2010 Political Costs: One Man's Opinion

Monday, September 25, 2006 03:45 AM

When the rubber hits the road in the 2010 Olympics and the actual costs are known, what will the political fall out be?

Already in the area where the most benefit is to occur (the 604) there are rumblings that the games are just too rich and the lasting legacy will be the bills that future generations will be called upon to pay.

While the 2010 Committee continues to wind its way around the province setting up shop and trying to convince a less thea eager audience that everyone will prosper from the 2010 , they are receiving less and less attention.

The effort to try and convince those living in the 250 is that all we have to do is hold up our hand and, presto, we will find the economic benefits flowing to our door.

The sweater story (in which a Kootenay company was able to sell sweaters to the Calgary Olympics) has been beaten to death. It is the story that is used by those who would like us to believe that when you talk about the 2010 Olympics, there really is a pot of gold at the end of that rainbow.

The cracks in the armor however are apparent, when taxpayers in municipalities in the lower mainland begin to look at what they can expect will be their share of the cheque when the games end. Residents living in the central and northern part of the province have been down this road before during Expo 87 we were told the roads would be awash with tourists flocking to our areas.

Business took a shellacking and their memories are not short.

What is beginning to take shape is the feeling that if the games run rampant over budget it could have a back lash on the standing of the Liberal Party in BC. There is more than one Premier who can attest to riding a high only to be relegated to obscurity by one bad political move.

In the end will the security costs for the 2010 be such a catalyst?

I’m Meisner and that is one man’s Opinion.

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Monday, September 25, 2006 03:45 AM in Views by Ben Meisner

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: acrider54 on September 25 2006 6:27 AM

There will no pot at the end of the rainbow here, unless it's just to fill it up with our tax dollars. But wiat a minute I heard a rumor that BC Hydro is for sale, maybe that will cover some of the costs.

Posted by: anniemartin on September 25 2006 7:33 AM

It is doubtful that we will see any benefit from the Olympics. Even if it is a big money maker our provincial government is not big on giving money to the North. I do believe that we will pay big taxes to cover 2010 and if this causes the downfall of the Liberals, it may be worth it!

Posted by: diplomat on September 25 2006 8:02 AM

Nothing but rumours and negativity. Some people just thrive on it, even if it has not happened yet!

What a way to start a new week!

Posted by: kimbo on September 25 2006 9:32 AM

There is no reason why we in the 250 area should feel positive about the olympics. We will have the privilege of helping to pay for all the fun and games. As Ben has mentioned Expo it was also pie in the sky. Some employers had to cap the cost of rooms a $60.00 for those from the 250 area that had to travel to the big apple for budiness purposes.

The cost of accomdations went up through the roof in Vancouver during Expo and the prices never did go to the old level. Expo was a great marketing ploy to find just how much the public can be exploited.

If we think that 400 million for ferries was excessive just waite till the bills are finalized for the olympics. Why do we have these pepole that walk with their head in the clouds and couldnt care less where their feet are at. As I have said before, " those who dont learn from,history will repeat history

Posted by: diplomat on September 25 2006 11:14 AM

The money borrowed for building the ferries was ADDED to the debt of the province and the ferries themselves are/were useless.

So, we still have the borrowed amount to pay off, plus the yearly interest charge. It will take quite a few years until the last dollar is paid off.

By that time the total damage will likely be closer to three quarters of a billion.

If the Winter Olympics have a profit overall, we will still have ALL the new infrastructure such as arena buildings, a new highway and a new RAV line, etc.

Plus, the Federal Government contributed a large chunk of the total cost.

It is too late in any case to wallow in pessimism, because once we were awarded the Games we are expected to fulfil all our committments.

What useful purpose does all this negativity serve, anyways?

I personally never was in favour of this province (which just emerged from a decade of the NDP doldrums) to tackle such an ambitious undertaking, but since the committment was made, I get on board and wish everyone good luck and good fortune to stage it as planned and profit from the excellent international exposure that we are going to get.

Posted by: Chadermando on September 25 2006 1:51 PM

I am being taken to court again by VANOC 2010 committee in January for the 6th time. This time it will be their final appeal to have my trademark for Eco-tourism 2010 overturned in the trademark courts.

They argue they have trademark rights to anything that has the year 2010 in it. Not if it is associated to Olympic games , but anything related to the general use term year '2010'.

I don't know of anything that monopolizes the opportunities of 2010 tourism more than the monopoly of the entire year by a host committee for a sporting event.

I offered VANOC and Tourism BC the ability to partner on an initiative to promote eco-tourism in Northern BC using the term 'Eco-tourism 2010'. Tourism BC had no interest and VANOC said they wanted the idea for themselves to be run out of their office in Vancouver.

My idea is to use the tourism promotion of 2010 as a catalyst to organize the eco-tourism industry in Northern BC. It could be used as a basis for a standards (certification) setting body for eco-tourism oporators; a brokerage service for eco-tourism offerings-bookings and marketing in a co-op fashion with eco-tourism operators; a conservation strategy for the local wildlife, as well as a political advocacy body for eco-tourism infrastructure initiatives.

The potential is huge and could be done for very little money through the domain names eco-tourism2010.ca and .com acting as the eco-tourism hub with a built in search engine by activity, community, as well as small start up and employment assisstance.

Unfortunately VANOC 2010 threatens further legal action with disregard for trademark law if this term is ever used for commercial purposes. Our tax dollars fund their massive legal team.

Posted by: ammonra on September 25 2006 1:56 PM

Actually, Diplomat, there was a surplus of $1.5 billion when the Liberals took over, so they could have paid off the ferries three times over. They did not, and borrowed a few billion more to give tax breaks to corporate supporters. That means the interest being paid on it and on the extra billions borrowed that and subsequent years is due to Campbell's Liberal policies.

You say "What useful purpose does all this negativity serve, anyways?". So why do you keep bringing it up when it is completely irrelevant to what is being discussed?

Posted by: ammonra on September 25 2006 2:03 PM

Chadermando, if they are taking legal action for the 6th time, does that mean you won the first five? If so, what are they thinking?

I must say that I find the Olympic Committee's approach to marketing as very much like a dog in a manger. There have been others, with long standing trademarks, who have been harassed and I find it completely unnecessary. I always presumed the purpose was to increase economic activity not inhibit it.

Posted by: Palopu on September 25 2006 5:24 PM

The Olympics are all about money for the Olympic Committee. Not for Chanermando or anyone else to make money. They make Billions off advertising that disapears into the sunset. You can rest assured that they will not give us any money to bale us out if we go heavily into debt.

Posted by: Chadermando on September 25 2006 5:25 PM

Correct Ammonra, the next court date is a opposition appeal to the Canadian Trademark opposition board after they were granted another 6 month extension to file their evidence as they have failed to provide any evidence to back up their claim on previous apperences to the trademark court. Anyone else would have been dismissed as frivolous by now, but because of the political clout of VANOC they were granted an unprecidented extension with no formal basis on which to grant an extension.

We must remember that the Olympic organizing committee is a multinational organization that wishes to monopolize every aspect of trade and commerce in their host cities in anyway that relates to not only their sporting event, but also marketing of the host city, and marketing connected to the year of the sporting event in the jurisdiction it will be hosted. This agressive approach does inhibit economic activity, but it is of no concern to the Olympic organization as that is not their mandate. Their mandate is to monopolize commerce for their benefit in the host country to the greatest extent the law will allow with the maximum subsidization of the host countries tax payer.

Posted by: diplomat on September 25 2006 5:30 PM

Ammonra:"You say "What useful purpose does all this negativity serve, anyways? So why do you keep bringing it up when it is completely irrelevant to what is being discussed?"

Let me bring this to your attention:

a)Kimbo:"If we think that 400 million for ferries was excessive just waite till the bills are finalized for the olympics. "

b) I DID NOT bring up the subject of the ferries!
Even you should be able to see that!

c) I was only commenting on Kimbo's remark about the ferries, just like you commented on what my comment was.

It was raised by someone else, it did have some
relevancy, since the commentator likened the loss of 400 million to a potentially greater loss after the 2010 Winter Olympics.

d) You are totally wrong about the Liberals inheriting any surplus. There never was a single NDP surplus, period.

e) You wish to relegate the Fast Ferry Flop to history, but there are still (fortunately) many people who have not forgotten it.

f) You have your opinion about what is irrelevant, and I have mine.

g) They do not necessarily agree.

Have a wonderful day!

Posted by: Chadermando on September 25 2006 5:33 PM

Palopu, the sad thing is I don't even really need to make any money off the concept. I would just like to assist the development of an eco-tourism industry in Northern BC so that I can have an organization that is greater than the sum of its parts and would assist myself at starting my own business in this sector of the tourism industry as well as help others I know are out there with the same ideas. That is why I wanted Tourism BC to get on board, and even invited VANOC to join as a partner when they first raised their opposition.

My next move might be to approach Initiatives PG about the concept and see if we can get destination marketing organizations like Tourism PG on board. The problem is Initiatives PG is highly partisan in their support of the BC Liberals and will most likely take their orders from VANOC via the BC Liberals. Before I can approach them I need to see through the VANOC oppostion claims.

Posted by: Gofaster on September 26 2006 9:29 AM

I think the Olympics have their place.
I don't however, beleive as so many do that we here in the north are going to benefit, dime one.
But you can bet that we will be helping pay for the short fall for many many years to come.
Interesting how Mr Campbell's world always gains and we alway loose.....or it sure seems to to me.
If I am wrong I appolologize in advance, but something just aint right here.

Posted by: diplomat on September 26 2006 11:09 AM

I could comment how I had a similar feeling (the provincial government's world always gains) during the entire nineties, but I am certain that someone will try to correct me by posting how irrelevant my comment would be to this discussion.

So I won't go into any details.

Whatever government has been elected by us(democratically) has been given the right to manage or mismanage to whatever extend it chooses to.

I don't see any recall campaigns going on at this moment.