Evidence of meeting #47 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was banks.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:45 p.m.
Bloc
Diane Bourgeois Bloc Terrebonne—Blainville, QC
What do you hope to achieve by selling these nine buildings in particular.
3:45 p.m.
Minister of Public Works and Government Services
We have several objectives, and the two main ones are as follows. Firstly, the government is not particularly well suited to property management. It is a highly specialized field. Those private sector companies that have succeeded in property management are experts in their field. They spend time on it and they recruit men and women with skills and expertise in property management. The second reason pertains to the government's priorities with regard to major renovations. The buildings in our portfolio are on average 45 years old, which basically means they are due for a mid-life upgrade. Our buildings are old and have been neglected for several decades. We do not invest enough in our buildings and we do not have the requisite expertise to management. At any rate, the government should not be in the business of managing buildings.
3:50 p.m.
Bloc
Diane Bourgeois Bloc Terrebonne—Blainville, QC
Minister, why have you chosen to sell these nine buildings in particular?
3:50 p.m.
Minister of Public Works and Government Services
These nine buildings featured on a list of 40 facilities set up by the department as part of a study carried out in the fall.
3:50 p.m.
Bloc
Diane Bourgeois Bloc Terrebonne—Blainville, QC
Is it a matter of urgency? You said that you made a choice. You told me that selling buildings was a matter of urgency. Is it a matter of urgency that these particular buildings be sold?
3:50 p.m.
Minister of Public Works and Government Services
No, it is not a matter of urgency; it is a matter of sound management of government assets.
3:50 p.m.
Bloc
Diane Bourgeois Bloc Terrebonne—Blainville, QC
Are you selling buildings that are of no use to the government?
3:50 p.m.
Minister of Public Works and Government Services
No, quite the opposite. They are office buildings on which we intend to take out long-term leases.
3:50 p.m.
Bloc
Diane Bourgeois Bloc Terrebonne—Blainville, QC
If I understand you correctly, you are going to sell these buildings and then pay rent to use them—
3:50 p.m.
Bloc
Diane Bourgeois Bloc Terrebonne—Blainville, QC
—because they are still in a usable state. The Auditor General told us that it is more beneficial for the government to own these buildings than rent them. Why do you think that your solution would be better for Canada? Why is it the best way to management these buildings?
3:50 p.m.
Minister of Public Works and Government Services
Allow me to go back to my two initial comments. In absolute terms, objectively speaking, owning property always offers advantages. However, you also need to have staff with high-end expertise. We have some, but not enough, and in order to attract more, we would have to offer working conditions similar to the private sector. Furthermore, and I'm not being partisan, governments would have to agree to invest huge sums in upgrading the real estate portfolio, something that successive governments have always refused to do because real estate is not a key component of government services. You just have to look at what is being done in other Western countries. Let us take the example of banks: their goals is to make money and they have sold off most of their real estate around the country.
3:50 p.m.
Bloc
Diane Bourgeois Bloc Terrebonne—Blainville, QC
You said that there was 40 buildings which could be sold, of which you have chosen 9. Furthermore, the 9 chosen buildings are valued higher than the 31 others. You are asking us to support your decision to sell these nine over-valued buildings and then rent them, without having seen the terms and conditions and without knowing exactly what you are trying to do. You have to agree with me that it is all a little strange.
3:50 p.m.
Minister of Public Works and Government Services
No, I do not agree with you. You can check the government books; we are not hiding the value of these buildings. I am trying to demystify the process for you; there are no secrets.
The nine buildings in question are office buildings. They are the sort of assets that could be of interest to the private sector. We will see if we are proven right, the process has just begun. I understand everybody might not agree with us, but I do not think that it is heresy to say that the government is not necessarily the best candidate for property management. I think we can agree in that. Furthermore, the records of our successive governments show that insufficient attention was paid to the whole portfolio, both in terms of human resources and financial resources.
April 24th, 2007 / 3:55 p.m.
Conservative
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
I'd like to ask questions directly to the deputy minister.
Thank you all for appearing.
Deputy Minister Marshall, I have some particular questions with regard to the TPG contract. How was the minister involved in contracting generally? We'll start with a general question.
3:55 p.m.
David Marshall Deputy Minister, Department of Public Works and Government Services
Mr. Poilievre, the minister is the general director of the department; he does not get involved in any individual contracting. He is typically informed only at the very end, when the department has made a recommendation.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
Was the minister or any of his staff involved in the TPG contract?
3:55 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Public Works and Government Services
Not in any way.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
As a non-partisan public servant who's served under numerous governments of different party colours, are you satisfied that the TPG contracting issue was a fair and open process?
