In this century Atlantic Canada attracted far too few immigrants and our social, economic and cultural development has been held back as a result. Brian Lee Crowley argues both the attitudes and policies toward immigrants must change.
In this article from La Presse, AIMS President Brian Lee Crowley argues Instead of being the source of environmental degradation, this competitive system has unleashed human ingenuity and generated the wealth that has allowed our planet to support far more human life than would have been thought possible even a century ago.
In his latest column on Newfoundland public policy, AIMS Fellow Peter Fenwick tells the story of how social welfare advocates in the province stymied attempts to return welfare recipients to the workforce, despite compelling international evidence that such welfare reform is a powerful aid in reintegrating otherwise marginalized members of our society. Britain's Prime Minister Tony Blair often argues that leaving people at home on welfare is to isolate them and bar them from participating in society. His reforms and those tried in the US have eliminated much of that exclusion and have given people the strongest incentive to get back on their feet. But vocal lobbying by powerful interest groups likely has prevented such policy reform from helping thousands of Newfoundlanders from making a successful transition from welfare to work.
NS and NB should stop squabbling and think big – An AIMS Oil & Gas Perspective, “Canada First” Puts Canada Last - AIMS presentation to the National Energy Board, Brian Lee Crowley in the Globe on why MSAs are worth a look and why poor quality social programmes breed dependency.
A survey conducted by Statistics Canada this week suggests that the four Atlantic provinces are the country’s most dependent on government transfers. AIMS’ President Brian Lee Crowley attributes this fact partly to the EI and welfare recipients that stay home instead of training or looking for work. "Once everybody's stamped up for EI, nobody has any reason to want to work," he said in an interview Thursday. Crowley suggests reforming the current system so that it would not pay out money to those eligible unless they entered re-training programs and started doing “the jobs that need doing”. Publication: CHH, July 12, 2002
Who pays and who benefits from our massive public spending on universities and colleges? In this article, AIMS author and intern John Philippe, continues to analyse the costs and benefits of a post-secondary education to both the individual who acquires that education, and the society that finances the greatest portion of the cash cost. Following-up to his enlightening report, “What’s a Degree Worth: Who Pays and Who Benefits at Atlantic Canada’s Universities?”, Phillipe argues in part that it only makes sense for students, as the major beneficiaries of their education, to bear a greater share of the costs than they currently do. He also discusses how the current regime of relatively uniform tuition levels across disciplines and levels of study is wasteful in that it prohibits universities from shifting money to the areas that are in highest demand. Publication: CHH & GC, May 14, 2002
The effects of natural selection are doubtless more muted than at any time in human history. The efforts of humanity, and particularly Western civilization, have allowed us to shelter one another from the ravages of natural selection, through education, vaccination, sanitation, redistribution of wealth, labour laws, agricultural innovation, and a whole host of other institutions that have softened the pitiless rigours of the natural world. But that doesn't mean that nothing is changing. In this column, AIMS President, Brian Lee Crowley, demonstrates that whatever else characterizes our modern societies, change on a grand scale is a huge constant. But that change is so vast, and happening so quickly, that natural biological selection, which works over millennia, cannot possibly keep up. The natural selection that matters in the world today is not of individuals for their genetic endowment, but rather the selection of social institutions for the benefits they confer on us. The long C
Robin Neill, Chair of AIMS Research Advisory Board, appeared before the House of Commons Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities during the statutory review of the Employment Equity Act. As part of his remarks, Professor Neill highlighted the difficulty with quotas by explaining to the committee that the problem now is a decline in the participation rate of males in the labour force. Employment of women is going up and the proportion of men employed is going down. Professor Neill asked if this then required legislation to improve the position of men, placing yet one more constraint on market forces? His answer is that what was not good for the gander is not good for the goose; we ought not to legislate advanced employment quotas of men in this country. What we ought to do is undo the legislation we now have on the books.
Following up on a highly successful national conference on equalization, hosted by the Atlantic Institute for Market Studies, the Frontier Centre for Public Policy, and the Montreal Economic Institute, AIMS and its partners collaborated on a National Post Article outlining a new way to approach equalization. According to this National Post editorial, the idea outlined in our earlier article seems to be catching on at the highest levels. On December 20, 2001, Finance Minister Paul Martin spoke at a luncheon in Halifax where he indicated that he is exploring the idea of replacing the billions of dollars in annual federal spending on job creation and economic development in “have-not” regions with lower federal corporate taxes. Based on the work being done by our three market-oriented think-tanks, representing all of the equalization-receiving provinces, this is an idea whose time has come.
In a keynote speech to the NB Seafood Processors Assoc. Annual Convention Moncton, 6 December 2001, AIMS' president Brian Lee Crowley shares his vision of how we can revive dead labour and dead capital, giving back to our communities a dynamism that exists today as an unrealised potential.