Evidence of meeting #74 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was buildings.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:30 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
Thank you very much.
You have run out of time. Sorry about that.
Mr. Stetski is next.
9:30 a.m.
NDP
Wayne Stetski NDP Kootenay—Columbia, BC
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you for being here today.
I'd like to start with you, Ms. Aird and Ms. Redfern. The committee did a study on parks and protected areas last spring. We went out and met with witnesses in some of the national parks, including Jasper. One of the chiefs who came and spoke with us used some words that have stayed with me ever since. He said, “We do not have a written language, so the Creator wrote our story on the land.” They proceeded to show us photographs of one site in particular, which is on private property. I, and I think many of my colleagues, wondered how that could not be protected.
I will back up about 10 years. I was manager with provincial parks in southeastern B.C., and we hired a Ktunaxa woman to do cultural studies on values inside parks. Of course, they were reluctant to share the results of that study, which I absolutely understood.
How do we build a better future for protecting indigenous sites? There seems to be a fair bit of mistrust to get past, to start with, in terms of sharing values. What are the most important steps the federal government can take to start better protecting indigenous sites?
9:30 a.m.
Director, Indigenous Heritage Circle
I think the message, loud and clear, from the round table that Indigenous Heritage Circle facilitated was about the value and need to have an institution that is indigenous-led, where that trust can be built internally, which then allows our peoples and our communities across the country to figure out how to have those difficult conversations. How do we share our heritage with Parks Canada? How do we influence Parks Canada's approach and policy in such a way that we can begin to have our heritage included in those spaces?
We actually had a conversation with Parks Canada about how there are some difficult histories around even the creation of those parks. In most cases, even from my research and work with the Qikiqtani Truth Commission, we know that where we had sacred sites or places we were using or that had special value because of them being caribou calving grounds, all of a sudden based on that information—from area administrators, or RCMP officers, interestingly enough, and many times in the north, or anthropologists, or scientists—those became sites protected on a Canadian national level, and we were then actually prevented from accessing or using these sacred sites that were the basis of, in some cases, the creation of those parks.
That shows the need for and the value in having such an organization that can actually have, as I said earlier, the difficult internal conversations that then allow us to figure out how we even have those conversations with institutions like Parks Canada, Heritage Canada, or National Trust for Canada, because we also have to figure that out for ourselves.
I do want to add one thing if you don't mind, Chair. Protecting even the Hudson's Bay Company building in Winnipeg is incredibly important to indigenous people not just from a national standpoint or from Winnipeg's standpoint but because the history of that particular company involves almost every indigenous community across the country. We also have HBC buildings in our own rural and remote communities, but we want to see our history included in those stories, not just the perspective of the company or possibly, in some cases, their views of what their historical relationship was with us. Our views need to be included in that building story.
Is there anything you want to add, Karen?
September 28th, 2017 / 9:35 a.m.
Director, Indigenous Heritage Circle
I get passionate about this.
9:35 a.m.
NDP
Wayne Stetski NDP Kootenay—Columbia, BC
That is great. We need to find a way forward to build a better future for protecting and celebrating indigenous sites across the country. We need to get there at some point, and hopefully sooner rather than later.
I have a question for you, Mr. Smith. In the city of Cranbrook, which is part of my riding of Kootenay—Columbia where I live, there was a 1929 municipal fire hall that was vacant, a beautiful old building. When I was mayor, we were considering moving it over to the arts council to become a permanent home for the arts. We had a change in administration, and the new administration decided to put it on the market, and sold it. It's now going to be the Fire Hall Kitchen and Tap, a brewery.
In your view, in terms of a hierarchy of who you'd like to see take over heritage buildings, is there a preference? Should it be federal government or governments first, non-profit societies second, and private sector third? Or does it matter?
9:35 a.m.
Director, Centre for Cultural Landscape, Willowbank, As an Individual
I don't think it matters. There in fact are eating establishments that are run by non-profit organizations in order to employ disadvantaged youth. Hamilton has some great examples of that. All I would say is that the non-profit sector has to be calculated in a way that we don't know how to calculate it. There's not just the private sector and the public sector; we also have this non-profit sector that can often play a critical role in carrying out some of the government's objectives because it's not working under a for-profit motive.
The one other comment I want to make to you, since you're from British Columbia, is that in my experience, the west coast of Canada is about a generation ahead of the east coast and central Canadian cities, townships, and rural areas in doing this kind of connection. I think that's because environmental awareness has been stronger because first nations communities have been a greater part of the conversation for a little longer. I think the rest of Canada has a lot to learn from what's going on not only in British Columbia. I think Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba are further ahead. I get frustrated when people look at some of the big central Canadian cities as maybe the places where we're going to learn about the future, because I don't think that's where it's coming from.
9:35 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
Thank you so much. And I'm sorry to have to cut that off, because it's great advice.
Darren Fisher.
9:35 a.m.
Liberal
Darren Fisher Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Thank you so much for being here.
Ms. Aird and Ms. Redfern, thank you so much for bringing your voices. Madeleine, you said we're having two different conversations, and I was thinking the exact same thing when you said that. Thank you for being the voice of your community.
Mr. Aldag said something that really struck home and that I've said before about the environment as a whole. He said this is a big challenge, but it's also a huge opportunity. So thank you for your testimony. I don't have any direct questions for you, but you opened my eyes with some of your comments, specifically when you said that the system is not set up for your communities and you're not part of the focus. Those are important comments, and I thank you.
Chris, you said that heritage rehab is “risky”. Certainly it's expensive, but I'm interested in your thoughts a little more on how it's risky. I'm interested in new build versus refurbishing heritage. The cost of a new building has probably doubled in the last 10 to 12 years, as compared with buying an existing home. Not that we're talking about homes, but please share your thoughts on new build as compared with refurbish, and whether that has balanced the scales a bit with the huge costs or there are corresponding huge increases to costs with refurbishing heritage.
I'm also interested in your thoughts on what I would call “façadism”. I'm not certain that's an actual term, but when we talk about heritage buildings, very many of the facades are being saved and the inside of the building is being gutted. One counsellor in Halifax called it the “Disneyfication” of heritage. I'm interested in your thoughts. My personal thought on that is it's not the best-case scenario, but it's much better than the worst-case scenario. I'm interested in your thoughts on those few topics there.
Also, I think it might have been you, Chris, who mentioned helping willing owners. The tax breaks or grants help willing owners, but they don't really push anybody to do anything they don't want to. I guess I'm trying to come full circle here and wondering if the changes in the economy as related to new build versus refurbish have maybe levelled that scale.
9:40 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
There are a lot of questions there and we have three and a half minutes. I just want to give that perspective on it—
9:40 a.m.
Liberal
9:40 a.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!
9:40 a.m.
Manager, Heritage Policy and Government Relations, National Trust for Canada, As an Individual
I'll try to do one minute, or maybe 30 seconds, per question.
We haven't seen a huge recalibration of the costs. The risk of heritage rehab is that in the mainstream construction industry, there isn't quite the same knowledge of how these old building systems worked. When they go into them, they're discovering that when they start pulling apart walls, they discover new things.
When you're building something from the bare ground up, you knock it down and you can create a very straightforward pro forma. You know exactly how much the steel beams cost and how much it's going to cost to put the panels on the outside, whereas with an older building, unless you're very knowledgeable, it can be a challenge.
Some of the differentials happen when there are aggressive new kinds of adaptive reuse being put into buildings. When you're taking a commercial building with big open floor plates and those services, and trying to make it into a residential building, then you have to put new things in and it becomes more complicated. If there's more of a gentle adaptation, then the costs are less. I'll have to look into that further, but from what we've seen, the costs haven't changed that much.
Facadism is an interesting point, because oftentimes the heritage designations we place on buildings are on the public value amenity, which is the facade that all the public can see. Why would I provide a grant or why would I designate the interior when that's the private space of the owner? I mean, I think it's kind cynical, in a way, to become fixated completely on the facade. Is it the best-case scenario? It's a waste of environmental materials to throw away the rest of the building, so there's a large conversation happening in the heritage conservation community about that one.
On helping willing owners, coming back to what Madeleine and Karen were saying, there's a whole conversation that needs to be happening around how we handle what we have, and making more with less, doing more with less things. I think there's the idea of adaptation, about adaptable places and looking at buildings that are adaptable and can change over time; about durability, about durable materials, because I think we build buildings that are somewhat disposable and get rid of them every few decades; about older buildings and their natural materials, so that there are no toxic elements in there that we're going to be leaving as a legacy to our grandchildren; and the idea of maintainability, about places that have the ability to be maintained over time.
I think it's part of a larger conversation about building a more sustainable world that isn't about creating things with solar panels on them, but just using things that we already have in a more informed and more holistic way.
Sorry, I was trying to rush through things there.
9:45 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
Wow, you answered all that, and you still have a minute. If you have anything more to share on it.... You really jammed that all in.
9:45 a.m.
Liberal
Darren Fisher Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
I'll just go to Mr. Smith, if I could.
You said that the national building code needs to be updated, but you didn't really specify what your thoughts were. Do you want to take 40 seconds or so to elaborate on how you think the national building code should be updated?
9:45 a.m.
Director, Centre for Cultural Landscape, Willowbank, As an Individual
I was chief architect at Parks Canada 35 years ago. At that time, the associate committee on the national building code said they were doing a study to adapt the national building code for existing buildings, because it's really focused on new construction.
Thirty-five years later, it still has to appear. It just needs to be a committee.... The associate committee on the national building code has lots of power to bring good people together.
9:45 a.m.
Liberal
Darren Fisher Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
It's an interesting comment, because this committee is quite interested in the—
9:45 a.m.
Director, Centre for Cultural Landscape, Willowbank, As an Individual
I would say that the expertise in education, architectural education planners and so on, is all focused on new construction, as is the national building code. At Willowbank, we run a program where we teach architects, planners, stonemasons, and carpenters with the same curriculum, because we want them to be comfortable with existing buildings, and we teach contemporary design. I would say that the cost overruns and the uncertainty with older buildings and older places are due to a lack of expertise in the professionals who get involved with them. The building code doesn't help.
9:45 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
We keep coming back to the building code. I like that.
Up next is Mr. Sopuck.
9:45 a.m.
Conservative
Robert Sopuck Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB
Thank you.
Ms. Redfern and Ms. Aird, I very much appreciated your testimony.
I'd like to point out to you, Ms. Redfern, that I spent some time with someone you know, Natan Obed. I was part of the C3 expedition from Nain to Iqaluit. I spent a lot of time with Natan and had some intense discussions with him on matters that you and I take a great deal of interest in. We stopped in at the Hebron site and saw the restoration there. I was very struck. Even though that was a site of pain, I think, for the Inuit people, I found the desire to recreate and preserve the site remarkable. God bless them for what they are doing. They are making some major headway there.
In that vein, there doesn't seem to be any reticence in the Inuit community. You talked about Hudson's Bay Company, for it to acknowledge the so-called cultural merging between Europeans and the Inuit, kind of based on the fur trade. That was very important.
Could you quickly elaborate on that for me?
9:45 a.m.
Director, Indigenous Heritage Circle
If I understand your question and comment correctly, I think the Inuit are very pragmatic. Even the work I did with the Qikiqtani Truth Commission.... This is a shared history. This is a shared reality. We need to have our histories told. It's kind of sad, I think; most of our communities, in Iqaluit or across the north, have these HBC buildings. They are not designated, and they are literally falling apart. But they are almost the first sites tourists want to come to. Ideally, these buildings could and should be refurbished. The challenge, even for us in our northern communities is that, except for Iqaluit and Nunavut, they are non tax-based. The reserves are non tax-based. A tax-based system.... It makes it even difficult. How do we move forward in trying to have access to a program that works that way, to actually begin to do those restorations or celebration sites? In the case in Newfoundland and Labrador, the provincial and federal government come in and assist.
I don't know if I actually touched on your question.
9:45 a.m.
Conservative
Robert Sopuck Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB
You certainly did.
I am also very interested in the relationship between wildlife tourism and the preservation of a culture. I think I got from both of your testimonies that cultural preservation is definitely a big part of heritage preservation. I am interested, for example, in how the polar bear hunt in Nunavut goes on. I will defend that hunt as long as I possibly can. It's well done. I have spoken very loudly in defence of that particular activity.
What's interesting about that hunt, as you well know, Ms. Redfern, is that it's done in a very traditional manner. I am going to quote from a document:
Positive cultural outcomes for communities that offer these hunts include the revival of dog mushing; preservation of traditional sewing, hunting and survival skills, and accommodation within the industry for the subsistence economy and Inuit norms of sharing.
Here, I think, is a remarkable melding of two cultures that, with no subsidies whatsoever, is very quietly preserving and protecting a culture.
How important is the polar bear hunt to the communities that do it in this particular manner?
9:50 a.m.
Director, Indigenous Heritage Circle
It is tremendously important, as you've indicated. What I find many people don't realize is that the sports hunt, when southerners come up, actually helps, as you indicated, preserve the traditional practices. When we do a non-sports hunt, we can hunt however we wish. We can hunt by snowmobile or even by boat in the summer. But the tourism and the sports hunt aspect, because of the requirement to use dog teams in those communities that decide...because we get to decide at the community level. On a community-by-community basis we get to decide what portion of the quota, which is determined on science and sustainability requirements, of those polar bears are put into a sports hunt process.
You're absolutely right; it not only revitalizes the sewing skills.... Believe me, there's nothing warmer than a caribou qulitta—