Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Dec. 11th, 2018

[Susan Kulba]

Yes, I think it is a good time, because as we progress into the Centre Block renovation, we're going to have to already start thinking about what we do with the West Block once it comes to moving back into Centre Block. We'll want to know that well in advance, what that final use of the West Block is.

[David Christopherson]

Just one last thing I'll throw out there, Chair, and this might be a bridge too far. I don't know, but it doesn't seem that crazy to me. We're recognizing that these kinds of projects require more than just very competent, capable professional folks, which you all are, but it takes more than that to build a Parliament. We're now talking, and I think we're making it very clear that parliamentarians need to have a say. The journalists and the professional media need to have a say. The security people do, obviously, and I would assume that's a no-brainer.

As we go forward, what's the budget? I just want to ask about the budget. I'm going to add an idea, but I want to ask questions that just occurred to me. Is the budget fixed?

[Rob Wright]

No, at this point, the baseline budget or schedule has not been firmly established. That requires information from the functional programming and the final assessment of the building's condition.

[David Christopherson]

The last thing I'll throw out, Chair, is this. Could it be an idea that for at least maybe a week there be an opportunity for the public to have a say before everything is finalized? Obviously, not every Canadian can go through here, but with current communications means, you can bring this to everybody's living room and they can have an opportunity to give input. That would allow all those brilliant architects, those former parliamentarians who are out there and citizens, who obviously have a vested interest in their Parliament, a formal opportunity for that feedback as almost the last piece. As everybody else has given their professional input, take one step back and put the whole thing out there to the nation and say, “Canadians, what do you think? We're about to finalize this. Do you have an opinion? We really want to hear it.”

That might be something we may want to build in.

I'll relinquish the floor with that.

Thank you, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Thank you, Mr. Christopherson.

We will now continue with Ms. Lapointe.

[Linda Lapointe]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I am going to continue in the same vein as Mr. Christopherson. If I understand correctly, the budget and the plans have not been completely established.

Earlier, you referred to the fact that a Parliament is not a house. I simply want to say that previously I had a business. I renovated it three times while operating it. Before beginning renovations, I knew exactly what the final result would be, and the deadlines involved. I'm a bit surprised by your answers. In principle, when taxpayers' money is at stake, we should know what is going to happen before we start.

My questions are very specific and are addressed to Ms. Kulba. Earlier, you talked about square footage. Do you know how many square feet there are in the House of Commons? If you don't know, you can send us the answer. Do you know how many square feet the House of Commons will occupy in the West Block? You can send us that answer as well.

What percentage of that space is currently occupied by the administration, the members, the whips' offices, the office the government leader and those of the ministers? What percentage of the space will all of these entities occupy in the West Block? I suppose it is possible to obtain those figures. If I understand correctly, we don't know how many square feet we have here and how many we will have over there. I would appreciate that information.

Thank you.

[Stéphan Aubé]

We have taken note of your question and we will be providing those details.

We'll provide the answer to Madame Lapointe.

[Linda Lapointe]

Thank you, I appreciate it greatly.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

On the same topic, I assume that if we don't get through all the questions—because David has 27 rounds—that you would be prepared to answer to our researchers or our clerk with some written answers to some other questions.

[Stéphan Aubé]

We will, sir.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Mr. Reid.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

David's fundamental point is not that he has more questions today, but as time goes on more questions will arise, and this committee ought to play an oversight role unless we can feel confident that some other committee of the House of Commons is doing the same thing. Would that be a fair assessment?

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

No, I don't have the confidence.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

I don't have that confidence either. That's not the fault of individuals here. I think it's a fault of the fact that we have a process that has been rolling along inevitably due to the deterioration of this building and the fact that technology is changing. We have to figure out a practical management structure for the next decade or whatever it turns out to be.

I had a further thought, but maybe I should wait.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Okay. Maybe I'll put you ahead of Mr. Graham's next round, because he's had a few. Do you want to go?

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

Yes. It's this thought—

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Sorry, I want to comment on what you just said. I spoke to the Speaker a few minutes ago, and he said it's incumbent on us to express our interest too. I think we've done that today. If we didn't express an interest, then we weren't involved before.

Go ahead with what you were going to say.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

The very first job I had, other than being a paperboy, was working as a draftsman at an engineering firm, Clemann Large Patterson—consulting engineers in Ottawa's west end. When I started working there, we were involved with the wrap-up of the renovation of the East Block in 1981. With the passage of some 35-odd years, the East Block is now once again requiring some renovations.

I remember at that time that part of what was going on was dealing with the previous sets of renovations—there had been one in 1910 and one at a somewhat later point—which makes the point that we're not talking about doing a renovation of a building. We're talking about a constant upgrading, modernizing process, both for this building, for East Block of course and eventually for West Block, even though right now it's been brought up to a very high standard. I don't know how Public Works, how you folks treat this kind of thing, if you have some kind of plan for this kind of cyclical upgrading and renovating. I'd be interested in your thoughts in that regard.

[Rob Wright]

Thank you very much for the question.

We've been focused quite a bit on the restoration and modernization of the Centre Block, which is the key parliamentary building, of course. It's set within the broader parliamentary precinct, of which there are many critical assets.

What I would say is that, at Public Services and Procurement Canada, we really have what I would call three buckets of approaches for the facilities here.

One is the major restoration and modernization under which the Centre Block would fall, as would the West Block, as you referenced. This usually requires the emptying of the building and a complete overhaul of the building, stem to stern, to bring it up to state-of-the-art condition under modern building codes and to modernize the facilities.

We also do what we call recapitalization and repair projects. The recapitalization projects are done in occupied buildings, to essentially take care of fairly large segments of the building. The East Block, as you referenced, is undergoing a recapitalization right now of four of the entrances and towers that were in very poor condition. That is to ensure that the building can continue operating in a safe condition and to reduce the cost of major overhaul projects downstream. There is also a repair bucket to make sure that we have an ongoing maintenance program to ensure that the buildings don't rust out as they did in the past.

The last point I would make is that when we do these major overhauls, we really pay attention to trying and get the maximum life cycle out of them so that we don't have to empty them for a very extended period. The goal here is to have a very robust program in place so that we are not in the situation we have been in over the past decade and that we face in the current situation.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Just before I go to Mr. de Burgh Graham, I have a really quick question, and I'll need a really short answer.

As you have said, there are towers. There are lots of nooks and crannies in this building. My understand is that a couple of months ago the Speaker asked for a tour of those nooks and crannies in this building. Has that occurred?

[Susan Kulba]

Not that I'm aware of. He may have had a tour with somebody other than us, but from my team, that's not something I'm aware of.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

I think it was your team that he asked.

Mr. Graham.

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Thank you.

I would just like to respond to a couple of quick comments from Mr. Reid and Mr. Christopherson before I get back to my questions.

First, Scott, I was born in 1981, so it was interesting to hear your history. Thanks for that.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

You too will be old one day.