CBC Article Bc Looking to stop Imports

39Ronin · Post by **39Ronin** » Fri Dec 22, 2006 7:54 pm

Read this :
http://www.cbc.ca/consumer/story/2006/1 ... kip300x250

BOOOOOOO! :(

josh · Post by **josh** » Sat Dec 23, 2006 4:27 am

would anyone dare to warrent a guess as to how long of a window we are looking at? I really would like to import one so that we have two... but is it to risky at this point?

Josh

Green1 · Post by **Green1** » Sat Dec 23, 2006 9:49 am

it's really too bad they only show one side of this story... basically the article says "they're unsafe"... "but they look nice!"

what type of reaction are they trying to get?!?!

how about pointing out that due to their mechanical condition they are SAFER than most north american vehicles that last had a safety inspection at the factory when they were built?
or highlight the point that ICBC says there's no proof that they are unsafe at all and that it's all just speculation on their part.

grrr...

it's bad enough we have to wait 15 years around here to protect our useless vehicle manufacturing industry... let alone 25

now show me a vehicle available in north america EVER that has the functionality of a Delica! small size, large cargo, great seating arrangment, good fuel economy (compared to anything else that is 4wd and has over 7 feet of cargo space!) I chose this vehicle for a project of mine because there simply is no north-american equivlant, and especially not at this price. the best I could do around here would have cost me 4 times as much, and required a LOT more modification for something that probably wouldn't have been as well suited in the end anyway.

ok... *sigh* I'm done for now... </rant>

39Ronin · Post by **39Ronin** » Sat Dec 23, 2006 11:16 am

josh wrote:would anyone dare to warrent a guess as to how long of a window we are looking at? I really would like to import one so that we have two... but is it to risky at this point?

Josh

They revisit the import laws and safety regulations every Febuary, so we will see then. It may also take a couple of years to implement change, as for now I wouldn't buy a vehicle from Japan direct unless you know for a fact that it will arrive before Febuary.

David · Post by **David** » Sat Dec 23, 2006 11:22 am

Isn't that a bait and switch.

SOME cars are unsafe because they are right hand drive, therefore
BAN the import of ALL cars under 25 years of age.

(what happens at 25 are they going to be safer than at 15?)

What they really should be saying is that they THINK there is a POSSIBILITY, that under certain circumstances, the driver of a right hand drive vehicle is POTENTIALLY at a disadvantage from the driver of a left hand drive vehicle, and this, WE BELIEVE, MAY translate into more accidents, BUT, there is NO evidence of this happening.
Yet, we would like to Pre-emptively strike at this Promised Premonition, in a Pork-fisted manner, with a Pronouncement Planned that will unfairly impact all importers of used vehicles, and does NOT address directly the PERCIEVED POTENTIAL POSSIBILITY used to justify the action in the first Place.
And by the way, PLEASE don't notice that this PARTISAN PRONOUNCEMENT PLACATES PERFECTLY the coordinated and active resistance to the Present Set of Standards, by a POWERFUL LOBBY of Special Interest Groups (SIGs), who have the ear of the Politicians and self Proclaimed Pundits, and are more concerned with THEIR LOSS of MARKET SHARE than these Plum Political Peach Phantoms they Promote.

Merry Christmas
David

Post by **BCDelica** » Sat Dec 23, 2006 11:31 am

Doesn't you ever get the feeling North American Auto manufactures and sellers are lobbying provincial and federal governments to keep Canadians buying gas guzzling SUVs and full size pickups. Anybody heard of that? I have known more then one MP who owned a car dealership - and is there really much difference between a politician and car salesman. Ford, Dodge, and GM are massive contributors to American elections alone so don't tell me there ain't no kick backs here in Canada! Also there's that huge difference in taxes collected, those 175 JDM vehicles a month sure didn't pay the same amount of taxes as say 175 new Dodge diesel's or Cadillac Escalade's. Our government just happens to own the car insurance company also.

I could rant more but I got go - it's a conspiracy.

Happy Holidays All. :D

Kev

maxpowers · Post by **maxpowers** » Sat Dec 23, 2006 2:50 pm

yep i was also wondering about that, are they really gonna be safer after 25 years,? what a bunch of bull.
But what gives? if north american auto producers could make a decent car.
maybe we wouldn't be in this fix in the first place.

the saddest part of it is at the rate our society is progressing it will still be worth it to import after 25 yrs!
:D

what a strange time we live in.

unless you believe we will all be driving hydrogen fuel cell powered hummers. but, if they can't even dream up something like a delica how in the frack are they gonna make one of those.

cheers and merry chrissmas

elbosque · Post by **elbosque** » Fri Dec 29, 2006 11:54 am

There is a group at IH8MUD trying to get a group of RHD owners together to combat this mis-information campaign. Check out this link for more information:http://forum.ih8mud.com/showthread.php?t=126970.
In the mean time, write your MLAs and MPs and the ministers responsible at both the provincial and federal levels.
I think that the thing pushing this is the automotive producers and dealers lobby who see their sales eroding from quality JDM vehicles. It is interesting that Ontario is not pushing this action. However, the automotive producer and dealers only have to get one province to convince Transport Canada to change the laws and then it will affect all of Canada. So, take some time in the next few days and write some letters.
Happy New Year.

josh · Post by **josh** » Sun Dec 31, 2006 12:04 pm

I guess the idea of changing the law to 25 yrs is not that the vehicles would be safer (we all know how silly that would be) but rather that not as many of us would import them at all.

I think it would be safe to speculate that the true concern is not the safety... just the amount of vehicles being imported.

Josh

elbosque · Post by **elbosque** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 4:50 pm

You got it Josh. The NA Auto fat cats want us to stay addicted to their disposable vehicles to keep them fat. If no one apposes them, they are going to get away with it. Their claim is that the Japanese vehicles are not as safe as our NA vehicles. Those of us who know JDMs know that not only are they safer than any NA vehicle of the same age, they are in better mechanical condition, and pollute less than their NA counterparts. As far as meeting federal and provincial regs - well we have the lack of government oversight and the privatization of inspection facilities to thank for that corrupt and sloppy mess. However, the politicians and the NA Auto lobby is also using this to condemn JDM vehicles. Now, if we want the fat cats to win this one and be dictated to, then all we have to do is say nothing. I hope people will write to the BC and Federal Ministers of Tranportation and to their MLAs and MPs. Otherwise, the 25 year rule will be a done deal.

The IH8MUD link in my earlier post has quite a bit more info now - including the Transport Canada "study" they are using for their argument.

Cheers, John

docsavage · Post by **docsavage** » Wed Jan 03, 2007 8:02 am

I have made a PDF of the Transport Canada study. If anyone wants it let me know.

Is there a Files section for putting this stuff - I may be blind to it.

James

jspyker@this1.ca

Delica Canada | Mitsubishi Van Club

CBC Article Bc Looking to stop Imports

CBC Article Bc Looking to stop Imports

False Logic