BCFerry and I sure as heck can't build a ship. But if you need your piano (which I can't play) carried up 2 flights of stairs, or your 9' sectional hoisted over your balcony, or your house moved from Comox to Strathmore -- I'm your man!
|
|
|
Post by ruddernut on Jan 2, 2008 20:57:43 GMT -8
I wonder if there's a way BC and Washington State can pool together to build a shared state-of-the-art shipbuilding facility in the area that can rival the Germans? It is not just the Germans. Perhaps the most prolific shipbuilders are located in Asia, due to the cost of labour and cost of materials/shipping. While it would be ideal to have a state-of-the-art shipbuilding facility, the cost benefit of it would be hard to realize. We are already do far behind the curve on it, that you would pound endless dollars into it for a questionable return. Playing catch-up on a stage this big is hard. I would much rather see the time and effort be put into getting better at what we can do -- smaller specialized newbuilds and refits. While not as glamorous, it takes a whole lot less risk and cost to go this route. I mean no slight whatsoever against those skilled craftsmen that are on the west coast, but the lack of these large-scale projects means that we cannot practice those skills. And, in a chicken-egg way, without having a reputation for it, it is hard to get any contracts to do it. Add in government boon-doogling which has hamstrung the industry, and you have a heck of an uphill battle, even if the industry had the stomach for it in the first place. Considering that this region has the second and third largest ferry service providers in the world (do they combine to beat #1?), with a large fleet and steady orders for more vessels, we definitely should be able to provide for ourselves as far as ship manufacturing goes. Granted we're not going to catch up overnight, but that is a long-term goal that we should work towards by gradually and incrementally improving our facilities, both for manufacturing the ships and training new personnel. If we're short of qualified personnel and Asia is so far ahead and has such a cost advantage over us, maybe we can lure some of their best qualified workers this way with better wages and benefits.
|
|
|
Post by Hardy on Jan 2, 2008 21:31:58 GMT -8
Granted we're not going to catch up overnight, but that is a long-term goal that we should work towards by gradually and incrementally improving our facilities, both for manufacturing the ships and training new personnel. True - but again, chicken-and-egg. Hard to get contracts to do the work until you prove yourself and it is hard to prove yourself until you get the contracts .... It is by no means an overnight thing. But how long has it taken Germany and South Korea to build up their shipbuilding industry? Germany has been a powerhouse since WWI, and South Korea dumped billions in during the cold war. As progress in this industry (as many others) is exponential, the curve is logarythmic. This makes catching up (or even staying current for that matter) much more difficult the farther you get into the timeline! If we're short of qualified personnel and Asia is so far ahead and has such a cost advantage over us, maybe we can lure some of their best qualified workers this way with better wages and benefits. That would in turn then make us less conpetitive. Cheaper cost of living overseas coupled with an industry that is already established. It is hard to explain this in terms that can easily be understood and applied practically. Think AFRICA in the summer-time and compare that to say Mount Washington on the Island right now. Your goal is to build a ski-resort. You could build one on Mount Washington (assuming zoning and space) - you have a hill established, it's covered in snow and people already know about it. Throwing away the logic of building a resort from the ground up in the middle of winter, to add a new resort there and now would be relatively easy. Now think about building the same ski-resort in the middle of say Ethiopia. No established infrastructure, no snow, middle of summer, no history of ski-resorts. I know this is a vague way to describe it and not particularly relevant, but I think you can see the broad strokes of what I am getting at (at least I hope you can ... I hate wasting my time typing out gibberish)
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Jan 2, 2008 21:39:15 GMT -8
I have said it before and I will say it again. If we could build the Spirits here then we could have built these new ships here also. Clearly the political will to spend the money at home is not alive and well in BC today. When the government tells me that I should buy BC and take my vacations at home I will follow their leadership and do as they do and not as they say.
Having said this, I can say in all honesty that we have been all over this topic from every viewpoint and it is now time to move on. No, I am not ready to participate in any boycott, but I am ready to hold politicians accountable for turning their backs on BC's shipyards and their workers.
In the meantime lets welcome the new boats. I am sure they will become as much a part of our maritime life as CP's British built Princesses were a half century and longer ago.
|
|
|
Post by Hardy on Jan 2, 2008 21:51:08 GMT -8
WCK: yes, we did build the Spirits here. Hodge podge between 4 yards. It was a great thing though, in the end they are good boats (generally). The building process was unique (as evidenced in the historical thread) and we overcame lots of challenges. But why was the building process SO COMPLICATED and why did the parts of the ship (and the hull) have to be moved, trucked, barged, craned, etc around so much to assemble it?
Compare to FSG - central building hall (cathedral) with subbed parts barged in once, and craned in. Contrast this with the gargantuan task of moving deckhouses off barges onto a hull, jacking them up and building superstructure under them. Efficiency springs to mind as one word which is not common to both "styles".
Cost overruns are another issue, as are delivery guarantees, warranty and accountability. FSG has been at it for HOW LONG (look at their banner on their site). Where's VITO SHIPYARDS now?
I know I have hit but a few points, but they typify what I am trying to espouse. I don't wish to just show ONE side of things.
Please don't misunderstand. I am proud of the Spirits, glad as heck they were built here. However, seeing how FSG did it and how quickly and the overall thing (IE: "hindsight is 20-20), I see NO COMPARISON WHATSOEVER between Spirit and Coastal construction. It's like comparing DUPLO to MECHANO ....
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Jan 2, 2008 22:25:03 GMT -8
Hardy, my point is not to argue efficiency. On that score we loose, clearly.
It is all about spending public money at home. Its about building the province. Something WAC Bennett knew so well and practiced so successfully. That is why every new-build vessel ever acquired by BC Ferries up until the creation of BCFS, was built proudly right here in BC.
And I don't want to here someone yet again telling me that its different now as the company is 'private' (they are NOT).
|
|
|
Post by ruddernut on Jan 2, 2008 22:27:30 GMT -8
Granted we're not going to catch up overnight, but that is a long-term goal that we should work towards by gradually and incrementally improving our facilities, both for manufacturing the ships and training new personnel. True - but again, chicken-and-egg. Hard to get contracts to do the work until you prove yourself and it is hard to prove yourself until you get the contracts .... Just the two regional ferry corporations and some other local shipping companies should be enough to start, shouldn't it? It is by no means an overnight thing. But how long has it taken Germany and South Korea to build up their shipbuilding industry? Germany has been a powerhouse since WWI, and South Korea dumped billions in during the cold war. As progress in this industry (as many others) is exponential, the curve is logarythmic. This makes catching up (or even staying current for that matter) much more difficult the farther you get into the timeline! But the technology already exists. It's just a matter of buying it and duplicating it here. No need to reevolve it from the most primitive methods and facilities over several decades. It is hard to explain this in terms that can easily be understood and applied practically. Think AFRICA in the summer-time and compare that to say Mount Washington on the Island right now. Your goal is to build a ski-resort. You could build one on Mount Washington (assuming zoning and space) - you have a hill established, it's covered in snow and people already know about it. Throwing away the logic of building a resort from the ground up in the middle of winter, to add a new resort there and now would be relatively easy. Now think about building the same ski-resort in the middle of say Ethiopia. No established infrastructure, no snow, middle of summer, no history of ski-resorts. I know this is a vague way to describe it and not particularly relevant, but I think you can see the broad strokes of what I am getting at (at least I hope you can ... I hate wasting my time typing out gibberish) I get what you're saying, but the analogy to building a ski resort where there's no snow would hold if you're talking about building ships where there is no water. Instead of Ethiopia, if we're talking about building a new ski resort in a pristine, previously undeveloped wilderness in Canada, Switzerland or anyplace else where there's snow, just lay out the money, and somebody will come and build. Anyways, like I said it is a long-term thing. It should be set as a goal for when the time comes to replace the current Spirit ferries.
|
|
|
Post by DENelson83 on Jan 2, 2008 22:30:40 GMT -8
And I don't want to here someone yet again telling me that its different now as the company is 'private' (they are NOT). Private in name only. BC Ferries is owned by an entity which is owned by the Provincial Government. They simply added an opaque level to the ownership structure so that the Government and BC Ferries cannot "see" each other, but the Government can still control BC Ferries to an extent.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,151
|
Post by Neil on Jan 2, 2008 22:34:46 GMT -8
....and I'm verbose? I have no problem with ferries being built in more than one place and fitted together. It spread the work around, and kept a massive amount of money in British Columbia. 80% of the construction cost of the 'Spirits' stayed in B.C. That would more than make up for the difference in bids between here and overseas on the 'Coastals', but the political structure of BC Ferries wasn't allowed to take that into account. Seventeen years ago, Flensburger was bankrupt, with no orders on their books. Modernization, injections of cash from a new owner, and aid from the German government helped turn things around. Don't tell me it couldn't have been done here.
|
|
|
Post by ruddernut on Jan 2, 2008 22:42:08 GMT -8
And I don't want to here someone yet again telling me that its different now as the company is 'private' (they are NOT). Private in name only. BC Ferries is owned by an entity which is owned by the Provincial Government. They simply added an opaque level to the ownership structure so that the Government and BC Ferries cannot "see" each other, but the Government can still control BC Ferries to an extent. It also adopted a private business model to maximize profits and efficiency, didn't it?
|
|
Nick
Voyager
Chief Engineer - Queen of Richmond
Posts: 2,078
|
Post by Nick on Jan 3, 2008 0:39:51 GMT -8
Also bear in mind that even though it might have cost more to build the Coastals here, 30-40% of the money spent on wages (quite a chunk I think) will go straight back into government coffers in the form of income tax. Then add on all the other taxes, duties and tariffs that would be collected on the construction materials. Suddenly those ships that seemed so expensive aren't going to cost that much in the long run. This is assuming the government is paying for the ships, which in the grand scheme of things, they are.
|
|
|
Post by DENelson83 on Jan 3, 2008 2:24:18 GMT -8
But of course, the Government, like the big corps, always look at the short-term and nothing else. Suddenly those ships that seemed so expensive aren't going to cost that much in the long run. But enough about the FastCats... ;D
|
|
|
Post by Northern Exploration on Jan 3, 2008 9:35:57 GMT -8
I was recently privy to a survey done by a polling firm regarding unions and the general publics view of them. Among the general public the opinion of unions has dropped in recent years. The executive summary said that people saw them as self serving and often doing more harm than good, their actions often damaged a company, and they seldom contributed to solutions and instead just complained. (I think the recent Magna deal where the right to strike was shelved in order to get a better deal would be something which could change the above impression.) Also is a strong undercurrent that certain sectors should not have the right to strike, namely public employees, transit and health workers. Binding arbitration seems to be growing in popularity.
There was a marked difference in opinion obviously between people who identified themselves as a union member vs. Joe Public and between regions in Canada.
Take the union statements at the arrival of the CR. Those would have been positively viewed by union members, while it would have further alienation of the general public if the trends in the survey are correct. If it was only intended to rally the troops or justify themselves to their membership, the union succeeded. If it was to help change policy then it probably failed. Unions had better be much smarter if they are going to have any impact on the growing public sentiments. Unions will have to be much more collaborative and work together as well. Often one union will take actions that hurt the overall labour movement but helps their own members.
Recently there have been a lot of positive union ads in the papers and on TV. Nurses are one example. The union has been placing ads in the paper that have positive messages about nursing. I am not sure if a contract negotiation is due to come up soon.
I think the unions in the shipbuilding industry had better have a good hard look at the situation facing them and in particular what is going on in BC. As I have said before they had better start coming up with some innovative and positive proposals that will change the public perception of them if they hope to influence policy. They need to dial down significantly the complaining.
If we look at the stories both the Union and BCFC have said about the tender process - nothing adds up. To use a British phrase, someone is telling porkies. BCF has a board and has oversight and I would doubt they could get away with saying local shipyards declined to submit bids if indeed one was submitted. On the other hand if indeed all these promises of matching bids and meeting timetables was made, maybe the union/companies should show in writing what was submitted to BCFC. I think there is a lot of misinformation going on perhaps on both sides.
The Spirits were an excellent example of top quality ships being built in BC. That was then though and this is now. I am not sure it could be pulled off again given the seeming workload at the yards and shortage of workers we keep hearing about. I also think the Fast Ferry fiasco put an end to any government entity to make the umbrella necessary to accomplish a build like this.
On the topic of any boycott - I just do not think there is the public stomach for such a thing. Businesses and commercial operators are not going to support it, people needing to get to a hockey game, medical appointments, weddings and funerals and other time sensitive events would have difficulties rescheduling their time to accomodate this. And certainly tourists will not care, they will want to travel on the newest and nicest if they care at all. In the summer when there are sailing waits how many people who miss a sailing can sit around for 4 hours to wait for a C Class if a CR is next. I hope the pro boycott people are already not sailing on the NorAd, the Chiliwack, and I would imagine they could only sail on half of the Kuper because she is part foreign ;P. And once the NorEx arrives they wouldn't be albe to sail to Prince Rupert or the Charlottes (off season). Driving or flying then and so much for global warming in order to make their statement.
This Christmas we tried something new. We decided we would shop for locally grown food and purchase Canadian made products in order to lower our carbon footprint and support Canadian companies (because of the strong dollar hurting exporters). We bought a fresh free range organic Turkey raised on a farm not too far from here. When people were going to Buffalo for a $0.99 a pound butterball american bird, we paid $58. We served a lot of local produce. We didn't go beserk with it but tried to be reasonable and where ever we could tried to support or local or Canadian companies.
I am a strong supporter of Canadian products. But I think the reasonableness test must be applied. I for one do not want my copious tax dollars propping up industries anymore that are not able to supply bang for the buck. Anyways my 2 cents worth and I think I have espoused my views on this enough now.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,151
|
Post by Neil on Jan 4, 2008 12:16:37 GMT -8
pnw, given the unrelenting propaganda war against organized working people these days, I would be astonished if a poll didn't show a decreasing respect for unions. Repeat a big lie often often enough, and eventually people tend to buy in.
One would be hard pressed to find examples of collective agreements today where unions are not losing benefits, job protection, or settling for miniscule wage increases. I can speak from personal experience, and I can cite the airline industry, the Magna deal, and countless others to show that unions are giving back, compromising, and retrenching just to keep members afloat. And still the propaganda gets churned out; unions are greedy, unrealistic, and stuck in another era. And they get told they complain too much. Go meekly, thy lambs, to slaughter, I guess.
If there is evidence that an unrealistic, uncompromising attitude on the part of the shipyard workers was instrumental in our losing the ferry contract to Flensburger, lets hear it. BC Ferries chose not to allow the local bid to stand in the final bidding process. Why? I suspect that BC Ferries set a time line and certain conditions for the bid so as to make it impossible for a local yard to win. They wanted the contract to go overseas because, on a narrow, strict contract cost basis, that's where they could get the best deal, just as you could have got a better deal buying your turkey in Buffalo- greater public good be damned. I would suggest that even if the 'Coastals' had cost 30% more to build here, we would have been left, as an economy and as taxpayers, with far more 'bang for our buck' than by flushing half a billion dollars into the German economy.
But we've done this topic a million times before. The new member raised an interesting question; what, if anything, can people who oppose building overseas do now? A boycott is a non-starter, but I think ruddernut had really the only answer- remember this at election time. For all the good it will do.
|
|
|
Post by landlubber on Jan 5, 2008 11:54:37 GMT -8
Given the importance to the BC economy of quick, reliable, and efficient ferry service to and from Vancouver Island, I would say that the economic benefits to the area as a whole, as will occur from the speedy addition of these three new ferries, and especially considering the cost, and efficiency with which they were built and delivered, is more an overriding consideration than having them built at home. Instead of second guessing whatever government made the decision to go with FSG, I would instead be praising them for their wise decision.
The only possible "real" issue would be.. could they have been built better, or to a higher standard, in BC. I doubt seriously if that's the case.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,151
|
Post by Neil on Jan 5, 2008 12:05:04 GMT -8
These ferries don't represent an 'addition' to the fleet, as they are simply replacing older vessels to be retired. Their slightly larger capacities will not have any appreciable impact on the economy. There was no rush to bring them into service as the older vessels are still in use.
|
|
|
Post by landlubber on Jan 5, 2008 17:36:14 GMT -8
To put my thoughts more clearly then.. If these ferries were built more quickly, at less expense, will be put into service sooner, and are equal to or greater in quality, compared to what would have been built locally, then it has been a good decision to have them built overseas with FSG. The region's economy is better served in the long run for it because it was all acheived at considerably lower cost than would have occurred otherwise. Having said that.. I completely understand why some would not agree with this if their livelyhood is directly tied in with the local shipbuilding industry. Unfortunately, they are too "close" to see the bigger picture. Just my 2 cents.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,151
|
Post by Neil on Jan 5, 2008 23:47:19 GMT -8
A person can have an honestly held, reasonably thought out position opposing building overseas, without having any connection to any shipyard, or union affiliation. Surprisingly enough. And it can be precisely because they are looking at the 'bigger picture', that they reject the narrow criteria of project cost in determining the value to society of building here or elsewhere. But, my two cents, added to your two cents, doesn't even come close to buying either of us a cup of coffee, let alone make an impact on where BC Ferries gets it's vessels, so, there we are.
|
|