Can we afford HST after the Games?

To those following the 2010 Games news may know that the skiing may be done on straw and ice transported from some distance as the local stuff may be all but washed away by the starting date. Some may have also seen the item that makes it plainer to recognize that the V in the VPD may mean the VANOC PD, as the department is rumored to be moving to its masters quarters. All such bits of view as to what is going on in camera, and who actually runs BC, IOC, VANOC, or the Gordo, all add to our worries. As in, guess who is paying for all this extra expense?

Well there is some past good news. The IOC made a press spread announcement some weeks back that they would cover all cost over runs. I heard it on CBC radio so it must have been said on record. But in the confusion of all the new plagues coming before the start, we the taxpayers may have to lift the bill before any one recalls the IOC gesture. We can truly help all to remember.

If a group of citizens get together they can seek an injunction in at a court just to prevent that lapse of memory. Now all that this would seek is to prevent any federal, provincial, or municipal tax dollars to be added to the burdens already agreed to before the IOC pledge over the over runs.

For added legal weight it may be cited that a court has already found that the games are discriminating contrary to our Charter. But this injunction is not conditional to the Games admitting the women skiers to glide on trucked in straw and ice. It is only the side ruling that the games are un-Canadian and outside Canadian jurisdiction that adds the weight to justify not a penny more.

This is in no way any attempt to disrupt the games or to slight them in any way. The more success to them with out our further bailing, would be a good thing. BC’ers and Canadians can watch
with the knowledge that their presence in the spectator seats are not adding to the tax burden. In this lefthanded way it assists the games, even against those vocally opposed to them.

It is meant as a prophylactic device to prevent Canada, BC, and our communities from coming down with historic games fiscal disease. An ailment that has plagued many past venues in Canada and other places. There is also VANOC, its members, and other sponsors that should take the responsible path and shoulder their own load and not on to us.

It is unlikely that any level of government would want to oppose
this injunction. On what grounds or what principles is it not the duty of them all to prevent the escalation of tax waste when it is not in any need in that quarter. Any representing the games or the sponsors raising any objections would be dooming the fate of the very games they pro port to be acting for.

If you know of any person or group interested in this proposition please pass it on, a court date needs to be before any games start to have any positive effect. I think it best be shared among grass roots community groups to keep partisanship out from stirring the intent. They (partisan organizations) may and should offer praise from an arms length distance.