Disproportionate Risks Vs. Rewards of B.C. Mega-Projects

The following letter was submitted to the Nanaimo Daily News in response to an article by a regular contributor to that paper in an attempt to show that, while there are always going to be few 'winners' in expensive public projects, the general taxpayer will likely not benefit but accepts all of the risk.

Dear Editor,
It is to be expected that David Lobay, President of the Nanaimo Chamber of Commerce, would have a very distinct perspective on issues which would affect his membership because that is his 'job'. To that end, he has written a number of pieces for publication in your paper which clearly demonstrate this bias.
Today, I am writing specifically about the latest of these, PNC worth the wait, Harbour City Star, June 14/08. It is all well and good for him to extoll the benefits of government spending, in this case, spending which directly aids/helps their membership (construction, hotels, restaurants, shops, etc.) but what he tries to gloss over is that they represent only a small portion of the population, notwithstanding his exaggerated 'ripple effect' theory ("everyone in the community wins when we factor in the 'ripple effect'). The people who are putting up the money, the general taxpayers, as a group stand to gain very little but they are the ones who are taking on the risk should anything go wrong (cost overruns, partner financing difficulties, less-than-anticipated revenues, etc.). The same can certainly also be said of grand, over-hyped, short-lived 'spectacles' such as the 2010 Olympics. For the 'average working guy or gal', the rewards will likely be small while the risks are great!