Government Operations Committee on Nov. 19th, 2013

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

Yes, how much would it be if you knocked it down and started from square one? It's like renovating a house versus knocking it down and building a new one. Renovating is a much more difficult task. I've done renovations of a private residence, and I know the aesthetic aspect is important. That's part of the heritage preservation, but there's a cost as well, not only in time but in dollars. We want to reaffirm to Canadians that it's the right thing to do.

I encourage all Canadians to come and tour the Parliament Buildings. It makes you proud to be a Canadian. We want to continue that heritage and tradition for our children and grandchildren, the future generations.

[Nancy Chahwan]

Because of the LTVP premise of preserving the heritage for generations to come, we did not cost certain options, like levelling the buildings on the Hill and reconstructing new ones. We went to great lengths to preserve as much as we could of that heritage, including numbering the cement blocks on the West Block and reinstalling them exactly where they went. All these options have received approval from the National Capital Commission and from the federal heritage buildings review office.

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

I have two quick questions.

On environmental savings and to preserve our operation and protect our infrastructure while maximizing energy efficiency, have you been able to incorporate the new energy savings into the restoration of the building?

The other one is on the infrastructure. Some of the buildings form a retaining wall around the perimeter. What's the status of the upgrade of the foundations not only of the building, but around the perimeter of Parliament Hill?

[Nancy Chahwan]

I will start with the question on sustainability. We endeavour to adopt as many of the requirements as possible that are now included in the updated national building code. We are proud to say that during the implementation of the LTVP, the modernization of the building systems will provide us with a higher energy efficiency than prior to the rehabilitation.

I would also mention that we were able to achieve LEED gold certification for the full production facility, for example. All our designs are set to meet 70% of the green globe standard, which are sustainability targets for heritage buildings, and that is approximately equivalent to LEED silver. We are using elements such as a green roof on the Sir John A. Macdonald Building, water-saving plumbing systems, and heat recuperation, including in the new chamber in the West Block.

Regarding your question on the slope, we have made progress in that regard. We have sought advice from experts on the best approach to stabilize Parliament Hill's escarpment, giving priority to the health and safety of passersby and users. A decision was rendered to carry out priority work associated with that stabilization. That work was completed in September 2013 at a cost of $1.2 million by—

[The Chair, NDP, Pierre-Luc Dusseault]

Thank you. Unfortunately, I have to interrupt you.

Mr. Byrne, the floor is yours.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thank you very much for your presentation. I'm curious. How would you describe the depth of the pool of available, qualified contractors for this particular type of work? Outside of the more conventional trades such as plumbing, electrical, and HVAC, this requires some specialized stonework and some other specialized historical trades. Is there a deep pool, or is it somewhat limited?

[Nancy Chahwan]

Mr. Chair, we have been very fortunate in our competitive processes and tenders in the sense that we have received a high interest from the industry, and our competitive processes have all borne good results for us.

I will turn to Ezio DiMillo once again to answer this in detail.

[Ezio DiMillo]

Thank you for the question, Mr. Chair. It is a very good question.

We have been fortunate that our construction managers were able to get the required resources. Of course, masonry has been talked about considerably. It's a very artisanal trade. We have a sufficient number of masons on the projects at this point, although we are getting close to the limit of what is available in this region. However, at this point we have no reason to believe this is an issue.

Certainly for all the other trades, some of the more traditional trades such as electrical, mechanical, etc., we don't foresee any issue at this point.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

Thanks very much.

Would you categorize the contracting process as being consistently or regularly put out to tender, or have there been relatively significant instances where contracts have been offered on a standing offer or a rollover of an existing offer, as is a frequent contractual process?

[Nancy Chahwan]

Thank you very much for this question.

Mr. Chair, at PWGSC we are very committed to maximizing the use of fair, open, and competitive processes to choose the contractors we work with. I can say that even the use of standing offers does not preclude the element of competition, since standing offers themselves are first subject to a public tender.

We do use our open system, buy and sell, to advertise the possibilities. Even in the cases where we have chosen a project construction manager, for example, PCL for the West Block, the contract with the construction managers includes very specific terms and provisions requiring the tendering of subcontracts, depending on the value of those subcontracts.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

Thank you very much.

Would you be able to inform the committee on the magnitude, the number of complaints that may have been received from prospective bidders or those who have felt aggrieved?

[Nancy Chahwan]

Thank you for the question.

Since I have been with the branch, I have not seen or heard any. I will turn to Joanne Monette to answer this question.

[Joanne Monette, Director General, Planning and Operations, Parliamentary Precinct Branch, Department of Public Works and Government Services]

Thank you for the question, Mr. Chair.

No, I don't believe that we've received many complaints, unless they're in the larger projects. On the smaller projects I look after, the day-to-day operations, I have not received any complaints.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

Thank you.

I think that's the best indicator. There's the competitive bidding process, and then there's the complaints process, and if you're not receiving any complaints, that's very healthy news.

My final question is on 2017, which is of course the centrepiece here. It's the 150th anniversary. We appreciate there may be a bit of a rush to get things done in time for that particular celebration so that the Hill is clean and clear for Canada Day and for the summer tourist season.

Can you provide the committee with some assurance that things are being properly planned for that, and there won't be an overload of expenditure to try to meet those deadlines?

[Nancy Chahwan]

Thank you very much for your question.

Mr. Chair, as I mentioned in my opening remarks, the West Block will be completed by 2017, in time for those celebrations. That includes the visitor welcome centre, which will be underground. The work on the East Block will not have started. There will be minimal visual work on the west pavilion of the Centre Block at that point. The work and the scaffolding around the East Block will be towards the east, and it will not be visible from the main grounds of Parliament Hill. This will be achieved without any significant acceleration, or any undue acceleration, of the work.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

Thank you.

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, NDP, Pierre-Luc Dusseault]

Thank you, Mr. Byrne.

Ms. Ablonczy, you have five minutes as well.

[Diane Ablonczy, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Thank you for coming. This is exciting. It's always exciting to see things grow.

I may have mentioned this before in committee. I don't want to sound like a broken record, but I've been around here for a while and I'm sad to see our wonderful heritage buildings that I think are really the envy of the world—and I've seen quite a few parliament buildings around the world, as have you—sort of erode and fade and be neglected, so I'm really excited about what you're doing. Congratulations, all of you, on being at the helm of such a wonderful project for Canada.

I note that part of your mandate is to maintain the historical and architectural integrity of the buildings. I'm going to make five points, hopefully quickly, and then you can give me your thoughts.

I've seen some buildings, and I won't mention them on the record because it may be not nicely taken by some, where traditional or old architecture tries to be married with some glass and steel modernism. In my humble opinion, that doesn't work. It does a disservice to both of these wonderful forms of architecture. I'm looking at what you're doing and I think you've avoided that, but I wonder what you think about that.

I also noted that accurate costings and project timelines are an important part of what you're doing. Others have mentioned this, but I would emphasize it. I sat on the Treasury Board for a while. It's so frustrating to see that government.... You know, we're leaders of the country, and yet we never seem to get our act together, and I am not referring to any particular government, but I mean government in general, as far as getting these big projects done on time and on budget. I really hope we can do it this time and prove that the wheels of government can actually operate in an efficient and effective manner. I'm cheering you on in that regard. I really hope there's some real commitment to that.

I will now turn to your interventions to stop or reduce continued deterioration. It is really sad. I remember once I came to work in West Block and the corridor outside my office was blocked off because the ceiling had fallen in. My assistant was pregnant at the time, and she quickly secured a move out of the building because she was concerned about the asbestos. This is not the way the premier organization in the country should be operating.

I wonder what your communications plan is to let Canadians know. We're spending billions of dollars here. We're taking many, many years. We're doing a great thing. I bet you there's not 0.1% of Canadians who have the faintest idea what's going on, and I think they should know. Hundreds of thousands of people come to see our Parliament Buildings every year. We're proud of them; as I said, they're some of the most stunning in the world. However, we're not telling Canadians how committed we are and the exciting plans we have to renovate them. What are your communication plans?

My last point is the decision-making. Some of the problems we have in being efficient in government is that there are too many cooks in the kitchen. Everybody's waiting on another department, or another group, or another team, to make a decision and then we try to coordinate them. Who's wielding the whip on this? Where does the buck stop to say, “Either you decide or I'll decide for you, and we're going to get on with this”?

[Nancy Chahwan]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, NDP, Pierre-Luc Dusseault]

You have about a minute left, but I can give you a little more time, given the number of questions that you were asked.

[Nancy Chahwan]

Thank you; that is kind of you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for your comments. We certainly share your excitement.

All the team in PWGSC is mobilized, knowing that we are working on securing the legacy of built heritage for generations to come. We are also committed to doing so in a fiscally responsible manner and to demonstrating that with all transparency, Mr. Chair, to the taxpayer.

The point about the heritage buildings and how we balance between new and old architecture is an interesting one that has been tackled by architectural associations and heritage associations. The challenge is to work both with form and function. However, we make our decisions based on consultation with industry experts. The designs have to be approved by the National Capital Commission as well as the federal heritage buildings review office, which provides advice and recommendations on protecting the heritage character without limiting us to returning it and restoring it exactly to the way it looked before. I believe these provide us with good guidelines in terms of how to balance this design.

In terms of the communications plan to Canadians, we invest a lot of energy both in collaboration with our parliamentary partners to make sure that the public, including the visitors to Parliament Hill every year, are aware of the work that is ongoing and the investment the government has decided to make to preserve this heritage. For example, we have a very extensive website that includes a description of each of our projects and the commitment of the scope and the budget, as well as the timeline. We have also used visible sites, for example, Hill Centre, to provide educational information to the public regarding the work that we are undertaking.

[The Chair, NDP, Pierre-Luc Dusseault]

Thank you for your answer.

The floor is yours, Mr. Martin.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I wasn't going to intervene, Madam Chahwan, but at the risk of being a bit of a buzzkill, with all due respect, I really feel I have to challenge both the tone and the content of some of your remarks.

I've watched this project balloon and swell and explode in proportion and expense. I'm a carpenter by trade. I understand the difference between renovations and restorations, but there's almost a rule of thumb that everything on Parliament Hill costs ten times as much and takes ten times as long. Speaking on behalf of taxpayers and people in the industry, frankly, it's extremely frustrating.

I want to point out the inherent contradiction in some of your remarks. First of all, you said that you're “on time and on budget”, in kind of a cheerleading tone. Then in the same sentence almost you said that the cost estimates, of course, “evolve over time”. In other words, the budget is whatever it costs and the timeframe is however long it takes. Of course you're on time and on budget with this ever-moving scale. It takes longer and costs more every year that ticks by. It was under construction when I got here in 1997, and it was under construction when Diane got here prior to that.

The other contradiction I have to point out in the time I have is this idea of pre-qualifying your contractors. How then do you explain having to run off this company with connections to the Hells Angels who couldn't comply with the basic requirement of the stonework? They had to be fired. Granted, you have PCL there now, the best construction company in North America if not the world, I would concede, but with regard to this pre-qualification idea, how did we wind up with organized crime on the job? In the place with the highest security in the land, you have these guys with biker connections.

The last thing I'll say, and maybe it's been my favourite bugaboo from day one, is how did we ever wind up with this extravagant opulence, this almost audacious impracticality of putting a glass roof on the House of Commons in this climate? How a cracked room full of chimpanzees ever decided that was a good idea is beyond me. This isn't the Winter Palace of imperial tsarist Russia; this is a temporary House of Commons. And it's a temporary move; it's not even permanent.

Can you confirm one thing for me? I understand that now they've designed a glass roof, they've learned that because of the sunshine, the TV cameras can't operate properly. Therefore, we now have to design a great big screen to cover up the glass. Wouldn't asphalt shingles have been more practical if you're going to have to cover up the glass roof anyway?

My specific question, I suppose—and I'm not even going to have time to touch on the asbestos abatement—is with regard to the cost factor associated with the glass roof. What is it? What was the additional expense to go to glass instead of conventional? Is it true that you now have to find some way to shield us from the glass roof or the televised documentation can't go on in the House of Commons?

[Nancy Chahwan]

Thank you for letting me know that I have another two minutes to answer those questions, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for the opportunity to answer this, Mr. Chair, and to clarify my earlier statements.

I would reiterate that we are very much committed to delivering this project in a fiscally responsible manner. I believe that the examples I gave earlier about cost and time savings speak to that commitment. There are different elements that influence the costs, and I will give examples of what those are and how we work on cost containment.

First of all, we have improved predictability—

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Mr. Chairman, not to interrupt, but we have so little time.

I don't really need the talking points about an open-ended cost. I think I've made my point, and there's really nothing you can say that can explain the way the costs have exploded. It's not your fault.

However, I would like a specific answer to the specific question about this glass roof, this ridiculous audacious glass roof.