MONTREAL

The notion of federal funding for a state-of-the-art hockey arena in Quebec City is a textbook case of desperate politics and bad policy. By flirting aggressively with the idea of forking out tens of millions of public dollars to finance the project, Stephen Harper and his Conservatives have manoeuvred themselves into a lose-lose position.

Consider the following:

If Harper does not commit close to 200 million dollars towards the arena, he will almost certainly lose some or all of his five Quebec-area seats in the next election. That would leave the Conservatives with the remnants of a base in the province and it would be a setback in the drive for a governing majority.

A new arena is a pre-condition for the return of an NHL franchise to the city. Quebecor CEO Pierre Karl Péladeau – whose interest in buying such a franchise is widely known – also happens to be the driving force behind a new Conservative-friendly television network dubbed Fox News North.

The potential return of major-league hockey to the city has naturally captured the imagination of its residents. Premier Jean Charest—who can afford to refuse no one these days—has just promised to fund 45 per cent of the arena’s building costs, leaving an equivalent portion of the bill to the federal government. As any Quebec City taxi driver will tell you, the ball is now squarely in the Prime Minister’s court.

Mayor Régis Labeaume is Quebec’s answer to Newfoundland and Labrador premier Danny Williams, a popular and populist politician who does not take no for an answer. This is his pet project. If he does not get his way, he will make sure the Conservatives pay for it in the next election.

But if Harper does give the green light to the funding—as there currently is every indication that he will—he will be financing a monument to his conversion to pork-barrel politics.

The economic case for the project is less than compelling. Not a single private partner has offered to pitch in. An Ernst Young feasibility study has concluded that it could generate profitable spin-offs … but only after the arena has been entirely built with public money.

Some of the assumptions behind the model are by definition sketchy. For the purpose of the study, for instance, cities as distant as Charlottetown have been deemed to be located in the catchment area of the future arena.

If Harper signs the cheque, it will not matter that the other federal parties are opportunistically egging him on to do so.

The decision would have a domino effect, triggering calls for similar funding from other mid-size cities, including some in the Conservative heartland. As prime minister, Harper is the party leader who would have to either extend the funding offered to Quebec to other municipal arenas or explain why he does not.

The Prime Minister would also have to reconcile an eye-catching largesse designed to shore up his fortunes in Quebec with the austerity message that his government is looking to promote in the lead-up to the next election.

Ultimately, funding the arena with such a massive injection of federal dollars would be a breach of the trust of the voters who supported Harper in the expectation that he would do things differently.

Quebec is a Conservative black hole these days and over the past two years the party has systematically consolidated its dozen ridings with generous helpings of public money.

Last year, Harper won a long-held Bloc Québécois seat in the Lower St-Lawrence area. A subsequent Canadian Press study revealed that the riding of Montmagny-L’Islet-Kamouraska-Rivière-du-Loup had received record heaps of federal stimulus money.

Harper is hardly the first unloved prime minister to try to buy Quebec’s affection. Brian Mulroney and Jean Chrétien tried it too, with less than convincing results.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

There was a time when the current prime minister would have had no part in pork-barrel politics but as on so many other fronts, including the promise to end patronage appointments to the Senate and the commitment to a more open government, that apparently was then and this is now.

Chantal Hébert is a national affairs writer. Her column appears Monday, Wednesday and Friday.

Read more about: