Government Operations Committee on Feb. 14th, 2008

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you for being here today.

I'm sure I speak for all of my colleagues when I say we're all interested in preserving the heritage of our communities. In my area there is a very active heritage group that's working diligently at protecting the character of buildings and other structures in my riding.

I'd just like to say as well that I don't remember having seen this before, but I would welcome this. Maybe it comes to our office and my staff files it with the hundreds of others, but it is a great magazine. Maybe you could come up to the Waterloo region some time and focus, for example, on the Walper Terrace Hotel, Doon Pioneer Memorial Tower, West Montrose Covered Bridge, and other structures, bridges, and barns and so on that have been designated. I applaud the work of heritage communities.

I want to come back to your three recommendations for a minute. I don't have it in writing so I may not have it accurately, but in your first recommendation there was something to the effect that before the government considers sales of its buildings, it should give consideration to the cultural value. I don't think you're implying that didn't happen, but I just wanted to point out that in fact there was a pretty detailed study done and consultation took place with provinces and municipalities in these jurisdictions in the interest of having their buildings designated. I think that piece is in place.

Also, as I'm sure you're aware, we did include, as in your third recommendation, that there be a protection covenant or something to that effect, and that also was included in the sale-leaseback agreement to protect the heritage character of these designated buildings.

I just wonder if you could comment. Those are two of your recommendations, your first and third, and my understanding is that those are already being worked on or have been done. What are the shortfalls in terms of what your ideals are from your recommendations and what I perceive we are already doing as a government?

[Natalie Bull]

Thank you for your question.

On our first recommendation about considering cultural value, basically what we are saying is that we believe there are buildings that should be retained in public ownership, that have a symbolic importance for the Government of Canada, that are seen by Canadians as important federal buildings.

There are certain buildings on the list—such as the National Library and Public Archives, for example, which is not only a building with a real public presence but also a very important building architecturally—that we are saying the government should consider holding in public trust, not just making sure they're protected when they are sold.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

For example, we wouldn't consider selling Centre Block or West Block, or something like that.

[Natalie Bull]

That's right.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

I think we're all in agreement there.

[Natalie Bull]

I would just say there are buildings on the list of the 35 that, in my view, are as significant as those high-profile buildings you named.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

So your first recommendation, clearly, is that, whenever possible, we not sell them. But you also then come to what I would consider a fallback position, in your third recommendation, where you urge us to have this protective covenant. I just want to understand your understanding of what the current protective covenant does and what its shortfalls are.

[Natalie Bull]

We haven't seen the terms of the lease or what the covenant actually says, so I can't comment in detail on what it accomplishes. Again, our understanding is that only one of the three designated heritage buildings sold to date has the covenant registered on title, but there are covenants.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

My understanding is that they're all included with this heritage covenant agreement, and I would welcome input contrary to that, if you have evidence of that.

[Natalie Bull]

I think the presentation that was made available to us indicated--and our sources indicate this--that all three buildings have covenants, but only one of them is registered on title. When the lease expires or when the building is sold, the covenant on two of those buildings disappears.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Are you referring to at the end of the 25-year period, or are you referring to now, when the sale is concluded?

[Natalie Bull]

My understanding is that for two of the buildings, the covenant is related to the government's lease of the building, so it's built into the government continuing to be a tenant. If the government pulls out or the owner decides to sell the building at some point or seek another tenant, that protection is no longer in place.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

I had another question, but my list escapes me. Maybe I'll come back later.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Thank you.

Mr. Angus.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Thank you, Madam Bull.

I found this an excellent presentation. It was very clear. I think it's given us a number of issues that we should be looking at. It's incumbent upon us.

I am very partial to our heritage buildings. When I was a wee lad growing up in a northern mining town, our notion of the federal assets was the Parliament Buildings. When we finally got to come to Ottawa, we did what every Canadian seems to do: we came to the wonderful grounds, the great open public commons that exist on Parliament Hill, and saw the buildings.

I find today, when I see all the young school groups coming, I'm ashamed at the condition of the buildings. West Block looks as though it's being held together by my old granny's knickers. We have trapezes all over the place, not because we're building, but to catch falling chimneys. These are the premier federal buildings of Canada. If you walk through West Block and you see the plastic sheets up on the inside to hold the rainwater, it's a shame. These are symbols of what our country is.

I know for a fact that the fixing of these buildings is difficult, because you need stonemasons, and stonemasons are rare these days. We actually built, I understand, a team of stonemasons to come to Ottawa to put this together, and now they're leaving because nobody at Treasury Board seems to want to actually okay the work. The longer we go with West Block deteriorating, East Block deteriorating.... We need a vision here to actually deal with this.

If we actually get through this next three-week monkey period, I would certainly like in the spring, if we are still around, to raise the issue of our federal buildings here on Parliament Hill and to see what plans are in place to move beyond holding them together with nylons and strings to actually building them.

But that was an opening rant, because I think it is indicative of the need for us to be more careful, as a federal government, with our federal assets.

I'm very interested in what you're saying about this issue of covenant and title. I would actually ask that information on how the sale of these buildings was done be brought forward so we can see if the covenant is on title. Does it need to be? These would be recommendations that we would certainly be able to bring forward. I think it's incumbent upon us to bring them forward.

I'm going to ask you just a simple question, because I think you've been very clear in what needs to be done and clear in your recommendations.

In terms of the government's need to ensure the development and protection of heritage sites, we did have a program--did we not?--that encouraged private sector companies to actually renovate and maintain buildings rather than turning them into landfill. These were not necessarily federal buildings. These were buildings like Barrington Street, in Halifax, and the old Gooderham and Worts in Toronto, places that otherwise would have gone under the wrecking ball. It was actually an innovative tax incentive program that allowed the private sector to decide that it's worth saving these buildings and it's worth making them usable in the 21st century. That program was cancelled recently.

Can you explain what you think would need to be done in order to encourage that these heritage buildings not hit the landfill?

[Natalie Bull]

I'd be happy to. There was a program, the commercial heritage properties incentive fund, modelled on the U.S. federal tax incentive I mentioned earlier, that was an excellent way to encourage private sector owners to go the extra mile and invest in a building that might otherwise be easier to demolish and push into landfill. It provided 20% of the cost of rehabilitation. It was a contribution program. The pilot was wound up early.

In the heritage sector, we're all waiting with bated breath for the introduction of the tax incentive this program was designed to pilot. We'll be looking for it in the federal 2008 budget.

Even the federal buildings that are proposed to be sold into the private sector could benefit from that kind of program. With a tax-based incentive program, an owner could invest in doing restoration work that might otherwise be economically challenging. It certainly revolutionized the way developers look at buildings in the United States.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Ms. Faille.

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Thank you. I would like to thank you for your presentation.

My question concerns the designation of new Canadian Heritage buildings. There is a program. In my riding, we've been trying for a number of years to have certain buildings recognized as heritage buildings. From what I understand, there's a kind of moratorium; no more funding is available to add new heritage buildings.

Is that correct?

[Natalie Bull]

That depends. The designation can be made at a number of levels, local or federal. The Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada studies the buildings and makes designations. This isn't actual protection, but an honourary commemoration. No cost is associated with it.

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

We've filed grant applications with Parks Canada to help us determine how to keep those buildings in good condition. We still haven't received any answers to those funding requests.

Are you aware of that program? Is funding inadequate, or is there simply no more funding?

[Natalie Bull]

At the time, funding could be obtained to restore national historic sites, but there's no more funding in that program. There's virtually no more funding for historic buildings at the federal level.

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

So no more money has been invested in this fund in the past two years.

Since when?

[Natalie Bull]

There's been no more money in the fund for a long time, at least five years. We can send you the details.

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Please.