Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Automotive

Europe’s EV Market Collapse Provides A Lesson For UAW Leadership

Published

6 minute read

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By David Blackmon

It is an ill-kept secret of American politics that most of the big labor unions in the country have long been client organizations of the Democratic Party. In presidential election years, endorsements from these unions for the party’s nominee have generally been foregone conclusions regardless of voting attitudes of rank-and-file union members.

Some are quicker to endorse than others. Vice President Kamala Harris barely had time to buy campaign letterhead before the United Auto Workers (UAW) weighed in on July 31 with its endorsement. The union’s bosses made the move despite the reality of the Biden-Harris electric vehicle mandates placing many of that union’s jobs at risk as the companies they work for lose billions each year on quixotic efforts to force the public to enjoy paying premiums for cars they cannot rely upon when the going gets tough.

Even with that early move, the UAW fell 9 days behind the AFL-CIO, which jumped on the Harris bandwagon so quickly it probably made union members’ heads spin. Hey, speed matters when your business model relies on constantly asking for favors and protections from the federal government, for which the Democratic Party has traditionally been the most fertile ground to plow.

Given that reality, the Teamsters Union made big news this week by endorsing — well, no one — despite overwhelming support among the rank-and-file for the Republican candidate, former President Donald Trump. It was the first time the Teamsters had failed to endorse the Democrat in a race since 1996, and only the second time in the union’s existence. Teamsters General President Sean O’Brien spoke at the Republican convention in July — and was snubbed by the Democrats at their convention in return. So, the refusal to endorse Harris was not a huge surprise. But O’Brien, fully aware of the vindictive nature of the Democrats towards their political enemies, apparently decided it would not be politically prudent to give a full-throated endorsement to the candidate his members so obviously prefer.

With the race shaping up to be another nail-biter, it remains to be seen whether any of these major unions’ decisions will prove to be wise. But for the UAW, the move to endorse Harris comes with increasing risk amid a softening market for the EVs being forced on U.S. consumers and the rising challenge by Chinese EV makers to the hegemony of domestic car companies in the U.S. market.

With legacy automakers like Ford and General Motors already bleeding billions of dollars in losses in their EV divisions despite heavy government subsidies in place, they can ill-afford an incursion into the U.S. market from Chinese carmakers who are able to make and sell quality EVs for far less than American car companies can. Right now, Europe is providing an object lesson about what happens in the EV space when governments allow that to happen.

EU countries were slow to move to protect their domestic car manufacturers when Chinese companies like BYD began to flood the European market with EVs. EV buyers in countries like Germany and France eagerly bought up the Chinese cars, saving thousands of Euros per unit in the process. When the EU belatedly moved to impose import tariffs on Chinese cars, the domestic car companies responded by raising prices for their own EVs in an effort to recover losses.

The result has been entirely predictable: EV sales in Germany collapsed by nearly 70% during the month of August. In France, they plunged by 33%. Clearly the appetite among EU car buyers for EVs is extremely price sensitive (no one could have possibly seen that coming), and consumers are more than happy to go back to buying gas-powered cars as cheaper alternatives.

Now, the climate alarmist central planners at the EU are proposing to respond to those uncooperative buyers by imposing massive fines on car makers for continuing to sell them the gas-powered cars they actually want to buy. Because, of course, that would be the response from power-mad apparatchiks.

Given that the Biden-Harris regime has basically followed the EU’s model on EV regulation, the EU’s struggles provide a preview of coming attractions for the U.S. auto market under a Harris presidency. It is hard to believe this is the future the UAW leadership really desires for its members.

David Blackmon is an energy writer and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.

Alberta

Premier Smith says Auto Insurance reforms may still result in a publicly owned system

Published on

Better, faster, more affordable auto insurance

Alberta’s government is introducing a new auto insurance system that will provide better and faster services to Albertans while reducing auto insurance premiums.

After hearing from more than 16,000 Albertans through an online survey about their priorities for auto insurance policies, Alberta’s government is introducing a new privately delivered, care-focused auto insurance system.

Right now, insurance in the province is not affordable or care focused. Despite high premiums, Albertans injured in collisions do not get the timely medical care and income support they need in a system that is complex to navigate. When fully implemented, Alberta’s new auto insurance system will deliver better and faster care for those involved in collisions, and Albertans will see cost savings up to $400 per year.

“Albertans have been clear they need an auto insurance system that provides better, faster care and is more affordable. When it’s implemented, our new privately delivered, care-centred insurance system will put the focus on Albertans’ recovery, providing more effective support and will deliver lower rates.”

Danielle Smith, Premier

“High auto insurance rates put strain on Albertans. By shifting to a system that offers improved benefits and support, we are providing better and faster care to Albertans, with lower costs.”

Nate Horner, President of Treasury Board and Minister of Finance

Albertans who suffer injuries due to a collision currently wait months for a simple claim to be resolved and can wait years for claims related to more serious and life-changing injuries to addressed. Additionally, the medical and financial benefits they receive often expire before they’re fully recovered.

Under the new system, Albertans who suffer catastrophic injuries will receive treatment and care for the rest of their lives. Those who sustain serious injuries will receive treatment until they are fully recovered. These changes mirror and build upon the Saskatchewan insurance model, where at-fault drivers can be sued for pain and suffering damages if they are convicted of a criminal offence, such as impaired driving or dangerous driving, or conviction of certain offenses under the Traffic Safety Act.

Work on this new auto insurance system will require legislation in the spring of 2025. In order to reconfigure auto insurance policies for 3.4 million Albertans, auto insurance companies need time to create and implement the new system. Alberta’s government expects the new system to be fully implemented by January 2027.

In the interim, starting in January 2025, the good driver rate cap will be adjusted to a 7.5% increase due to high legal costs, increasing vehicle damage repair costs and natural disaster costs. This protects good drivers from significant rate increases while ensuring that auto insurance providers remain financially viable in Alberta.

Albertans have been clear that they still want premiums to be based on risk. Bad drivers will continue to pay higher premiums than good drivers.

By providing significantly enhanced medical, rehabilitation and income support benefits, this system supports Albertans injured in collisions while reducing the impact of litigation costs on the amount that Albertans pay for their insurance.

“Keeping more money in Albertans’ pockets is one of the best ways to address the rising cost of living. This shift to a care-first automobile insurance system will do just that by helping lower premiums for people across the province.”

Nathan Neudorf, Minister of Affordability and Utilities

Quick facts

  • Alberta’s government commissioned two auto insurance reports, which showed that legal fees and litigation costs tied to the province’s current system significantly increase premiums.
  • A 2023 report by MNP shows
Continue Reading

Automotive

Bad ideology makes Canada’s EV investment a bad idea

Published on

Dan McTeague

Written By

It doesn’t bode well for our country that our economic security rests on tariff exceptions to be negotiated by Liberal politicians who have spent the majority of Trump’s public life calling him a “threat to liberal democracy” and his supporters racists and fascists. Their hostility doesn’t lend itself to fruitful diplomacy. In any event, Trump’s EV rollback and aggressive tariffs will spell disaster for the Canadian EV sector.

What does Donald Trump’s resounding win in the recent U.S. election mean for Canada? Unfortunately, there doesn’t seem to have been much thought about the answer to this question in Ottawa, because the vast majority of our political and pundit class expected his opponent to be victorious. Suddenly they’re all having to process this unwelcome intrusion of reality into their narrow mental picture.

Well, what does it mean?

It is early days, and it will take some time to sift through the various policy commitments of the incoming Trump Administration to unpack the Canadian angle. But one thing we do know is that a Trump presidency will be no friend to the electric vehicle industry.

A Harris administration would have been. But, Trump spent much of his campaign slamming EV subsidies and mandates, pledging at the Republican National Convention in July that he will “end the electric vehicle mandate on day one.”

This line was so effective, especially in must-win Michigan, with its hundreds of thousands of autoworkers, that Kamala Harris was forced to assure everyone who listened that the U.S. has no EV mandate, and that she has no intention of introducing one.

Of course, this wasn’t strictly true.

First, the Biden Administration, of which Harris was a part, issued an Executive Order with the explicit goal of a “50% Electric Vehicle Sales Share” by 2030. The Biden-Harris Administration (to use their own formulation) instructed their Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to introduce increasingly stringent tailpipe emission regulations on cars and light trucks with an eye towards pushing automakers to manufacture and sell more electric and hybrid vehicles.

Their EPA also issued a waiver which allows California to enact auto emissions regulations that are tougher than the federal government’s, which functions as a kind of back-door EV mandate nationally. After all, auto companies aren’t going to manufacture one set of vehicles for California, the most populous state, and another for the rest of the country.

And as for intentions, though the Harris camp consistently held that her prior policy positions shouldn’t be held against her, it’s hard to forget that as senator she’d co-sponsored the Zero-Emission Vehicles Act, which would have mandated that all new vehicles sold in the U.S. be “zero emission” by 2040. During her failed 2020 presidential campaign, Harris accelerated that proposed timeline, saying that the auto market should be all-electric by 2035.

In other words, she seemed pretty fond of the EV policies which Justin Trudeau and Steven Guilbeault have foisted upon Canada.

For Trump, all of these policies can be filed under “green new scam” climate policies, which stifle American resource development and endanger national prosperity. Now that he’s retaken the White House, it is expected that he will issue his own executive orders to the EPA, rescinding Biden’s tailpipe instructions and scrapping their waiver for California. And though he will be hindered somewhat by Congress, he’s likely to do everything in his power to roll back the EV subsidies contained in the (terribly named) Inflation Reduction Act and lobby for changes limiting which EVs qualify for tax credits, and how much.

All of this will be devastating for the EV industry, which is utterly reliant on the carrots and sticks of subsidies and mandates. And it’s particularly bad news for the Trudeau government (and Doug Ford’s government in Ontario), which have gone all-in on EVs, investing billions of taxpayer dollars to convince automakers to build their EVs and batteries here.

Remember that “vehicles are the second largest Canadian export by value, at $51 billion in 2023 of which 93% was exported to the U.S.,” according to the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers Association, and “Auto is Ontario’s top export at 28.9% of all exports (2023).”

Canada’s EV subsidies were pitched as an “investment” in an evolving auto market, but that assumes that those pre-existing lines of trade will remain essentially unchanged. If American EV demand collapses, or significantly contracts without mandates or tax incentives, we’ll be up the river without a paddle.

And that will be true, even if the U.S. EV market proves more resilient than I expect it to. That is because of Trump’s commitment to “Making America Great Again” by boosting American manufacturing and the jobs it provides. He campaigned on a blanket tariff of 10 percent on all foreign imports, with no exceptions mentioned. This would have a massive impact on Canada, since the U.S. is our largest trading partner.

Though Justin Trudeau and Chrystia Freeland have been saying to everyone who will listen how excited they are to work with the Trump Administration again, and “Canada will be fine,” it doesn’t bode well for our country that our economic security rests on tariff exceptions to be negotiated by Liberal politicians who have spent the majority of Trump’s public life calling him a “threat to liberal democracy” and his supporters racists and fascists. Their hostility doesn’t lend itself to fruitful diplomacy.

In any event, Trump’s EV rollback and aggressive tariffs will spell disaster for the Canadian EV sector.

The optimism that existed under the Biden administration that Canada could significantly increase its export capacity to the USA is going down the drain. The hope that “Canada could reestablish its export sector as a key driver of growth by positioning itself as a leader in electric vehicle and battery manufacturing, along with other areas in cleantech,” in the words of an RBC report, is swiftly fading. It seems more likely now that Canada will be left holding the bag on a dying industry in which we’re invested heavily.

The Trudeau Liberals’ aggressive push, driven by ideology and not market forces, to force Electric Vehicles on everyone is already backfiring on the Canadian taxpayer. Pierre Poilievre must take note — EV mandates and subsidies are bad for our country, and as Trump has demonstrated, they’re not a winning policy. He should act accordingly.

Continue Reading

Trending

X