Council seems to be adopting the dangerous practice of providing selective corporate welfare - doling out taxpayers' dough to companies as 'incentives' to either come, or stick around here.

It's not fair, and it's certainlty not smart.

If Canfor gets free taxpayer's money, what about Brink? If Horizon gets free taxpayers' money, what about WestJet?

Let the market (and Canfor's insurance policies) decide whether a new plywood plant will be built.

What? And you have no problem with PGGCC who has never paid tax on their land? Or other "entertainment" around town that just costs money?

Letting all businesses become tax free in PG would do more for the quality of life here than all the other stuff that are already tax free, or worse, like that bird that has been hung up by piano strings beside Queensway and City Hall!

Supt. Dahl Chambers? What? He should have been transferred a long time ago.

'What? And you have no problem with PGGCC who has never paid tax on their land?'

Why would you assume that Yamapoo?

I have a huge problem with the PGGCC getting a (better than) free ride from the taxpayer.

Ditto for the largesse given to Major Moneybags for his wealth-extraction projects at 16/97 and downtown.

The ONLY thng that council should be doing is grooming a level playing field for all businesses in this town, then stepping back and letting the market do its thing.

Moses I agree with you. Canfor should be given a reasonable length of time to make a decision on whether to rebuild.
If they do not present a proposal within 6 months, then the timber associated with this plant should put back on the open market and BID on by anyone that steps forward with a sound business proposal.
The present situation allows Canfor to hold Prince George and these workers hostage.

Posted by: Moses on June 9 2008 7:22 AM
Council seems to be adopting the dangerous practice of providing selective corporate welfare - doling out taxpayers' dough to companies as 'incentives' to either come, or stick around here.

It's not fair, and it's certainlty not smart.

If Canfor gets free taxpayer's money, what about Brink? If Horizon gets free taxpayers' money, what about WestJet?



If the fellow that quit his job up at the university gets free taxpayers money then why not all the rest of them Moses?
You can't have it both ways.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

No more tax breaks, It is the cost of doing business. PGGCC should not get tax breaks, Horizon Airlines are on a free ride to pass GO, and collect $500k.

I agree with Moses, groom down the playing field. Business will find its own way to survive, stop, or go broke.

I don't have a problem with incentives being used as a way to attract business, as part of a larger PLAN of community development. For example, lower taxes in the downtown core to try and revitalize that area or lower taxes for certain types of industries (tech for example) to try and establish jobs that were not here before.

I do have an issue with singling out one particular company and giving them tax breaks, especially as a desperation type measure with no accompanying PLAN. It leads to all sorts of problems like the others have already mentioned. Besides, if the destruction of the plant wasn't going to have a material impact on Canfor's financial statements (I believe that was the blurb used in Canfor's press release), why the heck would the payment of $215K in property taxes? It's a completely immaterial amount for them. As an aside, how do they waive this amount for Canfor and not waive proprety taxes for some poor guy when his house burns down? You could actually make the argument that it's MORE of a burden for joe homeowner than for Canfor, given the same situation. I somehow doubt the City would care though.

I suppose it would be a "feel good" moment that could be used during the next election campaign as a "see what I did for you", but unfortunately, it's a hollow jesture IMHO. IF Canfor decides to rebuild, it would be better for the City to eat some of the development costs related to getting them out of the bowl and into a location more in line with the City goals of cleaning up the air. That would be an investment that would benefit Canfor, the residents of the City and likely the future, as it could pave the way for other developments to be shifted there or located there from day one. It all comes down to that PLAN issue, something that our civic leaders seem incapable of embracing on anything other than no-brainer type decision items.

'If the fellow that quit his job up at the university gets free taxpayers money then why not all the rest of them Moses?
You can't have it both ways.'

They are entirely separate, and unrelated issues.

One involves the use of taxpayers' money to entice (preferentially) a private sector company to come (or stay) in Prince George, and do business here.

The other involves the settlement of a labour contract with an individual employee, after the employment agreement goes sour (for whatever reason).

They are completely separate concepts - the only similarity is that both involve the use of taxpayer dough.

Moses writes..."They are entirely separate, and unrelated issues.

One involves the use of taxpayers' money to entice (preferentially) a private sector company to come (or stay) in Prince George, and do business here."

Moses, the other one is paying someone a bonus because they didn't like what was going on so they quit their job. Totally bogus.

You must have some kind of similar contract yourself or you wouldn't be defending this rediculous practice the way you are.

As much as people hate to not face facts when in comes to public organizations, this City is in the business of being a City.

Once that is understood, the steps one needs to take to compete with other communities and to stay in the business of being a City should be quite easy.

When a shopping mall sets up, the developers of the property and the managers of the mall go about the business of promoting the mall and getting tenants for the space they have to offer. The better they are at getting the right businesses, not just any business, to be in the mall for as long a period as possible, the more successful their mall will be.

Do they provide incentives? You bet!!!! Do they treat everyone the same when providing those incentives? No way!!!!!

Incentives are provided based on what the market will bear and how good the negotiators are.

There is no reason why that should be any different for a City that is in the business of attracting tenants to thier community and enhancing the "property" they operate for their shareholders, the citizens of the community.

Put that mindset in place, and we are half way there.

Keep in mind, that our shareholders may want more than just survival of the City. They want dividends in livability in that City. So, it might sound like crass capitalism when one first reads what I have written, but it actually is not if the City understands its "shareholders" multifaceted interests beyond simple survival.

Owl - you are confusing private enterprise with a public organization. The mall is a private enterprise that pays corporate taxes and typically is not funded by other business and private citizens.

You use the term "shareholders" for citizens of the city. Well - the last time I checked shareholders willingly purchase shares in a private or public company - it is their choice to do so.

As citizens in a city we do not have any choice but to pay our taxes. The city has to be accountable to the citizens with every penny that they get and how they spend it. Subsidizing a publicly traded company does not help the economy - the free market must dictate if this plywood plant is viable or not - does Canfor willingly give the city extra money when their profits go up? I dont think so - so why should they get a hand out now?

It is a shame people lost work - yes. But the economy must move along - for bad or for worse - without government intervention.

How about a tax break for the people that lost their jobs at NCP.
I am sure they could use a break right about now.

"How about a tax break for the people that lost their jobs at NCP.
I am sure they could use a break right about now."

sure then you better include:

all of the forest industry and all of the transport industry and their suppliers.

The amount of tax breaks would outweight the taxes collected!

The NCP plant was not a dimension lumber mill of which its owners seem to favour above all else.This likely explains what is in store if left to them to decide.

I believe it to be a question of whether we lead or we follow corporate ONLY decisions.
Is it in OUR best interests to see less diversity and lose one of the last remaining plywood plants.?

A lot of people inluding our governments forgot the social licence which these majors aquired their timber rights from.

In 2003 when then forest minister dejong held his news conferance to announce the end of where timber had to be processed and that in fact it didn't have to be manufactured at all in BC is a most amazing thing. NO consultation with the public on a very consequential decision.

Like "batman" he arrives and does his thing--and then jumps into the batmobile and flees without further explanation.
Until this infamous decision was delivered to us by "batman", we actually had a public say in who, what and how our local resources were manufactured.

These timber licences (with very few exceptions) OBLIGATED the operation of a specific type of processing facility which was to be continuously operated at a specific location--a local location, for the duration of the licence term. The social contract WAS a two way street. The public approval and granting of its natural resources through an evergreen tenure was in trade for the LOCAL benefits of stable employment and community security.
It wasn't perfect--but it WAS the deal made between the public and the corporation.
Since that very announcement I have wondered how this could have been done without any public say in the matter.
It is simple to understand why they didn't ask us because we the public would have said NO. They knew that the public wouldn't support this--but did it anyway.

The recent approach by our government is that they "should" be able to arbitrarily change these legal contracted licence requirements through inhouse behind closed door policy decisions.
This changes everything to a corporate led government for economic advantages to them--and to hell with us.
There should be no debate about NCP, it is either rebuilt and provided ongoing timber supply OR it be subject to public review of what happens to OUR PUBLICLY OWNED timber. This process is at least accountable to us and whether its owners will commit to what is acceptable to us.
I believe we still have a legal right to demand this be done this way.

southfortguy ....

I am not confusing anything ... I am simply aware of how other communities not only in BC, but also the rest of Canada, the USA, and the western world work.

As I have posted on here before, Canada lost a major opportunity to establish the first Canadian Photocell plant in this country. They lost that opportunity to Germany who provided major incentives to have the plant built there.

Internationally, nationally/interprovincially as well as provincially, that is how the world works. Every government at every level, is positioning themselves to take business away from other governments. Just look at it as healthy competition.

Your tax dollars at work. So, if you are concerned how they are spent, look at the effectiveness of IPG, the Council, the City Administration in making this community one where people (you know, those who are the other resource we keep forgetting about) want to move to and where businesses will want to move to.

Of course, we could make PG a company town and privatize the entire thing and give everyone low cost housing and guarantee buy backs, swimmming pools like Tumbler Ridge, etc. etc. in order to move people here.

That way, we do not have to worry about the traditional division of influence and be concerned about the changing relationships of public versus private.

I know, I know, all these changes causes far too much confusion. If we just had the goode olde days back, eh?

'You must have some kind of similar contract yourself or you wouldn't be defending this rediculous practice the way you are.'

What's with all these irrelevant assumptions?

Should I assume you have an IQ of 70?

I think it is great that the mayor and council want to research their options to assist with the speedy rebuilding of NCP. But I think with the investigation of the fire not completed as of yet and no real official word yet from Canfor, I think council is putting the cart before the horse. Of course, the mayor may have some privileged information that may be dealt with in-camera that we are not aware of. I personally don't have a problem with offering the company a year's tax break to rebuild. I also agree that to encourage economic development in the city there needs to be a PLAN and a level playing field. I also agree that the free market should also be allowed to play out. I firmly believe that a dynamic approach needs to be taken by our governments when seeking economic diversification. Councils and Regional Districts need to be active and flexible with ALL business. This is more important now as several hundred British Columbians have lost their jobs and this impacts the overall economy so governments NEED to respond as quickly as possible. The way to do this, imo, is to open up the coffers for business expansion, small business development and increase funding for training and education. A good start would be to pay tuition fees for post secondary education as is done in Scandinavia where every citizen is provided free education. At the same time, on the job training needs to come to the forefront because employers can't wait the 2 plus years for prospective employees to finish their training.

I raised my eyebrows to the fact that the casino has to apply to allow dancing. Interesting bylaw....curious. Sounds like there is room for improvement in existing bylaws to encourage business.

City hall has to have input to decide for or against allowing dancers to drink or to allow drinkers to dance at the local gambling joint? My, what an over regulated world we have here in this town, province and country. Nothing worse than to bring shame on yourself, the community, province and country by getting yerself all likkered up and doing a bit of a shuffle out on the dance floor and winding up embarrassing yerself and the one your with. We have rules so these things don't happen. It is not as if we can trust you people with ANY decision, ya know.

should have read, "...the one you're with...". I knew all those English courses I took would pay off one day.

Canfor spends more on Jet Fuel and Hotel rooms than this piddly offer of $215,000.00 from the Mayor. This is a red herring that will allow them to give incentive's to their buddys in the future. First you extablish the precedent.

Horizen Airs daily service to Seattle would have an immediate effect on WestJets and Air Canada's revenues to and from Vancouver BC. So while the City is giving an incentive to one Airline it is giving the shaft to two others.

Air Canada is on record as stating they will keep on the daily Calgary flights if the City will gaurantee them $600,000.00 a year. An offer the Mayor didnt exactly jump at.

I suspect that behind closed doors Air Canada told the Mayor and IPG to keep their big noses and heads out of the business of private enterprise. Its possible that the reduced Vancouver revenue caused the failure of the Calgary flights.