G8, G20 cost 1Billion

[Smallc]

It seems like you don't understand the entire situation. There was originally to be a G8 only. Those can be held in isolated locations and they only involve a small number of world leaders. Not even the wives go. Canada knew it was hosting the G8 this year since....well at least 2002, and preparation has gone into it for a long time.

Now, fast forward to 2008. There was this little global financial crisis. Through this, it was seen that action by the G8 countries would not be enough. It would need to involve a wider group. What better group than the G20, an organization that Canada had really formed and an organization that already existed. The G20 is over 80% of the world economy, and can make a big impact.

Now, Canada had to do something. The G8 was becoming overshadowed as a global economic power (if not a global security power). Holding the G8w as becoming a far less significant thing....so we decided, in late 2009 or early 2010, to have a G8 and a G20. We had already made huge upgrades to Huntsville in preparation for the G8, so it was decided that the G20 would go there too....but the analysis showed that the summit would not in fact fit there. This summit involves tens of thousands of people....so it needed to be moved. The previous three summits were held in Washington D.C., London, and Pittsburg. They require a large location for their massive size.

The government of Canada decided to kill two birds with one stone. They decided that, as the one of the best fiscal performers in the G20, they would showcase our largest financial district. The G20 will be held near all of our major banks, the TSX, and many other financial and business institutions. The message here - Canada is open for business. Canada has a competitive advantage over almost all of the other G20 countries, and so we're going to show off who we are.

Now, should we have moved the G8 to Toronto? well, quite possibly, but then, we had already spent years preparing the venue. Should we have held the events at different times? Well, quite possibly, but then, it's said that the cost would have been more. Should we have cancelled the G8 and had the G20 supersede it? Maybe, but then there would be no organization to deal with global security concerns (though the G8 still might disappear after this year).

The simple reality is, it was our turn to host the G8, and in order to make it meaningful in today's world, we had to host a G20 as well. G20 meetings can't be held just anywhere, and no matter what some people may think, these things are as much about showing the country to the world as they are about the heavily scripted and mostly predetermined meetings.

[bush_cheney2004]

What's the big deal....it's just a G20 summit. Pittsburgh did it for far less and with reduced fanfare about the host country.

[nicky10013]

It seems like you don't understand the entire situation. There was originally to be a G8 only. Those can be held in isolated locations and they only involve a small number of world leaders. Not even the wives go. Canada knew it was hosting the G8 this year since....well at least 2002, and preparation has gone into it for a long time.

Now, fast forward to 2008. There was this little global financial crisis. Through this, it was seen that action by the G8 countries would not be enough. It would need to involve a wider group. What better group than the G20, an organization that Canada had really formed and an organization that already existed. The G20 is over 80% of the world economy, and can make a big impact.

Now, Canada had to do something. The G8 was becoming overshadowed as a global economic power (if not a global security power). Holding the G8w as becoming a far less significant thing....so we decided, in late 2009 or early 2010, to have a G8 and a G20. We had already made huge upgrades to Huntsville in preparation for the G8, so it was decided that the G20 would go there too....but the analysis showed that the summit would not in fact fit there. This summit involves tens of thousands of people....so it needed to be moved. The previous three summits were held in Washington D.C., London, and Pittsburg. They require a large location for their massive size.

The government of Canada decided to kill two birds with one stone. They decided that, as the one of the best fiscal performers in the G20, they would showcase our largest financial district. The G20 will be held near all of our major banks, the TSX, and many other financial and business institutions. The message here - Canada is open for business. Canada has a competitive advantage over almost all of the other G20 countries, and so we're going to show off who we are.

Now, should we have moved the G8 to Toronto? well, quite possibly, but then, we had already spent years preparing the venue. Should we have held the events at different times? Well, quite possibly, but then, it's said that the cost would have been more. Should we have cancelled the G8 and had the G20 supersede it? Maybe, but then there would be no organization to deal with global security concerns (though the G8 still might disappear after this year).

The simple reality is, it was our turn to host the G8, and in order to make it meaningful in today's world, we had to host a G20 as well. G20 meetings can't be held just anywhere, and no matter what some people may think, these things are as much about showing the country to the world as they are about the heavily scripted and mostly predetermined meetings.

The reason why the G20 is in Toronto is becase Huntsville doesn't have the requisite 20,000 hotel rooms needed for such an event, as the entire conference was incredibly mismanaged from the getgo and not because the government wanted to show off the financial district. There is no reason why there needs to be a G20 and a G8 within the same time period. There is no reason why Canada shouldn't be able to do it for 500 million, which is far larger than the G20 budget in London.

[Smallc]

The reason why the G20 is in Toronto is becase Huntsville doesn't have the requisite 20,000 hotel rooms needed for such an event, as the entire conference was incredibly mismanaged from the getgo and not because the government wanted to show off the financial district. There is no reason why there needs to be a G20 and a G8 within the same time period. There is no reason why Canada shouldn't be able to do it for 500 million, which is far larger than the G20 budget in London.

With all respect, security experts and the government have said that the G20 budgets for London and Pittsburg are BS...and I agree. Second, I said why the G20 was not being held in Muskoka. There is a very specific reason though that Toronto, specifically downtown Toronto, was chosen over, say, Montreal.

Edited June 10, 2010 by Smallc

[August1991]

What's the big deal....it's just a G20 summit. Pittsburgh did it for far less and with reduced fanfare about the host country.

Easy for you to say when you've got a President with a federal budget deficit rising from 40% to 90% of GDP or so in the next few years.

What's a billion between friends? B-C, it's all about government spending, and your guy Bush Jnr, was profligate abroad and with prescription drugs.

When government spending rises above 200% of GDP or so, it turns into a Ponzi scheme. I think we're about to hit the Western Wall and it has nothing to do with Republican/Democrat/Liberal/Conservative/Liberal Democrat/NDP or western society or even religion.

All the politicians/bureaucrats are guilty. They're spending other people's money.

And as Thatcher said, all socialist ventures fail when they run out of other people's money. I lived in the Soviet Union and I saw a few projects where the "developer ran out of financing".

Welcome to the Future.

Edited June 10, 2010 by August1991

[Smallc]

Easy for you to say when you've got a President with a federal budget deficit rising from 40% to 90% of GDP or so in the next few years.

That would be the debt, not the deficit.

[August1991]

The simple reality is, it was our turn to host the G8, and in order to make it meaningful in today's world, we had to host a G20 as well. G20 meetings can't be held just anywhere, and no matter what some people may think, these things are as much about showing the country to the world as they are about the heavily scripted and mostly predetermined meetings.

... and so our federal bureaucrtats/politicians had to spend $1 billion on a three day summit in Toronto rather than a new hospital in Montreal that will last for several decades.

Smallc, are you clueless?

Do you know how Canadians outside of Toronto/Muskoka are looking at these reports of a billion dollar summit?

Edited June 10, 2010 by August1991

[g_bambino]

Do you know how Canadians outside of Toronto/Muskoka are looking at these reports of a billion dollar summit?

Do you think Canadians in Toronto look at it any more favourably?

[madmax]

... and so our federal bureaucrtats/politicians had to spend $1 billion on a three day summit in Toronto rather than a new hospital in Montreal that will last for several decades.

Smallc, are you clueless?

Do you know how Canadians outside of Toronto/Muskoka are looking at these reports of a billion dollar summit?

ITs not a BILLION DOLLAR SUMMIT!!!!

Its a BILLION DOLLARS in SECURITY!!!

The COst of the SUMMIT is yet to come in.

Stop complaining about the Hospital you whiner.

We have a Fake Lake, Fake TORONTO stock exchange, and a really nice Million dollar Cabin in Huntsville that will be used by all the people of Canada as its our tax dollars.

Screw You and your Hospital. Hospitals are a PROVINCIAL matter and we need our Federal dollars spent on Entertainment on Foreign and Domestic Aristocrats.

Everyone outside of Quebec supports this summit and these costs. I am sure that if the Quebec Government has a seat at the table, they support it too.

Boo hoo.

This isn't going to cost $1billion.

ITs likely $5 Billion.

So just take off and jump into a fake lake.....

[Smallc]

ITs not a BILLION DOLLAR SUMMIT!!!!

You're incorrect. The total cost of the summit is budgeted at $1.1B.

[Smallc]

Do you know how Canadians outside of Toronto/Muskoka are looking at these reports of a billion dollar summit?

Did you bother to look under my name and see where I live?

[g_bambino]

You're incorrect. The total cost of the summit is budgeted at $1.1B.

Yes, but aren't they already at that point and the summit is still two weeks off?

[M.Dancer]

I don't know how true this is but I heard on the boobtube the other night that the event when held in London had a much lower security cost because the security infrastructure was already in place and had been for decades...as most already know, London is awash with closed Circuit Video...

Still, an audit would be amusing. emlightening and hopefully in context..

[Topaz]

There's more info. on the spending out today. Now, its the wallpaper...1.2 Mil?????????? BTW, a poll out today says the Tories are ahead by 3-4 points. None of the party have enough to form a majority government but I wondering how far the Tory supporters will let the Tories go on spending of OUR money? They are going to rise EI premiums, wait til that kicks in, they are taking that same money and putting were they want it to go and leaving 2 Bil in the EI fund. How far can Harper go before they supporters say, you've gone to far??? The PC's supporters threw the PC's out, the Libs threw the Libs out, so when are the Conservatives going to the right thing?? http://www.torontosun.com/comment/columnists/greg_weston/2010/06/09/14326731.html

[bush_cheney2004]

Easy for you to say when you've got a President with a federal budget deficit rising from 40% to 90% of GDP or so in the next few years.

What's a billion between friends? B-C, it's all about government spending, and your guy Bush Jnr, was profligate abroad and with prescription drugs.

Yes, but we didn't blow it on something as pretentious as a G8/G20 summit to show off our financial sector (or rigid control of guns). Love the fake lake. LOL!

When government spending rises above 200% of GDP or so, it turns into a Ponzi scheme. I think we're about to hit the Western Wall and it has nothing to do with Republican/Democrat/Liberal/Conservative/Liberal Democrat/NDP or western society or even religion.

It was good enough for WW2.

[nicky10013]

With all respect, security experts and the government have said that the G20 budgets for London and Pittsburg are BS...and I agree. Second, I said why the G20 was not being held in Muskoka. There is a very specific reason though that Toronto, specifically downtown Toronto, was chosen over, say, Montreal.

So the US and UK cooked their books? Is there proof of that? Honestly, what "expert" from this government can anyone trust considering the crap Harper and Co. has pulled?

The reason why Toronto was chosen over another city like Montreal is because Toronto is, for most leaders, a quick jaunt down the 400. For Obama, a quick helicopter ride. Proximity had more to do with it than anything else.

[nicky10013]

I don't know how true this is but I heard on the boobtube the other night that the event when held in London had a much lower security cost because the security infrastructure was already in place and had been for decades...as most already know, London is awash with closed Circuit Video...

Still, an audit would be amusing. emlightening and hopefully in context..

There's already CCTV already all over downtown Toronto. I fail to see adding a few extra could make up for the extra 800 million budgeted.

[M.Dancer]

There's already CCTV already all over downtown Toronto. I fail to see adding a few extra could make up for the extra 800 million budgeted.

All over downtown? Hardly...a few cameras at younge and dundas and a few more in the night club district is not all over down town. There are currently only 18 cameras in all of Toronto and only 16 down town.

In 52 Division, cameras are installed at the following

locations:

• Pearl Street, east of Duncan Street

• Duncan Street/Adelaide Street West

• Duncan Street/Richmond Street West

• Richmond Street West, east of Duncan Street

• Richmond Street West /Widmer Street

• Richmond Street West / Peter Street

• Adelaide Street West/Peter Street

• Richmond Street West /John Street

• Yonge Street at Dundas Street

• Yonge Street at Gould Street

• Yonge Street at Gerrard Street

In 14 Division, cameras are installed at the following

locations:

• Bathurst Street south of Queen Street West

• Bathurst Street at Queen Street West.

• Bathurst Street at Willis Street.

• Queen Street West at Markham St.

• Queen Street West between Bathurst Street and Ryerson Avenue.

http://www.torontopolice.on.ca/media/text/20080516-tps_cctv_project.pdf

An additional 77 cameras will be installed for the event. Unforunately, most will be removed afterwards.

http://ottawa.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20100602/g20-summit-security-costs-100602/20100602/?hub=OttawaHome

Edited June 10, 2010 by M.Dancer

[eyeball]

With all respect, security experts and the government have said that the G20 budgets for London and Pittsburg are BS...and I agree.

So why is our government so eager to spend over a billion dollars to invite a bunch of liars to come help us showcase our country? I just don't get it.

Are these liars supposed to illustrate how honest our leaders are?

[maple_leafs182]

Maybe they just wanna test crowd control methods...

[Argus]

So why is our government so eager to spend over a billion dollars to invite a bunch of liars to come help us showcase our country? I just don't get it.

Are these liars supposed to illustrate how honest our leaders are?

Hosting the things is a requirement. Once every 8 years for one, once every 20 years for the other.

How would Canadians have reacted if Harper had announced he is pulling Canada out of the G8 and G20 because Canada could not afford to host the events every 8 or 20 years? Do you think Canadians would have been a mite peeved?

[dre]

Hosting the things is a requirement. Once every 8 years for one, once every 20 years for the other.

How would Canadians have reacted if Harper had announced he is pulling Canada out of the G8 and G20 because Canada could not afford to host the events every 8 or 20 years? Do you think Canadians would have been a mite peeved?

I wouldnt have cared really.

Personally I think the leaders of these groups make way to much of these events. Folks like the UN, G8, G20, etc etc etc. Theres no reason these events need to be so lavish. All these dignitary types just LOVE wasting big bux on their huge parties.

Theres no reason why the G8 or G20 couldnt scale these events WAY back and still operate just fine. This is just a big party for those clowns to jack themselves off.

[ToadBrother]

I wouldnt have cared really.

Personally I think the leaders of these groups make way to much of these events. Folks like the UN, G8, G20, etc etc etc. Theres no reason these events need to be so lavish. All these dignitary types just LOVE wasting big bux on their huge parties.

Theres no reason why the G8 or G20 couldnt scale these events WAY back and still operate just fine. This is just a big party for those clowns to jack themselves off.

You're just pissed because you weren't invited!

[Smallc]

Yes, but aren't they already at that point and the summit is still two weeks off?

No, that is the total budget for the summit.

[Smallc]

So the US and UK cooked their books? Is there proof of that? Honestly, what "expert" from this government can anyone trust considering the crap Harper and Co. has pulled?

I didn't say experts from this government, I said experts and this government. It's impossible that $30M and $18M is a true reflection of all of the costs.

The reason why Toronto was chosen over another city like Montreal is because Toronto is, for most leaders, a quick jaunt down the 400. For Obama, a quick helicopter ride. Proximity had more to do with it than anything else.

No, that had nothing to do with it. They will be flown to Toronto by helicopter. If it would have been somewhere else, they would have been taken by jet.