Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7 ... 10  Next

WTF? What's that about Shep?

   

There was a spammer infesting this board, but I guess his posts have been removed. But responding to them, as Shep did, just feeds them. Ignoring them is the only way.

   

I thought the Olympics were a big waste of public money too. I couldn't give a toss about sports.

The place where the $57,000 water feature is to be constructed for the G20 is where the 5000 journalists from all over the world will be operating out of.

The idea was to showcase Canada in a building for the benefit of Canada, in front of the world's media.

If the Tories had put a cardboard cut-out of a moose there and a few copies of 'The Beaver', you guys would have been whining that it was a piss poor response and a missed opportunity to showcase Canada to the worlds press.

This is just more partisan petty politics.

It's quite obvious that the media are just looking for 'bad-news' stories on the whole G20 and it's just an extension of the antagonistic relationship between our media and Harper. Steve is reaping what he has sown with our media but come on, partisan, partisan, partisan.

   

Wow, finally someone said it! Well said, EyeBrock.

Regardless of how Canada arranged this event, they'd be attacked. If they didn't spend enough on security, they'd be accused of putting the world leaders at risk....

I'm tired of the games.

   

What games? Put 'em up by a REAL lake if they wanna showcase Canada. How does a fake lake showcase anything other than, we can make one? That would be like going to a summit near the Grand Canyon and the gov't deciding to put the reporters in a building with a little ditch dug in the floor to represent the canyon

   

Obviously this became a bigger event when it went from the G8 to the G20. But I think demonstrating some restraint, which is likely what they will be foisting on their subjects after the meeting, would be a good idea.

   

PA9,

They are just trying to showcase Canada to a very captive press. Those covering the G20 will be working in and out of very secure areas. They won't be wandering off discovering Canada while Obama et al are within the security framework of the conference.

What do you think they should have done at this locale with 5000 media guys working out of it?

As I've said, the government are in a no-win scenario here. If they had gone cheap they would have been pilloried for missing an opportunity.

It's easy to find fault in the petty details, anybody can do that. Thinking about the big picture and trying to look at the G20 constructively takes a little more thought.

   

EB,

It's not just the lake. It's the whole shabang. We just pissed away $1 billion plus for security for the Olympics and now at least another $1 billion for this event which is nothing more than a semi-annual excuse to visit other countries and party.
And in about 5 months, they'll all be meeting for the same reason in South Korea.
The claim is this will help showcase Canada to the world. I guess the Olympics failed miserably in that attempt??

   

So when it's Canada's turn to hold such an event, you suggest we just say "pass"?

If we opted not to hold the event, the Liberals and media alike would be all over Harper on passing over a chance to have these leaders in Canada to showcase our Country.

And had we not spent the money to build a fake lake, imagine the cost to bring all these leaders, media and security up to Muskoka....I'll take the 2 million tab rather than the massive cost to drag these leaders half way around Ontario.

   

Yup.



So? That's what the media does. Raise a stink. Me? I'd rather have had the billion.

   

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/0 ... z0qrVb2Jbl

Wow, our loony must have dropped quite a bit if it now costs us 61 times as much.

   

I would hardly call the money spent on the Olympics "pissed away".

I think it was an excellent way to fund amateur sport in this country for the next generation (look at how much the Calgary Olympics impacted amateur sport in Canada), as well as showcase Canada quite well. It might have been expensive, but the infrastructure built in and around Vancouver will also last a generation, and support economic growth and opportunities there for a long time.

As for the money spent on the G20 summit, that's kinda the price of admission if you want to sit at the adult table with the big boys. I may not like spending that kind of money, but it's only once a decade or so, and as long as we gain some positive economic/political benefit from it, I don't have a big problem with it.

   

er, BL, it sounds like they have one of these summits every year - see my above post. (I admit I havn't followed that closely) But to go from 18mil to 1.1 bil seems a little steep.

And we're now paying for the Olympics when the money's not there for things that are really needed.

   

The voice of reason. Nicely said Boots.

   

Not sure I buy this. First of all, Canada is relatively small player in world geo-political affairs. So, if it costs a billion to "sit down with the big boys" then maybe we should be at the little boys table. This whole desire in CFanada (and it's really bad in Vancouver) to be "world-class" is just vulgar vanity at its worst.

"Mirror, mirror on the wall, who is the fairest of all?"
"Why you are of course, Vancouver"

I certainly can't see the economic benefit exceeding the total security price tag, and even if it does, why should my taxpaying dollar go to benfitting Ontario businesses in the area?

And third, even if its agreed that we really should hold this, I can't believe that they can't get the job done for a hell of a lot chepaer than a thousand million dollars.

   

Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7 ... 10  Next