Keith Colwell has it all wrong

No, we’re not writing about the off-the-ice incident with Percy Paris. We’ll leave that discussion with the referees and race-relations pundits.

The important point is this: in a week in which Stats Canada recorded Nova Scotia as the only province with three consecutive months of job creation Colwell was trying to lecture the government on how economic development works:

Keith Colwell: The Minister of Economic and Rural Development and Tourism touted that Theriault Shipyard got a whole $20,000 to really help their operation. Now, $20,000 is great, and that’s a very solid, good, long-standing company in Nova Scotia, but Irving gets $300 million? There’s something wrong with this whole picture here – $300 million (for a $25 billion contract).

It’s like comparing Mars to Jupiter.

Keith Colwell: So $300 million that Irving could have done by themselves; they could have done it without the $300 million.

You don't spot the other team 20 points on a $25 billion contract.

You don’t spot the other team 20 points on a $25 billion contract.

But would they have? Could they have? Someone should really ask Jim Irving.
Or ask the federal bureaucrats who administered the national shipbuilding procurement strategy. Ask them whether or not bids required a provincial guarantee to protect the federal government from unwanted liabilities?
Or see here

Keith Colwell: People are starting to realize that there are going to be very few jobs from this.

“Very few jobs”  is Colwell logic.  As if a “few” workers are going to build a bunch of 21st -Century combat ships for Canada’s navy? It’s ridiculous stuff to be putting on the record in Hansard.

The key to the Ships contract, like the ships to be built, is scale. Large industrial projects drive economic growth because they are big. Lots of ships built, lots of jobs, lots of consumer spending,  lots of tax revenue, lots of houses built, lots of cars purchased, etc. Big projects encourage the small, spin-off, local business development. In the Ships context, there’s even a word for it: supply chain.

The Liberal logic is twisted: they are in favour of small companies operating in the supply chain, but against the company that’s at the end of the supply chain paying the bills?  It makes you dizzy.

The Ships opportunity is real. Missing it is not an option. Would the Liberals scrap the loan agreement and sacrifice those 10,000+ jobs and the $25 billion dollar contract?

Advertisements