Most people will agree with the statement, “When it comes to business, government shouldn’t be picking winners and losers.”
Unfortunately, it almost can’t be helped. Even with the best of intentions, governments everywhere still blunder and stumble into unintentional bonuses and harms. Public highways, roads and streets, bridges, police and courts are almost all the responsibility of governments. So, too, is the responsibility of other things, like community arenas, swimming pools and many government agencies. Things private enterprise usually stays away from.
Unless money can be made!
When billionaire sports franchise owners decide a new stadium or arena is “needed,” he or she can be counted on to go knocking on government doors. Some call these handouts. Others call them incentives. In the case of those sports stadiums, there will be enormous arguments why emergency rooms, overpasses, schools, and more government services of every kind are a better spend of taxpayer money.
Accidentally or deliberately, it’s still winners and losers one way or another.
Money isn’t the only item on the table. Other examples of winners and losers abound. After lengthy private fundraising and public hearings, the new Peace River SPCA building can be called a winner in some ways. And a loser in others, such as time spent moving the project forward. The effort was worth it.
Another way of looking at this is, it is a “something.” To steal another quote, “Which is better? A little bit of something? Or a whole lot of nothing?”
Take that topic further. One might say, “We have an emergency department in our hospital.” Another might come back with, “But most of the time it’s only open three days of the week!” We say, “Well, it’s still better than nothing!”
And almost always, easier to improve something than start from scratch.
Another case in point is the High Prairie Native Friendship Centre. High Prairie town council decided to not support the centre with some money. There were arguments why. One councillor’s argument was presented in this newspaper last week by the vice-president of the centre.
Charles Calhoon Jr. wrote about the councillor who said the location in downtown High Prairie is “a horrible spot. They attract the vagrants and the homeless to the downtown core. You can’t have a goal of supporting the Friendship Centre and a goal of supporting local business at the same time.”
There are factors at play here beyond our space, time and energy. As it appears, also beyond time and energy of the councillors. Do they have facts? Or opinions? Were all the business people in the core surveyed? What might be the impact of the Centre closing?
Oh, wait! Maybe this is a job for that brand new economic development office the Town and County want to start. Which is to be a combined cost of over $100,000 per year total. Which, according to the over $100,000 already spent on the Deloitte Economic Study, should have as one goal, keeping existing business and services in the community!
Perhaps that goal is not a “must.” It is just a suggestion. Something. Or nothing?
Jeff Burgar