EN FR

"Spending" priorities

Author: Adrienne Batra 2007/09/20
No matter what level of government, there is always talk of priorities. For taxpayers that usually means there is going to be some serious spending. But on a rare occasion, someone in government recognizes the difference between a priority and a "nice to have."

In this case, it is Manitoba's senior federal minister Vic Toews. Toews has all but unequivocally ruled out providing $40 million of public dollars to fund a new Blue Bomber stadium. As was reported in the Winnipeg Sun, Toews was simply going to look at the proposal as a "courtesy" with little to no intention of actually providing any funding. He pointed out there are much more pressing issues that are facing the federal government, and Manitoba.

Toews correctly refers to the desperate need for water and sewer systems requiring repair or upgrades, for example, to the 50 communities that are under boil water advisories. Not to mention the multi-billion dollar infrastructure deficit that Manitoba faces. When asked by the Sun if football stadiums fall under the federal government's infrastructure spending priorities, Toews said "it's not what I would call hard infrastructure." Obviously the minister recognizes what most Manitobans would view as infrastructure such as roads and bridges.

Unfortunately, not all politicians see it that way. Manitoba's premier is all too happy to provide millions of tax dollars to fund the $120 million stadium, which will be privately owned. In the last provincial election, the NDP committed to provide funding for a new stadium, but with the federal government not necessarily on board, it is not clear how much of the required $80 million in public funds Doer is willing fork over.

Doer touts the proposal as a public-private partnership (P3) but it appears more like a public partner pays and private partner gains arrangement.
He likes to buttress his rationale of this funding arrangement by pointing to the success of the MTS Centre, which to be sure, has done well, however all of the economic spin-off taxpayers were assured have not materialized. But because the MTS Centre was going to be profitable, is exactly why it shouldn't have received public money.

In spite of Toews' position not to confuse funding football stadiums as an infrastructure spending priority, the federal government in some way will be de-facto funding the stadium through the billions of dollars that Manitoba receives every year through transfer and equalization payments from richer provinces.

The only real value the government could add to this deal would be to relieve the tax burden that prevents the business community from acting alone. Sadly, the idea of funding a pseudo-public works project on the back of taxpayers simply reinforces the mentality that nothing in Manitoba can succeed without government intervention.

The premier needs to be reminded of the spending priorities for Manitobans. The city is undergoing a $1.3 billion sewer and water upgrade taking place in the city of Winnipeg and the province should be at the table funding that - not a "nice-to have" football stadium.


A Note for our Readers:

Is Canada Off Track?

Canada has problems. You see them at gas station. You see them at the grocery store. You see them on your taxes.

Is anyone listening to you to find out where you think Canada’s off track and what you think we could do to make things better?

You can tell us what you think by filling out the survey

Join now to get the Taxpayer newsletter

Franco Terrazzano
Federal Director at
Canadian Taxpayers
Federation

Join now to get the Taxpayer newsletter

Hey, it’s Franco.

Did you know that you can get the inside scoop right from my notebook each week? I’ll share hilarious and infuriating stories the media usually misses with you every week so you can hold politicians accountable.

You can sign up for the Taxpayer Update Newsletter now

Looks good!
Please enter a valid email address

We take data security and privacy seriously. Your information will be kept safe.

<