HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum

Since 1999, the SkyscraperPage Forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web. The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics. Welcome!

You are currently browsing as a guest. Register with the SkyscraperPage Forum and join this growing community of skyscraper enthusiasts. Registering has benefits such as fewer ads, the ability to post messages, private messaging and more.

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Jan 27, 2011, 10:23 PM
Migs's Avatar
Migs Migs is offline
Regina 4 Life
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Regina, Sk, Canada
Posts: 1,844
People on the govt funded CBC website complaining about something else that is govt funded, irony at its finest.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Jan 27, 2011, 10:31 PM
Migs's Avatar
Migs Migs is offline
Regina 4 Life
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Regina, Sk, Canada
Posts: 1,844
I guess the folks in Quebec don't understand that they actually have to put an application into the P3 fund before they can be approved for the funding.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=3513...medium=twitter

Quote:
FEDS SAY QUEBEC ARENA PROJECT NOT YET READY FOR FUNDING
QUEBEC -- The federal government has moved to hit the pause button on the contentious Quebec arena debate, delaying any funding announcement for a project that has roused passions across the country.

The government says it will give the city's mayor time to raise more private-sector funding before it considers a federal role.

The Conservatives' top local minister, Josee Verner, told a news conference that the government has yet to receive a proposal that includes private-sector money.

"We do not have everything we need," Verner said.

"It is important that (Mayor Regis) Labeaume continue (raising funds)."

Ottawa's move comes just ahead of a possible federal election -- which will happen if the government's budget is defeated several weeks from now.

The arena issue could easily flare up during a campaign, not only with Quebec City voters or those in other cities seeking new sports buildings -- but also with taxpayers angered that their money would be used to build an arena for a non-existent NHL team.

Verner said today that there is no precedent for an arena being built entirely with public funds.

She added that she hopes the arena gets built and stressed that the federal government is not slamming the door on participation.

"The door is not closed from the federal government -- far from it," Verner said.

But the issue of Quebec -- which lost its NHL team in 1995 -- getting federal money for a $400-million hockey arena has prompted a fiery national debate.

That debate was revived this week when the Quebecor media empire, which wants to bring a team to Quebec, announced that it will put some of its own money -- "tens of millions of dollars" -- in the project.
A good question is why is Quebec City getting all the attention when Regina applied for funding under this program last summer?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Jan 27, 2011, 10:46 PM
Bdog's Avatar
Bdog Bdog is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 1,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by Migs View Post
People on the govt funded CBC website complaining about something else that is govt funded, irony at its finest.
Kind of like the irony of a conservative provincial government lobbying a conservative federal government for government funding for a stadium...
__________________
Fresh
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Jan 27, 2011, 10:58 PM
Migs's Avatar
Migs Migs is offline
Regina 4 Life
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Regina, Sk, Canada
Posts: 1,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bdog View Post
Kind of like the irony of a conservative provincial government lobbying a conservative federal government for government funding for a stadium...
A once in a lifetime investment on a project that'll revilitize a large urban piece of land that will house arts and entertainment as well as the one entity and cultural icon that brings this province together more than anything is a wise investment for any political stripe. $1billlion dollars annually into a TV/radio station that nobody watches (other than hockey), umm I think you get my drift.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Jan 27, 2011, 11:04 PM
Bdog's Avatar
Bdog Bdog is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 1,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by Migs View Post
A once in a lifetime investment on a project that'll revilitize a large urban piece of land that will house arts and entertainment as well as the one entity and cultural icon that brings this province together more than anything is a wise investment for any political stripe. $1billlion dollars annually into a TV/radio station that nobody watches (other than hockey), umm I think you get my drift.
Sorry, I couldn't resist...
__________________
Fresh
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Jan 27, 2011, 11:05 PM
Migs's Avatar
Migs Migs is offline
Regina 4 Life
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Regina, Sk, Canada
Posts: 1,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bdog View Post
Sorry, I couldn't resist...
Touchee!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Jan 28, 2011, 5:56 PM
Bdog's Avatar
Bdog Bdog is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 1,728
Interesting column from the Leader Post today:


MANDRYK: Federal politics might still block Saskatchewan's drive for stadium cash


Quote:
To begin with, the idea isn't going over big with either Conservative MPs or the party's base. Already, Stephen Taylor of the National Citizens Coalition (which Harper once led) and the Canadian Taxpayers' Federation have taken aim at spending money on sports facilities that could be going to reduce deficits or the Conservativefavoured corporate tax cuts. And most Conservative MPs -including Quebec's Maxime Bernier -are either privately or publicly agreeing.
Quote:
Finally, Harper's Conservatives have likely read the lay of the land in Saskatchewan and found out that something has changed. The enthusiasm for a domed stadium appears to be waning -especially the further you travel from Regina.
Quote:
There are mounting questions over whether this project is even viable with a $100-million federal contribution. Can the city afford its $60-million share? Can we really get $70 million from the private sector? Who pays for maintenance and upkeep of an indoor facility? Does the province own it? Will the city collect taxes?
I know some have dismissed Mandryk columns before because he is "pro-NDP". However, since the NDP are supposedly behind this project, that shouldn't really matter, should it?
__________________
Fresh
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted Jan 28, 2011, 6:44 PM
Spongebob's Avatar
Spongebob Spongebob is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bdog View Post
Interesting column from the Leader Post today:


MANDRYK: Federal politics might still block Saskatchewan's drive for stadium cash








I know some have dismissed Mandryk columns before because he is "pro-NDP". However, since the NDP are supposedly behind this project, that shouldn't really matter, should it?

Usually I enjoy reading Mandryk's columns, however I'm not sure where he gets his stats from to say that support for a dome stadium is waning. There hasn't been an official poll taken on the issue since 2009. He dismisses the feasiblity study that was done which showed that the domed stadium could turn a modest profit. He also dismisses the fact that compared to Quebec City, the Regina proposal has a much more detailed business plan, a pre-selected site and a professional sports team that is here now and wants a new facility to move in to. Mandryk doesn't give enough credit for the footwork that has already been done on this project. He just comes out and says that the Feds should not contribute. There is over 1 billion dollars in the P3 fund that the government WILL spend. Why not spend a bit in Saskatchewan? Not that I'm against asking tough questions on the viability of this project but I think his bias comes through a little too much in this article.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted Jan 28, 2011, 7:02 PM
thefourthtower thefourthtower is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Rueannatta
Posts: 1,863
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spongebob View Post
Usually I enjoy reading Mandryk's columns, however I'm not sure where he gets his stats from to say that support for a dome stadium is waning. There hasn't been an official poll taken on the issue since 2009. He dismisses the feasiblity study that was done which showed that the domed stadium could turn a modest profit. He also dismisses the fact that compared to Quebec City, the Regina proposal has a much more detailed business plan, a pre-selected site and a professional sports team that is here now and wants a new facility to move in to. Mandryk doesn't give enough credit for the footwork that has already been done on this project. He just comes out and says that the Feds should not contribute. There is over 1 billion dollars in the P3 fund that the government WILL spend. Why not spend a bit in Saskatchewan? Not that I'm against asking tough questions on the viability of this project but I think his bias comes through a little too much in this article.
dont feed the monster
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Jan 28, 2011, 7:59 PM
Migs's Avatar
Migs Migs is offline
Regina 4 Life
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Regina, Sk, Canada
Posts: 1,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bdog View Post
Interesting column from the Leader Post today:


MANDRYK: Federal politics might still block Saskatchewan's drive for stadium cash


I know some have dismissed Mandryk columns before because he is "pro-NDP". However, since the NDP are supposedly behind this project, that shouldn't really matter, should it?
The column is nothing but an opinion of a political hack who's wrong way more than right. With every column he writes about the stadium, he proves just how out of touch he truly is with the project.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted Jan 28, 2011, 8:21 PM
Bdog's Avatar
Bdog Bdog is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 1,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by Migs View Post
The column is nothing but an opinion of a political hack who's wrong way more than right. With every column he writes about the stadium, he proves just how out of touch he truly is with the project.
If it's merely his opinion, then how is he wrong way more than he's right? What has he been wrong about? You've implied before that as pro-NDP, his opposition to the stadium should be dismissed - how does that fit in with your assertions that both federal and provincial NDP are on board with the project?

It's clear from most of Mandryk's columns that he isn't in favour of the stadium. But I don't know how this is any different Kevin Blevin's "articles" (which are posted here as well), which read like press releases from the backers of this project. His bias is clearly in favour of the stadium, and are opinion pieces just as Mandryk's are. I guess we'll see in February whose columns were "right"...
__________________
Fresh
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted Jan 28, 2011, 8:28 PM
Bdog's Avatar
Bdog Bdog is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 1,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spongebob View Post
Usually I enjoy reading Mandryk's columns, however I'm not sure where he gets his stats from to say that support for a dome stadium is waning. There hasn't been an official poll taken on the issue since 2009. He dismisses the feasiblity study that was done which showed that the domed stadium could turn a modest profit. He also dismisses the fact that compared to Quebec City, the Regina proposal has a much more detailed business plan, a pre-selected site and a professional sports team that is here now and wants a new facility to move in to. Mandryk doesn't give enough credit for the footwork that has already been done on this project. He just comes out and says that the Feds should not contribute. There is over 1 billion dollars in the P3 fund that the government WILL spend. Why not spend a bit in Saskatchewan? Not that I'm against asking tough questions on the viability of this project but I think his bias comes through a little too much in this article.
I agree that his bias has shown in his columns, just as some other writers (ie: Blevins) have had their bias shown through theirs. However, in regards to the part I bolded, it's interesting that there has been no official poll since before the feasibility study came out - and yet, various supporters of the project argue that "numerous polls" show that a vast majority of residents support the project...
__________________
Fresh
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted Jan 28, 2011, 8:40 PM
Spongebob's Avatar
Spongebob Spongebob is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bdog View Post
I agree that his bias has shown in his columns, just as some other writers (ie: Blevins) have had their bias shown through theirs. However, in regards to the part I bolded, it's interesting that there has been no official poll since before the feasibility study came out - and yet, various supporters of the project argue that "numerous polls" show that a vast majority of residents support the project...

I agree, neither the for or against side should be claiming that their view is more popular until a new poll is done. (if one ever gets done). Having said that, I'm not sure the numbers would move that much from 09 anyways which showed the province pretty much split.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted Jan 28, 2011, 8:53 PM
Bdog's Avatar
Bdog Bdog is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 1,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spongebob View Post
I agree, neither the for or against side should be claiming that their view is more popular until a new poll is done. (if one ever gets done). Having said that, I'm not sure the numbers would move that much from 09 anyways which showed the province pretty much split.
Yeah, I agree with you 100%. One thing that may change people's minds though is the increased cost (as the estimated $430 M wasn't known at the time of those polls)...
__________________
Fresh
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted Jan 28, 2011, 9:54 PM
Migs's Avatar
Migs Migs is offline
Regina 4 Life
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Regina, Sk, Canada
Posts: 1,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bdog View Post
If it's merely his opinion, then how is he wrong way more than he's right? What has he been wrong about? You've implied before that as pro-NDP, his opposition to the stadium should be dismissed - how does that fit in with your assertions that both federal and provincial NDP are on board with the project?

It's clear from most of Mandryk's columns that he isn't in favour of the stadium. But I don't know how this is any different Kevin Blevin's "articles" (which are posted here as well), which read like press releases from the backers of this project. His bias is clearly in favour of the stadium, and are opinion pieces just as Mandryk's are. I guess we'll see in February whose columns were "right"...
Its another disadvantage of you living in Manitoba. Mandryk has a reputation in this province for putting a negative spin on things and failing to discuss both sides of the equation if it doesn't suit the tone of his column. Like spongebob stated, he tries to pass off his opinion as fact (ie support is waling) and has in the past gotten into a corner trying to do so. Read Gormley's book titled "Left Out" and you'll get a good glimpse of what Murray Mandryk is all about. IMO he's nothing but an empty suit who dreams back to the days of the CCF.

Last edited by Migs; Jan 28, 2011 at 10:04 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted Jan 28, 2011, 9:56 PM
Migs's Avatar
Migs Migs is offline
Regina 4 Life
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Regina, Sk, Canada
Posts: 1,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bdog View Post
Yeah, I agree with you 100%. One thing that may change people's minds though is the increased cost (as the estimated $430 M wasn't known at the time of those polls)...
There were alot of things not known at the time of those polls, including all the extremely positive information that came out of the feasibility study. So I think its more likely that support could've actually of increased given that one of the main questions of the naysayers was "is it feasible?" Also remember the $430M includes land costs, which was never included in any of the provinces original quotes as to what the stadium's pricetag would be.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted Jan 28, 2011, 10:11 PM
CCF's Avatar
CCF CCF is offline
Saskatchewan's Capital
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Regina
Posts: 3,029
Quote:
Originally Posted by Migs View Post
Its another disadvantage of you living in Manitoba. Mandryk has a reputation in this province for putting a negative spin on things and failing to discuss both sides of the equation if it doesn't suit the tone of his column. Like spongebob stated, he tries to pass off his opinion as fact (ie support is waling) and has in the past gotten into a corner trying to do so. Read Gormley's book titled "Left Out" and you'll get a good glimpse of what Murray Mandryk is all about. IMO he's nothing but an empty suit who dreams back to the days of the CCF.
Gormley talking about the left wing perspective.....I bet that was fair and balanced..........
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted Jan 28, 2011, 10:23 PM
Bdog's Avatar
Bdog Bdog is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 1,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by Migs View Post
Its another disadvantage of you living in Manitoba. Mandryk has a reputation in this province for putting a negative spin on things and failing to discuss both sides of the equation if it doesn't suit the tone of his column. Like spongebob stated, he tries to pass off his opinion as fact (ie support is waling) and has in the past gotten into a corner trying to do so. Read Gormley's book titled "Left Out" and you'll get a good glimpse of what Murray Mandryk is all about. IMO he's nothing but an empty suit who dreams back to the days of the CCF.
Fair enough, I understand that you want to marginalize the voices of those who oppose the project. However, Blevins "tries to pass his opinions as fact" in his columns too, but they are still posted here as though they are unbiased articles.
__________________
Fresh
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted Jan 28, 2011, 10:28 PM
Migs's Avatar
Migs Migs is offline
Regina 4 Life
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Regina, Sk, Canada
Posts: 1,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by CCF View Post
Gormley talking about the left wing perspective.....I bet that was fair and balanced..........
Bdog wanted an example, I led him to one. Its up to him to come to his own conclusions. Off topic, if some of the things Gormely says about the NDP are untrue, why doesn't anyone in that party go on his show and defend themselves? I look at his show as very fair and balanced as he always gives the NDP the opportunity to participate in the debate.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted Jan 28, 2011, 10:48 PM
djforsberg's Avatar
djforsberg djforsberg is offline
Saskatchewan pride
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Warman, SK
Posts: 1,037
Quote:
Originally Posted by Migs View Post
Bdog wanted an example, I led him to one. Its up to him to come to his own conclusions. Off topic, if some of the things Gormely says about the NDP are untrue, why doesn't anyone in that party go on his show and defend themselves? I look at his show as very fair and balanced as he always gives the NDP the opportunity to participate in the debate.
I agree. He even has that wingnut Larissa Shasko from the Green Party on there every once in awhile.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
   
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:52 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.