[ad_1]
Calgary voters sent a clear message to politicians: They do not want any part of the beleaguered candidacy of the city at the 2026 Winter Olympics.
The vote is not binding, but should probably leave those of Calgary City Council. Before this plebiscite, the organizers of the bid had hoped for a vote Yes somewhere in the mid-50s, a support close to 60% if things went well.
They did not come near. The results were decisive: 132,832 for accommodation in Calgary (43.6%) and 171,750 for 56.4%. The official result will be available at 15h. MT Friday, with constituency results released Thursday at noon.
After seeking advice from constituents, Calgary City Council will likely put a final end to the city's bid process at a meeting held on Monday.
When Calgary initially announced its intention to continue the Winter Olympics of 2026, everything seemed so perfect. Calgary would regain the Olympic spirit and enthusiasm that enveloped and energized the city when it hosted the 1988 Winter Games.
But for many, this candidacy never looked like 1988. Whatever the magical feeling that 30 years ago, she never captured voters. And now Calgary's fledgling Olympic bid has finally tipped to an informal end.
So, what has happened?
The people behind Calgary 2026 did a lot of things right. They mobilized and mobilized a representative sample of favorable votes. They tried to portray the Games as an opportunity to revitalize and rehabilitate the 1988 physical heritage. The organizers also pointed out that a successful bid constituted an economic lifeline for a city whose capital city was in need. economy was handicapped by falling oil prices.
Bad event at the wrong time
But as this process evolved, an increasingly mobilized and vocal opposition approached the day of the decision. With a lot less money at their disposal than the professional bid committee, a group of critics seem to have effectively conveyed the message that it was the wrong event at the wrong time for Calgary.
And from an outside point of view, beyond the dynamism of those linked to the Olympic movement, there never seemed to be any real excitement among ordinary Calgarians.
Maybe it could have been overcome. Most of the concerns surrounding this bid were about who would pay for the Games. But voters did not like or can not understand the numbers they were given. Even on the Calgary City Council premises that preceded this vote, there was confusion as to exactly how much each level of government would provide.
These voters were promised this information before asking them to decide if they wished for the Olympics.
"How much can we give to the citizens of Calgary?" Coun. Jeremy Farkas asked.
Judging by the results, the city's 11-hour funding agreement between the Government of Alberta and Ottawa, weeks before this vote, offered little clarity or confidence to the people of California.
Past Olympic failures were important
This offer was also undeniably the victim of the unpleasant baggage hanging over the Olympic movement. The cynical story is now familiar. Cities are spending billions more than what was originally proposed to hold a two-week holiday with little positive economic impact in the long run.
Robert Livingstone operates the GamesBids.com website and has followed this process closely. He says people are becoming wiser in the face of past Olympic failures.
"It's so rooted and people realize that Olympic culture is corrupt, sometimes even real in some cases, and they've witnessed that accumulation and passing."
Livingstone notes that the International Olympic Committee has taken steps to alleviate this perception among Calgary voters.
In the past, the IOC had rarely interacted or visited potential host cities. But with fewer cities lining up to host the Olympics, the IOC has resorted to the active sale of the Games. Representatives have been to Calgary on a number of occasions in recent months to attend town hall meetings and media interviews.
Livingstone also said that the IOC, as part of its 2020 Agenda, has taken steps to make the Games easier to organize and cheaper to host. For example, at previous Games, the IOC has generally emphasized new buildings, often with limited long-term practical use for host cities. But Calgary's bid was focused on the idea, supported by IOC, to renovate mostly old facilities instead of building new ones.
The Agenda 2020 has never resonated in Calgary
According to Livingstone, the lighter candidacy model might be able to counter the story of the Olympic bid, but he might even have made a potential bid less appealing to Calgary voters.
"I think the 2020 Agenda is a total disconnect in Calgary," Livingstone said. "Agenda 2020 did not make any sense because in Calgary they want the sites, they did not stop talking about the NHL and how they would go about it and the rail link with the airport .But because of the Agenda 2020, it was left [and] not included."
So what to do for the Winter Olympics 2026 – Games that nobody seems to want?
When this process began, there were eight cities full of hope. There are only two: Stockholm and an Italian joint offer. And these two offers face significant internal political obstacles.
Livingstone thinks there could be another host hidden in the background.
"I really think that the IOC hopes that Stockholm and Italy will disappear and can then work with Salt Lake City."
The American city, like Calgary, also inherited the Olympic Games in 2002, an Olympic legacy. According to Livingstone, the difference in Utah is true enthusiasm.
"As they say themselves, they can do that tomorrow [with] 89% of public support. The Governor of Utah has already approved it. They did a feasibility study and could literally host the Games next year. "
For a lot of people in Calgary, that seems to be fine.
Calgary, like the rest of the country, will undoubtedly benefit from the 2026 Winter Olympics, wherever they land.
We will continue to celebrate Canadian medals and achievements just by letting someone else pay for the bill.
Source link
