Evidence of meeting #22 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A video is available from Parliament.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
12:45 p.m.
North Island—Powell River, NDP
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Through you, perhaps I could come back to Ms. Tassi. I thank both the ministers very much for being here, but I've heard her mention again and again this idea of jurisdiction and the challenges with jurisdiction.
Practically, what would the change be if the precinct were expanded? If collaboration is already happening, which it is, as I understand from the previous testimony, what would be different?
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
Filomena Tassi Liberal Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON
Thanks, Madam Chair, for the opportunity to respond to that question. It's a good question.
In terms of the work that this committee is doing, I think first and foremost we have to determine what the end objective is. After consultation with all partners, what exactly do we want the parliamentary precinct to look like? Do we want it to expand? What do we want Wellington Street to look like? What do we want Sparks Street to look like?
These are determinations that have to be made in order for us to look at a path forward and implement an approach that is supported in collaboration and in partnership.
12:50 p.m.
North Island—Powell River, NDP
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I'd like to go back to Minister Tassi. I would assume that, through this process of all the changes that are happening to the precinct, there are conversations that are happening with the indigenous people of this land. I thank you for acknowledging them at the beginning of your comments. If the precinct does increase, if that is a process that is moved forward with, what discussions will happen with the indigenous community of this territory?
As well, what will happen to the building that is there for the indigenous community? That's something that is on my mind. If this changes, what does that mean for that resource?
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
Filomena Tassi Liberal Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair. Those are very important questions.
One thing I will acknowledge is that yesterday, with the block 2 announcement, it was very clear that the indigenous peoples space is going to be respected and honoured. In fact, the winning bidder, when the media asked the first question as to what was motivating this design, talked about the indigenous space, the open piece of that space, and how it focused and looked right at Parliament Hill. It was very much a part of that. The winning bidder also worked with an indigenous architecture firm, from Hamilton, Two Row, which contributed in terms of design content.
With respect to the question of dialogue, these conversations have to take place. I'm happy to turn it over to my officials to talk about what they see in terms of the number of conversations, but you're absolutely right about the conversations with indigenous peoples in that space in order to determine this. What does closing Wellington Street mean? How does it impact that space? What are we going to do in order to ensure that, whatever the plans are for that space, they are honoured and respected with respect to the pathway that we are moving forward? These are all discussions that are extremely important.
There are many partners. You have Parliament. You have the PMO. You have the Privy Council. You have the PSPC. You have the NCC. You have the City of Ottawa. Then you have all the policing jurisdictional issues that vary. PPS is one. RCMP is another. City of Ottawa is the streets.
This is why all these conversations are so important, so that moving forward we get it right in a respectful way that brings the greatest benefit to this wonderful opportunity we have here in Parliament to create a space that is welcoming and inviting for people around the world.
12:50 p.m.
North Island—Powell River, NDP
Thank you for that.
Minister Mendicino, I am just really curious. We know that there continue to be conversations about jurisdiction—who did what and when, what this should have looked like, and how collaboration between all of the different police forces should happen in the future. If the precinct is increased, I'm wondering what the potential cost will be for the PPS. Have there been any discussions about what that would look like and what next steps would need to happen?
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
Marco Mendicino Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON
Madam Chair, through you to Ms. Blaney, I think that is a very pertinent question. As this study undertakes its work in exploring potential enlargement of the parliamentary precinct, there may very well be cost implications, as you allude to. I do think that is a consideration to take into account, if this committee makes that recommendation.
I would simply encourage you, Ms. Blaney, and others on the committee to carefully consider how the different mandates work. This is what we mean when we say “interoperability”. For the PPS the primary mandate, as we all know, is protection, not enforcement of the law. In other words, not charging and arresting, but rather keeping all of us who work on the Hill safe.
It is when you have an emergency like last winter where there needs to be co-operation between the PPS and the police of jurisdiction so that there can be enforcement. Even as you look at the perimeter and a potential expansion of that, I do think again, as you are implying in your question, that we should carefully plot out resources so that there can be that high degree of communication and co-operation to prevent another kind of public order emergency of the magnitude that we saw last winter from occurring again.
12:55 p.m.
North Island—Powell River, NDP
Thank you for that, Madam Chair.
I would ask the minister a following question. It would be helpful to have some sort of stance on what resources would be included. If the committee's going to make wise recommendations then knowing the costs associated with that would be really helpful. Hopefully your department can give us something so that we have it to consider.
It goes back to the question that I asked Minister Tassi earlier around the precinct. We know that there were a lot of challenges with jurisdiction. We heard that from many people during the occupation. For me, I also want to recognize that I saw a lot of challenges, especially for people living with disabilities moving around that space. I had many confrontations in my ways in and out, talking about if they could just move their vehicles a few feet it would make accessibility a lot easier. I did not get very positive feedback from those folks at all, which was frustrating.
If we could go back to that part, could you get us some sort of costs? The other part is, if this does grow, if that is something the government takes on, what will be the fundamental change in terms of jurisdiction and debating who does what and when?
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
Marco Mendicino Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON
Through you, Madam Chair, to Ms. Blaney, I think that is an entirely reasonable request. I know that other colleagues also have a direct line of sight to the Parliamentary Protective Service. I think we'd be happy to share that information with the committee so that your deliberations can be properly informed, yes.
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
Excellent, thank you.
Now we will be going for five minutes to Mr. Vis, followed by five minutes to Mrs. Romanado. Please keep them tight. I will just notify members that we will be running about 10 minutes past this committee, but as long as members keep it tight we'll be out of here very soon.
Mr. Vis, we'll go to you.
12:55 p.m.
Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, CPC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Through you to Minister Mendicino, I believe—if I understand correctly—the proposal to expand federal security jurisdiction within Ottawa and across the river to Gatineau was signed by two parliamentary secretaries, including the Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister.
Am I correct in assuming that the government is very open to expanding federal jurisdiction right now beyond the current precinct?
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
Marco Mendicino Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON
Just to be clear, I would not say “right now”, to use your words literally, but I do think we embrace the conversation that is occurring at this committee and appreciate the study.
12:55 p.m.
Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, CPC
Thank you.
My second question, Madam Chair, is to Mr. Wright. I have two very specific questions.
You frequently appear before this committee in respect of the various Parliament Hill construction projects, including the block 2 rehabilitation between Wellington and Sparks Street. Does the possibility of changing security jurisdiction require you to develop contingencies for these construction projects?
12:55 p.m.
Rob Wright Assistant Deputy Minister, Science and Parliamentary Infrastructure Branch, Department of Public Works and Government Services
I would say the devil's in the details. That's very important. As both ministers have indicated, getting this right is extremely important.
At the same time, in terms of the prospect of transforming Wellington Street into a pedestrian zone, the timing for that conversation really couldn't be better, as the parliamentary precinct has changed and continues to change. Those three city blocks facing Parliament Hill were expropriated in 1973 for the expansion of Parliament. Increasingly, as Minister Tassi indicated, a number of parliamentarians will be located on the south side of Wellington Street. Within the next 10 years, approximately 50% of parliamentarians will be there.
Wellington Street, which used to be a border, is now figuratively running through the living room of the parliamentary precinct, and Sparks Street is running through the backyard.
1 p.m.
Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, CPC
I have another quick question for you, Mr. Wright.
One of the things I look at as a parliamentarian when I come to Ottawa, as there are a lot of large assets—it's very different from my neck of the woods in suburban and rural British Columbia—is whether the Government of Canada does the little things right. One of the things that's been annoying me—I wrote to the Speaker about it—and that I'm worried about in expanding the jurisdiction is your department's ability to handle more responsibility.
I mention this because the ability for your department to manage, say, the replacement of light bulbs in the Valour Building has been a very big challenge for you. In fact, for six months, I've been waiting for new light bulbs, as have many other parliamentarians in the Valour Building. Your department hasn't been able to fix that problem.
Why should the people of Canada trust your department with an expanded jurisdiction when some of the little things, like lighting in an existing building, are so hard to accomplish?
1 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
I'm going to pause the time and remind everyone that we go through the chair. Otherwise, it sounds really personal—
1 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
—like Mr. Wright is going to go and change the physical light bulb himself.
1 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
I have no doubt, so I wanted to remind everyone.
Go ahead, Mr. Wright.
1 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Science and Parliamentary Infrastructure Branch, Department of Public Works and Government Services
Thank you very much for the question, Madam Chair.
I couldn't agree more. The big and the small things are extremely important. Thank you for raising that. We'll respond to it immediately.
1 p.m.
Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, CPC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Minister Tassi, through you, Madam Chair, Gatineau's public transit agency, STO, has proposed building a tramline into downtown Ottawa. An option under consideration would see it running at grade along Wellington Street, which I believe the NCC has supported. That option makes the pedestrianization of Wellington Street a likely outcome, which would naturally resolve many of the security concerns we've been discussing today, not to mention saving hundreds of millions of dollars by not digging a tunnel under Sparks Street.
Minister, do you endorse this option for Gatineau's tram?
1 p.m.
Liberal
Filomena Tassi Liberal Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON
Madam Chair, what I would endorse is to ensure that the project office that has been opened under PSPC and included in our budget, in order to ensure that studies are refreshed, that this subject is looked at and that we determine what the best pathway forward is.... That's why, again, I'm making this point about ensuring that we're talking to all stakeholders, that we're looking at the long-term vision and plan and at all the projects that are on the table as we move forward, and that all this is considered as we move forward. Of course—
1 p.m.
Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, CPC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I have one other very important, quick question to the Minister, Madam Chair.
Madam Chair, Minister Tassi has the responsibility for Ottawa's interprovincial bridges, either through the NCC or directly through her department. Under the proposal to have multiprovincial jurisdiction for federal security, would the minister be proposing any changes with respect to the bridges that connect Gatineau and Ottawa?
1 p.m.
Liberal
Filomena Tassi Liberal Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON
Again, when we're looking at this, we have to ensure that we are looking at each of the things that are being proposed and what the impacts of those proposals are. The project office is open. They are looking at these very issues, so it's important that we support their work, and we will continue to support their work.