:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
[English]
Good afternoon and thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today on the progress of the long-term vision and plan, or LTVP. We are pleased to be here.
[Translation]
My predecessor appeared before this committee around this time last year to report on the LTVP, and I realize this is a new conversation for a number of us. I will therefore begin with a brief introduction on our responsibilities and the broader LTVP.
[English]
The parliamentary precinct branch has two distinct responsibilities. One is to operate and maintain the precinct, which includes 33 crown-owned buildings occupied mainly by Parliament, the Prime Minister's Office, the Privy Council Office, and a number of commercial tenants. Our other responsibility is to carry out a full rehabilitation of the precinct through the implementation of the LTVP.
The level of deterioration of Canada's Parliament Buildings presents operational and health and safety risks to parliamentarians, workers, and the public. In December 2010, the West Block experienced a flood that could have shut down the building immediately and indefinitely had it still been occupied. Thankfully, it had been vacated a mere two weeks prior. In February 2012 a leak in the Centre Block caused the failure of one of only two transformers providing the power to all of Parliament Hill.
The LTVP is addressing these issues, as well as the accommodation needs of Parliament, which have evolved considerably since the buildings were constructed.
[Translation]
The LTVP was initially approved in 2001. The strategy has evolved. Since 2007, it has been based on rolling five-year programs of work, with the main objective to rehabilitate the West, Centre and East Blocks.
These five-year programs of work give the government clarity and increased control. They allow us to respond to evolving priorities and permit us greater accuracy in developing project costs and schedules.
[English]
The need to rehabilitate and modernize the Parliament Buildings has been a long-standing consideration, recognized by many as a priority. Independent assessments going back to 1999 consistently conclude that the condition of the buildings is deteriorating, particularly that of Centre Block, which is projected to reach a critical risk of total failure by 2019. This means that major structural, mechanical, or electrical failures could force us to shut down the building. We must also contend with the presence of hazardous materials and the need to comply with modern building codes.
The nature of this work is thus complex and costly due to the age and condition of the buildings and the level of restoration needed. For instance, in many cases this involves removing stones, and then numbering, repairing, and reinstalling them in exactly the same place, as you can see on the slide.
Furthermore the LTVP requires managing a number of interdependent and concurrent projects as illustrated in the work sequencing map on slide three.
Given these complexities, the cost to undertake this work is significant but necessary to ensure a safe and functional work environment for Parliament and the vitality of the precinct for all Canadians.
We take seriously our role as stewards of the investments associated with an undertaking of this scope. This stewardship includes adequate controls and constant efforts to contain costs and identify savings.
About $1.1 billion was invested in the LTVP between 2001 and March 2013, mainly for the relocation of parliamentary functions and administration to support the work on the main Parliament Buildings, and for urgent repairs and planning initiatives.
PWGSC is authorized to expend an additional $1.5 billion between 2013 and 2018 to complete all current projects, including the West Block, and to initiate work on the East Block. This budget will also be used to undertake urgent repairs and toward planning future phases of the LTVP, including the rehabilitation of Centre Block.
Cost estimates evolve over time. This can be attributed to asset deterioration or changes to building codes, security, or client requirements. Having said this, in the delivery of 19 projects since 2006, and in collaboration with the House of Commons administration, PWGSC has been able to contain costs and realize savings amounting to more than $39 million. All major projects are advancing on time and on budget.
The restoration of Canada's Parliament Buildings is governed by a robust accountability regime that includes regular reporting to the minister and Treasury Board Secretariat and a third party review framework covering areas such as contracting and costing.
In addition, all major construction contracts are awarded through a transparent and competitive two-stage process that is overseen and reported on by independent fairness monitors. The first stage is pre-qualification. All firms are invited to demonstrate their interest and submit proposals against mandatory criteria, such as capacity to take on projects of a similar scope and financial ability. The firms that are deemed qualified after this first stage are then invited to submit detailed proposals and are assessed against technical criteria and on the financial merits of their proposal. The successful bidder is chosen on the basis of the best overall technical and financial result.
Furthermore, our work in the precinct is subject to various levels of audit and evaluation, including from the Auditor General and the private sector. PWGSC also has in place a strong integrity framework that demonstrates our commitment to ongoing monitoring of procurement activities with a view to ensure the highest standards of integrity, protect the interests of taxpayers, and reinforce ethical behaviour.
[Translation]
Over the years and in concert with our parliamentary partners, we have yielded some truly remarkable achievements. In addition to realizing substantial time and cost savings already mentioned, I would like to add that in 2010, the Auditor General reported that PWGSC “had in place generally sound project management practices” and “developed a costing estimates methodology that takes into account the risks…”.
Similar conclusions were made in September 2012 when an independent firm concluded sound project management practices, systems and control were in place in all six projects it assessed. Also in 2012, the Auditor General stated that “PWGSC adequately plans for and assesses the benefits, costs and risks of its contractor use.”
More recently, PricewaterhouseCoopers found that all amounts invoiced by the construction manager for the West Block between June 2011 and December 2012 are in accordance with the terms of the contract.
[English]
The four projects on slide 7 represent key milestones in the delivery of the LTVP, and demonstrate once more modern-day functionality, timely delivery, and savings for taxpayers.
Work is now focused on initiating the rehabilitation of Centre Block. To do so, interim accommodations must first be secured for the Senate and the House of Commons. To this effect, the Sir John A. Macdonald Building is being rehabilitated to replace the former room 200 in the West Block and provide permanent ceremonial space for the House of Commons. I had the honour of revealing the designs earlier this year to the Honourable Diane Finley.
The project includes constructing an addition to the west of the building with support and loading facilities. Demolition of the existing heritage building is complete and interior fit-up is well under way. The project is half done and on track for completion in 2015, the bicentennial of Sir John A. Macdonald's birth.
The renovation of the Wellington Building is also on track. Demolition and abatement are complete and interior fit-up has begun, to support the House of Commons starting in 2016.
The West Block project, undoubtedly the most complex endeavour to date, is also advancing as planned. Demolition and abatement are substantially complete; masonry rehabilitation has begun.
As you can see on the design boards, the building will house an interim House of Commons chamber in the courtyard. It will also house a number of offices and functions during work on the Centre Block. We look forward to showing you the work under way.
The critical path project is on track for completion in 2017, a fitting contribution to the celebration of Canada's 150th anniversary. PWGSC is working towards clearing Parliament Hill of major construction activities for this momentous occasion.
[Translation]
I would like to share some examples with you on the innovative approach that has allowed us to maximize efficiencies in the delivery of the LTVP.
[English]
Until recently. the LTVP provided for West Block and East Block to be rehabilitated first to accommodate people and functions from Centre Block, an approach that included consideration for constructing an interim Senate chamber in the East Block similar to what is being done in the West Block. This approach proved to be technically complex.
As you may be aware, Senate functions, including the chamber, will now be relocated to the Government Conference Centre. Its proximity to the Hill and ability to accept functions from Centre Block, especially the chamber, makes the former train station an ideal fit.
This approach is the most cost-effective solution. It will enable the needed rehabilitation of a 101-year-old heritage building while providing an interim home for the Senate.
The approach will allow the work on Centre Block to advance ahead of 2019. As such, significant costs associated with the original solution and timeline can be avoided. It also reduces the amount of disruption on Parliament Hill at one given time.
As we proceed with urgent masonry work on the East Block, we know that interior building systems can endure to 2030 with regular maintenance.
[Translation]
With a clearly defined approved plan under way for the relocation of functions from the Centre Block, PWGSC is now planning its major rehabilitation. The project is in the early pre-planning stage, which is focused on identifying the scope of work based on the state of the building and clients' requirements. Estimates are in development and will be refined as assumptions are validated and the project moves into implementation.
[English]
As we proceed with this very important undertaking, and on behalf of and Deputy Minister Michelle d'Auray, I look forward to continued collaboration with our parliamentary partners.
We are fully committed to leveraging lessons learned from projects like the West Block and Wellington Building, and to taking advantage of new opportunities to create efficiencies for the overall delivery of the LTVP.
At this time, I would be happy to answer your questions.
Thank you.
:
Thank you for coming. This is exciting. It's always exciting to see things grow.
I may have mentioned this before in committee. I don't want to sound like a broken record, but I've been around here for a while and I'm sad to see our wonderful heritage buildings that I think are really the envy of the world—and I've seen quite a few parliament buildings around the world, as have you—sort of erode and fade and be neglected, so I'm really excited about what you're doing. Congratulations, all of you, on being at the helm of such a wonderful project for Canada.
I note that part of your mandate is to maintain the historical and architectural integrity of the buildings. I'm going to make five points, hopefully quickly, and then you can give me your thoughts.
I've seen some buildings, and I won't mention them on the record because it may be not nicely taken by some, where traditional or old architecture tries to be married with some glass and steel modernism. In my humble opinion, that doesn't work. It does a disservice to both of these wonderful forms of architecture. I'm looking at what you're doing and I think you've avoided that, but I wonder what you think about that.
I also noted that accurate costings and project timelines are an important part of what you're doing. Others have mentioned this, but I would emphasize it. I sat on the Treasury Board for a while. It's so frustrating to see that government.... You know, we're leaders of the country, and yet we never seem to get our act together, and I am not referring to any particular government, but I mean government in general, as far as getting these big projects done on time and on budget. I really hope we can do it this time and prove that the wheels of government can actually operate in an efficient and effective manner. I'm cheering you on in that regard. I really hope there's some real commitment to that.
I will now turn to your interventions to stop or reduce continued deterioration. It is really sad. I remember once I came to work in West Block and the corridor outside my office was blocked off because the ceiling had fallen in. My assistant was pregnant at the time, and she quickly secured a move out of the building because she was concerned about the asbestos. This is not the way the premier organization in the country should be operating.
I wonder what your communications plan is to let Canadians know. We're spending billions of dollars here. We're taking many, many years. We're doing a great thing. I bet you there's not 0.1% of Canadians who have the faintest idea what's going on, and I think they should know. Hundreds of thousands of people come to see our Parliament Buildings every year. We're proud of them; as I said, they're some of the most stunning in the world. However, we're not telling Canadians how committed we are and the exciting plans we have to renovate them. What are your communication plans?
My last point is the decision-making. Some of the problems we have in being efficient in government is that there are too many cooks in the kitchen. Everybody's waiting on another department, or another group, or another team, to make a decision and then we try to coordinate them. Who's wielding the whip on this? Where does the buck stop to say, “Either you decide or I'll decide for you, and we're going to get on with this”?
I wasn't going to intervene, Madam Chahwan, but at the risk of being a bit of a buzzkill, with all due respect, I really feel I have to challenge both the tone and the content of some of your remarks.
I've watched this project balloon and swell and explode in proportion and expense. I'm a carpenter by trade. I understand the difference between renovations and restorations, but there's almost a rule of thumb that everything on Parliament Hill costs ten times as much and takes ten times as long. Speaking on behalf of taxpayers and people in the industry, frankly, it's extremely frustrating.
I want to point out the inherent contradiction in some of your remarks. First of all, you said that you're “on time and on budget”, in kind of a cheerleading tone. Then in the same sentence almost you said that the cost estimates, of course, “evolve over time”. In other words, the budget is whatever it costs and the timeframe is however long it takes. Of course you're on time and on budget with this ever-moving scale. It takes longer and costs more every year that ticks by. It was under construction when I got here in 1997, and it was under construction when Diane got here prior to that.
The other contradiction I have to point out in the time I have is this idea of pre-qualifying your contractors. How then do you explain having to run off this company with connections to the Hells Angels who couldn't comply with the basic requirement of the stonework? They had to be fired. Granted, you have PCL there now, the best construction company in North America if not the world, I would concede, but with regard to this pre-qualification idea, how did we wind up with organized crime on the job? In the place with the highest security in the land, you have these guys with biker connections.
The last thing I'll say, and maybe it's been my favourite bugaboo from day one, is how did we ever wind up with this extravagant opulence, this almost audacious impracticality of putting a glass roof on the House of Commons in this climate? How a cracked room full of chimpanzees ever decided that was a good idea is beyond me. This isn't the Winter Palace of imperial tsarist Russia; this is a temporary House of Commons. And it's a temporary move; it's not even permanent.
Can you confirm one thing for me? I understand that now they've designed a glass roof, they've learned that because of the sunshine, the TV cameras can't operate properly. Therefore, we now have to design a great big screen to cover up the glass. Wouldn't asphalt shingles have been more practical if you're going to have to cover up the glass roof anyway?
My specific question, I suppose—and I'm not even going to have time to touch on the asbestos abatement—is with regard to the cost factor associated with the glass roof. What is it? What was the additional expense to go to glass instead of conventional? Is it true that you now have to find some way to shield us from the glass roof or the televised documentation can't go on in the House of Commons?