The ICBC study that CADA is referencing in its call to increase the exclusion rule from 15 to 25 years upon has been completely discredited.  Not only is ICBC unable to provide the original data used for their study, an independent review commissioned by the Imported Vehicle Owners Association of Canada (IVOAC) found results of the ICBC study to be totally inconclusive.   At best, the IVOAC`s reviewers felt the ICBC results were inconclusive.  

In response to CADA`s view that RHD vehicles are dirty and dangerous, Mr. Leier points to ICBC`s website where it states no evidence to suggest these vehicles are any more polluting than other vehicles of the same age. Moreover, driving vehicles on opposite sides is nothing new.   In Japan, a 2010 Corvette can with left-hand steering can be purchased, while in the USA anyone can buy a RHD Wrangler from their neighbourhood Jeep dealer.  “So, when Mr. Gauthier talks about harmonizing with the USA in this regard, I can`t help but wonder exactly what law he has in mind,“ questioned  Leier.

Mr. Leier goes on to point out the fact that there is ample evidence in other countries that opposite-side steering is nowhere near the problem CADA imagines.  For example, over 2 million cars and trucks cross the English Channel between the UK and Europe every year according to Eurotunnel statistics.   Somehow, French LHD drivers are able to operate safely in the UK, and British RHD drivers are able to operate on the continent without any significant issues.   Moreover, they routinely demonstrate these safe driving skills without any formal training whatsoever.    

Therefore, CADA`s position on RHD vehicles is curious, considering these vehicles make up less than .05% of the Canadian vehicle fleet.  While only Mr. Gauthier is privy to the timing of CADA`s publicly pronounced penchant for safety, Leier finds it noteworthy that Statistics Canada reported new vehicle sales tanking in September just one week before.  “I sure hope things aren`t so bad that CADA`s dealers need to shut the door to a measly 3,000 RHD vehicles a year in order to survive, Leier said.    

“Surely CADA can find other ways to help boost sales than to beat up on a small group of enthusiasts and collectors harming nobody.   If they really want to improve road safety, they should join us in advocating better driver training and testing.   Otherwise, there would seem to be no good reason why the UK, France, Germany and Japan should all have lower accident rates per 100,000 km`s driven than either Canada or the USA.“

Meanwhile, CAVI is calling on the manufacturers to build more of the kinds of cars that people want to buy.  Consumers have an acute sense of value and will vote with their dollars where they see benefit.  “Let the marketplace dictate what people drive, not a special interest group such as the CADA,“ declared Leier.

The Canadian Association of Vehicle Importers is the national association of a group of independent business people and individuals who import vehicles on behalf of collectors and enthusiasts across Canada.  For further information, contact Dale Leier, Managing Director, CAVI by telephone at (250) 920-9955 or email dale@cavi.ca.

ICBC and the Right Hand Drive Report: Whose Interest is Really Being Served?

(Vancouver, BC) ICBC recently commissioned and published a study titled “The Safety of Right-Hand-Drive Vehicles in British Columbia.” This study claims that right-hand drive (RHD) vehicles are 40% more likely to be involved in an accident. According to an ICBC spokesman, they endeavored to eliminate any bias in the study. However, IVOAC and CAVI believe ICBC’s actions themselves are part of a calculated smear campaign intended to discredit RHD vehicle drivers and discourage individuals from purchasing imported used vehicles - especially those who would rather do so themselves than going through Government sanctioned car lots.

The situation here in BC is one of drivers operating RHD vehicles in familiar territory on the side of the road they are used to operating on. This is nothing new. Hundreds of millions of kilometers have been safely accumulated by fleets of North American built right-hand drive vehicles operated by the postal services of both Canada and the US, even though we operate primarily on the right side of the road.

For years, Japanese drivers have been able to purchase vehicles in both left and right hand configuration directly from dealer’s showrooms, even though they primarily operate on the left side of the road. Interestingly, ICBC appears to have made no effort to include either of these relevant experiences into their study.

Rather, ICBC inappropriately cites examples of Korean drivers operating in Japan, an unfamiliar country operating on the opposite side of the road they are use to as evidence of the inherently greater risk RHD vehicles pose for the motoring public in BC. Also, ICBC makes reference the situation regarding European tractor/trailer units operating in the UK, but chooses to ignore the fact that the Chunnel currently transports over 2 million cars per year between England and France where drivers operate on opposite sides of the road with seemingly little difficulty.

There does not appear to be any effort by either Transport Canada or BC Transportation to outlaw RHD vehicles; neither has ICBC bothered to increase the insurance premiums for these supposedly high-risk vehicles. What is apparent is that a certain stridency has entered their vocabulary: we don’t have an increase in RHD cars – we have a “proliferation.” Nor, it seems, do people have accidents anymore -any reportable fender dent or door scrape is now called a “crash.” For some reason, ICBC is using it’s highly-refined PR machinery to scare people away from purchasing economical innovative and entertaining vehicles that seemingly no North American car company could ever imagine building.

The real question in many mind is, what’s the real motive behind ICBC’s propaganda campaign against unique vehicles at a time when it’s coffer’s overflow from unintended profits? On a recent radio talk show, ICBC’s spokesman Peter Cooper may have let the cat out of the bag when he revealed that the 200 cars a month coming into BC aren’t the real concern, but rather, it is the potential for thousands of cars a month coming in over the years to come that has them concerned. Apparently we should all fear for the well-being of millionaire car-dealers who need bigger yachts, rather than the needs hard-working citizens of this province who are simply looking for a vehicle better suited to them than the usual schlock being pumped out by Detroit.

After all, if BC drivers are going to be faced with world prices for gas and climate change, should we not also have the freedom to choose from the world of vehicle options with which to respond to our crises? Apparently, ICBC thinks not.

Background

IVOAC (Import Vehicle Owners Association of Canada) is a group of Canadian import owners who are working together on the issue of imported vehicle safety and legality in Canada. For more information, please visit our website at www.ivoac.ca or contact Mike Bain at (604) 649-3871.

CAVI (Canadian Association of Vehicle Importers) was formed to represent the interests of vehicle importers and the rights of Canadians to freely chose the type of vehicles that best suit their individual needs. For more information please visit our website at www.cavi.ca or contact Dale Leier at (250) 920-9955.

Organization Formed to Fight Imported Vehicle Rule Changes

New group urges Minister of Transport not to sign off just yet

Renfrew, ON, Feb. 26, 2007. The Canadian Association of Vehicle Importers (CAVI) has been formed in response to actions being taken by Transport
Canada to unfairly limit vehicle choices for Canadian motorists. For several decades now, Canadians have been allowed to import unique and
collectible vehicles for their personal use without having to comply with costly regulations required of major manufactures. These regulations,
know as the Canadian Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, are currently waived for vehicles 15 years of age or older – an exemption known as the 15-year
rule. Imported vehicles are still required, however, to pass appropriate federal and provincial safety inspections prior to highway use.

According to Louis Skebo, Interim Chair of CAVI, the reasons behind government efforts to prohibit importation are questionable. “Despite working
reasonably well for so many years, the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators (CCMTA), of which Transport Canada is a member, has proposed
amending the 15-year rule by extending the age of vehicle that may be imported to 25-years. This change is being pushed through by despite the absence
of:

• Public demand to increase the age of exempt imported vehicles.
• Any evidence that such a change is necessary.
• Research into the full impact that this change will bring about.
• Consultation with all key stakeholder groups.
• Consideration of alternatives to meet the, as yet, unstated objectives.”

CAVI is concerned that the CCMTA’s efforts to push through changes to the 15-year rule for sign-off by the Minister of Transport before proper public
consultation has taken place is inappropriate. As Skebo says, “Changes to the 15-year rule have negative consequences, not only for vehicle owners who
want greater transportation choices at a time of rising fuel costs and environmental concern, but also could affect relations with major trading partners
such as Japan. By arbitrarily restricting Canadians’ access to the widest possible range of vehicle choices, we are being denied world-class solutions to
the twin challenges of diminishing oil reserves and global warming.”

Imported vehicles have always played an essential role in providing Canadians with effective, safe and efficient vehicles. CAVI believes that through proper
consultation and dialogue, the genuine interest of Canadian motorists can be preserved while ensuring the integrity of our shared public highway system.
Therefore, CAVI has asked the Minister of Transport to postpone approving the changes being requested by the CCMTA until proper consultation with stakeholders
and a review of alternative strategies for accomplishing mutually beneficial goals has taken place.

About the Canadian Association of Vehicle Importers
CAVI is a not-for-profit organization formed earlier this year to represent the interests of over 30 small and medium enterprises involved in the purchase,
importation, sale and distribution, modification and maintenance of imported vehicles, primarily from Japan. The impetus for the organization is efforts of
unelected government officials pushing for changing the rules currently allowing imports in the absence of any clear need for any such change or consultation
with key stakeholder groups. CAVI believes that Canadian drivers, facing world-prices for energy and concerns for global warming, should continue to enjoy
the right to import world-class vehicle solutions.

For more information, visit our website at www.cavi.ca, or contact:

Dale Leier, Managing Director

dale@cavi.ca
(250) 920 - 9955

Canadian Automobile Dealers Association (CADA) wrong to attack Right Hand Drivers

VICTORIA, Nov. 10, 2010  – Today, the Canadian Association of Vehicle Importers (CAVI), which represents almost 100 independent vehicle importers nationwide, is calling on CADA to retract its inaccurate public statements and apologize to Canadians who choose to collect and drive right hand drive (RHD) vehicles.  “Theirs is an entirely unfair position to take, considering CADA is neither qualified to determine vehicle safety, nor are they basing their comments on objective research,“ said Dale Leier, Managing Director of CAVI.