Ooops - I missed that one. We now have an agreement in place which changes the apprenticeship program in Newfoundland and Labrador.
Just listening to Bob Ridgley MHA on Back-Talk and he explains basically - now we can train them and Alberta can have them.
Anything that makes it easier for tradespeople to get their credentials is a good thing. But what's behind the change is cynical. Alberta has the jobs - we have spaces in trades courses - so let's link it. Great - too bad they can't get the experience home.
This quote from the News Release:
"From this point forward, apprentices who remain permanent residents of this province will receive full recognition for their work experiences in Alberta and be able to continue their in class training in Newfoundland and Labrador. This will ultimately make it far easier for an apprentice to complete the requirements for certification in their chosen trade."
Once they get their certification - then what? Do they have to be permanent residents then? Seems to me that is being used to twist statistics. While all of our skilled apprentices are leaving for Alberta - the government would like to record them as still living here. Very smart - but not smart enough! So you're jigging the numbers...
On this note I'd like to introduce the fact that Revenue Canada recognizes the province of employment as at December 31st of any year. Considering the lower taxation rate for Alberta - where do you think our "homing pigeons" are filing their tax returns? How much is that costing this economy?
Look at it this way - if they all come home for part of the summer - holidays etc. when they will avail of healthcare and infrastructure here at home - now they will not be paying tax to support it.
Oh my Oh my...
"Carry on Governing"
By the way can the Auditor General have a look into that one and give us the real damage?
Loss of skilled workers
Investment in training - which is shipped to Alberta
Lost provincial tax
Lost numbers for transfer payments
Use of infrastructure without tax base
2 comments:
If this Reciprocity Agreement has all the deficiencies that you outlined in your blog Sue, I would like to hear from our government as to why they would have signed such an agreement that you say Sue is going to cost the people of this province a bundle through the following deficiencies:
a. Loss of skilled workers
b. Investment in training - which is shipped to Alberta
c.Lost of provincial tax
d. Lost numbers for transfer payments
e. Use of infrastructure without tax base
I would like to see the Provincial Government come to this blog and either rebut what you said or agree. If it is true then this agreement is no different than agreements that past governments have signed, it is an agreement with very little substance for Newfoundland and Labrador. Maybe that is not the case. If it isn't I would like to hear it from the Provincial Government that it does not have those deficiencies.
I believe Sue is right here.
It will make stats look good for govt.
We will have students in our trades programs at public and private colleges... important number to quote given the lack of trades people and the push to get more trained even if for Alberta.
More students means better numbers for those colleges - all good given the number of non post secondary educated in the province. More of our people educated (an important mandate)- even if for Alberta.
I like them having to be permanent residents - maybe we'll get their taxes while they are apprenticing.
As I see it the only "substance for NL" is that it makes trades training easier for the students.
Post a Comment