Thanks for this article, I’d been wondering about the background on this.
One question though, why does your suggestion of the development of a domestic tourism industry require the removal of the cabotage/regulatory arbitrage industry? Seems to me they could co-exist?
And from a Canadian perspective, why do we care whether the cruise lines pay taxes to the USA? Are you suggesting that we should hope for the loss of the one-stop-in-BC cruise industry just so these cruise lines pay taxes to other foreign nations, and not sales taxes here in BC? It seems to me that the cabotage angle is a separate issue than the building a domestic tourism industry angle.
Hi Brad, I agree with you. We don't need cruises to go away to build a domestic tourism industry. However, this moment should serve as a wake-up call for governments that until now have focused on attracting big foreign cruise lines to turn their investments toward local industries that provide opportunities for Canadian businesses. For instance, instead of investing millions into cruise terminals, we should be supporting small harbour infrastructure in places like Campbell River, Port McNeill and Prince Rupert which have nascent but growing wildlife-watching industries. It isn't one or the other necessarily, but public budgets are finite and the cruise industry has a lot more lobbying firepower in Victoria and Ottawa than small businesses.
A counterintuitive moment to attack the cruise industry, but I like this idea. Part of the issue here is that the benefits of the cruise industry are borne by a few and the costs (the congestion, pollution, damage to marine life) are borne by the population at large.
If Canada is playing regulatory arbitrage, maybe there is more room to see how elastic the demand is from the cruise ships by raising additional per head levy’s so that the people who bear the cost of these negative externalities are better compensated. If you don’t like the industry anyways, what do you have to lose in trying to extract as much as you can from them? I don't see a lot of other feasible foreign stops on a cruise to Alaska.
The issue I would take with this article is that it is arguing against a source of income without proposing any sort of alternative. Transition to sustainable tourism sounds nice, but I’m not sure how this will accomplish it. Eliminating the cruise industry will further restrict the number of people coming into the area. For people looking to partake in sustainable tourism, I’m not sure that the emissions from taking a flight to lower mainland will be sustainable, and I expect most Americans will consider the experience in the Puget Sound to be pretty similar.
There are a couple of different angles we could take here. As you note, there is hardly another foreign country cruise lines can stop in, so Canada has leverage to unilaterally demand more economic benefits from the cruise lines. Another option would be trying to negotiate a bilateral deal with the US to have minimum labour and safety standards for transboundary cruises, similar to what we've done in NAFTA/USMCA. This could help address the problem of the cruises being a worker and passenger safety blackhole and reduce negative externalities.
The challenge, as we've now seen, is that some US politicians are very supportive of the foreign cruise industry, and if the US decides to let foreign cruise lines operate direct from Seattle to Alaska permanently, Canada will suddenly have lost its leverage. And that's why I highlight the need to support domestic tourism industries that aren't dependent on the whims of our US neighbours.
Years ago we took a trip on the Inside Passage from Tswassen (sp?) to Prince Rupert on the aptly named Queen of Prince Rupert. It was, sadly the last voyage for that service, but it was stunningly beautiful experience. I'd gladly pay for that again but you couldn't get me on one of those floating Gargantuas for free.
You may be interested in the new BC Ferries day cruise service from Port Hardy to Bella Coola, another stunning beautiful trip on a brand-new vessel. It was suspended in 2020 due to the pandemic but should be back eventually.
All very well for you to despise the low-hanging fruit provided by the cruise ship regulatory system, and even better should we be able to develop a real tourism industry such as the one you describe. In the meantime, a few thousand people here in Victoria depend on this despicable low-hanging fruit to survive from day to day, so maybe it might behoove you to despise it a little less until such time as they can all get back on their feet.
This article should remind Canadians jist how much the Liberals care about economic growth and how little they care, carbon tax aside, about the environment.
This reality didn’t just miraculously occur in 2015 when Trudeau was elected. The situation has been going on for many many decades under numerous Liberal and Conservative governments.
Thanks for this article, I’d been wondering about the background on this.
One question though, why does your suggestion of the development of a domestic tourism industry require the removal of the cabotage/regulatory arbitrage industry? Seems to me they could co-exist?
And from a Canadian perspective, why do we care whether the cruise lines pay taxes to the USA? Are you suggesting that we should hope for the loss of the one-stop-in-BC cruise industry just so these cruise lines pay taxes to other foreign nations, and not sales taxes here in BC? It seems to me that the cabotage angle is a separate issue than the building a domestic tourism industry angle.
Hi Brad, I agree with you. We don't need cruises to go away to build a domestic tourism industry. However, this moment should serve as a wake-up call for governments that until now have focused on attracting big foreign cruise lines to turn their investments toward local industries that provide opportunities for Canadian businesses. For instance, instead of investing millions into cruise terminals, we should be supporting small harbour infrastructure in places like Campbell River, Port McNeill and Prince Rupert which have nascent but growing wildlife-watching industries. It isn't one or the other necessarily, but public budgets are finite and the cruise industry has a lot more lobbying firepower in Victoria and Ottawa than small businesses.
A counterintuitive moment to attack the cruise industry, but I like this idea. Part of the issue here is that the benefits of the cruise industry are borne by a few and the costs (the congestion, pollution, damage to marine life) are borne by the population at large.
If Canada is playing regulatory arbitrage, maybe there is more room to see how elastic the demand is from the cruise ships by raising additional per head levy’s so that the people who bear the cost of these negative externalities are better compensated. If you don’t like the industry anyways, what do you have to lose in trying to extract as much as you can from them? I don't see a lot of other feasible foreign stops on a cruise to Alaska.
The issue I would take with this article is that it is arguing against a source of income without proposing any sort of alternative. Transition to sustainable tourism sounds nice, but I’m not sure how this will accomplish it. Eliminating the cruise industry will further restrict the number of people coming into the area. For people looking to partake in sustainable tourism, I’m not sure that the emissions from taking a flight to lower mainland will be sustainable, and I expect most Americans will consider the experience in the Puget Sound to be pretty similar.
There are a couple of different angles we could take here. As you note, there is hardly another foreign country cruise lines can stop in, so Canada has leverage to unilaterally demand more economic benefits from the cruise lines. Another option would be trying to negotiate a bilateral deal with the US to have minimum labour and safety standards for transboundary cruises, similar to what we've done in NAFTA/USMCA. This could help address the problem of the cruises being a worker and passenger safety blackhole and reduce negative externalities.
The challenge, as we've now seen, is that some US politicians are very supportive of the foreign cruise industry, and if the US decides to let foreign cruise lines operate direct from Seattle to Alaska permanently, Canada will suddenly have lost its leverage. And that's why I highlight the need to support domestic tourism industries that aren't dependent on the whims of our US neighbours.
Years ago we took a trip on the Inside Passage from Tswassen (sp?) to Prince Rupert on the aptly named Queen of Prince Rupert. It was, sadly the last voyage for that service, but it was stunningly beautiful experience. I'd gladly pay for that again but you couldn't get me on one of those floating Gargantuas for free.
You may be interested in the new BC Ferries day cruise service from Port Hardy to Bella Coola, another stunning beautiful trip on a brand-new vessel. It was suspended in 2020 due to the pandemic but should be back eventually.
All very well for you to despise the low-hanging fruit provided by the cruise ship regulatory system, and even better should we be able to develop a real tourism industry such as the one you describe. In the meantime, a few thousand people here in Victoria depend on this despicable low-hanging fruit to survive from day to day, so maybe it might behoove you to despise it a little less until such time as they can all get back on their feet.
This article should remind Canadians jist how much the Liberals care about economic growth and how little they care, carbon tax aside, about the environment.
This reality didn’t just miraculously occur in 2015 when Trudeau was elected. The situation has been going on for many many decades under numerous Liberal and Conservative governments.
Agree but the Liberals run on a progressive platform. That and they are Canada’s natural governing party
Your comments are based on partisanship and ideological considerations unhelpful and unproductive to so many issues here in Canada or “in Germany.”