Procedure and House Affairs Committee on May 14th, 2019

[Jennifer Garrett]

I can jump in and try to answer.

Part of what we are looking at is making Parliament more family friendly. We have been given requirements from our parliamentary partners to make sure that when parliamentarians and their families are busy, they can effectively support that.

With regard to exterior play, honestly I'd have to go back and check the functional program requirements, but with regard to the interior of the building, I know we've been given requirements for improved family-friendly space in a universally accessible environment and we will endeavour to make sure that those spaces are in the appropriate locations within the building.

[Stéphan Aubé]

There have already been discussions on possible play areas on the outside. Consideration was given to the visitor welcome area beside the West Block, but that hasn't yet been finalized. As you can see, we're just in discussions right now, first, on how circulation would happen both inside and outside the building.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Mr. Nater.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Very briefly, there are a few of us around the table who do have young families now. I joked that my daughter will be the MP by the time we get back into Centre Block, so it won't be relevant, but it would be nice if, when these discussions are happening, those who currently have young families have some type of consultation or input.

My family was up last week and they had a great time on the front lawn of Parliament blowing bubbles and running around. It was a lot of fun. That doesn't happen in the winter, so it would be nice to have some consultation with those of us around the table and in Parliament who currently have young families on the Hill.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

I have a six-year-old and a 10-year-old.

Mr. Reid, you're next on the list. Also Ms. Kusie hasn't spoken yet, which you might want to defer to. However, where do you want to go with your motion? Did you want to finalize that today or at another meeting?

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

Mr. Chair, I think it would be preferable if we let that wait until a different meeting. There are still more questions. I know I'm not the only person who has more questions and we have all these witnesses here, so it's our chance to ask them.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Okay. Do you want to allow Ms. Kusie to go, or do you want to go?

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

Are you okay with my taking it?

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Go ahead.

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

I want to say a couple of things. First of all, I want to stress one area where I really admire the work you've done: your seismic work on this building to make it earthquake-proof. It was most emphatically not earthquake-proof before you started your work on it, so I congratulate you for that. I'm well aware of the challenges that Centre Block faces in that regard, and while I like to economize on many things, I'm not asking you to economize on that.

I think the fundamental problem that all of you face is that your parliamentary partners, as you describe the various groups that are submitting to you, have not told you what their needs are. They've given you a wish list, which is not quite the same thing. It's the difference between what I would like to have and what the economists talk about as supply and demand.

Demand is ultimately what I want to have and am prepared to pay for. None of us has made the hard choices. I'm not talking about you making hard choices; we haven't made the hard choices. We're imposing the arbitration job to a large degree on you, and that is profoundly unfair. I can see you attempting to deal with it and respond to everybody's needs.

We have to give you clearer guidelines, so I hope that what I've said so far is not understood as criticism of Public Works, the architects or the House administration. Au contraire, it is a critique of the process that we are part of, and we need to get our act together.

On another note, I gather that the idea of swing space beside the former U.S. embassy has not been approved by anybody. I think it is a good idea. Right now, that is an unutilized space. It's a parking lot that doesn't even have cars parked there anymore. It makes eminent sense to put something in there that could be used as space, and then in the long run, the obvious flaw with the current building is that it is too small for an indigenous heritage history museum. There's no way there is enough space. The swing space might serve that purpose.

I do have to ask this question: How long do you anticipate the big hole, as you've called it, in the ground for the visitor welcome centre being there? We know it starts in September 2019. When will it be filled in and the ground covered over and be back to being usable?

[Rob Wright]

I think that would come back to one of the questions. If Parliament wanted to accelerate the opening of the visitor welcome centre, in essence, to prioritize the visitor welcome centre and return the front lawn and the operations that the functionality that would be provided there, that would be a different scenario than if you wanted the visitor welcome centre and the Centre Block to reopen on the same day. We could look at both of those scenarios. If there were a desire to prioritize the visitor welcome centre, it would be there for a shorter period.

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

I assume the rationale for phase two of the visitor welcome centre being the first thing on your agenda is that the work that's going on in Centre Block initially for the first couple of years is not the heavy structural work that will be needed later on. It's a matter of figuring out what's there, removing items that are there. You're trying to do multiple things at the same time. I assume that's the logic of it.

If the visitor welcome centre or parts thereof were started later, thereby allowing us to figure out what should and shouldn't go out there, is it possible that either the amount of time the visitor welcome centre hole is in the ground or the amount of ground that's being dug up at any given time could be reduced, or some combination? I mean some part of the footprint being not dug up for all or part of the period and perhaps the period during which all or part of this being dug up being shrunk.

I worded that in a way that's difficult to answer, but I'll leave that with you.

[Rob Wright]

To be clear on the Centre Block, there will be significant interior demolition work beginning this fall. That's not the construction of particular spaces, but the demolition of large floor plates. Regardless of what you decide you want, that is the way to go. We're comfortable with that. Then the excavation of the visitor welcome centre is to happen in tandem. I understand what's coming from at least certain members of the committee, that waiting could perhaps reduce the footprint and save money, which is admirable. At the same time, waiting spends a lot of money. It's really important for the committee to be aware of that as well. The longer we wait, the more money is being spent. Both sides of the balance sheet have to be looked at.

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

Thank you very much to all of you. I appreciate it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

I want to thank you all too.

There are lots more questions and meetings. There is another committee coming in here.

Make it really short, David.

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

I have just a very quick question to validate.

Is the media being consulted to ensure that there isn't an area like the Hot Room again?

[Michel Patrice]

That is part of the plan.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

I'll go to Mr. Christopherson in a moment.

Just so the committee knows, on Thursday, the first hour is the minister on the main estimates on the debates commission. The second hour is free, perhaps for what Mr. Christopherson is going to do. Then the first meeting after we're back, we had tentatively scheduled to have the review of the draft report on the parallel debating chambers. Sometime we have to get back to Mr. Reid's motion. And we have to get out of here at 1:00 because there is another committee.

Mr. Christopherson.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

How much time does that give me, Chair? I can't see the face of the clock.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

There's about one minute on the clock.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

That's what I thought. I'll take this opportunity. I appreciate that. I only asked for the floor so that I can formally move my motion: “That the Committee study the following proposed changes to the Standing Orders and report back to the House”. The attached documents with the details of those changes have been circulated in both languages.

I don't know how much discussion we require here. I'm sort of going on the assumption that there's enough support in the back benches to at least explore, and give some air and time to, a lot of work that's been done by a lot of colleagues. I'm a little bit part of it, mostly just contributing thoughts as opposed to being a key player. My role is just that I'm on this committee, so I'm the one moving the motion.

I'd be looking for, either now or quietly afterwards, or at the beginning of the next meeting, but in some way, whether the study is going to become an issue or whether we can quickly deal with this motion and get on with having the delegation come in and start rolling up our sleeves and going through some of the proposals.

That's what I would be seeking going forward. The answer to that will dictate how quickly we can dispose of this motion and get on with the work, or if we're going to have to make a bit of a cause célèbre out of it, which I'm hoping is not the case.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

We'll certainly discuss that shortly, but probably not today.

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

I'm ready to vote.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

You're ready to vote.