Fisheries Committee on April 3rd, 2008

[Natalie Bull]

I'd like to respond to that.

Concerning your references to existing policy—the divestiture policy, the Treasury Board policy for heritage—I think the key point is that it's a policy, and when property managers are weighing the requirements that they need to deal with in their roles, policy can fall off the table and you really focus more on statutory requirements. As the Auditor General noted, it's really about accountability.

This would bring an increased level of accountability to those managing heritage lighthouses. The current divestiture policy requires the departments to make best efforts in ensuring that the property will be protected and treated appropriately after it leaves the federal inventory. But with this legislation, the minister's approval would actually be involved in looking at the future of the lighthouse: the potential ownership, the potential use of the building, and also the level of protection it would be afforded.

Typically, with the Heritage Railway Stations Protection Act, there's a requirement that the property have a protective covenant in place when it's divested, or that it be subjected to heritage protection at some other level of government. That's the difference.

You questioned whether there would be a requirement to invest before divesting. I don't see that requirement here. The only mention in the legislation, as we have it before us, is for reasonable maintenance while it is in the federal inventory.

Again, the existing obligation to maintain property is an obligation that federal property owners must comply with, but this is about increased accountability and ensuring that those measures are taken.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Bill Matthews]

Thank you very much, Ms. Bull.

Mr. Blais.

[Raynald Blais, Bloc, Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Earlier, I heard someone say that you currently own a lighthouse, Mr. Noreau. Could you tell me how you acquired this structure?

[Peter Noreau]

I do not own the lighthouse. I am the head of the Corporation du Phare de Cap-au-Saumon. I set up a non-profit organization in order to satisfy government criteria. Our goal, quite simply, was to preserve a historical heritage structure.

[Raynald Blais, Bloc, Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC]

Could you explain to me how your organization went about acquiring this particular lighthouse?

[Peter Noreau]

We set up a corporation in order to satisfy the government's ownership criteria.

This corporation is registered with Quebec's Inspecteur général des institutions financières. I signed a memorandum of understanding with the federal government, and specifically with Fisheries and Oceans Canada, and this arrangement has worked out exceedingly well. These officials placed their trust in me because I solemnly swore that I would restore the lighthouse to its original state. And that is exactly what happened. We respected the structure's architectural features, matched the colours, and everything else you can imagine. The lighthouse looks exactly like it did when it was first built.

[Raynald Blais, Bloc, Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC]

You said the lighthouse was located in a very remote area.

[Peter Noreau]

Indeed, it is very difficult to access the structure.

[Raynald Blais, Bloc, Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC]

Where exactly is it located?

[Peter Noreau]

It is located in the Charlevoix region, very close to the communities of Port-au-Persil and Saint-Siméon and approximately forty kilometres east of La Malbaie.

[Raynald Blais, Bloc, Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC]

How much did you pay to acquire this structure?

[Peter Noreau]

I invested over $270,000, not to mention my time, the wear and tear on my car, gas, accommodation and food. To my mind, these are secondary considerations. I spent a great deal of money, and I have the photographs to prove it, but I was not the only one who did.

[Raynald Blais, Bloc, Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC]

Basically, I'm curious as to the overall cost of restoring the lighthouse? Was it $270,000?

[Peter Noreau]

I personally invested that sum of money in this venture. We are talking about major work, that is putting new roofs on five buildings, doing some structural work, and so on and so forth.

[Raynald Blais, Bloc, Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC]

So then, if I understand you correctly, a corporation was created. However, the venture's main financial backer...

[Peter Noreau]

The corporation was set up merely to satisfy government criteria.

[Raynald Blais, Bloc, Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC]

That is just what I was about to say.

[Peter Noreau]

In essence, a non-profit organization is nothing more than a corporate entity.

[Raynald Blais, Bloc, Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC]

So then, you are the principal financial backer.

[Peter Noreau]

I am the head of the corporation and the only person involved, along with my spouse, of course. In terms of corporate structure, that's all there is. I was asked to get insurance to satisfy civil liability criteria. I have my own hydro meter, to avoid squabbles. God knows that there has been some squabbling, despite the fact that the site had been abandoned for about thirty years. It was in need of some attention.

[Raynald Blais, Bloc, Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC]

No doubt the bill will not really change your situation in any way. However, could it mean some changes overall?

[Peter Noreau]

As far as my situation is concerned, the bill will not change anything since the restoration has already been completed. However, I do think it could help ensure that other structures are restored. As this member was saying, the bill could eventually be amended to make provision for some financial assistance.

I briefly mentioned to Mr. MacDonald and Mr. Bradley that I would not want to see our lighthouses become costly pieces of real estate just so wealthy Americans, as Mr. Stoffer was saying, could come in and buy them up by skirting the law. That is not what we want.

We want to preserve lighthouses. Ms. Bull from the Heritage Canada Foundation is here to attest to that fact. If the funding was available, it might be possible. We would need some sound guidelines in place, to avoid any kind of underhanded action. That is where we should be focusing our energy.

[Barry MacDonald]

I have one comment. A good part of the cost to put these light stations like Mr. Noreau's back in shape is because there has been nothing done to these buildings for so long. Mr. Noreau can back me up on this. Once these light stations were destaffed--I can speak from experience in the Maritimes region--there was almost no maintenance--zero maintenance--done on these buildings. If you let any kind of building, whether concrete, wood, or whatever it is built from, go.... I like to call this cost associated with bringing these back “deferred maintenance”. That's what I like to call it from DFO's perspective, because they have done nothing for so many years.

I'd like to use one example in Quebec. I don't know if it's part of your riding or not, but one of our real lighthouse pioneers in the country is Yves Foucreault. He's at La Martre.

[Peter Noreau]

Yes, he is at La Martre.

[Barry MacDonald]

When you go to his lighthouse, you almost feel you should take off your shoes when you go inside, really. This is how well he takes care of this lighthouse.

This lighthouse has not been divested, but Monsieur Foucreault has taken it upon himself, and he's got the passion I spoke about in my presentation. He makes the care of this building his personal responsibility. If Mr. Foucreault were here today, I'm sure he could tell you he goes quite regularly, yearly, to DFO and says he needs paint and paintbrushes, just simple things to keep up that light. He does the yearly maintenance that was done by a keeper when a lightkeeper was on staff.

The cost to DFO when and if that lighthouse is passed over under the divestiture program will be zero. We've got Mr. Foucreault to thank for that. It's too bad we didn't have an Yves Foucreault at a lot of lighthouses in this country.

The reason for some of these initial costs--and some of them aren't that great, the cost of bringing these things up to standard--is because there's been no maintenance for so many years. Now they're faced with bills, but it's deferred payments.