Government Operations Committee on Dec. 6th, 2012

[The Chair, NDP, Pat Martin]

I think that would be helpful for us to better understand how the prices evolve.

For the Conservatives, we have Ron Cannan.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for being here again today.

To follow up on Mr. Blanchette's comments, to date have you been approved for $1.6 billion approximately? If we're adding the two numbers on slide 14, that's $1.1 billion and $425 million. Is that what has been approved to date?

[Pierre-Marc Mongeau]

For the West Block program, the projects approved are in the order of $1.171 billion. Those are approved projects. For the Wellington Building rehabilitation, the $425 million is in the overall rehabilitation budget. Once again, that includes contingencies, consultants' fees and the like. My budget for the West Block, the project that Mr. Doucet was talking about, is $863 million. The Sir John A. Macdonald Building rehabilitation comes to $99 million.

Those three amounts are final and approved, for all the renovations to be completed.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

When you say it's on time, on budget, and on scope, is it based on those numbers?

[Pierre-Marc Mongeau]

That is correct. When I tell you that the projects are on time and on budget, I am basing that comment on the preliminary projects approved by the Treasury Board. They are the amounts on which we can be judged.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

They won't be going up. Can you guarantee that?

[Pierre-Marc Mongeau]

We have put in place measures to guard against the unexpected. We have learned lessons over the years that let us clearly understand how masonry works. National and international experts are working on different projects, mainly on the roof and the building's historical issues. We are very sure of what we are doing.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

We started talking about this in 1997. Is it fair to say, then, if you had started earlier, the cost would have been a lot less if we hadn't procrastinated for this long?

[Pierre-Marc Mongeau]

Thank you for your question.

As I said at the beginning, the program today is different from the one we started with. It was modified along the way. Changes were made and things were added. For example, we will have 30 additional members of Parliament. That was not foreseen. We now include it in our projects. It will not bring about an increase in the overall cost, but factors like that mean that the project evolves over the years, right up to the point that project approval is obtained. We have that now for the three big projects.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

With respect to the bollard security measures that are taking place right now, when in 2013 will they be wrapped up?

[Pierre-Marc Mongeau]

We are looking at the spring of 2013, before the tourist season starts, Mr. Chair. That is our objective.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

We won't have a police officer sitting in a car on Wellington, going forward for 10 metres and in reverse for 10 metres.

[Pierre-Marc Mongeau]

The requirements in terms of the security bollards come from the RCMP. They asked us to do that work. With them, we specified the number and type of bollards we needed. The decision was based on operational requirements. We did it to meet the RCMP's needs.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

I think it would be a better use of resources. Great.

We briefly chatted before the meeting about electronic voting. This would go through the Board of Internal Economy, and then it would have to be approved by the House leaders. Is that how it works?

[Pierre-Marc Mongeau]

The approval process of projects for the House and the Senate actually goes through the administrative committees for whom we work. There is the House, the RCMP and us. The House of Commons provides those committees with ideas. We look at how they can be made possible, but, ultimately, we get the technical requirements from the House of Commons or from the Senate. Their administrative groups tell us what the needs are. In the case of the House of Commons, we go through the Board of Internal Economy, their own administration.

The House of Commons has a very solid information technology organization. It was once led by Louis Bard and now it is led by Stéphan Aubé. They know your requirements well and they tell us what they are so that, subsequently, we can turn them into reality.

[The Chair, NDP, Pat Martin]

Thank you, Ron. You're well over your five minutes.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, NDP, Pat Martin]

We have a bit of a gap in the agenda now, so I'd like to ask for two points of clarification just before we go to Costas.

First of all, the first point that Ms. Duncan raised, I believe, was regarding what I've always considered to be a dog's breakfast of overlapping jurisdiction in the administration. She has asked for a flowchart, if you will, that would identify, ultimately, who has primacy in the management of this huge project. We've counted the House of Commons, Public Works, the Senate, the Library of Parliament, the Department of Canadian Heritage, the National Capital Commission, the City of Ottawa—

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

The RCMP.

[The Chair, NDP, Pat Martin]

—the RCMP, and security for both chambers. It's an overwhelming number of cooks in the kitchen spoiling the broth. That's the way some people have put it over the years. I'd like further clarity on that. Who has ultimate primacy over this decision-making process?

Second, you said the shape of the roof was structured.... I was very surprised to see the profile of the roof. I think it's an engineering marvel that you can span that kind of distance with such a low profile. Why is it that you can't see it from the road? Whose idea was it that you shouldn't be able to see this glass structure from the road? I'm thinking of the Louvre in Paris which is a pretty nice heritage building. It added a magnificent glass triangle which complements it. The international community agrees that it has complemented the architecture, not taken away from it.

Was it Heritage that demanded this incredibly expensive glass option as opposed to a gabled peak skylight, which would cost about one-third of the amount, I would think?

[Pierre-Marc Mongeau]

Thank you. I am sorry. I will give you the clarification you need.

I will ask my colleague Ezio to answer the question about the roof. As to the governance, I am sorry that I was not clear. I will give you the list of committees. All the stakeholders are part of various committees that, in turn, are supervised by steering committees. Decisions are made in groups in which all sectors are represented.

[The Chair, NDP, Pat Martin]

If I could just interrupt you, I think the point Ms. Duncan was making is that in England they've put it all together under one...and I think it's the parliamentary architect's office. Instead of having a whole series of meetings with representation from all these various agencies, they have one. It's the same thing in the United States. They have their office of the architect of the Capitol or something like that. It's one person, one office, handling the administration of the maintenance and operations of the precinct. Here everybody and their grandmother needs to have a say. They argue and fight, and there's power broking going on, etc.

[A Voice]

What's wrong with grandmothers here?

[The Chair, NDP, Pat Martin]

I have nothing against grandmothers, but keep them out of our....

I didn't mean to interrupt you, but it must be frustrating for all of you to have to consult to that extent for a simple decision. There's that joke about a camel being a horse designed by a committee. Well, we have a whole series of committees, and we're ending up with some pretty strange architectural choices, I think, as a result.

[Pierre-Marc Mongeau]

Thank you for the question.

As I mentioned at the outset, we have looked at various models and we are ready to continue the discussion with the Senate and House of Commons representatives. We are in a holding pattern.

I will give you the structure. There are not that many committees and consultations go on very positively. In fact, the picture I want to leave you with is that relations are very good. Discussions go on between the partners and the major priorities are understood.

Ultimately, there are two separate roles. The role of the House, the Senate and the Library of Parliament is to establish your needs and requirements. Then you have Public Works, whose job is to turn those requirements into reality within federal government rules, meaning the cabinet, the committees and the Treasury Board. Those are the two major roles and responsibilities. The RCMP and the Federal Heritage Buildings Review Office work with us to improve the project. We are not in a confrontation situation.

I should tell you that the final authority is the government when it approves the five-year plans. When we submit memoranda to cabinet or Treasury Board requests, it is the government’s decision whether or not to award mandates and contracts, or to give us directions. That is the way things work at the moment.