Make it a homeless shelter. In 6 months, cart what is still standing to the dump. Set up a shiny new Brookfield manufactured home. If it is good enough for working folk, it is good enough for a politician.
Let’s tear down 24 Sussex — and replace it with something we can be proud of
- Thread starter B00Mer
- Start date
Why the hell are we spending money we don't have on a building no one is using? The stupidity is astonishing! MAKE A FREAKING DECISION!!PM Carney says he has no plans to tackle 24 Sussex question during his mandate
Author of the article:Canadian Press
Canadian Press
Catherine Morrison
Published Jun 14, 2025 • 4 minute read
OTTAWA — Almost a decade after 24 Sussex Drive was abandoned as the official residence of the Canadian prime minister, taxpayers are still shelling out tens of thousands of dollars a year to maintain the vacant property, and the new prime minister has signalled he’s in no rush to deal with the crumbling building.
Prime Minister Mark Carney told reporters in May that it’s up to the National Capital Commission to decide what to do with 24 Sussex.
“It’s not a challenge for today, this month, this year and it’s probably a challenge for this mandate,” Carney said in French, adding that multiple ideas on how to renew 24 Sussex have been put forward by former prime ministers.
The home is a 35-room mansion that was built in 1896, and served as the prime minister’s official residence starting in 1951. It has been a federal heritage site since 1986.
But former prime minister Stephen Harper was the last leader to live at 24 Sussex. When Justin Trudeau took over as prime minister in November 2015, he and his family instead moved into Rideau Cottage, a home on the grounds of Rideau Hall. Carney and his family now also live at Rideau Cottage.
While the grounds of 24 Sussex were used during Trudeau’s tenure for some social events, it was closed by the National Capital Commission in 2022 for “health and safety reasons.”
Those included an infestation of rats that was so severe they found rodent carcasses and excrement in the home’s walls, attic and basement.
The commission has since spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on maintaining the building.
A document detailing expenses for 24 Sussex, obtained via information access law, shows that upkeep of the building cost taxpayers more than $680,000 between January 2018 and June 2023.
Those costs included elevator maintenance, janitorial services, boiler maintenance, the removal of a bees’ nest, pest control, roof repair and pool cleaning.
In 2022, the NCC spent just over $76,000 to repair a stone wall and steel fence after a tourist bus crashed into the gates of 24 Sussex.
NCC spokesperson Valerie Dufour said the organization is unable to provide any up-to-date information on operations and maintenance costs for the building. She confirmed the NCC continues to pay to maintain the building.
A separate document from 2023, obtained via an access to information request, shows the Trudeau government looked at three main options for the official residence.
The first option would be to establish Rideau Cottage as the prime minister’s permanent residence by investing in additional residential infrastructure, such as laundry and staff offices.
The second option would be to build a new “modern facility” at 24 Sussex with “limited heritage elements,” which would accommodate both residential and official functions.
The third option would be to build an entirely new residence on NCC-owned land elsewhere in Ottawa.
Dufour said the commission presented options on the future of the official residence to the government and is awaiting a decision.
In a letter addressed to then-procurement minister Jean-Yves Duclos, Trudeau asked for a proposal on new options for the official residence to be drafted by January 2026.
Trudeau said the proposal should include a plan to transfer all responsibility for the official residence, except for general maintenance, from the National Capital Commission to Public Services and Procurement Canada.
Andrew MacDougall, who was director of communications to former prime minister Stephen Harper, said that while Carney is right to focus on more important files, Canada still needs to maintain “symbols” of its nationhood — including 24 Sussex.
“Imagine a U.S. president leaving the White House in a dilapidated state. They would never,” he said. “And so why do we tolerate it?”
MacDougall argued that Carney is already “opening the taps and spending like there’s no tomorrow” and he might as well take on a problem that too many prime ministers have ignored.
Franco Terrazzano, federal director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, said the real problem is that the National Capital Commission is “too good at wasting our money but bad at managing properties.”
“With debt interest charges blowing a $1 billion hole in the budget every week, Prime Minister Mark Carney must make it a priority to hold the NCC accountable to stop wasting so much money,” he said.
“Canadians also shouldn’t be paying for an official residence for any opposition leader or Speaker, and the prime minister doesn’t need multiple residences.”
Katherine Spencer-Ross, president of Heritage Ottawa, said Carney’s reluctance to tackle 24 Sussex is “hardly surprising” given the amount of work on his plate.
“I’m not holding my breath,” she said. “I think he’s got another fish to fry.”
Spencer-Ross said that while prime ministers have been afraid to do anything about 24 Sussex because of the political optics, the prime minister of the day is still the “steward” of the building.
“It is not their home. It is not their party’s home. It belongs to the people of Canada,” she said.
Spencer-Ross said Heritage Ottawa wrote to Trudeau in 2018 to suggest setting up an external advisory committee to look at options for the residence. She said nothing happened with that idea until Trudeau included it in his letter to Duclos.
She said her organization believes the building should be maintained, renewed and kept in public hands, even if it’s no longer the official residence.
PM Carney says he has no plans to tackle 24 Sussex question during his mandate
A document detailing expenses for 24 Sussex shows that upkeep of the building cost taxpayers more than $680,000 between 2018 and 2023.torontosun.com
Black mold and asbestos for starters. 2nd its not safe housing for a leader of any nation.
The smart thing is to build a new residence in secret with all the penetration points buttoned up, a fancy schmancy home with a robust blast resistant exterior atop a complex bunker system with an extraction point blocks away in an innocuous building or cover.
Canada’s lengthy Parliament upgrade a stark contrast to East Wing demolition
Author of the article:Washington Post
Washington Post
Frances Vinall, The Washington Post
Published Oct 23, 2025 • Last updated 14 hours ago • 5 minute read
Americans were confronted with an extraordinary image this week: the mostly demolished East Wing of the White House, torn down to add a 90,000-square-foot ballroom to the historic building, a pet project of President Donald Trump that has moved at breakneck speed and prompted widespread complaints.
A stark contrast to this pace can be found in the United States’ northern neighbour. Works to upgrade and modernize Canada’s Parliament buildings – first built more than a century ago – are underway in a process that may take some three decades, with initial plans approved in 2001 and the complex’s Centre Block not expected to be reopened until 2032.
HOK, the lead design architect for the Centre Block upgrade, has called the project – which has an overall estimated price tag of up to $3.6 billion – “the largest and most complex rehabilitation ever undertaken in Canada.” It says workers have removed or protected more than 20,000 heritage items such as paintings, murals, stained-glass windows, woodwork and sculptures, some of which will be restored, and dug 75 feet to construct new visitor facilities that will minimally impact the appearance of the original buildings.
Salman Soleimani-Dashtaki, an adjunct professor in the department of civil engineering at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, said he was “a bit surprised” at the pace of the White House renovation in comparison to the Canadian approach.
“There are a lot of challenges, especially when you’re dealing with a building that’s extremely old and has a lot of value – preservation of that becomes a very important factor,” he said of the Canadian project, adding that its engineers’ “main, major goal” was to upgrade the Parliament buildings to meet modern standards without significantly affecting their appearance.
Canada’s Parliament complex was built in the 19th century. The Centre Block – where the House of Commons and Senate are traditionally located – and the precinct’s well-known Peace Tower were built between 1916 and 1928 after the previous structure was damaged in a fire. The White House was built in the late 18th century, while the East Wing was added in 1942.
“When a building becomes such an iconic structure in the country, any alteration that you do to the building runs a lot of risks, right?” Soleimani-Dashtaki said. “It becomes part of the history.”
He added that the solutions developed, particularly work to improve the structures’ earthquake resistance, were “an engineering wonder of the history of Canada” designed to save the buildings for future generations.
“Why it’s taking so long is because we know it’s going to be an example of a very extraordinary heritage restoration project,” he said. “I think that great things take a long time to build.”
A first version of a long-term plan to improve the parliamentary precinct was approved in 2001 and updated about six years later, to be executed in five-year increments – a considerably more deliberate pace than the Trump administration’s approach to the construction of the White House ballroom, in which demolition of the East Wing occurred within months of the project’s official announcement in July.
While Trump pledged at the time that the ballroom would not “interfere” with the existing building, White House officials said Tuesday that a full-scale teardown of the East Wing was expected. On Wednesday, the president said the privately funded project would cost $300 million, up from his original claim of $200 million.
The work at the White House also started without public review processes, according to the National Trust for Historic Preservation, a nonprofit created by Congress to help preserve historic buildings.
The lengthy timeline involved in the Canadian project has not been without criticism. In 2010, a report from the country’s auditor general found that planning had been slowed down by fragmented bureaucratic processes, with various agencies and branches of government needing to be consulted and provide approvals, which “ultimately results in project delays and inefficient use of resources.”
By 2023, though, the auditor general’s office found that much of the project had been effectively managed. In its earlier report, it had stressed the importance of getting the process right for the sake of preserving a national landmark.
“Canadians are attached to the Parliament buildings,” the report noted. “Surveys found that they see them as symbols of Canada’s history and tradition, and of democracy and freedom. Like official residences, the buildings are part of Canada’s heritage and belong to all Canadians.”
David Lieberman, architect and associate professor emeritus of the University of Toronto, said the sudden demolition of the East Wing without detailed review was “tragic.”
“Is the Canadian renovation too slow? Yes,” he said. “But does this mean that the budget is spread over a number of years? Does this mean that things are being done properly? Probably.
“Maybe the East Wing does need a major retrofit – the White House has been rebuilt several times, of course,” he said, referring to previous renovations. But he added that extensive engineering and design consultations would normally be undertaken before initiating a project of this magnitude.
The U.S. and Canada are among many countries that have grappled with how to make changes to landmark government buildings. The Trump administration argues that the White House’s current capacity to host events is too small – in a Tuesday statement, it called the ballroom a “necessary addition” in keeping with a “storied history of improvements and additions from commanders-in-chief.”
Britain has debated for years, without significant progress, the issue of how to address problems such as the presence of asbestos and frequent fires in its official buildings including the Palace of Westminster, the Guardian reported. Australia opened its new Parliament House in 1988, after about 13 years from planning to completion, converting the original into a museum, to address the need for more space.
In Canada, the prime minister’s official residence has also been a cause for concern. The building, constructed in the 1860s, has not been used for years and was officially closed in 2022 for health and safety reasons, while successive governments have been unable to decide on a solution for its future, Canadian media reported.
torontosun.com
Author of the article:Washington Post
Washington Post
Frances Vinall, The Washington Post
Published Oct 23, 2025 • Last updated 14 hours ago • 5 minute read
Americans were confronted with an extraordinary image this week: the mostly demolished East Wing of the White House, torn down to add a 90,000-square-foot ballroom to the historic building, a pet project of President Donald Trump that has moved at breakneck speed and prompted widespread complaints.
A stark contrast to this pace can be found in the United States’ northern neighbour. Works to upgrade and modernize Canada’s Parliament buildings – first built more than a century ago – are underway in a process that may take some three decades, with initial plans approved in 2001 and the complex’s Centre Block not expected to be reopened until 2032.
HOK, the lead design architect for the Centre Block upgrade, has called the project – which has an overall estimated price tag of up to $3.6 billion – “the largest and most complex rehabilitation ever undertaken in Canada.” It says workers have removed or protected more than 20,000 heritage items such as paintings, murals, stained-glass windows, woodwork and sculptures, some of which will be restored, and dug 75 feet to construct new visitor facilities that will minimally impact the appearance of the original buildings.
Salman Soleimani-Dashtaki, an adjunct professor in the department of civil engineering at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, said he was “a bit surprised” at the pace of the White House renovation in comparison to the Canadian approach.
“There are a lot of challenges, especially when you’re dealing with a building that’s extremely old and has a lot of value – preservation of that becomes a very important factor,” he said of the Canadian project, adding that its engineers’ “main, major goal” was to upgrade the Parliament buildings to meet modern standards without significantly affecting their appearance.
Canada’s Parliament complex was built in the 19th century. The Centre Block – where the House of Commons and Senate are traditionally located – and the precinct’s well-known Peace Tower were built between 1916 and 1928 after the previous structure was damaged in a fire. The White House was built in the late 18th century, while the East Wing was added in 1942.
“When a building becomes such an iconic structure in the country, any alteration that you do to the building runs a lot of risks, right?” Soleimani-Dashtaki said. “It becomes part of the history.”
He added that the solutions developed, particularly work to improve the structures’ earthquake resistance, were “an engineering wonder of the history of Canada” designed to save the buildings for future generations.
“Why it’s taking so long is because we know it’s going to be an example of a very extraordinary heritage restoration project,” he said. “I think that great things take a long time to build.”
A first version of a long-term plan to improve the parliamentary precinct was approved in 2001 and updated about six years later, to be executed in five-year increments – a considerably more deliberate pace than the Trump administration’s approach to the construction of the White House ballroom, in which demolition of the East Wing occurred within months of the project’s official announcement in July.
While Trump pledged at the time that the ballroom would not “interfere” with the existing building, White House officials said Tuesday that a full-scale teardown of the East Wing was expected. On Wednesday, the president said the privately funded project would cost $300 million, up from his original claim of $200 million.
The work at the White House also started without public review processes, according to the National Trust for Historic Preservation, a nonprofit created by Congress to help preserve historic buildings.
The lengthy timeline involved in the Canadian project has not been without criticism. In 2010, a report from the country’s auditor general found that planning had been slowed down by fragmented bureaucratic processes, with various agencies and branches of government needing to be consulted and provide approvals, which “ultimately results in project delays and inefficient use of resources.”
By 2023, though, the auditor general’s office found that much of the project had been effectively managed. In its earlier report, it had stressed the importance of getting the process right for the sake of preserving a national landmark.
“Canadians are attached to the Parliament buildings,” the report noted. “Surveys found that they see them as symbols of Canada’s history and tradition, and of democracy and freedom. Like official residences, the buildings are part of Canada’s heritage and belong to all Canadians.”
David Lieberman, architect and associate professor emeritus of the University of Toronto, said the sudden demolition of the East Wing without detailed review was “tragic.”
“Is the Canadian renovation too slow? Yes,” he said. “But does this mean that the budget is spread over a number of years? Does this mean that things are being done properly? Probably.
“Maybe the East Wing does need a major retrofit – the White House has been rebuilt several times, of course,” he said, referring to previous renovations. But he added that extensive engineering and design consultations would normally be undertaken before initiating a project of this magnitude.
The U.S. and Canada are among many countries that have grappled with how to make changes to landmark government buildings. The Trump administration argues that the White House’s current capacity to host events is too small – in a Tuesday statement, it called the ballroom a “necessary addition” in keeping with a “storied history of improvements and additions from commanders-in-chief.”
Britain has debated for years, without significant progress, the issue of how to address problems such as the presence of asbestos and frequent fires in its official buildings including the Palace of Westminster, the Guardian reported. Australia opened its new Parliament House in 1988, after about 13 years from planning to completion, converting the original into a museum, to address the need for more space.
In Canada, the prime minister’s official residence has also been a cause for concern. The building, constructed in the 1860s, has not been used for years and was officially closed in 2022 for health and safety reasons, while successive governments have been unable to decide on a solution for its future, Canadian media reported.
Canada’s lengthy Parliament upgrade a stark contrast to East Wing demolition
A stark contrast to this pace can be found in the United States' northern neighbour.