Government Operations Committee on March 20th, 2007

[Mary Chaput]

You're right, 25 years is a very long period of time. Even though the government works in 25-year and long-term contexts like that, in the private sector many things can change quickly, and 25 years is a lifetime. So I think what PW will have to do--and again, I can't speak on their behalf--is be very careful about what the off-ramps may or may not be in negotiating the terms of the leases and about any financial penalties that may go with those.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

I understand there are two banks involved and these banks have produced a report on these properties that the government has said is confidential, so we don't know their findings and their recommendations. Is it usual that these reports would not be accessible to the public so that we can determine whether or not the proposal is actually a good proposal for Canadians?

[Mary Chaput]

My understanding is that those reports were advice to the minister, and therefore, typically, advice to a minister is protected under the Access to Information Act. I personally don't find that element of the current context particularly unusual.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

So there's going to be no way we can get the details of this. If it's a normal process, there's no way we can get the details until after the leases are signed. Is that what you're saying?

[Mary Chaput]

I don't know exactly how the next steps will play out, but certainly the details are going to have to be vetted at Treasury Board. In fact, we will be doing the analysis on that. So again, yes, that would be protected information on a go-forward basis.

As you're suggesting, once the leases are struck, I don't know how PW treats those kinds of documents from an ATI Act point of view.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Can you give us the timetable of when you will be doing your analysis and when you would expect a deal to go forward if the minister is going to pursue this?

[Mary Chaput]

The timing of our analysis will be completely and utterly contingent on how quickly that bidding process runs its course and on the time given to bidders to submit their proposals. Then typically there will be analysis inside PW, and it would only be after this that it would come to the secretariat. So my estimation would be that we're talking about at least a number of months.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

One of the arguments that have been made for selling these buildings is that some of them require ongoing maintenance. When the minister was here and talking about properties, this is the point he made as well. There had been no funds or insufficient funds put aside for maintenance.

I'm a homeowner, and normally that's something you do. After so many years you have to replace your furnace and your windows and paint the place and do various things. How could it be that in looking after these 46,000 buildings worth $20 billion or so that we neglected to set aside adequate funds to maintain these properties?

[Mary Chaput]

In answering your question, I would remind you, of course, that those aren't all PW buildings. That said, what transpires when a department runs into a funding pressure is that typically, to the degree that they can't allocate from within to cover it, a Treasury Board submission is looked at in the framework of all the competing government priorities. The government has to address the most urgent and the most pressing at the time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Thank you very much.

We'll go on to the next questioner.

Mr. Bonin.

[Raymond Bonin, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I have a few short questions that you can probably respond to, but you may want to send us the details later on, if the chair agrees.

I'd like to know how many buildings that we own are not being used, and how many buildings that we rent are not being used. Of these, how many are over 35 years old? If a building is not being used, I'd also like to know if it is debited, if it is charged to the department, to Public Works, or to a general account.

[Mary Chaput]

We can certainly get back to you with those answers, sir.

In terms of to whom the debit accrues, it depends on whether or not the building is owned by a custodian department. For a laboratory owned by Fisheries and Oceans, they would be carrying the cost for that. If it's a building that PW has leased on behalf of the government and it's standing empty, that expense would be reflected in their accounts.

[Raymond Bonin, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

In Public Works' accounts?

[Mary Chaput]

Yes.

[Raymond Bonin, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

And not the department's?

[Mary Chaput]

You know what? That's a good question. I see the distinction that you're making.

[Raymond Bonin, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

The department will determine a need for 20,000 square feet. Two years later, they close the department down. If we have a lease for years, that department should be paying the note.

[Mary Chaput]

Right. How can you see where the...?

[Raymond Bonin, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

You change the minister, you change the whole system, and then you have empty space.

[Mary Chaput]

Yes, I see exactly what you're asking.

[Raymond Bonin, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

I'm interested in knowing that.

[Mary Chaput]

We'll do some research on that for you.

[Raymond Bonin, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

Okay.

I consider a building with one telephone and one desk in a corner to be a building that is not being used. We know of one in Gatineau, I think it is. It's an enormous building, and there are five or six people working there. I consider that to be a building that is not being used.

[A voice]

We can sell it.

[Raymond Bonin, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

You can sell anything.