Skip to content

Mining cluster 'theory' isn't our only hope - William E. McLeod

I write in response to Professor David Robinson's column in the Aug. 7 edition. He natters on ad nauseum about the mining supply and services business and Michael Porter's cluster theory.

I write in response to Professor David Robinson's column in the Aug. 7 edition.

He natters on ad nauseum about the mining supply and services business and Michael Porter's cluster theory.

Porter's cluster theory is very interesting, but it applies only marginally to Sudbury and the mining supply and services industry.

One of his excellent papers on cluster theory uses the example of the wine industry in northern California. Many businesses that supply the wine industry have clustered and thrived there. They are, at least in part, connected with the University of California - Davis Campus. U.C. Davis is world renowned for its agriculture and viticulture programs. The wine industry in northern California is there to stay. The vineyards will not run out or move elsewhere, at least as long as there is a demand for wine.

On the other hand, the mining supply and services business can locate almost anywhere. Firms can come and go almost at will. Attracting such business and keeping them here is a worthwhile objective and can be best done, in my opinion, by getting out of their way and by making Sudbury an attractive city in which to live and raise a family.

To that end we should not be throwing taxpayers' money at these businesses and consultants and other parasites. We should be making sure there is a place for kids to learn to ski and to swim, enough tennis courts, soccer fields, ice rinks, etc. We should encourage the symphony, the theatre and the art gallery. We should be working at keeping up the high quality of our elementary and secondary schools and trying to get Laurentian University out of the basement of Maclean's rankings.

Robinson does not seem to realize that in the 1970s this town got itself into very serious economic trouble by relying almost exclusively on the mining industry. A number of forward looking and bright citizens understood the need to diversify and rolled up their sleeves and did it. Robinson should ask some of us who lived here then what it was like and what was done about it.

There are a number of opportunities for economic diversification in Sudbury. We have some of the best agricultural land in the province. We have post-secondary education and health-care sectors that are here to stay and perhaps grow. There seems to be an opportunity for alternative energy generation. Millions of dollars of forest products in various stages of processing pass through Sudbury every year. That might be a "value added" opportunity. We have very good rail transportation. The completion of the four-laning of Highway 69 is crucial, but thanks to fellows such as Gerry Lougheed Jr. and Rick Bartolucci this is happening. The potential of tourism has hardly been thought of.

And finally, Sudbury is bursting with brainpower and managerial and technical talent. There are thousands of retired mining company executives who would jump at the chance to get back into harness for a day or so each week to help the community. Maybe it's time for Robinson to step aside for a while and let folks who know what they're talking about write some economic development columns. I'm tired of this one-trick monkey.

William E. McLeod , Sudbury

Editor's note: Northern Life's welcomes guest columns from anyone with good ideas.