EVERYONE read this and speak up for your self

[EnviroImports.com]

the ability to buy your delica and any other import 15 years old is possibly going to be taken away from you.
but you have a say in this, the catch is you actually have to speak up, you dont even have to leave your computer. So take a look, submit a real responce not just a profanity laiden verbal attack as that will never be taken seriously.


link to 15Yr Rule feedback from public
http://www.tc.gc.ca/roadsafety/importat ... act-us.htm

if you dont send in the feed back then dont complain when your rights are take away from you.

[Adam]

I put in a response. Now I need to get a Delica and convert it over to WVO, or at least use biodiesel. Especially in light of the current gas pricing: http://www.gasgouge.ca/

[kb&2dogs]

My submission:

We just purchased a 1991 Mitsubishi Delica. It has been inspected in a government approved facility and passed, it has had new tires and rims, new headlight and bulbs all around, and, frankly, I feel safer driving it than most vehicles I have owned.

A car (or minivan) that is 15 years old that was manufactured in Canada or the US cannot be safer than my Delica imported from Japan purely because it was not manufactured here. If it wasn't safe, how did it pass the stringent inspection that it did?

My previous car is a 1989 Mercury Topaz. It was involved in an accident over $2000 several years ago and repaired, it has no airbags, has never been through a safety test to my knowledge, and yet there is no talk of banning such vehicles just because they are not imported. The only thing that kept the vehicle safe was my own care and attention to its maintenance.

Every day I see American cars on the road that are in questionable mechanical condition, yet there is no talk of banning all cars over 15 years old, or instituting mechanical testing for cars over 15 years old. The safety of the vehicle is not necessarily dependant on where it is from, it is how it has been maintained and repaired.

I most strenuously object to the proposed 15 year ban on imported vehicles!

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

[delicanuck]

Hi gang,

There is a pretty active website devoted to this topic here:

http://www.ivoac.ca/

and you have probably noticed that there is a link to that site at the top of our site. Also, there is some good reading about the rationale for the proposed rule change here:

http://www.tc.gc.ca/roadsafety/importat ... arrule.htm

You can see a more technical looking document here:

http://www.luxuryimports.ca/faq/joinfight.php

Likewise, you will probably have found these already so I'm just adding quick reference short-cuts. Read up.

[Fanny Bay Delica]

To All,

Non-ranting response sent!!!!!

[BCDelica]

Yes, as Andy reminded no replies after a few drinks, please.

Seriously, every body should respond and also pass the word to everybody you know whom might be interested. Forward a email with a few links for IVOCA and the TC page.

[josh]

I also sent a polite, although pointed and firm, response.

Josh

[piyeguyo]

"Protecting US automakers' interests..."

My reply talked about that... I think that's what they're doing.

Several other countries allow newer imports but Canada doesn't do it, and I think it's caused by US pressure...

Fabio
Calgary

[delicanuck]

Hi Gang,

I've been reading and watching, and worst of all, thinking. Hate that. Smoke hurts my eyes.

Not to point too fine a point on it but I think that to the extent that protectionism might be a factor in this issue, I suspect that the matter at hand is Canadian jobs that depend on American auto manufacturers. I think we probably do ourselves a disservice by accusing the ministry employees, Canadians every one, of being witless dupes of the US industrial juggernaut, which incidentally is not jugging these days. That would be cent #1

Cent #2 is that when they talk about 15 year old imports being statistically problematic, they probably aren't talking about Delicas. After all, we aren't really tearing up the streets, are we? I think the issue has more to do with some portion of the other %95 or so of the import market. For instance, the report posted at Luxury Imports points rather squarely at drivers under 25 yrs who couldn't afford to buy a decent domestic high performance car but a 15 year old import affordably puts them right into that car they just drove in Grand Theft Auto. I probably shouldn't draw too straight a line here but something that does get a lot of political play these days is street racing and I'm sure we've all heard about the legendary Nissan Skyline. RHD. JDM. 200 KMH in a heartbeat, $13,900.00 with 60 ,000 kilometers.

So what's my point? I don't think I have one really, except to say that complaining to the ministry that we aren't the problem is probably preaching to the choir. They know we aren't the problem. We are just the baby that might get tossed out with the bath water. While I don't agree with the blanket nature of solution that TC is threatening to use, I do see why they don't want to use a finer grained solution. To a man with a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. Can we suggest another tool?

So aren't you just a bout ready to barf with all these metaphors ???

Yep so. Two cents worth. No change please!

[josh]

So Brett,

The million dollar question.... did you send them an email? :P

Josh

[delicanuck]

Hi Josh,

Well yeah.. well no. I didn't send an email to the feedback link at the top of this post. I did send an email to the Transport Canada office a long time ago and I have a friend who is one of the provincial inspectors so I do sorta keep up but I wouldn't say that I've done my share.

The folks at IVOAC, in thier "Perspective" document have really done their share, in particular in Schedule "B" . That's the kind of material that is going to make a difference. I don't have a lot of time to devote to this at the moment but I think the best thing we could do is figure out exactly what Transport Canada wants to achieve and come up with something better than a hammer to achieve it with....

I'm going to submit a protest but I haven't crafted it yet.

[delicanuck]

Hi Again,

At a glance, this idea seems patently self serving but what if the rule were changed for gasoline powered cars but diesels stay the same?

The likelihood of an accident is often related to, if not directly proportional to the speed a vehicle is moving at. My experience with Japanese diesels has mostly been they aren't particularly fast. If we could posit that as a category, diesels are not representative of the problem group of cars, we could offer a clear and simple new tool that would be somewhat more elegant than the hammer they are using now. They couldn't reasonable say that cars capable of X kilometers per hour or more are subject to a 25 year rule and cars that aren't are subject to the 15 year rule because it would just be too hard to administrate. What if the only question they had to ask was " Gas or diesel?" That would be manageable.

So which cars would become subject to the 25 year rule? I don't really know that, nor do I know who that would affect. Maybe some of the dealers could offer some insight as to what impact this suggestion would have. Obviously, this would impact Kei cars and I think Kei cars are some of the best imports there are. Hmmmm... still needs tweaking.

[psilosin]

I don't think discriminatory deals are the routes to be exploring. Discrimination is wrong in any form be it from from ethnicity to religion to fuel type... :lol:

[Fanny Bay Delica]

A little off topic here but I only hire guys over 40 who have had a vasectomy (thereby avoiding stupid paternity benefits)!!

Is that discriminatory

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[josh]

A little off topic here but I only hire guys over 40 who have had a vasectomy (thereby avoiding stupid paternity benefits)!!

Is that discriminatory

That depends, are they allowed to drive gasoline powered imports? Or just Delicas? :P

Josh