If you think Ottawa is on a spending spree now, it could get much worse. One of the mega-projects waiting in the wings to jump on the billion dollar-break the bank-no budget in sight for eons bandwagon, is a national broadband Internet scheme.

Indeed, this idea received a major boost last month when the national broadband task force delivered its report to Subsidy - 'er we mean Industry - Minister Brian Tobin.
Given the Minister's warm response as detailed in a departmental news release, and his "arrogant" dismissal of critics (we'll return to this in a moment), taxpayers have every reason to worry.

So far, Captain Handout (read: Tobin) has shown his unbridled enthusiasm for redistributing confiscated taxpayer dollars to tax breaks (read: subsidies) to Canadian shipbuilders who still won't be able to compete with the even more heavily subsidized South Koreans and Chinese. And in the space of six months, he has also spearheaded Cabinet approval of over $3.3 billion (CDN) in loans to foreign airlines to buy Bombardier regional jets.

Now it appears that the Minister is all set to push a national broadband Internet network (into every community, and potentially most businesses and homes) at a cost to taxpayers ranging from $2.5 to $4.5 billion, if not higher.

In lay terms, broadband Internet, according to the task force report is "based on today's technology and applications - defined as a high-capacity, two-way link between end user and access network suppliers capable of supporting full-motion interactive video applications to all Canadians on terms comparable to those available in urban markets by 2004." Translation, a super fast Internet backbone (read: physical infrastructure) that would put today's high-speed cable modems to shame.

To be fair, the broadband task force comprised some 36 knowledgeable and influential stakeholders from business, government, academe, the not-for-profit and aboriginal sectors of Canadian society. And their report, entitled The New National Dream: Networking the Nation for Broadband Access makes some prescient observations about the need for wide-scale access to broadband services and networks and the potential positive impacts such access will have on our international competitiveness, quality of life and national cohesion.

But a national role, read taxpayers footing the bill, in financing the hard wiring (so to speak) of a broadband backbone represents bad public policy.
To start, sentimental notions of a new "national policy" tailor made for the 21st century may make for good speech copy, but they have no place in modern industrial policy. The public sector has neither the capacity, nor track record to undertake such a project. In addition, there is no pressing public good argument to be forwarded.

If estimates today peg such an initiative at $4 billion or more, then the project cost will probably double once underway and be subject to political interference and meddling. Think Pacific Railway scandal, think Parliament Hill cost over-runs from $440 million to $1.4 billion. Better still, think eight years after the 1993 election and still no concrete plan or schedule to replace aging helicopters that are basically falling out of the sky, when they're not grounded for air unworthiness. With tax revenues in flux during a continuing slowdown, the financial capacity for Broadband is non-existent.

But even if we were flush with cash, Ottawa's record with technology procurement and implementation is abysmal. Oh sure we can Netfile our taxes, but when it comes to roll-out and project management of multi-million and multi-billion dollar plans, recent experience is telling.

At HRDC a few years ago, the social benefits redesign project cost us a bundle with a fix still working it's way through the system. And in the early 1990s, Transport Canada's attempt to modernize the air navigation system included the never-ending and cost-overrun plagued $800 million Canadian Automated Air Traffic System (CAATS) project, the obsolete almost from day one microwave landing system (MLS) debacle and the perpetually delayed radar modernization project (RAMP).

Indeed, the inability of Transport Canada to properly manage these efforts was in part responsible for the commercialization of the air navigation services directorate into the multi-stakeholder, not-for-profit entity we now know as NavCanada.

The combination of light-speed technological change, evolving aviation industry structures and priorities, and monolithic project management proved that Ottawa could not effectively manage a national, technically complex implementation project.

Given the speed at which Internet technology is evolving, who knows if today's broadband vision will be outdated in four or five years. While the promise of viewing world premiere movies on demand in our homes is exciting, it is hardly a pressing public priority. Even in an area such as telehealth and the dream of a neurosurgeon in Toronto leading a virtual surgery team in Iqaluit to resect a deep brain tumour in a young child; the private sector can surely make this a reality.

In fact, this is happening. Media organizations are buying up Internet providers and establishing rival networks to serve consumers and the public at an affordable cost. In public institutions such as libraries and hospitals, swarms of vendors are already delivering the tomorrow's products and sweetening the deal with high-speed optical Internet network tools to support them.

As mentioned earlier, Minster Tobin despises those who dare to question the merit of a publicly funded, national broadband network. On June 26th, news outlets reported that Mr. Tobin belittled broadband contrarians for their "pompous, arrogant, misguided, and short-sighted thinking." He went on to state that their views have "no place in a modern and contemporary Canada."

It appears as though the Minister is starting to believe his own press clippings and views his ministerial briefing binder as a compendium of truth. Or maybe he is swept away by the romantic notions inherent in the title of the task force report. Sadly, his axiomatic disdain for competing opinions speaks volumes to his fundamental lack of respect for democratic debate.

He must be oblivious to the feds record on the Parliament Hill renovation project or the air navigation system during the early and mid-1990s. And most troubling of all, the trend over the past twenty years is a government migration away from sole or prime authority in infrastructure initiatives. From airport divestitures to food inspection to facilities construction, Ottawa is leaving the direct and even indirect financing of projects to the pros.

Will we need a national broadband network Probably, yes. But the private sector stands to gain the most from such a venture through infinite commercial applications for individuals, businesses and public institutions. Let them build it and we will come.

Mr. Tobin's embrace of this scheme represents 19th century luddite-style, industrial policy. For Ottawa to get involved, to borrow Tobin's words, would be "pompous, misguided - and shortsighted." Such public policy folly "has no place in a modern and contemporary Canada."