Fisheries Committee on June 19th, 2007

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

So somewhere along the line we're going to need to find a barrel of money for the departments to deal with the issue.

That may be beyond where we can go. But let me just go to this question. I understand that with the bill as it's written, it's estimated that DFO would require about $364 million of a total estimated $384 million over five years for recapitalization. Maybe those figures are a little different from what we heard earlier, but that's another estimate that's come forward. It would cost about $28.5 million of an estimated cost of $30 million annually thereafter for maintenance costs. Now, that is, I presume, for the ones that were designated as heritage structures.

Mr. Hegge, are you familiar with those numbers? Can you tell us if that is based on 450, roughly, on the 60% formula?

[Cal Hegge]

I think the difference is five years versus ten years. The figures I gave you in my opening remarks, which I could repeat, are predicated on 450 light stations being designated. The estimate was $461 million out of a total estimated cost of $481 million for recapitalization. Then there was a lesser amount for the ongoing maintenance.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

Another question is that if there is a divestiture program where a group takes it over, there seems to be some confusion about whether DFO would still have some custodial responsibilities or whether the department would be clear entirely. It's only if they're designated heritage that DFO would have some custodial responsibilities. Could you clarify that?

[Cal Hegge]

If we divest of it, basically we are absolving any responsibility from our department. It's now in the hands of the party to which we divest it. Sometimes there are some provisions that go along with that divestiture. They have to maintain the light, for example, in good shape for a period of time or what have you. But basically it becomes their responsibility in accordance with the agreement that supports the divestiture.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gerald Keddy]

If there are no further questions, we do have another item.

Madame DeBellefeuille.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I know that it is challenging for an anglophone to pronounce my name.

I have a brief question regarding something that I am curious about. I want to know how Canada compares with the United States and other countries when it comes to managing and maintaining its heritage lighthouses. Is Canada good at maintaining and preserving its lighthouses as compared to the United States? Where are we at?

[Gérard Asselin, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

We are the worst country in the G8.

[Cal Hegge]

We have some figures that we could give the committee if you are interested. These figures come from a study on lighthouses in other countries. There is great variety among the ways in which different countries treat their lighthouses.

In Canada, the figure for designated eligible buildings is about 55 to 60%. However, these figures can vary greatly in other countries. For instance, in Japan, the country with the most lighthouses, this study shows that only 2% of lighthouses are classified as historical sites.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

Do you have any figures for the United States?

[Cal Hegge]

Yes. In the United States, the rate is 87%.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

In fact, 87% of lighthouses have been designated as heritage sites.

[Cal Hegge]

The United States have 460 lighthouses. Eighty seven per cent of them are designated as heritage sites.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

Are they better at maintaining them than we are? Are they spending more money for this than we are?

[Cal Hegge]

I do not know.

[David Burden]

In the United States, any lighthouse older than 50 years is designated as a heritage site. This is the most important criteria.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

Do they invest any money? Are the lighthouses dilapidated or contaminated?

[David Burden]

I do not know. This only has to do with designation. I have no information on the amount that the United States spends on maintaining its lighthouses.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

You must know whether the lighthouses in the United States are in poor condition. Do you have this information?

[David Burden]

We don't have this information.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

Usually, we are able to make good comparisons with the United States regarding many subjects. You are telling me that we have nothing regarding lighthouses. We cannot make a comparison.

[Cal Hegge]

I am not sure if I understand your question. This bill applies to Canada. I think that there are no studies—

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

—to make a comparison—

[Cal Hegge]

—that would allow us to compare. It would be a good idea, but I do not think that there are any.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

Very well.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.