Evidence of meeting #146 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was tree.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Paul Johanis  Chair, Greenspace Alliance of Canada's Capital
Andre Barnes  Committee Researcher
Lisa MacDonald  Senior Landscape Architect and Arborist, Department of Public Works and Government Services
Robert Wright  Assistant Deputy Minister, Parliamentary Precinct, Department of Public Works and Government Services
Clerk of the Committee  Mr. Andrew Lauzon
Jennifer Garrett  Director General, Centre Block Program, Department of Public Works and Government Services

11:55 a.m.

Liberal

David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC

You made frequent reference in your comments to climate change, which is—as you know—something we all take quite seriously. What is the greenhouse gas impact of working around this tree—there would be a significant amount of extra movement and extra displacements, potentially—compared to the environmental impact of simply moving the tree? What are we saving in terms of that? It's symbolic, but in terms of real savings, I'm trying to see what they would be.

11:55 a.m.

Chair, Greenspace Alliance of Canada's Capital

Paul Johanis

Locally, it's just one tree. It has produced and continues to fix carbon and to exhale oxygen that we breathe in, but it is just one tree.

In the big picture, we're not making the argument that this going to have an impact in that sense. We are saying that this is not just any tree; this is a very symbolic tree. Whatever we do here is in a sense the image of our commitment to fighting climate change.

11:55 a.m.

Liberal

David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC

That's all I have for now.

Thank you.

11:55 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell

Does any Liberal who hasn't spoken have a one-minute question?

I'll go informal now, like we do for one-minute questions.

Mr. Garrison.

11:55 a.m.

NDP

Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC

Mr. Chair, my question is a procedural one at this point. I know we have other witnesses to hear on this.

From what we've heard today—and I certainly find it very persuasive—we're trying to get a moratorium on further damage to the tree at this point, and then an evaluation of its health. That's one question. How do we go about getting that in terms of this committee?

The second, of course, is a bit of a broader question in terms of the siting of the visitor centre and my own concern that we get busy on the green space and not wait 10 years for that.

I'm a visitor here today. How would the committee have impact on those two decisions?

Noon

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell

We'll defer that until the end of the meeting, but it's a good question. We just won't do it now, because we have other witnesses.

Noon

NDP

Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC

I understand that we have other witnesses, but I—

Noon

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell

Are you leaving?

Noon

NDP

Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC

This is my third committee today. I hope not. Also, I have one more coming up. No, I'm not planning to leave, but it's a critical question. I don't think we should mislead people. If, in fact, this committee doesn't have any power to affect either of these decisions, then we need to direct our witnesses to where they need to go next, if it isn't this committee. That's my reason for asking while they're still here.

Noon

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell

Well, I'm sure they'll stay to hear the next witnesses, so we're going to discuss that at the end.

Noon

NDP

Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC

Thank you.

Noon

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell

Does anyone else have a question?

We're going to suspend for a very short break to change witnesses, and then we'll carry on.

Thank you very much. It was very helpful information.

Noon

Chair, Greenspace Alliance of Canada's Capital

Paul Johanis

Thank you for having me this morning.

12:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell

Welcome back to meeting number 146 of the committee as we continue our inquiry into the status of the elm tree on Parliament Hill.

We are pleased to be joined by officials from Public Services and Procurement Canada. Here with us today are Robert Wright, Assistant Deputy Minister, Parliamentary Precinct Branch; Jennifer Garrett, Director General, Centre Block program; and Lisa MacDonald, Senior Landscape Architect and Arborist.

I want to make a couple of comments before we start.

One is on the relationship with the National Capital Commission. From Parliamentary Privilege in Canada, page 169, “The grounds are maintained by the National Capital Commission by virtue of a request from the Minister of Public Works”. That's where the buck stops.

I'd also just like to put this discussion about one tree in the larger context. I think that over December and the beginning of this year we crossed the Rubicon in having parliamentarians have input into the development of their precinct. I want to thank Public Works and the Board of Internal Economy for coming to those agreements, which I think will make for good development.

Mr. Wright, before you came here I mentioned that I hoped you might include in your opening comments some real, technical description of the relation of where the visitor centre would be in relation to the nine-metre base coming out from the roots of the tree.

Second, the May report said the tree was in good condition, and subsequently it deteriorated; one of the reasons given was the drought in September. I'd just like to know if there's irrigation in that section of the Hill, water sprinklers, etc.

Lastly, do you have any comments on the fact it was fine in May? I read the dendrologist's report by Mr. Farr that your department provided to us; apparently there was just a one-day cursory evaluation of the tree.

Ms. MacDonald, first, could you tell me a little about your position and your scientific background?

12:05 p.m.

Lisa MacDonald Senior Landscape Architect and Arborist, Department of Public Works and Government Services

I'm a landscape architect and certified arborist. I have been a certified arborist for seven years and have been practising landscape architecture for 10 years. I have been employed with CENTRUS since September. I've examined the tree a number of times starting in late September, including having some information from an aerial inspection that was conducted recently.

12:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell

Pardon my ignorance, but what's an arborist and what's a dendrologist, and what's the difference?

12:05 p.m.

Senior Landscape Architect and Arborist, Department of Public Works and Government Services

Lisa MacDonald

I believe a dendrologist is his position at NRCan, I'm not 100% sure, but he's also a registered professional forester. That's a different qualification. A certified arborist is somebody who practises in the field and has certification offered by an organization called the International Society of Arboriculture. You write an exam to enter, and then you have to maintain your certification with continuing education credits.

12:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell

So that's related to the scientific growth of trees?

12:05 p.m.

Senior Landscape Architect and Arborist, Department of Public Works and Government Services

Lisa MacDonald

It's related to understanding trees, how they grow, yes.

12:10 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell

Okay.

Mr. Wright, thank you for coming, and I look forward to your comments.

12:10 p.m.

Robert Wright Assistant Deputy Minister, Parliamentary Precinct, Department of Public Works and Government Services

I do have some formal opening comments, but I'll try to address some of those questions up front so that sets the stage, if that would be okay.

The location of the visitor welcome centre is obviously a really critical matter to this study. You would all be aware of where phase one of the visitor welcome centre is located, in between Centre Block and West Block, which creates the new public entrance to West Block. The blasting that was referenced through some of the discussion in the first hour was related to the creation of that phase one of the visitor welcome centre. It's a large excavation.

Although the final elements that will be going into the visitor welcome centre are not final at this point, and we're working very closely with officials within the parliamentary administration to clarify that, it is becoming clearer over time. We'd be happy to come and make a presentation on where things are at. We do know, however, and have known for a long time, the broad contours of the visitor welcome centre. The visitor welcome centre in simple terms has phase one as the western section in between West Block and Centre Block. We would see the mirror image of that on the eastern side. The parliamentary complex, the triad, would work together as an integrated complex. As people were referencing during the discussion, it would extend out under the front lawn in front of Centre Block and be a fairly significant facility that would connect the triad and create a host of services that have been requested by Parliament.

First and foremost, of course, it creates significant enhanced security to the triad. That has for a long time now, in getting to an integrated visitor welcome centre, been seen as a priority. Two, it provides a universally accessible, barrier-free front door to Parliament for the first time, obviously extremely important; a number of services for Canadians who will be visiting the Parliament Buildings; interpretive services provided by the Library of Parliament; and of course core services. The intent would be to have some core services for Parliament as well. At this point, working with parliamentary officials, and again it's not final, it would be envisioned to have some committee rooms within the visitor welcome centre as well. We have heard loud and clear on Centre Block that it is very important to retain the look and feel of Centre Block. You would see many important services taking place within the visitor welcome centre. That would enable a restoration instead of a changing of Centre Block, which I think we've heard, critically.

That's the visitor welcome centre. We would be happy to come back or follow up with some images that could demonstrate that in a clear manner.

On the question about irrigation, there is no irrigation in that area. It happens from natural rainfall. Perhaps Ms. MacDonald can speak to this more clearly.

There is a suite of maples, for the most part, and the elm tree is in the area. Some of the maples are invasive. There are some linden trees that are invasive as well. Then there are a number of indigenous trees. My understanding is that maple trees are more susceptible to drought than elm, but you see some of those being quite healthy.

Now, the range of opinion on the health of the tree is critically important, because the conversation really began with asking, “What is the condition of the tree? Would it really be viable for removal and replanting?” Initially, we had a couple of different perspectives, going back to 1995, when a very eminent arborist indicated that it would have a lifespan of about 20 plus years, which we're at about now due to a couple of factors, of having suffered from Dutch elm disease and....

Just by way of interest, I grew up in “the city of stately elms”, Fredericton, New Brunswick. I've been an elm tree lover for a long time.

We took this very seriously. We had some differing reports, so essentially we went out and got a second opinion and a third opinion, as you would if you were getting a medical diagnosis. In fact, I think at this point there are six assessments. It would seem fairly conclusive evidence—and I'll maybe have Ms. MacDonald speak to this more specifically—that the tree is in poor and declining health and is not a good candidate to be removed and replanted, which really informed our advice.

With that, I'll move to formal comments.

Good afternoon. My name is Robert Wright, and I am the Assistant Deputy Minister for the Parliamentary Precinct at Public Services and Procurement Canada, or PSPC.

Also here with me today is Jennifer Garrett, the Director General for the Centre Block rehabilitation program, as well as the professional arborist Lisa MacDonald who works under the design team for the project, CENTRUS.

Mr. Chair, I would like to start my remarks today by thanking you and all the committee members for your keen interest in the restoration and modernization of the Parliamentary Precinct.

Public Services and Procurement Canada is committed to working in partnership with Parliament in implementing our long-term vision and plan that is focused on restoring and modernizing the parliamentary precinct to ensure it meets the needs of a modern parliament and continues to serve as an inviting environment where Canadians can gather.

A core part of this joint plan is the restoration of the iconic Centre Block and the construction of an expanded visitor welcome centre, which will provide important services to parliamentarians and the Canadian public visiting Parliament Hill, providing both enhanced security and a barrier-free front door to Parliament.

Our joint plan to restore and modernize the precinct extends beyond the buildings to safeguarding and renewing the parliamentary grounds and all other spaces key to the operations of Canada's parliamentary democracy.

The landscape and the setting, including the great lawn that serves as Canada's market square as well as the rugged escarpment and the urban forest, are as much a part of what makes the precinct uniquely Canadian as the beautiful neo-gothic buildings themselves.

The restoration of Centre Block and, more to the point, the construction of the next phase of the visitor welcome centre, which will be located underground to minimize the visual impact to this important landscape, will require significant excavation work. Unfortunately, there are a number of trees, including the large elm tree, in the middle of the excavation zone.

To enable the work to proceed, it is impossible for the trees located in the excavation zone to remain in place. Although excavation work is not scheduled to begin for several months, it is highly dependent on the completion of preparatory work this spring and summer on the east side of Centre Block. These preparatory activities include archeological work, the relocation of underground services including an IT duct bank and the completion of a construction road.

Demonstrating leadership in sustainability is a core objective of the long-term vision and plan and the Centre Block rehabilitation. Public Services and Procurement Canada is committed to working with Parliament to reduce its environmental footprint, as well as protecting and enhancing Parliament's urban forest.

As a means to achieving this important commitment, Public Services and Procurement Canada has developed a comprehensive strategy to minimize the impacts of this required excavation work as much as possible. The focus of this plan is on relocating, wherever feasible, healthy trees that are indigenous to the area and replacing within the precinct all removed trees at a 4:1 ratio. Note that this plan exceeds the National Capital Commission best practice recommendation of replacing trees at a 2:1 ratio.

Of the 30 impacted trees, 14 will be relocated within the precinct. Of the 16 that will be removed, eight are invasive species. To offset the removal of the 16 trees, 64 new trees will be planted within the precinct.

Additionally, the Centre Block and visitor welcome centre projects will include the implementation of a landscape plan that will see additional trees replanted in the east pleasure grounds.

To implement these plans, we worked hand in hand with parliamentary officials who have been engaged throughout the process. We also engaged with the federal heritage buildings review office, given Parliament Hill's important status, and with the National Capital Commission, which reviewed our plans and provided approval to proceed.

In addition, Minister Qualtrough has communicated with the Greenspace Alliance of Canada's Capital about the plan to remove the tree. Departmental officials also met with representatives of that organization. In addition, PSPC responded to a joint letter from the speakers of the House of Commons and the Senate of Canada.

I want to ensure the committee that removing trees in the parliamentary precinct is seen as a last-resort option. Unfortunately, the American elm tree is located in a high-intensity construction zone requiring significant excavation work and will not be able to remain in its existing location.

Given the tree cannot stay in its location, Public Services and Procurement Canada sought the advice of independent experts on the possibility of relocating the tree. Multiple arborists were consulted. They found that the elm is in deteriorating health, and given its health, the elm would not likely survive the trauma of relocation even if world-leading best practices in tree relocation are used. The costs to relocate the tree would be significant, estimated at approximately $400,000. These costs were developed by the construction management firm for the project, PCL/EllisDon, in joint venture. The combination of the elm's declining health, its low likelihood of survival and the significant costs that are involved led us to recommend the tree be removed.

Even if the construction on the visitor welcome centre does not proceed as discussed here earlier and the tree remains in place, significant construction activities in support of the Centre Block rehabilitation, such as the excavation of the foundation and work on the building's exterior masonry, will undoubtedly cause the tree stress and exacerbate its already poor condition. To preserve the legacy of the American elm, it is proposed that the dominion sculptor repurpose the wood in consultation with Parliament. As you may be aware, the thrones used in the newly restored Senate of Canada building used wood donated by the Queen from her estate.

As well, on the advice of the Greenspace Alliance of Canada's Capital, we are working with the University of Guelph to propagate the elm as well as provide genetic samples to support the university's elm recovery project. We recently took approximately 100 twig samples with the objective of being able to propagate up to approximately 50 elms within the parliamentary precinct.

This means that the tree samplings will be reproduced under scientific supervision, and we are committed to continue to work with Greenspace Alliance to commemorate the tree and to work with them and Parliament to find appropriate locations where the newly propagated elms might be planted.

Now that parliamentary operations have been moved out of Centre Block, we are preparing to begin the major rehabilitation program. We want to keep the project on track so that Centre Block can be reinstated as the seat of government as soon as possible. Work in the east pleasure grounds starting this spring is essential to maintain the program's momentum.

In closing, I would like to reiterate that the ongoing engagement with Parliament is essential to ensure that the work being undertaken meets the needs of a 21st century parliamentary democracy without losing touch with our collective past.

Once again, I would like to thank you for your interest, and I would be happy to respond to questions from committee members.

12:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell

Thank you very much.

I'm looking at that picture. Is there any reason the new visitor centre can't start where the little grey hut is and come south towards the lawn?

12:20 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Parliamentary Precinct, Department of Public Works and Government Services

Robert Wright

Our understanding at this point is that it would reduce up to around 15% of the planned volume of the visitor welcome centre, which would have significant impact.

If we were to take the root system, as was discussed—and I'll pass it over to Ms. MacDonald—it certainly extends well beyond the trunk of the tree. There's a large zone that would be proscribed, which would require no activity around there.

You couldn't leave it there without changing the visitor welcome centre, but if the visitor welcome centre were to change, it would be very difficult to protect it.

Our understanding is that if there were no construction in this area and the Centre Block rehabilitation were not happening and there were no visitor welcome centre, then it is likely that this tree would have a one- to five-year lifespan, potentially up to 10 years. The likelihood that this tree would still be living when parliamentarians return to Centre Block is quite low, from our understanding and the analysis that has been done, which has been fairly significant. To date, I think there have been six assessments, which is fairly robust for the assessment of a tree.

12:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell

Okay.

We'll go to questions.

Mr. Graham.

12:25 p.m.

Liberal

David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC

Thank you.

Based on what you just said, what would it cost to leave the tree in place?