Comments for The Canadian Business Journal Blog

Comment on Need for youth vote shouldn’t eclipse need for fairness by Wendy

Wendy — Sun, 17 Apr 2011 17:42:47 +0000

Mr. Holmes, I will take some of your points, but I have a serious issue with others.

Should more research have been done and procedures more strictly followed in terms of the special ballot? Yes, it appears so. However, Elections Canada upheld the ballots, which it could not have done were they truly improper.

Should the vote be impartial? Absolutely it should. Is Anti-Tory sentiment high on the University of Guelph campus? As an alumnus and former employee of the University, I can say, absolutely it is.

“There may well have been outright bashing”

There may have? Were you there? Did you see it? Did you see with your own eyes anything that rendered the vote impartial? If so, I welcome your objection. If not, the conjecture is quite useless. Yes, media and campus climate plays a role, but let us observe that the Tories themselves are not doing much to endear themselves to young voters either. If anything swayed a potential Tory voter to cast a vote for someone else, my guess is, it would be the antics of the Conservative supporter.

Lastly, your assertion that students don’t need to vote on campus as they can vote at home holds no water. For many undergrads, including myself when I was one, Guelph IS home, and their connection to the place their parents live is incidental. The Guelph candidates are the ones these students have seen in debates and on the local news.

Further, as an off campus student, I had issues with accessibility of polling places, not in terms of structure, but in terms of location. I, along with many other students, did not have a car. In some instances, I could only attend the polling stations in the evening hours. Using public transit and then having to walk a fair distance in the dark and/or in inclement weather to get to a polling station is unsafe and not reasonable. I dealt with those things and voted anyway because it’s important to me, but I found it absolutely ridiculous that I should have to go to the lengths I did to vote. Many wouldn’t have.

Comment on Saddling up for, yes, another election by tom

tom — Fri, 25 Mar 2011 21:52:31 +0000

Right on. Right in the middle of economic recovery these idiots have decided to spend money on an election not jobs. Makes me think we need a dictatorship here just for say a four year term. When you think about it, well dont its too depressing.

Comment on Broken necks and idle threats by Chris Greaves

Chris Greaves — Sat, 19 Mar 2011 16:25:29 +0000

All the more puzzling since Air Canada, an airline, is in the serious image-business of “no deaths, no injuries”, unlike, say, a flower-basket business or Tim Hortons.
Air Canada’s business image and central message needs to be injury-free, just a jolly good pleasant experience.

Comment on More hard data on right-hand-drive vehicles needed by Commercial trucks

Commercial trucks — Fri, 11 Mar 2011 08:15:30 +0000

RHD or LHD makes no difference, if you are a good driver.The driver position is not such a huge difference that it makes you unsafe.I agree it took time to adjust with RHD but once you get used to it makes no difference..

Comment on More hard data on right-hand-drive vehicles needed by Stuart Anderson

Stuart Anderson — Wed, 09 Feb 2011 13:26:50 +0000

Would you kindly comment on the spate of right-hand-drive (RHD) vehicles that have appeared in B.C. recently? I have always been under the impression that imported vehicles had either to meet, or be modified to meet, Canadian standards before being licenced in Canada. As far as I know this requirement applies to such relatively inconsequential matters as metric instrumentation, running lights and high central rear brake light. Surely the fact that a vehicle has its controls on the side opposite what is standard in Canada cannot be considered less consequential than these other matters.

A 2007 study by the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia found that drivers of RHD vehicles used here in B.C. are more than 40% more likely to be involved in a crash than those using “normal” left hand drive (LHD) vehicles. The risk appears to extend for the long term rather than being reduced by the driver becoming more familiar with using a right hand drive vehicle in a left hand drive environment.

Comment on Customer service…a thing of the past? by Do businesses ACTUALLY care about their customers? | Kieran Goebel

Do businesses ACTUALLY care about their customers? | Kieran Goebel — Sun, 30 Jan 2011 21:56:44 +0000

[...] Here is a quick article in the Canadian Business Journal too. [...]

Comment on The G8/20 Business Summit by business directory

business directory — Tue, 11 Jan 2011 11:40:50 +0000

Great article.Thank’s for this post.

Comment on Ho ho ho and a Happy Holidays to you all! by compact production

compact production — Sat, 25 Dec 2010 04:46:56 +0000

Happy holidays for every one

Comment on More hard data on right-hand-drive vehicles needed by JDM Fan

JDM Fan — Wed, 08 Dec 2010 21:03:36 +0000

Kudos Justin, for being the voice of reason in a sea of self serving organizations.
CADA - They sell cars, why not eliminate more competition?
ICBC - They are interested in lower claims costs, maybe they should make cars sold in BC safer?
The only people who don’t have a voice are the people who have businesses to serve this niche.
I have a Right Hand Drive car I imported from Japan myself.
It’s in very good mechanical condition.
It passed Ontario Drive Clean Emissions with Flying Colours.
It’s body has no rust, unlike every other Canadian version of this car I’ve seen.
Driver Error kills, not RHD, not Japanese Imports.
Two teens dead is a tragedy, don’t make another tragedy by changing the law for these self serving organizations !

Comment on More hard data on right-hand-drive vehicles needed by Taxpayer Dave

Taxpayer Dave — Tue, 02 Nov 2010 02:12:11 +0000

That ICBC report sure hand picked the sample size to be able to come up with the “40% more likely” statement. There is absolutely no reason why RHDs would be more dangerous. I admit that it took me about 1 week to get used to the RHD position but now I am just as comfortable with it as a LHD. There are no extra blind spots or safety problems. Any accidents that RHD vehicles get into are the fault of the driver (or other vehicle driver) and not of the vehicle.

As for CADA’s objection, it is purely protectionist. If they want the piece of the market that these RHD vehicles are currently filling, they can start selling 4×4 fuel efficient diesel LHD minivans for resonable prices. Oh no, they want to force the north american gas guzzlers onto us and lie in the media saying it is for public safety. BS!