Bernier slams Harper's pledge to fund arenas; potential "caucus revolt"

[RedHot25]

http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/201...ervatives.html

Former cabinet minister Maxime Bernier has come out against Prime Minister Stephen Harper's willingness to use federal dollars to fund sports arenas and stadiums across the country.

The Quebec MP has joined other Conservatives, particularly in Western Canada, who are reportedly angry at the proposal. Sources have told CBC News that a caucus revolt could possibly be brewing, with MPs demanding the federal government keep out of the business of professional sports.

Writing on his blog, Bernier said that "the project is simply not profitable and will constitute a financial burden for taxpayers for decades to come, even in the best scenario. That’s why not a single private player has been found to invest in it.

Bernier said the government is carrying a $56-billion deficit and the priority should be getting back to balanced budgets and "avoid by all means getting involved in risky financial ventures."

...

Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach said he's no supporter of public money going toward building stadiums.
...

Harper's spokesman, Dimitri Soudas, told CBC-TV's Power & Politics
Thursday that the openness to fund sports arenas isn't about funding a professional team.

Soudas said in many cases, arenas and stadiums across Canada exist but need to be upgraded. The federal government helping in these cases is similar to helping improve roads and other community infrastructure projects.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle1702397/

Mr. Bernier has since taken to the local airwaves in his Beauce riding to pour cold water on the idea of the Tories showering taxpayer dollars on sports facilities while battling a $56-billion deficfit.

Meanwhile, La Presse’s Joël-Denis Bellavance suggests a backbench revolt could be brewing. One Conservative MP is reported as saying he fears alienating the party’s western base if the government starts throwing money at a rink to curry favour in Quebec.

All this while Prime Minister Stephen Harper appears to be opening the door to some form of funding. His comments Thursday, while touring in Saskatchewan, suggest he is receptive to helping out.

[RedHot25]

http://www.calgaryherald.com/sports/...694/story.html

In January of 2000, Stephen Harper, then president of the National Citizens Coalition, decried a proposed federal tax break for Canadian NHL teams. "Canadians are being forced to subsidize millionaire hockey team owners and that's a misconduct," he said in a news release, calling it "a puck in the face of taxpayers." After the plan was scrapped, Harper was overjoyed, saying, "The taxpayers have scored a goal in overtime."


Today, with Quebec House of Commons seats up for grabs to the highest bidder and Harper lusting for a majority, his government is apparently eager to spoon out nearly $200 million for a new arena in Quebec City.

[GGG]

Plus if they fund quebec's they will end up having to toss money at Edmonton, Calgary, Saskatchewan, Hamilton, and Ottawa as well for their projects. 200 mil will very quickly turn to 500 mil.

[starseed]

So now if the NDP stick with their decision to allow a free vote on the gun registry bill, the Quebec conservatives will be under even more pressure to vote to save the registry. So what will Harper do? Alienate the west by abandoning fiscal conservatism to buy votes in Quebec? Alienate Quebec by eliminating the gun registry?

[Jbo]

I support stadiums and I support Harper

[Ashartus]

Especially hard to justify that money since they don't have an NHL team and no guarantee of getting one just because they build the arena.

[bcb]

Originally Posted by J-bo09

I support stadiums and I support Harper

I support Harper too, but I also support millionaire owners using private funds to build their private businesses.

[peter12]

So clearly Harper has one more election in him and Bernier is making appeals to the base in the hope of a future leadership run.

[Cowperson]

Generally, taxpayers should stay away from public funding of arena's or at least play a more minor role.

Coincidentally, in the New York Times a few days ago, this headline: "As Stadiums Vanish, Their Debt Lives On" with the well-established evidence from 40 some years of funding such facilities clearly showing taxpayers getting hosed. Required reading for anyone supporting public investment in a new arena in Quebec City . . . . or Calgary frankly.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/08/sp...es%20on&st=cse

Cowperson

[SeeBass]

I saw the speech yesterday harper in no way said he would be doing that.

The press was tying to see if there was an interest in the feds giving to 'certain cities" for new a new arena, we know they were digging at Quebec City. Harper stated that if he was going to give to one city then he would have to give to others. Then said in a round-a-bout way that he might look at it. But it was never anything beyond that. It was more of a way to close out a topic than expand on the potential of it actually happening.

Bernier is just fishing as he is dead with Harper as leader.

[redforever]

Originally Posted by bcb

I support Harper too, but I also support millionaire owners using private funds to build their private businesses.

If governments wish to help, they could do so by helping with certain types of infrastructure. So for instance in Calgary, if the Flames build a new arena, then perhaps the city or province could help build a CTrain station there, or perhaps a road to get there. But I can't see getting involved in the actual arenas themselves.

[Nuje]

Originally Posted by redforever

If governments wish to help, they could do so by helping with certain types of infrastructure. So for instance in Calgary, if the Flames build a new arena, then perhaps the city or province could help build a CTrain station there, or perhaps a road to get there. But I can't see getting involved in the actual arenas themselves.

Yep. How many buses in Winnipeg actually went to the Winnipeg arena? (and no, I'm not saying that is the #1...even the #3 reason the Jets are gone, but transportation may have been a concern)

[SeeBass]

^^Polo Park (stadium/arena) would have probably been the second easiest bus stop in Winnipeg to get to, next to downtown.
There had to have been about 8 different routes I can think of that went there.

Nothing like getting drunk at Chi Chi's and taking the bus home.

[Northendzone]

^^^^^ for the record there was more than sufficient amount of parking around the old winnipeg arena. in additiona to the paid parking in the stadium lot, there was also some on street free parking in the area. i don't think parking/transportation was an issue in the jets demise.

the feds funding these mega projects is a very slippery slope - how do you fairly dtermine which ones get funding - currently the liberals are accusing the PC of vote buying (apparently those in the liberal party forget about the heady days of johnny c and paul m and all their good time initiatives in la belle province). persoanlly i am not in favour of the government funding these buildings; however i will concede that there are many spin-offs from building them.

[Devils'Advocate]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

currently the liberals are accusing the PC of vote buying (apparently those in the liberal party forget about the heady days of johnny c and paul m and all their good time initiatives in la belle province).

Yeah, but the Cons got in on a promise to clean up politics.

Now their supporters are all "well they did it too!!!".

It's well know that I'm not a supporter of Harper or the Conservatives, but this all seems like a tempest in a teapot. SeeBass nailed it. Harper didn't promise anything and Bernier is trying to make a bigger name for himself. The Conservatives have hurt themselves plenty in the past few months for the media to have a need to blow this story up beyond what it is.

[SeeBass]

^^^there sure was a ton of parking, of course, how could I forget. It wasn't free but I agree busing and parking was never the issue. Especially at that time when just south/ west of there was when most of the middle and upper income families were.

Issue one would be that Winnipeg is not an NHL quality city. It may be a city of 700K today but there is a whole lot of poor and lower income in that number.

[starseed]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

Yeah, but the Cons got in on a promise to clean up politics.

Now their supporters are all "well they did it too!!!".

It's well know that I'm not a supporter of Harper or the Conservatives, but this all seems like a tempest in a teapot. SeeBass nailed it. Harper didn't promise anything and Bernier is trying to make a bigger name for himself. The Conservatives have hurt themselves plenty in the past few months for the media to have a need to blow this story up beyond what it is.

Which seems a little ironic considering how quickly a cloud of opacity covered Ottawa. He muzzled his employees/caucus, made access to information more difficult in ways like eliminating CAIRS, fired whistleblowers as well as silenced critics in top government positions. Maybe his way of 'cleaning up politics' is cleaning out anything/anyone that could damage the image of the government.

[killer_carlson]

I think Harper's caucus meeting in a couple of weeks is going see the smack laid down on his MPs. This is their shot at a majority government, but they have to shut some of these idiots up and get everyone towing the party line and nothing else.

[John Doe]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

I think Harper's caucus meeting in a couple of weeks is going see the smack laid down on his MPs. This is their shot at a majority government, but they have to shut some of these idiots up and get everyone towing the party line and nothing else.

Or perhaps the MPs could stand up for their constituents for once and the caucus could democratically decide what the party should do.