Government Operations Committee on Nov. 18th, 2010

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Thank you.

Before I ask questions of our guests I'd like to thank you all for attending this morning.

You know, it's rather interesting. I heard my friend Ms. Coady talk about what a delight it was to have you here today and how much she appreciated your service. I know that to be a sincere comment, and I appreciate that. Then I heard a colleague who I hold in regard, and as he asked questions of you, I frankly was shocked and sincerely disappointed. I heard comments such as “Why has your department patently failed?” I heard a second comment: “Why shouldn't this committee hold your department in contempt?”

It's no small wonder sometimes that when people come in front of this committee they're not sure what they're going to get. I have not heard such badgering, intimidation of the highest order, and maligning of what I deem to be our dedicated public service. I am disappointed about that this morning. I have to share that with you.

I do appreciate the work you do, and I know people around this table appreciate what you do. The absolute intimidation is not acceptable, from my perspective--my standard. I would hope that we, as a committee, can ask serious questions in a serious and thoughtful way.

If I might, Mr. Conrad, you've taken the brunt of the questions this morning, and I think you've held your head up high. Could I ask you to focus on this issue of legacy funds? It is a question that's come back time and again. How do you define a legacy fund, sir?

[Bryce Conrad]

Well, in this regard.... Do you mean this fund specifically?

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Yes, please.

[Bryce Conrad]

This one was very much set up to provide funding for infrastructure projects that would help the Parry Sound--Muskoka region prepare for the hosting of the 2010 G-8 summit. It was also there to provide legacy, as I said, for the residents and tourists who would be inconvenienced by this thing. So in that regard, the fund supported projects that allowed for the secure and successful holding of the summit, enhanced the visual and tourism image of the region, and improved the security of visitors and residents in the region.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Was that legacy unique to the region, or have we done this with other summits in the past?

[Bryce Conrad]

As I indicated earlier, it's not entirely unusual. In 1997, with the APEC summit in Vancouver, the Government of Canada invested $60 million to widen Route 1 to improve the Sea Island connector to the Vancouver International Airport as well as to endow its share--

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Can you talk about Halifax, though? It's one of my favourite places. It's near Cape Breton, where my mother is from. Tell me about Halifax, if you would. What was the legacy that we left there in that great city?

[Bryce Conrad]

Absolutely. Obviously I was not part of that fund, so I can only speak to it from what I understand and what I know.

There was $300,000 set aside to improve and restore the Bluenose. There was $8.1 million spent on infrastructure projects, including local roads, sidewalks, landscaping, repair and cleaning of major iconic Nova Scotia landmarks, and the construction of a world peace monument. There was a million dollars spent on marketing and promotional items, $250,000 in gateway tourism signage. And after the summit was over, there was a $3.2-million investment in Pier 21, which was very much considered a--

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

This was after the summit was over, presumably when leaders may not have had a chance to visit it, and I'm not sure members from Halifax and region would have objected to that kind of commitment to the region.

[Bryce Conrad]

Sorry. I believe Pier 21 was done after the summit.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Exactly my point, though.

It seems to me that if I was going from one end of the city of Halifax to the other, not even necessarily during rush hour, it might take 40 minutes, probably the same amount of time that it might take from Huntsville to Parry Sound, give or take a bit, on a good day.

I share that with you because you talked about this as being a legacy for the region, and you've suggested that this is not extraordinary, that it was done with the Pope's visit as well, if I recall what you said. It's a gift to the region. It's something that stays behind, some way for all Canadians to say thank you to all parts of the country. And were that to be in Quebec, we would do that kind of legacy funding in Quebec, presumably, as we've done coast to coast. Is that a fair comment?

[Bryce Conrad]

Again, I can't speak to what would be done in the future or what has been done in the past, but as I said, this legacy fund was certainly not unique. It has been done in the past when we've hosted major events.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Mr. Holder. Mr. Vincent would be very upset if I treated you any differently than I treated him.

Five minutes for Madam Coady.

[Siobhan Coady, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

Okay. I only have five minutes and I have four questions, but before I ask them I want to address something that my colleague Mr. Holder said.

Please don't think that any questions we're asking you are being asked of you as individuals. We're asking them because the Government of Canada and the ministers responsible for those departments are ultimately responsible. This is only for clarity, simply to make sure.

I want to go back, because I was a little concerned about the place settings. I know it's a relatively small amount of money. I think it was $19,500 for 24 people, and you said it's probably $1,000 less than that. In any event, it's a lot of money. My point here is, didn't Deerhurst Resort, which hosts weddings all the time, have enough for 24 place settings? Why would someone approve a fairly significant expenditure for 24 place settings? I'm trying to get a sense of why.

I only have five minutes and I have four questions, so could you be brief?

[Sanjeev Chowdhury]

Before I reply to that question, could you please repeat what you quoted as the cost, because I think that's an error.

[Siobhan Coady, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

I'm simply adding up all the place settings: dining room place settings $11,000, glass charges $6,600, frosted glasses $1,890--when you add all that up.

[Sanjeev Chowdhury]

The frosted glass was a gift, actually. It's not part of the place settings.

[Siobhan Coady, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

It was in your list.

[Sanjeev Chowdhury]

Yes, it's in the list. But the 24 place settings, a determination was made that no, they didn't have the resources to do that. So somebody made the decision.

[Siobhan Coady, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

It's a lot of money.

Okay, I want to go to another question, and this is something we just talked about, the legacy fund for the region. We talked about that significantly. I have concerns because of the distances. Sidewalk upgrades are all very important, tree replacements are all very important, but it was an hour away from the summit site itself in the G-8. Where's the legacy fund for Toronto? Toronto was very inconvenienced under the G-20. We had witnesses here from the Toronto Restaurant Association, and they were talking about lost wages. Some of them were talking about lost jobs because of the summit. We know there were windows smashed. Was there a legacy fund for Toronto?

[Bryce Conrad]

In recognition of how limited the time is, I'll keep my answer brief. The answer is that Infrastructure Canada was given the purview and authority to manage the G-8 legacy fund for the Huntsville-Muskoka region.

[Siobhan Coady, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

That's it. It's an interesting fact.

I want to turn to Public Works. I said I had four questions to ask in five minutes, so thank you for pointing that out.

Item 168 on the spreadsheet is the fit-up of the quarry site near Huntsville for the RCMP. We understand or have been told that the government actually had to pay to have that site levelled not once, but twice. I want to know why the second levelling was necessary and what the additional cost to the government was of that second levelling. Again, I understand that the improvements to the site were dug up and obliterated after the G-8. Why was that additional cost incurred?

If you could be brief, I'd really appreciate it.

[Renée Jolicoeur]

Sandra Young can respond.

[Sandra Young]

Sorry, what was the number again?

[Siobhan Coady, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

It was 168 on your spreadsheet. It was a fit-up of the quarry. You don't need the number.

Was the fit-up of the quarry done twice, meaning that the site was levelled not just once, but twice? Was there an additional cost to government because of that, and why was the second levelling necessary?