Letter to The Right Honourable Stephen Harper, PC, MP - July 13, 2007

July 13, 2007
Our file: D102.71

The Right Honourable Stephen Harper, PC, MP
Prime Minister of Canada
Langevin Block
80 Wellington Street
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A2

Dear Prime Minister:

        At this time of year, millions of Canadians all across the country are taking time off to enjoy the country’s vast natural heritage. At the seashore or in the mountains, by the lakeshore or on the prairie, this rich heritage is available to all Canadians.

        Canada’s urban dwellers, too, enjoy a rich heritage – including a rich architectural heritage. Sadly, the pleasure that urban Canadians have long taken in that architectural heritage may soon be diminished, if your government goes forward with plans to sell many of its buildings, including such architectural treasures as Ottawa’s own Thomas D’Arcy McGee Building and Vancouver’s Sinclair Centre, in addition to seven other properties in Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto, Edmonton, Calgary, and Vancouver.

        The main reason given for the sale by your Public Works minister, Mr. Fortier, is that the government needs to pump in billions of dollars to renovate its entire real-estate portfolio and needs to find innovative sources of funding to pay for that work. I am not, however, convinced that such a drastic measure as selling off over $1 billion worth of federal government buildings is at all necessary, particularly at a time when the federal budget is in surplus, and has been for some years.

        Even more important, there is no guarantee that the sale will benefit Canadian taxpayers in any way. As the Globe & Mail reported on June 25, your own officials from the Privy Council Office and the Department of Finance warned that the sale could wind up costing taxpayers up to $600 million over 25 years, and recommended that a full risk analysis be done before the government proceeded with putting the buildings out to tender.

        As one government source quoted in the Globe article pointed out, the fear is that “the potential savings have been overstated and the potential risks ignored.” To say that I agree with this sentiment is to understate matters considerably. From everything we have seen here at the Institute, this lease-back program appears to be a case of short-term gain leading to considerable long-term pain. Do you and your most trusted advisors not find it strange that the potential benefits of the sale, which would entail the government leasing back the buildings it had just sold for a 25-year period from their new owners, are a maximum of $250 million, or less than half the potential costs?

        The commissioning of the Deutsche Bank as a consultant to provide independent advice on the building sale is a positive step forward, since the Deutsche Bank is precluded by conflict-of-interest rules from being a player in any sale-lease deal that may go forward. Nonetheless, we continue to have concerns about the process through which the potential sale is being considered. In particular, we are concerned about the fact that the Deutsche Bank’s report will not be made public before it is sent to Cabinet ministers with a recommendation.

        Frankly, the secrecy surrounding this issue makes a mockery of the pledges of transparency and open government that your government made upon taking office less than 18 months ago. If you sincerely believe that the sale is a good deal for Canadians, there is no reason why the report recommending that sale should not be exposed to the light of day and the scrutiny of the media.

        I can only urge you, by way of conclusion, not to be the Esau who sells off his country’s architectural heritage for a pitiful mess of pottage.

        Thank you for taking the time to read and consider this letter.

Sincerely,

Michèle Demers
President

MD/jp