Quebec Arenas & Toronto Summits

[August1991]

The federal government spent over $1 billion on a three day summit in Toronto.

When it is mooted that the federal government spend less than $200 million on an arena in Quebec City, all the usual suspects object.

IMHO, at least we'd get an arena for our efforts, in a city where many Canadians go as tourists. Heck, if the federal government put in money, it would have bilingual signs.

What did we get for the $1.2 billion summit in Toronto? A fake lake and paved roads in Huntsville.

----

I am the first to object to government spending, but I see alot of Quebec bashing in comments about this arena proposal.

[capricorn]

I am the first to object to government spending, but I see alot of Quebec bashing in comments about this arena proposal.

What proposal is that? Who proposed it and where can I see this proposal?

[August1991]

What proposal is that? Who proposed it and where can I see this proposal?

Uh?

The divisive debate among Conservative ranks over whether Ottawa should spend millions of dollars to build an NHL hockey arena in Quebec City ratcheted up a notch yesterday, when high-profile MP Maxime Bernier condemned the plan, saying he could not "in good conscience" support what will become a "financial burden on taxpayers for decades to come."

National Post

---

Where was Max Bernier when Harper spent over a billion dollars in Huntsville and Toronto?

Edited September 12, 2010 by August1991

[Shwa]

The federal government spent over $1 billion on a three day summit in Toronto.

When it is mooted that the federal government spend less than $200 million on an arena in Quebec City, all the usual suspects object.

The Air Canada Centre in Toronto cost $265 million to build ten years ago. How much did the Feds kick in do you know? Of course this arena was built to house professional hockey, baskeball and lacrosse teams. How many professional teams in Quebec City that currently use the Colisee? Minor league hockey right? A few concerts now and then?

IMHO, at least we'd get an arena for our efforts, in a city where many Canadians go as tourists. Heck, if the federal government put in money, it would have bilingual signs.

Of course, there is almost 10 times the population in Toronto compared to Quebec City. And there is no comparison of tourism when it comes to the two cities. Toronto is world class, Quebec City is provincial. There are likely more tourists in Toronto and GTA during the year than the entire population of Quebec City.

What did we get for the $1.2 billion summit in Toronto? A fake lake and paved roads in Huntsville.

So what will "we" get for a $200 million investment in a rink in Quebec City? Bilingual signage? Come now... At least the "$1.2 billion" was an injection of money into the local economy which included many goods and services, world exposure, jobs, etc.

----

I am the first to object to government spending, but I see alot of Quebec bashing in comments about this arena proposal.

Hey, I am all for a beautiful new arena in Quebcec City and I think they should have their own NHL franchise. What bothers me is the all the whining about it. Maybe there is some anti-Quebec bashing going on over the proposal, but I am thinking that Winnipeg, Saskatoon, Regina would all love beautiful new arenas and NHL franchises too.

[Argus]

I wonder if August would be as supportive if the $200 million being bandied about were for an arena in Vancouver.

I'm of two minds about this sort of thing. On the one hand I see no reason why government should subsidize highly lucrative commercial enterprises. On the other hand, the government does that every year to the tune of billions of dollars anyway (see bombardier et al).

It's worth noting that the Ottawa Senators not only had to pay every penny of the cost of constructing their arena, but even had to reimburse the provincial government tens of millions of dollars for the overpass needed on the freeway in order to bring in fans. That enormous debt load, which is still being paid off, has had an influence on the team over the years, robbing them of money they would otherwise have been able to spend on player salaries. At least the provincial government gave the Maple Leafs the land for their new stadium and didn't make them pay for the roads.

In the U.S., virtually all arenas and stadiums are constructed with public money, which is weird when you think about it. So-called free enterprisers who oppose government money and all that sort of thing.

But the result is that given equivilent markets, the American team will have a lot more money than the Canadian team. The American team doesn't have to pay for its stadium, or upkeep, or local taxes on it. It usually gets most or all of the refreshment and parking costs as well. The state virtually provides them a free place to set up shop and grants them all the income. This has put Canadian hockey teams behind the eight ball for a long time. I think it was said at one time that - either the Senators or the Canadiens paid more in local taxes than all the American teams combined.

Oddly, the same people who are most enthusiastic about government money going to opera houses and theaters and ballets and orchestras - who few care about - are most opposed to money going to hockey, which is far more of a cultural icon in this country than anything they do.

So I suppose I support it, kind of. But it seems unfair to me that the Nordiques would be able to start up in a new building without the debt load the Senators are still carrying.

Edited September 12, 2010 by Argus

[capricorn]

Uh?

National Post

Gilles Duceppe was the first to float the proposal that the feds help fund the cost of a new arena for Quebec city. His dream is to see a return of the NHL to Quebec city.

Le chef du Bloc Québécois, Gilles Duceppe ne s'explique pas le peu d'action du premier ministre, Stephen Harper, dans le dossier de la construction d'un nouvel amphithéâtre multidisciplinaire à Québec.

Accompagné de plusieurs de ses députés de la région de Québec, Gilles Duceppe a lancé un appel au premier ministre afin que celui-ci s'engage personnellement dans le dossier du nouveau Colisée.

---

« La venue des Jeux olympiques et celle d'une équipe de hockey professionnelle sont toutes deux tributaires de la construction du nouvel amphithéâtre. Voilà pourquoi je lance aujourd'hui un appel à Stephen Harper afin qu'il s'engage fermement, sans détour et dès maintenant pour permettre à Québec de poursuivre sur sa lancée favorable » a déclaré Gilles Duceppe dans une conférence de presse dans la capitale nationale.

http://matin.branchez-vous.com/nouvelles/2010/08/colisee_de_quebec_le_bloc_queb.html

Bloc Québécois leader Gilles Duceppe is calling on the prime minister to personally endorse the construction of a new arena in Quebec City.

Duceppe said at a news conference Wednesday that he hopes Ottawa will come out in favour of the project, which he says will help the dream of drawing a new NHL hockey team in Quebec City.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/montreal/story/2010/08/25/quebec-city-arena-duceppe.html

It seems that the media speaks of this as a Harper proposal. That's not quite correct.

In any case, I am opposed to any federal money going into this venture which is really meant to pave the way for an NHL franchise. Let the private sector and sports fans in Quebec pony up.

[Michael Hardner]

I'm guessing that this move wouldn't endear Westerners to their boy Harper. It seems like classic Liberal Santa Clausing.

[scribblet]

That's okay, Ignatief can take it away and explain to Quebec why he doesn't want them to have it -

[Smallc]

That's okay, Ignatief can take it away and explain to Quebec why he doesn't want them to have it -

I guess any principle is expendable to Conservative supporters now.

[CANADIEN]

The Conservatives have opened a Pandora box.

If they back down on this, they will be lucky if they retain even one seat in the Quebec City area comes the enxt election.

If they go ahead... Winnipeg and south-central Ontario are two other prospective NHL markets, and they will want money for an arena too... Then comes the CFL: some stadiums will have to be replaced sooner or later, Toronto needs a stadium that fits the needs, and the league is constantly musing about a return in Otawa, or a team in Halifax, if not Quebec City as well. And how about towns with junior hockey team?

Edited September 12, 2010 by CANADIEN

[capricorn]

If they back down on this, they will be lucky if they retain even one seat in the Quebec City area comes the enxt election.

What is your reasoning Canadien?

1. They're Conservative voters. Why would they penalize the Conservatives for abiding a principle of fiscal restraint especially that we're in a huge deficit?

2. Not all Quebec City area residents are hockey fans.

3. Quebec also has a huge deficit and a lot of Quebecers are against Charest spending more money.

From the comments I have read in the French media, some feel the private sector should put up the funds and some think Charest simply wants to ingratiate himself to voters because of the scandal he's involved in. I have not read one comment about the federal government's involvement in this funding. As things stand, the issue in Quebec is at the municipal and the provincial level.

[nicky10013]

What is your reasoning Canadien?

1. They're Conservative voters. Why would they penalize the Conservatives for abiding a principle of fiscal restraint especially that we're in a huge deficit?

2. Not all Quebec City area residents are hockey fans.

3. Quebec also has a huge deficit and a lot of Quebecers are against Charest spending more money.

From the comments I have read in the French media, some feel the private sector should put up the funds and some think Charest simply wants to ingratiate himself to voters because of the scandal he's involved in. I have not read one comment about the federal government's involvement in this funding. As things stand, the issue in Quebec is at the municipal and the provincial level.

If polls are to be believed, Conservative support in Quebec is already gone. From 11 seats down to 1. Nice accomplishment.

[CANADIEN]

What is your reasoning Canadien?

1. They're Conservative voters. Why would they penalize the Conservatives for abiding a principle of fiscal restraint especially that we're in a huge deficit?

2. Not all Quebec City area residents are hockey fans.

3. Quebec also has a huge deficit and a lot of Quebecers are against Charest spending more money.

From the comments I have read in the French media, some feel the private sector should put up the funds and some think Charest simply wants to ingratiate himself to voters because of the scandal he's involved in. I have not read one comment about the federal government's involvement in this funding. As things stand, the issue in Quebec is at the municipal and the provincial level.

The problem is that the Conservatives have already hinted at funding.... They don't go ahead with it, they are asking for trouble in those ridings.

The vote for any party is not a monolithic non-changing block. Enough people may be pissed up to switch party. Add to that that the Quebec City mayor is very popular, has a lot of clout locally, and doesn't easily take no as an answer. What the Conservatives faced when they messed with the Newfoundland and Labrador Government may repeat itself again.

They would have been better to stay away from the whole thing from the get go.

[Black Dog]

Oddly, the same people who are most enthusiastic about government money going to opera houses and theaters and ballets and orchestras - who few care about - are most opposed to money going to hockey, which is far more of a cultural icon in this country than anything they do.

That's because pro hockey teams in Canada don't actually need government subsidies to survive and thrive.

[capricorn]

They would have been better to stay away from the whole thing from the get go.

Yeah, starting with that stupid stunt of posing with Nordiques sweaters. And they say Harper is a one man show.

[scribblet]

I guess any principle is expendable to Conservative supporters now.

What principle would that be - or is Ignatieff going to stick with his principles and go along with it LOL

[nicky10013]

What principle would that be - or is Ignatieff going to stick with his principles and go along with it LOL

Fiscal "Conservatism," or is that not in the platform anymore after fighter jets and prisons?

[fellowtraveller]

I have no problem with the feds gifting $200 million to a Quebec City arena. Alberta will just reduce the $8 billion in kiss ass money that Quebec gets now every single year, net out at $7.8 billion next years welfare payments. Oops forgot the $200 million that the province of Quebec is 'contributing' of course every cent of that comes from Alberta too- net at $7.6 billion now.

Then.... damn, forgot the $50 million Quebec City is supposedly kicking i9n, all that will come from the provincial govt or actually Alberta too, now we are down to $7.55 billion for next years Gravy Train Express.

Unless of course the same contractors who built the Big Owe get involved......

[Smallc]

I'm sure you know this, but Alberta has only 1 vote out of 11 with what happens to Equalization.

[nicky10013]

I have no problem with the feds gifting $200 million to a Quebec City arena. Alberta will just reduce the $8 billion in kiss ass money that Quebec gets now every single year, net out at $7.8 billion next years welfare payments. Oops forgot the $200 million that the province of Quebec is 'contributing' of course every cent of that comes from Alberta too- net at $7.6 billion now.

Then.... damn, forgot the $50 million Quebec City is supposedly kicking i9n, all that will come from the provincial govt or actually Alberta too, now we are down to $7.55 billion for next years Gravy Train Express.

Unless of course the same contractors who built the Big Owe get involved......

I wouldn't be talkin about the gravy train express. Alberta has it pretty good. What royalties do the oil companies pay to Ottawa?

[Smallc]

I wouldn't be talkin about the gravy train express. Alberta has it pretty good. What royalties do the oil companies pay to Ottawa?

Shh, don't burst their bubble. The money Alberta has would have been there regardless of their oil and gas......

[bloodyminded]

Shh, don't burst their bubble. The money Alberta has would have been there regardless of their oil and gas......

Yep. It's their "libertarianism" and "common sense" which has won the day.

Unlike "the ROC," which is comprised mostly of whining losers...we whine so loud, it almost sounds like it's emanating from Alberta!

I blame the CBC....

[capricorn]

That's okay, Ignatief can take it away and explain to Quebec why he doesn't want them to have it -

Oh no! You mean a Liberal flip-flop?

Bob Rae has told Liberal party members he backs federal funding for a new arena in Quebec City as long as it’s not the only initiative in the country.

“I’m a hockey fan, so naturally I see a team in Quebec,” the Liberal MP said Friday at a fundraiser dinner in Montreal.

http://www.calgarysun.com/news/alberta/2010/09/12/15322106.html

The federal Liberals have supported such a project for a year, MP Marc Garneau said, saying Mr. Harper made his comments about the NHL because “obviously they have a base in the Quebec City area and they felt the need to do something about it.”

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/quebec/400-million-hockey-arena-in-quebec-city-skates-closer-to-reality/article1697590/

[waldo]

Oh no! You mean a Liberal flip-flop?

will Harper Conservatives also be funding the new proposed Edmonton Oilers arena... and if not... why not? Waddya mean 'No'... are there no additional votes to be had there?

[capricorn]

will Harper Conservatives also be funding the new proposed Edmonton Oilers arena... and if not... why not? Waddya mean 'No'... are there no additional votes to be had there?

My feeling is that the Conservatives will turn thumbs down on any federal financing of any venue where professional sports is concerned.