Evidence of meeting #135 for Public Accounts in the 42nd Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was buildings.
A video is available from Parliament.
Vice-President, Indigenous Affairs and Cultural Heritage Directorate, Parks Canada Agency
We take into account a number of factors, including the safety of the public and our employees, the number of tourists and the visitor experience. Of course, we also take into account the historic significance of the sites.
Liberal
Deputy Minister, Department of National Defence
In our case we prioritize on three criteria: health and safety, compliance—environmental compliance, as an example—and then operations. We have almost zero. There are a couple of museums that have a tourist value. The majority of our buildings are, of course, on bases, many of them quite remote, so it's health and safety, compliance and then operations.
Liberal
René Arseneault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
Okay.
How does your department proceed, Mr. Stringer?
Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
It's very much the same at Fisheries and Oceans. It really is operational, starting with safety and security, health and safety, and then operational considerations for what we need it for and the life-cycle management of the active facilities we have.
With respect to heritage issues, when it is a heritage building, as we've said before, we will be guided by our guidance in terms of what we can do and what we must do with respect to those heritage buildings as well.
Liberal
René Arseneault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
I have a rather difficult question that's bothering me.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes
Mr. Arseneault, I'm very sorry, but I must interrupt you. We need to vote in half an hour.
Would committee members agree that we stay until 10:25 to finish?
Okay. Thank you.
Liberal
René Arseneault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I gather, from what we've heard, that your departments are already responsible for a great deal of infrastructure, including monuments, buildings, places, sites and so on.
In small communities, both urban and rural, it's relatively easy to have historic monuments designated. One reason is that the municipalities don't have the means to take care of the monuments. As soon as the municipalities have the monuments designated as national heritage, the municipalities are relieved because another organization will take care of the monuments. That's my impression, and I may be wrong. I would like you to talk about this.
In short, the government is expanding its stock of infrastructure when it may not have the means to maintain its current infrastructure.
I want to hear from the Parks Canada representatives.
Vice-President, Indigenous Affairs and Cultural Heritage Directorate, Parks Canada Agency
You're talking—
Liberal
René Arseneault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
I'm sorry, my question is for the Department of National Defence or Fisheries and Oceans Canada.
Deputy Minister, Department of National Defence
I guess my short answer is that yes, assets are growing. The cost to maintain them is increasing. I wouldn't want to speak to whether it's too easy to designate a property or not. That is being studied.
But Treasury Board is leading a horizontal review of infrastructure for just the reasons you have raised.
Liberal
René Arseneault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
In two words, what could be the criteria to designate something as being part of Heritage Canada?
Deputy Minister, Department of National Defence
I'm not sure you want Defence to answer that.
Liberal
Vice-President, Indigenous Affairs and Cultural Heritage Directorate, Parks Canada Agency
You're talking about another type of designation. You're not necessarily talking about property belonging to the federal government. Are you talking about other heritage places?
Liberal
René Arseneault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
No, I'm actually talking about monuments or buildings—
Vice-President, Indigenous Affairs and Cultural Heritage Directorate, Parks Canada Agency
—that belong to the federal government?
Liberal
René Arseneault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
No, not at all. I'm talking about monuments or buildings that belong to the communities.
Vice-President, Indigenous Affairs and Cultural Heritage Directorate, Parks Canada Agency
In that case, it's something else. The Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada is responsible for the designation.
Vice-President, Indigenous Affairs and Cultural Heritage Directorate, Parks Canada Agency
It's our responsibility, but it's another type of designation.
Liberal
Liberal
Chandra Arya Liberal Nepean, ON
Quickly, I want to ask two questions, one to the Auditor General's office. The policy on management of real property was revised in 2006, which in turn replaced the Treasury Board heritage buildings policy that was last revised in 1998, I think, or 1996.
Did you find there were any changes made in the heritage designation for properties in this newer policy?
Director, Office of the Auditor General
From the perspective of our work and what we look at, there hasn't really been a major change in the framework.
Liberal
Chandra Arya Liberal Nepean, ON
I have a very short amount of time left.
This particular change in 2006 replaced 13 different policies all related to real property. Now, Treasury Board, as you say, is again revising this. Once again, if there's a comprehensive review, then heritage may be a small part of the total infrastructure.
I think the committee has to make some specific recommendations. My first question is, instead of having 40 years to look at the property to see whether it can be designated as a heritage property, what if we replace that 40 years with 100 years?
I would like a quick response.