Search string: "mandate"
Matches found: 43A brand for all Canadians
There is no task that the NCC pursues with more zeal than their primary mandate: to promote themselves. And so it is that they are spending $2.5 million over the next five years to develop a brand for the Capital, for all Canadians. Apparently it is to be reflective, inspiring, and, uh, something to do with the environment. From the Citizen:
The National Capital Commission is working to develop a catchy yet dignified slogan, to be unveiled in June, that's meant to brand the capital region as a source of pride for all Canadians.
[...]"It's not just a phrase. It's about: Why does (the capital) matter to you as a Canadian?" said NCC chief executive Marie Lemay. "There are a number of things that are important to Canadians that are not, in their mind, reflected in the capital. Those had to do with the environment, with making it more reflective of the country, and inspiring. Working on those is really important. ... It's about the value of the capital to Canadians."
The slogan is to be part of a five-year $2.5-million branding and marketing project that the NCC began last year.
The values identified in the research are meant to infuse the NCC's corporate culture and operations, as well as the development of a new "Plan for Canada's Capital."
[...]In the efforts to come up with a branding and marketing strategy, the NCC commissioned Ipsos-Reid to conduct a survey of 3,500 Canadians on their attitudes toward the national capital.
The survey found that four out of five Canadians have a positive impression of the place. Most people saw the capital as historic, interesting, beautiful, welcoming, and culturally rich.
Fewer saw it as fun, dynamic, modern, cosmopolitan and innovative.
"It doesn't matter that much -- they don't expect you to be those things," said Ipsos-Reid vice-president Alexandra Evershed.
Obviously that's a good thing, being that this project is in the hands of the NCC.
Citizen: NCC to roll out hip (but not too hip) slogan for national capital region [22 Apr 2010]
Citizen: Slogans: keep it simple, stupid [25 Apr 2010]
Centretown News: Ottawa not just for Ottawans: NCC [21 Apr 2010]
More tinkering with the National Capital Act
The government today announced an "Action Plan for the National Capital Commission." This Plan of Action consists of a few mild proposals for changing the National Capital Act:
Highlights of the proposed legislation (Bill C-37):
- The NCC's board be required to hold at least four meetings in public per year, and may hold parts of a meeting in camera if required;
- The NCC be required to submit, at least once every ten years, a 50-year master plan for the National Capital Region, for approval by the Governor in Council and tabling in Parliament;
- The NCC's existing responsibility for the six official residences and for certain elements of transportation planning in the National Capital Region be reflected in the Act;
- The NCC may designate or remove designations of properties that are part of the National Interest Land Mass only if regulations setting out the criteria and process have been introduced;
- The NCC must manage its properties in accordance with principles of responsible environmental stewardship;
- The NCC be required to give due regard to maintaining the ecological integrity of Gatineau Park;
- The boundaries of Gatineau Park are described in a schedule;
- The NCC may make regulations prescribing user fees, which under this new legislation, would require Governor in Council approval;
- New and enhanced regulatory authorities and enforcement provisions to enable the NCC to better protect its properties; and
- The NCC no longer be required to seek Governor in Council approval through an Order in Council for individual real estate transactions such as acquisitions, disposals and leases.
This follows on from previous tinkering after the Mandate Review from a couple years back, and leaves the NCC to go about its business in much the same way they always have.
The NCC board meetings are already public - excepting those portions that aren't - so no real changes there. The NCC has never been short of plans, just worthwhile achievements, so requiring them to submit yet another plan every 10 years is something that, if we were in the government's shoes, we'd have kept to ourselves.
The government release does mention that "a transparent regulatory regime be established before properties can be designated as part of the National Interest Land Mass." So perhaps when the government is done, the mysterious and arbitrary process by which the NCC buys and sells land will become less mysterious, although probably no less arbitrary.
The release also includes vague language about "due regard for ecological integrity" and "principles of responsible environmental stewardship" - more specifics in due course, no doubt.
"Enhanced regulatory authorities" is, of course not something you want to hear about an already regulation-happy group like the NCC. And, lest they forget, they've put those elusive park boundaries in a schedule - well that should come in handy.
The legislation will be introduced in parliament this summer.
Citizen: New law would let NCC designate Gatineau Park lands [9 June 2009]
CBC: Gatineau Park gets more federal protection [10 June 2009]
Metro: Rules don't go far enough for park: NDP [10 June 2009]
Release: Government of Canada presents an action plan for the National Capital Commission [9 June 2009]
Leave governance to elected officials
Michael Polowin, writing in the Citizen, believes the NCC should leave governance to elected bodies:
I have given this long thought, and reached the conclusion that the NCC in its present mandate has outlived its usefulness, and needs to be substantially cut back.
[...]There are thousands of ways that the NCC regulates life and business, and it does so without direct accountability to the public.
[...]First, we should consider limited development in the current greenbelt, combined with a provincially mandated greenbelt somewhere outside the city, one that cannot be leapt (as is now the case in southern Ontario). Let's preserve wetlands, recreational areas and agriculturally valuable lands, while allowing scrub lands that are otherwise lying fallow to be used to intensify development of our city. In other words, get the NCC out of the greenbelt business; it has failed miserably.
[...]Height limits were intended to protect views of Parliament, but seriously, can you see Parliament from anywhere on its south side? No, you can't. The real effect of height limits is that they create more buildings and thus more sprawl. They create less profit for developers, and less profit leads to cost-cutting, which leads to boring and banal buildings.
Artificially low height limits were an NCC thing. Taller buildings would promote a more vibrant downtown, better architecture and more taxes paid to the city on more valuable real property. We will constrain sprawl as fewer buildings accommodate more people.
Return the NCC to its previous mission of beautifying the city. Let it keep the parks and bikepaths. They can make my jogs and bike rides more pleasant, but not regulate life or business in the capital. Let those we elect do the governing, for good or for ill.
For more on the impact of height restrictions on the city's tax base, see Greber's legacy.
Citizen: Leave governance to elected officials [26 May 2009]
Bill granting protection for Gatineau Park expected
Debate on one bill to protect Gatineau Park has been adjourned because the government will introduce its own. From the Citizen:
After years of debate about proposals to protect Gatineau Park from development and overuse, the Conservative government is expected within the next several weeks to present its own bill giving legal protection to the park.
The Senate adjourned debate on a private member's bill by Senator Mira Spivak on Wednesday after Conservative Senator Pierre Claude Nolin told senators that a government bill to protect the park will be introduced soon.
[...]Speaking in the Senate, Nolin said unlike national parks, the boundaries of Gatineau Park can be changed, its land can be sold and roads can be built without parliamentary approval.
Catherine Loubier, a spokesman for Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon who is also responsible for the NCC and Gatineau Park, said the government hopes to present a bill on the park and the role of the commission before the end of June.
"We are going to be more active in the coming weeks in the review of the NCC's mandate," Loubier said. "I can't confirm that we are tabling a bill today, but Minister Cannon is still living up to his commitment to provide more protection for Gatineau Park."
Various bills for protecting the park have come and gone over the years; the NCC has generally opposed the idea.
Citizen: Gatineau Park nears national status [7 May 2009]
CBC: Gatineau Park could get national protection [9 May 2009]
Citizen: Manitoba senator emerges as saviour of Gatineau Park [18 May 2009]
NCC Watch: Gatineau Park
NCC ombudsman office now open
The NCC ombudsman, a position recommended by the NCC Mandate Review some time ago, is finally operational. From the Citizen:
The National Capital Commission's ombudsman is open for business, ready to take complaints about the federal agency.
Lawyer Laura Bruneau, appointed to the part-time post by the NCC's board, said Wednesday that she will have a two-track approach to complaints. She will intervene and try to resolve a complaint, but if that doesn't work, she will start an investigation and present a formal report.
[...] Ken Rubin, one of the commission's longstanding critics, said he would not likely use the ombudsman's office. He said that if he wanted something changed at the commission, a more effective way is to go to the chairman, the minister responsible, a parliamentary committee or the press to raise the issue.
He said an ombudsman should be able to probe the organization on his or her own, without any specific complaints.
The ombudsman also has a website.
Citizen: New NCC ombudsman set to solve problems [9 April 2009]
Release: NCC's First Ombudsman Now Open for Business
Openness and Transparency roundup
Well, the NCC announced their latest openness initiative, and, what do you know, just like that, they are opening board meetings to the public. For old times' sake, let's go back a few months to a Citizen article on Marcel Beaudry's response to the NCC Mandate Review's report on the NCC:
Beaudry said at least one of the recommendations has already been well discussed by the NCC's board. The report asks the NCC to open its meetings to the public, a move already considered twice in the past 14 years, Beaudry said. He added that Treasury Board guidelines recommend Crown corporation meetings be held in private.
Chairman Beaudry, so characteristically stonewalling to the bitter end. In this context, the NCC's Damascene conversion to open meetings cannot be underestimated. (And check out this classic from the Citizen, the board's ideas on privacy from 1998.)On the other hand, considering the NCC's low standing with the press and the Mandate Review panel recommendations for openness, open meetings had become the very least the NCC could get away with to ensure its own survival. And no doubt current interim CEO Micheline Dubé, who by all accounts just can't wait to be open and accessible, would like to avoid being raked over the coals like her predecessor, as in this fav from March 2006:
Everything you need to know about the National Capital Commission is summed up by the way a five-year initiative to dispel the idea that the NCC is secretive and unaccountable was revealed. It was obtained through access to information. Rather than produce a five-year plan to appear open and transparent, why not just be open and transparent?
The NCC, a creaky, out-of-touch bureaucracy, hunkers down behind the walls of the Chambers Building, fearing controversy and debate. On his castle throne, the woefully inaccessible Marcel Beaudry ponders the end of his 14-year reign. His tired, confused term concludes in September.
So, open meetings it is. And the first, mostly open meeting is scheduled for November 7. Also on the Openness and Transparency agenda, the NCC will establish "public standing committees" of as yet vague standing, get an external ombudsman, and introduce an annual open house. There's also a survey on the always amusing NCC website, but only until October 12.
NCC: NCC Announces New Initiatives to Enhance Openness and Transparency [12 Sep 2007]
CBC: NCC unveils reforms for greater openness [12 Sep 2007]
Radio-Canada: Opération transparence [12 Sep 2007]
City Journal: NCC to open board meetings [12 Sep 2007]
NCC: Share Your Ideas! (until October 12)
Citizen: The public makes more noise than they should [24 Aug 1998]
The NCC's bright, shining moment
Over at the Citizen, city editorial page editor Ken Gray is optimistic about the Mills appointment (link, expires 30 days):
To name one of the chief critics of the Crown agency, through his newspaper days, to run it speaks volumes. His appointment is a stroke of political genius by Transport Minister Lawrence Cannon, no doubt aided by Environment Minister John Baird, the political minister for Ottawa. The best way to defuse your critics is to appoint one to the top job. It is a rare bit of political insight on the Conservative government's horrid local file, but you take your genius where you can get it.
The fly in the ointment is just how much power Mr. Mills will have. For at the new NCC, there will also be a chief executive officer. Will that person be the straw that stirs the drink.
[...]Recently, Mr. Cannon, who is responsible for the NCC, said he is impressed with the open processes at Ottawa City Hall (too bad the city is becoming more secretive). That might be the tip that the mandate review's position on openness would be adopted in future reform. Let's hope so.
This public process would build trust if handled well. No doubt, old-time NCC administrators would strive to keep the process secret, as has been their wont. That's where Mr. Mills would come in with his well-honed journalist's instincts. He should question, as he certainly will, NCC staff attempts to keep information private. Withholding information should be the exception rather than the norm.
Beyond this, Mr. Mills must establish what the role of the NCC is in the capital. Prior to municipal amalgamation on both sides of the provincial border, the NCC needed to be an overseer of the national interest in the face of the conflicting positions from myriad cities.
Now with amalgamation, two formidable municipalities have been created, often with expertise, particularly in planning, that far exceeds that of the NCC. In terms of consultation, implementation and creating area-wide blueprints such as the official plans, the cities have not only grown up, they have left the NCC in their dust. The Crown corporation has become a ponderous, bureaucratic body that dallied for years over impractical schemes for such sites as the city core, the Daly site and LeBreton Flats.
The review panel would like to see a reinvigorated planning and heritage function for the NCC. But the experience of the past decade and more show that the Crown corporation is out of touch with modern planning principles and basic efficiencies.
Rather than being the leader in planning in the community, perhaps the NCC would do well to try to mediate solutions to cross-border transportation problems between governments and become an adjunct to the vastly superior municipal planning process. Perhaps the Crown corporation should approach municipalities with its projects in such a way that they build better cities rather than just being one-off grandiose projects.
Mr. Mills enters the NCC with an enormous task in front of him at a critical time. Never has the Crown corporation's stock been so low. He must build an organization that is open and that residents can trust. As well, the new chairman must revolutionize from within so that it produces projects that result in improved cities. In that way, it can be a force to create a better capital to benefit all Canadians.
The NCC must think local to produce a stronger Ottawa-Gatineau that will be an inspiration to the rest of the country, not only culturally but from an urban-planning perspective.
Mr. Mills's appointment is an enormous opportunity to create an invigorated, useful, trustworthy NCC. It should not be lost.
Citizen: The NCC's bright, shining moment [11 May 2007]
Russell Mills roundup
Lawrence Cannon made Russell Mills' appointment as chair of the NCC official at a little ceremony today, taking the opportunity to appoint some chap called Jason Sordi to the board at the same time. According to the Transport Canada news release, Sordi is a "senior account manager, commercial financial services, for RBC Financial Group. He has also worked as an event planner, regional project manager and representative for the Canadian Unity Council" - whoever they are.
At the press gathering, Mills declared his commitment to greater transparency at the tired organization. From the CBC:
Mills said he will focus on a recommendation by an external review panel to bring more accountability and openness to the agency that manages federal properties in the Ottawa-Gatineau region, which has often been criticized for its secrecy.
"I believe that transparency is the greatest promoter of accountability in public institutions," Mills said.
He told reporters that he fought for public openness during his own 35 years as a journalist.
"The fact that the government chose someone like me to be the chair is a pretty strong signal that that's what they want, too."
Several more local grandees have also had the opportunity to weigh in on the appointment, with largely positive comments. From the Citizen:
Jim Watson, a former mayor of Ottawa and current Ontario cabinet minister, who has been one of the NCC's toughest critics, said putting Mr. Mills in charge of the board spells the end of the Beaudry-era closed meetings.
"It's a great appointment. His appointment sends a pretty clear signal that the government expects the NCC to be much more open," said Mr. Watson. "Russ is well known for being a great advocate of openness and transparency. I'm very optimistic about the future of the NCC under his guidance.
"It's an appointment that will be well received by us who have been fighting to make sure the NCC is more accountable, more open, and really more a part of the community," said Mr. Watson.
"He's a true community advocate and that's the kind of person that you like to see in an organization like the NCC."
"It's an excellent appointment," said Jacquelin Holzman, a former mayor of Ottawa.
She hopes Mr. Mills will lead a revival of pride in the capital. She said Ottawa should be as revered by Canadians as Washington is by Americans, but that's not the case and it needs to be turned around.
Ms. Holzman said Mr. Mills' experience with a wide number of boards in the corporate and charitable sectors means he understands that the board of directors gives overall direction, rather than micromanaging the organization.
Ottawa Centre MP Paul Dewar, one of the most knowledgeable critics on the NCC, said the appointment of Mr. Mills is "an interesting choice" for the government, and he views Mr. Mills as "a decent person." He says "any change, to some respect, is welcome."
Randall Denley, meanwhile, notes that the CEO position will likely be far more important than the chair, which is after all a part-time position. From the Citizen:
The former Citizen publisher has always been a champion of openness at the NCC, and so his selection sends a positive message about the direction of the organization. The problem is, the new chairman won't be running the organization day to day, and his role might be more ceremonial than consequential. In every organization, someone has to lead and it's not likely to be a part-time board chairman.
Given his stance in the past, Mills certainly has to open the organization's board meetings, but the NCC's secretiveness is just a small part of its problem. Despite a recent mandate review, it's far from clear what value the NCC really adds. Finding a useful role is the real challenge for the new chairman and the yet-to-be-appointed CEO who will actually run the NCC.
The board meets only four or five times a year, essentially rubber-stamping the work of the bureaucracy. The public ought to expect more, and one value of opening the meetings might be to show us if the board members are making a real contribution or are just in town for the free lunch.
The NCC could gain more ground on openness by releasing every possible document -- not making people chase them under access-to-information rules, then treating the contents of the reports like state secrets.What the NCC really needs is a visionary with a tremendous grasp of urban planning, but there is nothing in Mills' past to indicate he's that sort of person. In choosing Mills, the government has at least recognized that the board chairman needs to know this community, not just be the "person of significant national stature" envisioned by the group that reviewed the NCC mandate.
NCC critics would have been happy if the federal government had shut the organization down, but the truth is, the federal government likes the NCC because it gives it a tool to do as it pleases in Ottawa. For that reason, the NCC is not going away any time soon. At least in Russ Mills, we have an NCC chairman who won't confuse his role with that of a divine right king.
Transport Canada release: Appointments to National Capital Commission [3 May 2007]
Citizen: Former Citizen publisher to be new NCC chairman (expires 30 days) [3 May 2007]
Citizen: Door opens at the NCC (expires 30 days) [3 May 2007]
Citizen: Positive move at the NCC (expires 30 days) [3 May 2007]
CBC: Greater transparency a priority for new NCC chair [3 May 2007]
Radio-Canada: La nomination de Russell Mills confirmée [3 May 2007]
NCC claims opening meetings costs too much
Briefing papers prepared by NCC staff, obtained by access to information researcher Ken Rubin, claim that opening NCC board meetings to the public will cost $23,000 per meeting and still leave the public bitter and frustrated (no doubt -- ed.). From the Citizen:
In an interview Thursday, NCC spokeswoman Lucie Caron said that translation and meeting room costs would also be included in the estimate provided. Ms. Caron said the estimate was a ballpark figure and she didn't have a detailed breakdown of the different costs.
The commission also argues in the internal report on the issue that the public might be frustrated by the large number of confidential items at board meetings. The commission says that in the previous year, only about three of the 20 items before the board of directors would have been aired in public.
The commission argues that Treasury Board submissions, contracts, third-party information, cabinet confidences, security and compensation matters, as well as performance evaluations, are all confidential matters that would be held in camera, regardless.
[...] The federal government held a review of the NCC last year, led by professor Gilles Paquet, who concluded there is "a culture of secrecy" at the commission and it needs "a cultural revolution."
The panel, which reported on time and under budget, found that there have been "a series of flawed initiatives and public relations problems," and that it is increasingly viewed with suspicion because of recent sales of land for development to balance the books.
The panel concluded that two ways to improve the public's regard for the commission are to give it more money so it can pay the bills without selling land, and to improve corporate sensitivity and communications by having advisory committees held in public with full public input. The four meetings of the NCC's board each year should be held in public, with members of the public able to observe, but not comment on the proceedings, the panel said.
The minister responsible for the NCC, Transport Minister and Pontiac MP Lawrence Cannon, called the panel report "a refreshing direction" and "a good initiative," noting that lack of transparency at the NCC had been "an irritant for many years." A first response of the government came last week in the federal budget when the NCC got an additional $30 million over two years. Ms. Caron said Thursday that the NCC is awaiting the government's directions in response to the mandate review.
"We're open to having open meetings," said Ms. Caron.
Former mayor Jim Watson also points out that the NAC opened its meetings and somehow, they coped:
MPP Jim Watson, who urged the NCC to open its meetings and is one of the former NAC board members who pushed for the NAC's openness policy, said the NAC experience showed that predicted "chaos and anarchy" never happened.
[...] Mr. Watson said the NCC's current annual meeting held in public is little more than a "dog and pony show," and "a chance for the NCC to boast and brag." He said the NCC has thrown out many arguments over the years to keep the board doors closed. But he argues the commission is really something close to a municipal government, with planning issues that are best dealt with in public. "They're looking for any feeble excuse not to shine the light on their activities," he said. But he said the commission will find out that, if it does open meetings, "the sky doesn't fall down."
Citizen: Open NCC meetings to be costly, agency says [29 Mar 2007]
NCC gets $30 million
Buried in the orgy of spending in budget 2007 is $30 million for the NCC. From the Citizen:
When the government set up a panel to review the mandate of the NCC, one of the biggest criticisms presented was that the commission had turned from a protector of heritage and greenspace in the capital, into more of a developer-type force in the community. The panel, led by University of Ottawa professor Gilles Paquet, urged the government to boost funding by as much as $25 million per year.
The budget infusion, if approved by Parliament, will add $5 million to the operating budget in each of the next two years. This will bring the operating budget to about $79 million, a figure that includes payments in lieu of property taxes to other governments.
On the capital budget side, the commission will get an additional $10 million a year for the next two years, bringing the capital budget to about $26 million a year.
Operating budgets cover day-to-day costs, while capital budgets cover expenses such as buildings and equipment. The commission has seen some additional funds in the last decade but they were always tied to specific projects, such as the cleanup of LeBreton Flats.
The extra money means the NCC won't have to generate funds through land sales to keep operating, said Ms. Caron. But she said, in accordance with Treasury Board guidelines, the commission might still sell property that's judged to be not "national interest" lands.
While it's too early to say what the immediate impact of the money will be, Ms. Caron said it will speed up the commission's work such as preserving cultural landmarks, building and maintaining roads and pathways.
Actually, we know exactly what the immediate impact will be - the NCC will have even more freedom to do what they do best: screw up at our expense, with little accountability or oversight.
Citizen: NCC get $30 million from budget [29 Mar 2007]
NCC interest group meeting
While nothing's been heard from the government since the NCC Mandate Review Panel submitted its report last year, the NCC is suddenly interested in "Openness and communication with the public; Increased representation of Canada and Canadians in the Capital; and Use of new technologies to better communicate the Capital to Canadians." These topics will apparently be the focus of their occasional meeting with interest groups, this year to be held Wednesday, May 2, 2007, 6 pm at the Best Western Cartier Hotel, 131 Laurier Street in Gatineau. To be able to present your suggestions, you have to register and submit a written brief no later than Friday, March 23, 2007.
NCC: Meeting with Interest Groups and the Public - 2007 Edition
NCC's boorish behaviour
Citizen City editorial page editor Ken Gray continues his (somewhat optimistic) look at the NCC Mandate Review recommendations:
All this talk of bad behaviour brings to mind the National Capital Commission, the custodian of federal activities and lands in the capital. It has been boorish in the past, alienating the citizens of Ottawa and Gatineau in the process. For example, with its misguided plan to add a third lane to Champlain Bridge, it plugged a residential area of Ottawa with traffic - in the process destroying one of the NCC's own scenic driveways along Island Park Drive.
Community groups across the north end of Ottawa fought this bad planning, taking the NCC to Federal Court and bankrupting themselves in the process. As a result, the NCC caused many across the city to consider the Crown corporation boorish.
[...]After a while, the citizens, critics and politicians ganged up on the NCC and forced the federal government to create the NCC Mandate Review to investigate reforming the Crown corporation. Last week this column looked at the panel's misguided recommendations to give this dysfunctional operation more power. Given its chequered past, it would be foolhardy to allow the NCC a stronger mandate. Instead, when the people of this community feel they can trust the NCC, perhaps then it will be time to bolster its mandate. In the meantime, it is best to leave such fields as transportation and planning (as suggested by the panel to be moved to the NCC) to the cities, where there is accountability and skill in such matters.
[...]It is through transparency and recognition of local needs that the NCC will regain its long-lost trust and stature. It doesn't need more power. The NCC must warm to the community and, in turn, the community will return that goodwill. But it will take time to repair the damage done over the past decade or more.
[...]It is with transparency and local participation that the NCC will flourish. The review panel report, though flawed, is at least a start to the end of the boorishness of the NCC
Citizen: Toward an Open and Caring NCC [12 Jan 2007]
The good, the bad, and the NCC
Citizen City editorial page editor Ken Gray (link, subscribers only, expires in 30 days) notes a few minor problems with the mandate review panel report recommendations:
Giving more power to an organization that has botched its planning role so badly is like expecting your teenager, who just totalled the family Toyota, to drive better by giving the youngster a Porsche.
For example, the NCC would have a "new focus" on heritage, according to the report. Odd that recommendation, given that the NCC and its forerunners put the word flats in LeBreton Flats when it demolished that neighbourhood and left it empty for half a century. And then there were its plans to move or dismantle buildings of historical significance on Sparks Street.
The panel, chaired by Gilles Paquet, would see a NCC that would put "new focus on the core of the capital," a core it almost destroyed with its plans to remove a large number of vibrant businesses and institutions for an ill-considered plan to widen Metcalfe Street.
As well, the report recommends "a renewed emphasis on the planning function." Over the past few decades, the NCC has not planned well. Now, if the panel has its way, we would see more of this.
In a move that could result in inefficient area job and economic growth, the report suggests giving the NCC the power to co-ordinate the 75/25-per-cent split in the allocation of federal government development between Ottawa and Gatineau. Imagine waiting at LeBreton Flats-development speed for approval of a new home, for say, the RCMP. And furthermore, why should federal investment be confined to a cross-border quota? Perhaps it would be better for the feds to simply build where it makes the best economic and planning sense.
And this proposed mandate is far beyond the capability of the NCC when you look back at its slow planning and approval processes. The NCC could paralyse federal government growth in the area.
The panel perpetuates the myth that the rest of the country cares about the activities of the NCC. "Both the national and local communities have to be kept informed of how the national capital coordinating agency is carrying out its tasks," the report says. "The capital city has to speak to the country," the report says in another nose-stretcher. In fact, the rest of the country doesn't spend much time thinking about the capital, and few Canadians outside the Ottawa area have even heard of the NCC.
Realistically, the Crown corporation is another form of area government and thus needs to address regional issues effectively. If it does that, the NCC, in conjunction with the only Canadians preoccupied with health of the capital -- the residents of the region itself -- will help build a city that will attract Canadian visitors.
The panel suggests the NCC play a bigger role in regional transportation, but the Crown corporation has consistently failed in that function. The third lane built on the NCC's Champlain Bridge pours traffic into residential areas; the NCC has so far failed to develop a plan for interprovincial bridges; and the NCC was so slow off the mark that the City of Ottawa had to purchase the Prince of Wales railroad bridge across the Ottawa River to preserve it for transit.
Citizen: The good, the bad, and the NCC [5 Jan 2007]
Meaningless language that protects the status quo
Citizen editorial board member Kate Heartfield takes a look at the mandate review panel report and finds it wanting:
The report gives the NCC much advice in the form of glossy phrases that don't mean anything.
The NCC is "the main instrument of the federal government charged with the coordination of all activities pertaining to the ongoing planning, stewardship, and celebration of the capital of Canada."
Further, the NCC must "pay particular attention to the local partners, who must be mobilized to produce a true 'national capital experience.' " (The unnecessary and bewildering quotation marks are in the report.)
If my editor called me into his office to talk to me about sharpening my focus, then told me I must plan, steward and celebrate the editorial pages and mobilize sources to produce a true newspaper experience, I wouldn't know where to begin. The panel is asking the NCC to do everything and nothing, which is how the NCC got in the position of needing a review in the first place.
The panel all but ignored its first and most important task. It didn't ask the question: Does the capital region need the NCC?
[...] Then it bewailed the poor public image of the NCC, noting the calls for the organization's reform or elimination. It called that an "unfortunate situation" and blamed the image problem on misunderstanding. Sure, it's unfortunate if you're a supporter of the NCC. If you're a disinterested observer -- as a review panel should be -- it's not unfortunate that many people dislike the NCC. It's merely a fact.
[...] Apparently, there are "opportunities and potential that it can leverage in pursuing the important national undertaking," the "progress and development of Canada's capital."
So it would be useful to know what progress will mean to the revamped NCC. Will it look anything like the City of Ottawa's definition of progress? Will it be limited to useful interprovincial projects, such as a new bridge over the Ottawa River? Or will it be similar to the beautification plans of the old NCC? Are there statues involved? Ceremonial boulevards? Is my neighbourhood likely to be razed? Who knows?
[...] Still, let's be optimistic for a moment. It's a new year, and a good time for optimism. It would be wonderful to end up with an open, accountable NCC that did not do anything any other agency could do. It would be wonderful to end up with an NCC that could make the municipal, provincial and federal governments co-operate effectively on projects.
That isn't what the review panel has given us. It's given us an Ottawa special: meaningless language that protects the status quo.
Citizen: Your NCC: leveraging potential [2 Jan 2007]
Give them three years
Citizen columnist Randall Denley thinks the NCC should be given at most three years to prove its worth in the wake of the mandate review:
The federal agency has a potentially useful role as the point of connection between Ottawa, Gatineau and the federal government, but it needs to come down from the mountain top where it has resided for more than a decade. If the NCC wants to actively engage in the process of city building, it's welcome, but the NCC's history is one of planning to do, not doing.
How many years has the NCC been talking about improving access to the Ottawa River, for example? The reformed NCC should be given three years, at most, to prove its worth.
Citizen: 2007 is a crucial year for the 'city that can't' [31 Dec 2006]
Missing: real accountability
Citizen letter writer Katie Paris sums up what's missing from the Mandate Review recommendations:
Something is missing in the report on reforming the National Capital Commission: real accountability. The NCC is guilty not of small miscues but of blunders: Letting LeBreton Flats sit undeveloped for 40 years is an unpunished failure, and so is choosing a development with as little spark and innovation as what is now being built.
The NCC needs to be held accountable when it makes lousy decisions, and electoral accountability is the only mechanism where leaders will lose their jobs if they ignore the public good. Citizens of Ottawa and Gatineau should be able to vote for the CEO and chair of the NCC.
Unless there is direct accountability to voters, the NCC will continue to act in an arrogant and unresponsive manner. The proposed public meetings and ombudsman are progress, but they will do little to change the fundamental incentives faced by those who run the NCC.
Citizen: Elect NCC head [28 Dec 2006]
Mandate Review submits report
As expected, the Mandate Review's report recommends giving the NCC more money ($25 million per year) and more power to do what it wants, in exchange for opening some board meetings and other minor tinkering, all passed off as "a major transformation." The Citizen sums up:
The review of the NCC's mission, run by a three-person panel led by Gilles Paquet, said the commission should be strengthened, rather than scrapped, which was one of the suggestions that had been floated by Pontiac MP Lawrence Cannon.
Mr. Paquet said the panel's look at the NCC found the Crown corporation is important to the region to fulfil its role as a capital and a functioning urban area. But he said the increasing criticism faced by the commission -- dismissed by outgoing NCC chairman Marcel Beaudry at a public hearing in Ottawa this fall -- has foundation.
"The NCC has, at times, seemingly lost its way," said Mr. Paquet. He said the commission has developed a "culture of secrecy" in recent years that has fed public mistrust.
The panel found that since the 1990s, there have been a series of "flawed initiatives and public relations problems," often involving plans to sell land or take down buildings, such as those on Metcalfe Street. The commission courted conflict with "cavalier relationship management," and was indifferent to Ottawa history and the attachment of residents to greenspace.
And yet, Mr. Paquet said the commission -- which runs Winterlude and Canada Day festivities, plans federal government projects and land use, and maintains the capital's most scenic public spaces -- would be sorely missed if it were not there. He likened the NCC to the human digestive system: little understood, but essential to a good life.
[...]The panel wants the federal government to instruct the commission not to sell land to generate operating funds. To make up the difference, the government would increase its taxpayer-funded contribution by about $25 million each year. The NCC has an annual budget of about $131 million.
The report is available from the Mandate Review website.
Meanwhile, Chairman Beaudry was trying to put the best spin possible on the review, claiming that the mandate review panel report's call to revamp the NCC is "not an indictment" of the NCC, but "an acknowledgment of the [the NCC's] exceptional work," not realizing, perhaps, that by making the claim he was pretty much proving the point. Ever clueless, he then took the opportunity to take a shot at the whole tiresome business of opening NCC board meetings:
Beaudry said at least one of the recommendations has already been well discussed by the NCC's board. The report asks the NCC to open its meetings to the public, a move already considered twice in the past 14 years, Beaudry said. He added that Treasury Board guidelines recommend Crown corporation meetings be held in private.
Hear that? The NCC board considered opening its meetings twice - twice! - in the past 14 years, and found it to be impractical. Enough already!
CBC: Capital commission should quit selling public lands [21 Dec 2006]
CBC: Call for NCC revamp not an 'indictment': chair [22 Dec 2006]
Citizen: Bolster NCC, don't scrap it [22 Dec 2006]
Citizen: Some juicy bits; some no-brainers [22 Dec 2006]
Radio-Canada: On recommande une transformation majeure [21 Dec 2006]
New Edinburgh Community Alliance: NCC Mandate Review Committee Report [6 Feb 2007]
Citizen: The public makes more noise than they should [24 Aug 1998]
NCC needs cultural revolution
Over at The Citizen, city editorial page editor Ken Gray notes some of the differences between dealing with the NCC as opposed to the city:
During the last 10 years at the Citizen, I've written 141 stories and columns that have mentioned the National Capital Commission. It took me months of trying to get my first phone interview with NCC Chairman Marcel Beaudry.
"Mr. Beaudry," I said, "you're a very hard man to reach."
"Well, maybe this is the beginning of a new relationship," the elusive chairman said.
I never heard from him again.
Conversely, former mayor Bob Chiarelli was mentioned 533 times in my stories but he was almost always available for interviews. You could call him, walk with him to meetings, ambush him on the way back from the washroom, he'd call you down to the mayor's boardroom, and sometimes knock on your office door.
Former regional government chief administrative officer Merv Beckstead was so accessible he would apologize if he took too long to answer your phone call. I was just happy to get a call at all.
People such as Mr. Chiarelli and Mr. Beckstead realized that nature and newspapers abhor a vacuum, so if they didn't get their side of the story out, someone else would fill that space. And it might be something they wouldn't like to see in print.
This is by way of saying that the NCC is not only out of touch with the community, it doesn't even make the effort to be in touch.
[...] The decline at the NCC has been precipitous. So much so that officials at the Crown corporation don't understand that by placing two prominent NCC employees on the four-member secretariat that advises the review panel, the NCC jeopardizes the integrity of the mandate review and the Crown corporation itself. No self-respecting organization would allow its members to be working on a supposedly independent review of itself. But then, that's the NCC. If that is what we see of this closed organization from the outside, what's going on inside?
Citizen: NCC needs cultural revolution [15 Dec 2006]
NCC to have "new, stronger mandate"
Little over a week before the expected report from the NCC Mandate Review, and Treasury Board pres John Baird is already crowing about a "new, stronger mandate" for the clapped out organization:
"Lawrence Cannon has been working on this hard, and we've got a phenomenal opportunity to protect the Greenbelt, increase accountability and transparency, and a new, stronger mandate for the NCC," Mr. Baird said in an interview.
"It has the potential to be a big win for environmentalists, for people who want more accountability and for people who want vision. It can be a real accomplishment of this minority Parliament. It is exciting."
Ah yes, the Vision thing - not all that long ago, the NCC's vision included the Metcalfe Grand Boulevard and the Canada and the World Pavilion.
Nevertheless, "most observers believe the NCC's mandate will be expanded to include, at least, transportation planning and a new funding model will be put in place to prevent it from being forced to sell land to fund and sustain its activities." Transportation planning - much like that freeway they're building through Gatineau Park? Another "big win" for the environmentalists. Oh yeah, and the new NCC will be "more open."
It's a curious end to a process that started a few short months ago with Lawrence Cannon wondering if the NCC was even necessary. Since then, the NCC performed a reverse takeover of the review to the point where NCC flak Laurie Peters now runs interference for the panel and the NCC gets everything it ever asked for, all in exchange for maybe opening up a few board meetings. Looks like a "big win" alright - for the NCC.
Citizen: More open NCC to have stronger mandate: Baird [13 Dec 2006]
NCC panel rejects secrecy beefs
The Ottawa Sun follows up on the secret meetings conducted by the NCC Mandate Review:
A panel studying the future of the National Capital Commission continues to refuse to reveal the participants and content of secret meetings it held over two months to discuss the federal agency that has long been derided for its lack of transparency.
The panel is unmoved by the heavy criticism it has received from local politicians and the public for its decision to keep the meetings under wraps.
Bloc Quebecois Gatineau MP Richard Nadeau said the secret meetings have thrown the legitimacy of the panel's public meetings into doubt.
"Are they putting more importance on their secret meetings than the public meetings?" asked Nadeau, who made a presentation to the panel last night during a public hearing in Gatineau. "When you hide things, it smells bad."
The panel's secrecy is being defended by the minister who created it.
"These people have to deliberate and they conduct consultations at the same time," Transport Minister Lawrence Cannon said Friday while responding to a question from Nadeau during Question Period. "In order to prepare the work and the recommendations, they need to work together."
The panel says it will release a list of people and organizations that had private meetings with the panel once the report is released. The transcripts won't be released.
Sun: NCC rejects secrecy beefs [16 Nov 2006]
NCC Mandate Review public consultation meeting, take 1
The first NCC Mandate Review public consultation meeting went down in predictable fashion last night, with Chairman Beaudry denying that anything is wrong and demanding more power for the NCC. Area politicians Jim Watson and Paul Dewar took the opportunity to ask for more openness from the NCC. A parade of well meaning groups also offered a variety of ideas for tinkering with the NCC's funding and governance, or presented plans for various projects, believing somehow that if only the NCC could be renewed or subverted to their ends, all would be well. Some former NCC employees were also on hand to offer their support.
NCC Watch's position remains that "NCC renewal" is a contradiction in terms, and any renewed NCC will ultimately be subject to the same issues of empire building and corporate arrogance that currently plague the NCC.
Citizen: Give NCC more power, chairman says [10 Nov 2006]
Citizen: Jim Watson - Let there be light [9 Nov 2006]
Radio Canada: Début des audiences sur son mandat [9 Nov 2006]
NCC Mandate Review: Submissions received [10 Nov 2006]
Citizen: No new power for the NCC [15 Nov 2006]
NCC Mandate Review won't disclose secret meeting transcripts
The Ottawa Sun reports that the NCC Mandate Review panel is refusing to release a list of individuals and organizations it has met with in secret, let alone the transcripts of the meetings. Evidently oblivious of the irony of conducting secret meetings to review an organization criticized for secretiveness, the review panel's executive director claims all is well:
Gilles Dery, the panel's executive director, says it's normal practice to hold secret meetings. Some of the individuals and groups with opinions on the NCC do not want their views known publicly, he says. Dery says a list of everyone who was consulted will be included in the final report, but the contents of the secret meetings will never be released to the public.
This should prompt further calls to review the review panel. Meanwhile, Chairman Beaudry took the opportunity to once again blame the media "for creating the perception of secrecy at the agency," all the while insisting, without a hint of irony, that there's no reason to open up NCC board meetings as federal guidelines do not require it.
Dewar crafting bill to crack open NCC
Ottawa-Centre MP Paul Dewar will introduce a private members' bill in Parliament intended to open the NCC, establish "merit-based" appointments, clearly define the roles of NCC members, and mandate elected representatives on the NCC board. Dewar criticized the NCC Mandate Review as "a regrettable reflection of how the NCC already operates," stating that "It's sadly mirroring the behaviour of the NCC, which is not the whole problem but a good part of the problem." He also describes the NCC's process for developing the LeBreton Flats, which resulted in only one bidder for the project, as a "fiasco."
City Journal: Dewar crafting bill to crack open NCC [1 Nov 2006]
Review the NCC review
An editorial in The Citizen today highlights the latest absurdities of the NCC Mandate Review:
So what has happened since the current review started? Well, two of the major players in the secretariat that helps and advises the three-person panel are major players at the NCC. That's a problem.
Now the way the panel has set up the consultation on the review smacks of the way the NCC holds its meetings.
To speak at these consultations, you had to register by Oct. 15 and provide a written submission last week. As well, the panel will accept submissions but isn't compelled to make them public.
Now not only does the NCC need review, the review of the NCC needs review. How much longer can this mess be allowed to continue?
Citizen: Review the NCC review [30 Oct 2006]
MP launches alternate review
With the NCC mandate review now more or less serving the NCC's own agenda, Ottawa Centre MP Paul Dewar has decided to organize and host an open forum on the NCC's future Saturday, November 4 from 2-4 pm at the Old Firehall on Sunnyside Avenue. The forum will feature as yet unnamed "progressive thinkers" and "land use experts." In explaining his reasons, he cites the overly restrictive nature of the comment submission process and widespread cynicism in his constituency. "This is the wrong process, run by the wrong people, and it is costing far too much," he said.
Minister Cannon responded by praising Chairman Beaudry, the NCC, and the mandate review panel.
Radio-Canada: Un député conteste le processus de révision [26 Oct 2006]
Paul Dewar Press Release [26 Oct 2006]
Mandate review fatally undermined
In his Citizen column today, Ken Gray points out something pretty obvious, once you're looking for it, about the NCC Mandate Review Panel: two of four members (not including two support workers) of the mandate review secretariat are NCC employees. Listed on the mandate review contacts web page are Laurie Peters, NCC spokesperson, and Francois Lapointe, NCC planning director. Amazingly, Ms. Peters is responsible for telling the panel what areas of NCC operations the public has had concerns about.
From the article:
The secretariat supports the panel's work and gives contract and project management advice on financial matters. Certainly other people could have been found to provide communications or financial advice in political affairs in the national capital of consultation. People like this grow on trees in this community. Why go to the NCC for it?
Mr. Drery [the secretariat executive director] said he knew the optics of having NCC people on the NCC review weren't good, but he felt the short time frame for the panel to report to government meant the Crown corporation's people had to be brought on board.
In reality, the appearances are terrible. Are these two people likely to recommend or support or mention, say, eliminating their jobs? The appointment of half the secretariat from the NCC is the kind of trust and transparency complaint that has dogged the NCC for years.
Many residents of the national capital already distrust the NCC. Why? Well, there was the matter of just missing destroying Ottawa's downtown by bulldozing a ceremonial boulevard through millions of dollars worth of good businesses on Metcalfe Street so the Peace Tower's view would be centred on the street.
Then, of course, there was the botched development of the Daly site, a location of national importance occupied by a condominium. Or placing a series of post-Stalinist apartment buildings on LeBreton Flats. Or just leaving the Flats sit idle for about half a century.
[...] In fact, from a public relations and governance view, the panel has already failed because residents can't trust its findings. As a result, don't be optimistic that a new NCC will come out of the study to be revealed in December.
So, after a promising start, the Mandate Review appears to be just one more botched attempt at reforming the NCC.
Citizen: NCC employees working on review of agency [13 Oct 2006]
Last chance to register for mandate review consultations
The NCC Mandate Review Panel would like to remind everybody that this is the last week to register for the NCC Mandate Review Panel Public Consultations.
Visit the NCC Mandate Review website for details.
Public consultation period underway for NCC review
Having dismissed the only rational course of action for dealing with the NCC problem, the recently appointed three-member NCC Mandate Review Panel is opening the floor to the public to solicit, oh, whatever other ideas they can come up with. Public meetings will be held November 8, 2006 at the University of Quebec in Gatineau and November 9, 2006 at the National Arts Centre in Ottawa. "Interested individuals and groups" who want some time should register by October 16 and send a written brief of their presentation to the panel no later than October 27. Not quite so interested people have until November 15, 2006 to submit written comments.
The NCC Mandate Review now has its very own website as well.
NCC Mandate Review: Release [18 Sep 2006]
Don't expect any big changes at NCC
Citizen columnist Kelly Egan takes a look at the NCC Mandate Review, and has understandably low expectations:
In April, Lawrence Cannon, the federal minister responsible, announced a review of the NCC's mandate. Here was point one, verbatim:
"Is the National Capital Commission still important? Is it even necessary?"
By early August, a miraculous conversion occurred. When Mr. Cannon announced the makeup of the review panel, abolition was off the table. A new first point appeared, verbatim:
"Assess the various functions of the NCC."
The second task focused on "governance structures" and the third on funding and "cost-effectiveness."
Wow. Score one for the commish.
[...]The review panel chairman, University of Ottawa's Gilles Paquet, has already expressed the view that the NCC isn't funded properly. So in four months, the entire framing of the question has changed, from "do you need to exist?" to "how can we get you more money?"
Hardly a bold prediction but, at the end of the day, the NCC will survive, albeit with doo-dads attached.
[...]If we could sell 10 per cent of the greenspace, or 2,000 hectares, and use those funds to build a new science museum or a subway, or bring to life the Ottawa River islands, or rescue the Sparks Street Mall, would you make the deal?
This is the kind of big proposal, I think, that is worth thinking about in terms of building a great capital.
Instead, we have a farm being restored in Gatineau and talk of an equestrian park. We have the NCC fussing over pine cone pickers along the Rideau Canal, or fending off dog owners, or negotiating leases for hospital land.
How does it get so regularly side-tracked from its core function?
The NCC, if anything, suffers from a lack of grandeur in its vision, not an overabundance, as some would have you believe.
It has many pretty plans locked in brochures and, forever and a day, nothing seems to happen on the ground. Its biggest problem is not open-versus-closed board meetings, it's inertia.
Citizen: Don't expect any big changes at NCC [11 Aug 2006]
NCC mandate review panel announced
The panel tasked with reviewing the NCC is already off on the wrong foot by declaring that they will not be abolishing the NCC. And things look set to go downhill from there. According to The Citizen, panel Chairman Gilles Paquette "sees the NCC's problem as fundamentally a 'governance' issue that needs an appropriate solution. 'I see it as a design problem. It is like an architect, and the challenge is, can we manage to design the building in such a way that it fits everyone?' he said. 'We are going to work hard at it, and then the challenge will be to put together a design that for that house that will work for everyone.'" You know, sort of like an episode of Debbie Travis' Facelift, but with bureaucrats. Our prediction for the big reveal: lots of neutral colours.
Marcel Beaudry has once again confirmed his willingness to not obstruct or undermine the review, and no doubt looks forward to subverting the review panel to the NCC's ends.
CBC: Professor appointed to NCC review panel [2 Aug 2006]
Radio-Canada: Mandat à revoir [3 Aug 2006]
Citizen: We are not abolishing the NCC [2 Aug 2006]
NCC: NCC responds to announcement of review panel [3 Aug 2006]
Abolish the NCC? Not likely
Ken Rubin points out in the Citizen today that, despite questioning the NCC's purpose, the Conservative government looks more like it wants to continue, and even expand the NCC:
- Minister Cannon has stated rather brazenly that he wants to move the Science and Technology Museum to the NCC's Jacques Cartier Park.
- The government has confirmed that it is splitting the positions of CEO and Chairman, and both the CEO and the chair will have indefinite terms and be appointed by the government.
- Treasury Board President John Baird said that the NCC should get $6-7 million more annually for financing capital projects instead of selling off its lands. But the fact that the NCC must sell lands to finance its projects is one of the few real, if clumsy, impediments to the NCC doing any old crazy thing it wants.
- Both ministers have said they want to make the NCC's Ottawa River waterfront plans a priority for the "new" NCC.
As Rubin says, "it sounds like not only is the NCC staying around, but that it is going to continue to have a big-time developer role, however secretly and badly it has performed that role in the past."
Minister Cannon announced a mandate review of the NCC last week.
Citizen: The Tories don't really want a reformed NCC [20 Apr 2006]
Transport Canada Release: Review of NCC Announced [13 Apr 2006]
Cannon questions role of NCC
In a speech today, minister of transport, infrastructure and communities Lawrence Cannon raised questions on the role of the NCC, including whether it was still pertinent. But questions were all he had, falling short of revealing any concrete plans for reform and insisting that changes would only come about after a "full and frank discussion."
One concrete change that has come about is separating the roles of Chairman and CEO - but only after Chairman Beaudry retires in the fall.
The NCC, meanwhile, was quick to ingratiate themselves with their new overlords in their usual self-serving way. Still, how reassuring to learn that the federal agency is committed to fully cooperating with the federal government.
Citizen: Is the NCC necessary? [14 Apr 2006]
CBC: Feds seek review of NCC [13 Apr 2006]
NCC Release: NCC responds to call for mandate review [13 Apr 2006]
Good riddance to a white elephant
Randall Denley sums up the legacy of the Canada and the World Pavilion in today's Citizen:
If you believe the NCC's public utterances, the quasi-museum next to Rideau Falls closed strictly because of a budget squeeze at the commission. The real story, an internal NCC document reveals, is that the museum was closed because it was an expensive attendance flop that was outside the commission's mandate.
In letters to the private sector company and government departments that gave money to the pavilion, NCC chairman Marcel Beaudry said "the difficult decision to close the pavilion was motivated solely by financial considerations, and by the complexity of sustaining a museum-type infrastructure when faced with financial constraints."
That's still the official word, according to NCC vice-president Gilles Lalonde.
Funny, though, that's not quite the story revealed in the NCC report released to Ottawa researcher Ken Rubin as the result of an access to information request. According to that report, "Visitation levels at the pavilion are low and the facility is operated on a seasonal basis. As a result, this use of funds is not the best value for Canadians."
The report notes "operation of this facility is not central to the corporation's mandate." No kidding. Even though the NCC has a broad and vague mandate, being in the quasi-museum business isn't part of it.
You have to appreciate the droll language. "Interest and visitation have been somewhat disappointing, notwithstanding that there is no entrance fee charged for individuals." Translated, this means "we can't give the thing away."
The pavilion was projected to have annual attendance of 120,000, although it has mostly fallen well short of that. In 2001, it's opening year, it drew only 62,131 visitors. That crept up in 2002, then fell back again in 2003. The NCC says 125,211 visited last year, which would seem to indicate a record level of success. The problem with the numbers, though, is that they include all visitors to the site, even those who only attended outdoor events. No admission is charged, so the numbers are based on visual estimates. Guesses, in other words.
The NCC report suggested that each free visit actually cost the NCC $10 in operating costs.
[...]The NCC has dribbled away some millions in operating money, plus the $5.7-million cost to build and outfit the pavilion, but the bigger problem is in the long term. The commission's misguided dabbling in the museum business has created a white elephant, and a particularly awkward one. [...] the NCC will continue to bear the costs of heating and maintaining the building. The commission estimates that it will cost $75,000 to decommission the pavilion and return the contents. The staff report earlier said the figure would run to the hundreds of thousand of dollars.
Citizen: Good riddance to white elephant [18 Oct 2005]
NCC ignores its park policy
Andrew McDermott of the New Woodlands Preservation League writes in the Citizen:
The Gatineau Park Master Plan review process is an exercise in smoke and mirrors designed to cloud the real issue, which is the National Capital Commission's failure to administer its own land- management policy for the park.
While the NCC raises the ire of local citizens by talking about restricting access to Gatineau Park and charging user fees, it sells off chunks of the park and abets the proliferation of new residences within it.
The NCC's 1990 Gatineau Park Master Plan claimed that private properties and residences are inconsistent with the park's zoning and mandate, and that a long-term program for purchasing them should be set up. However, between 1992 and 2002, the agency sold 372.37 acres of land in the park and allowed the construction of 65 new residences within its boundaries -- in the municipality of Chelsea alone.
Since the NCC has flouted its own 1990 policy, how can we trust it to honour its 2004 Gatineau Park Master Plan, which advocates the gradual purchase of private properties?
Citizen: NCC ignores its park policy [19 Nov 2004]
Monday, December 8, 2003
Gatineau Park's forgotten founder
Vice president of the New Woodlands Preservation League Jean-Paul Murray writes in the Citizen that the National Capital Commission has misrepresented the story of Gatineau Park, and failed in its mandate to "communicate the capital to Canadians":
Though the NCC attempts to portray Mackenzie King and Jacques Greber as the park's founders, the facts tell us that title rightly belongs to Roderick Percy Sparks.
For instance, the Ottawa Journal of March 30, 1959 credits Sparks with being the "father of the Gatineau Park," adding that as chairman of the Federal Woodlands Preservation League, he "brought about the first purchase by the Dominion government of what is now [...] the Gatineau Park."
[...]Yet in the reams of documents the NCC has produced on this subject, not one mention is made of Sparks or the process that led to the park's creation. Supporting the claim that Sparks led the charge on this issue, however, are seven key documents, most of which he wrote or co-wrote.
[...]As the NCC proceeds with drafting a new master plan for the park, it should consider the facts presented in this article. Although I've brought this matter to its attention several times over the last two years, it has yet to acknowledge Sparks's contribution.
Perhaps the best method to recognize Sparks and complete his work would be to make Gatineau Park into the truly national and public park he envisioned.
Citizen: Gatineau Park's forgotten founder [8 Dec 2003]
Saturday, May 10, 2003
Group to present case to give Gatineau national park status
The recently formed Coalition for the Survival of Gatineau Park will present Parks Canada with a formal written proposal next week to give national park status to Gatineau Park:
The Coalition [...] says that under the current management by the National Capital Commission, a federal agency, the mandate to protect the park is unclear. National park status would lay out in detail how the park can be protected, the group says.
The coalition is concerned about projects such as the new access road for the Mackenzie King Estate, the McConnell-Laramee Highway linking Aylmer and Hull, and increased human traffic into the park which the coalition believes will degrade the environment in and around the park, said Nicole Desroches of the Council on the Environment and Sustainable Development of the Outaouais.
'If you make it easier for cars, therefore you will have more cars and then you are going to need another parking lot," said Ms. Desroches.
Citizen: Group to present case to give Gatineau national park status [10 May 2003]
Sunday, September 29, 2002
NCC has cyclists on a road to nowhere
The Ottawa Cycling Advisory Committee (OCAC), who have been tracking the NCC's performance from a cycling perspective, has some pointed criticisms. From the Citizen:
"The NCC treats bicycles as toys for tourists," Brett Delmage said. "They say they don't have a mandate for transportation, but the decisions they make affect transportation for people all the time. They think about roads, but they don't think about commuters on bicycles."
At the south end of the newly renovated Champlain Bridge, for instance, a bike path runs straight into a traffic sign.
"It's a new project," said John Kane, an NCC spokesman. "There are going to be things that have to be worked out."
Mr. Kane said he didn't know who would have been responsible for painting lines that, if cyclists were to obey them, would cause serious injuries.
When the Champlain Bridge was closed for construction, Mr. Delmage said, the commission suggested cyclists use the next one over -- a six-kilometre detour.
The NCC, he said, considers its pathways recreational and thinks nothing of closing them or creating detours without warning, and doesn't consider the safety of cyclists who might be on the paths after dark.
According to the committee, cyclists have been badly hurt when they've run into barriers the commission has placed to stop cars from running into its paths -- which are painted black.
The OCAC recently got the NCC to change its plans for a proposed biking detour to accommodate the LeBreton Flats construction. The NCC was going to have cyclists crossing Booth Street walk or ride their bikes through crowds of people waiting for buses at the LeBreton Transitway station. OCAC has assembled a list of the NCC's more notable blunders:
- Leaving marker lines unchanged during construction projects: During a construction project at Britannia in the mid-1990s, a cyclist was led into a snow fence by path lines that didn't change to indicate a detour.
- Portage Bridge: Closed to cyclists during construction in 1998; reopened with a poorly designed bike path.
- Champlain Bridge: When the Champlain Bridge was closed for construction, the NCC suggested cyclists use the next one over -- a six-kilometre detour. Cyclists had to use a 1.5-metre-wide, 1.7-kilometre-long sidewalk during a three-year reconstruction. And when finally reopened, it had wide bike paths, but multiple obstacles when exiting the bridge, and a bike path that runs straight into a traffic sign (see photo).
- Alexandra Bridge: Vendors' booths were placed across the marked bike path during the Francophonie Games in 2001, while the existing bike path leads cyclists onto a pedestrian sidewalk.
- Wellington Street: During reconstruction of Wellington Street in 1998, the NCC placed a sign to car drivers across a nearby bike path.
- Ottawa River Parkway: Cyclists ordered off the road during reconstruction in the early 1990s.
- Black bollards: Low poles to keep car drivers off bike paths are black and nearly invisible in the dark.
Citizen: Advisory committee says NCC is oblivious to city's cyclists [29 Sep 2002]
Ottawa Cycling Advisory Committee
Champlain bridge cycling hazards
Friday, September 27, 2002
For all Canadians
The NCC and its defenders claim that critics don't really understand the NCC's role, that it serves a far grander purpose than serving the necessarily parochial interests of the residents of the national capital region. It is an insidious argument, as it allows the NCC to dismiss criticism out of hand as the time wasting provincialism of an idle and feckless citizenry, while granting themselves a mandate so vague that it allows them to justify anything.
Suppose then that the NCC proposed, in the interest of all Canadians, to explode a neutron bomb over the city. Is there some point at which one could stand up and say "I disagree" without being dismissed as a yokel? An absurd example, perhaps, but that's more or less what the NCC did to the LeBreton Flats in 1963. Now I don't care if the NCC demolished the flats for all Canadians, for their mothers, or for baby Jesus -- whether I lived in Vancouver or Wawa, given the salient facts I would conclude that that was a monumentally boneheaded thing to do.
Of course, chances are that if I lived in Vancouver or Wawa, I wouldn't be aware of the NCC, because while the NCC may be doing whatever it does for all Canadians, most Canadians just aren't paying attention. It therefore falls to those Canadians who are paying attention (not improbably, largely residents of the NCR) to hold the NCC to account for its actions. Why, you could even say we are criticizing the NCC on behalf of all Canadians. We judge the NCC's behaviour on its merits -- and the NCC has no one but themselves to blame if it is so often found wanting.
Monday, May 13, 2002
Senate continues to hammer the NCC
The Senate's debate concerning the NCC's proposal for Moffatt Farm, initiated by Senator Cools, has widened into something broader, questioning the NCC's methods and very mandate. On May 8, Senator Kinsella raised the following points:
- All Canadians have a direct interest in the open lands and assets of the National Capital. The NCC holds these properties in trust and on a fiduciary basis on behalf of all Canadians from coast to coast.
- The National Capital Act was brought in by Prime Minister John Diefenbaker in 1958; after 44 years the time has come for Parliament to review the adequacy of this model of legislation.
- The social, economic and mobility dynamics in the year 2002 sees Canadians being stakeholders in the use of all public lands in the National Capital in far greater numbers than 50 years ago. Therefore decisions of the NCC relating to the disposition of these public lands affect all Canadians across the country in new ways.
- The Section in the National Capital Act dealing with the sale of public lands held in trust for all Canadians needs to be revised to provide for a recall mechanism. Section 10(2) of the Act, which gives the power to the NCC to sell lands held in trust, could be amended to provide for a review mechanism by a Parliamentary Committee upon the receipt of 1,000 signatures. As well, the Section of the Act that gives the authority to Cabinet to overturn any decision by the NCC to not sell land should also apply to any decision to sell land.
- The National Capital Commission should not be selling assets to private developers to offset ongoing costs of the Commission. If the NCC needs money they should bring their case to Parliament.
- The NCC should withdraw its application before the Ontario Municipal Board to appeal the decision of the City of Ottawa to deny re-zoning of Moffatt Farm.
Now that's what we call sober second thought.
Senate Debate May 8, 2002
Senate Debate April 23, 2002
Friday, April 6, 2002
Urban blight a fitting symbol of NCC decay
The Toronto Star ripped into the NCC today in an editorial:
By any measure, it is the capital's - perhaps the country's - most conflicted, revealing and evocative empty lot. A two-minute stroll from Parliament Hill, next door to the faintly lugubrious Chateau Laurier and across the street from the conference centre where the deal to bring home the Constitution was cut, the Daly site is spectacularly located at Canada's symbolic epicentre.
Sadly, it is equally well-located at the heart of bureaucratic bungling by another symbol: the starkly undemocratic National Capital Commission. After dithering over the Daly site since 1978, the commission is finally doing something. If all goes well - and it rarely does when the NCC puts on its developer overalls - nine floors of luxury condominiums will rise over street level shops on a historic, prime piece of property that belongs to all Canadians.
It wasn't supposed to end this way. At one time, the NCC was so committed to integrating the original home of Ottawa's first department store into grand - some say grandiose - plans for the national capital that it snubbed public demands for a temporary park that citizens, in a fit of civic pride, offered to build with their own hands.
Instead, the NCC, claiming to act in the national interest, built hoardings, dumped some benches, ran up a few flags and for more than a decade allowed a site with stunning potential to become an eyesore. True, the commission and Marcel Beaudry, a well-connected former developer who is now its reclusive chairman, were hardly idle. There was bold talk about a people place that would attract tourists while connecting a political sector that is silent after dark to the city's bustling Market. A 1997 shortlist of proposals led to a bizarre, fatally flawed plan to turn a quintessentially Canadian asset into an overflow hotel for the Chateau Laurier and, wait for it, an aquarium.
In contrast, the deal that will see a private developer build some 70 condominiums seems positively inspired. Artist drawings promise an appropriately handsome building and the units, ranging from just over $300,000 to just under $1 million, will bring more people and energy into the city core.
But what the NCC and Canadians get out of this is surprisingly small and out of sync with national interests. Leasing the land will cost the developer a modest $100,000 annually, money the NCC will use to fulfill its mandate of "Creating Pride and Unity Through Canada's Capital."
Again according to the NCC, the three tenets - that's tenets, not tenants - of that mandate are to "communicate Canada to Canadians, to create a meeting place for Canadians and to preserve national treasures and lands." How building condominiums fits that objective is a mystery at the heart of the NCC enigma. A crown corporation created in 1959 to safeguard federal buildings, monuments and parks, the NCC is much more. It is a mini-municipality that controls 10 per cent of the land in the sprawling National Capital Region. And, horrifying its many critics, it is often a developer, one with a nasty record of costly projects that regularly inflame a local population that has no control over an essentially unaccountable political institution.
Officially, Beaudry and 15 directors from across Canada are ultimately responsible to Parliament through Heritage Minister Sheila Copps. Reality is a little different. Too often, key decisions are made in private with mandarins or the Prime Minister.
That process can put the capital on a convoluted course. Last year, Beaudry and Jean Chrétien abruptly relocated the planned new military museum from a superior site on the Ottawa River to the downtown wasteland of LeBreton Flats as part of the search for the Prime Minister's missing legacy. And then there was the lunatic notion that a significant part of Ottawa's centre should be gutted to open a panoramic view to the Peace Tower.
Much less flamboyant, if almost as damaging, is the NCC's inept management of the Daly site. In less than 25 years, this deformed public-and-private-sector hybrid has levelled the last Canadian example of the Chicago school of architecture and created urban blight, only to build condominiums.
There were alternatives. The park, a public place capturing the spirited openness of Rome's Spanish Steps, a plaza of the provinces and a lasting tribute to the contribution of aboriginal peoples were all discarded.
A price should be paid for such wanton disregard of the public interest. Despite recent NCC efforts to let taxpayers occasionally peep inside its meetings, despite good works more in keeping with its mandate, it's far past the time for an autocratic, anachronistic institution to close its doors. Turn public lands over to Parks Canada, let Beaudry the developer return to development and let elected politicians, federal and local, shape and implement a national capital vision in the full glare of daylight
Friday, July 13, 2001
The National Capital Commission's planning disasters through time
The NCC has redone its web site (www.capcan.ca). Fear not, the site is still rich with irony, and apparently they still can't get enough of themselves, particularly their own special brand of planning genius. In a new section Planning Canada's Capital Region, they go on at length about their perceived planning victories. As a public service, NCC Watch offers this alternate planning time line:
"Stalinist Planning Writ Small: A people's history of the NCC"
1800 | First settlement on the north side of the Ottawa River. Notably, this was done without the aid of NCC planners. |
1826 | A town is founded on the south side of the river when the building of the Rideau Canal begins. Incredibly, this too was done without any advice from the NCC. |
1857 | Ottawa is chosen as Capital of the newly formed Province of Canada (created from Upper and Lower Canada, parts of today's Ontario and Quebec). The NCC regrets that it wasn't around at the time so that it could come up with this idea first. But if they had been, they would have, you bet. |
1899 | Formation of the Ottawa Improvement Commission "to beautify" Ottawa. It clears industry from around the Rideau Canal and creates parks and Ottawa's first scenic parkway. It then snubs the remaining industry by spreading vicious rumours about it and never inviting it to dinner. |
1903 | Todd Plan: Expresses the idea of a Capital region framed in a network of parks. Pushes for a boulevard to link the Parliament Buildings to Rideau Hall. The story behind this is classic Federal Government planning in action: Sussex was one of Ottawa's first and most successful commercial streets, but Lady Aberdeen, wife of the Governor General, wanted to enjoy a "beautiful ride on her way from Rideau Hall". She eventually got the government to expropriate the entire west side of Sussex, except for the Daly Building (that would be taken care of later). The Connaught Building was built between 1913-1915, but then the rest of the land stayed vacant. It was used as a parking space for decades. The U.S. Embassy was finally built there in the 90s. |
1915 | Holt Report: Recommends establishment of a federal district planning authority and extension of the park system. |
1922 | Yet Another Report: Boldly supports the idea of a new planning authority, recommends removal of rail lines from the centre, building of highways, extension of the park system, general tidying up. |
1927 | The Federal District Commission is formed with the authority and budget to enact past recommendations. And, according to this time line anyway, promptly does nothing for the next 20 years. This period is now looked back on as something of a Golden Age. |
1950 | Greber Plan rather imaginatively recommends emasculating Ottawa's rail network and building roads, decentralizing government offices (resulting in those triumphs, Place du Portage, Les Terraces de la Chaudiere, Confederation Heights, etc.), and expropriating vast amounts of land for the Greenbelt. |
1958 | The National Capital Act sets the mandate for a new kind of planning authority (just like the old planning authority). |
1958-66 | The NCC expropriates land for the Greenbelt from people like the Woodburns. |
1959 | The National Capital Commission (NCC) is formed to carry out recommendations of the Greber Plan. Of course, they've no intention of stopping there. |
1962-65 | True to their ideals, the NCC expropriates and demolishes the LeBreton Flats. Incredibly, this was planned without consulting the people who actually lived there. The land remains vacant. |
1966 | The NCC generously decides to not demolish Ottawa Union Station, figuring a vacant lot might not look so good during the Centennial. The train station was however moved to the suburbs, guaranteeing its irrelevance. The rail lines were replaced with roads such as the Nicholas Expressway. |
1973 | The Federal Government expropriates the north side of Sparks Street, essentially freezing development and accelerating its decline. |
1980 | Fearing its budget isn't growing fast enough, the NCC persuades the government to expand its mandate to include public programming, because the public need programming. |
1991 | After neglecting the building for a decade, the NCC demolishes the Daly Building in the heart of Ottawa, quashing plans for its restoration. The land remains vacant. |
1998-01 | The NCC conceive a Vision for the Core Area (complete with a plan to demolish Metcalfe Street), approve a Plan for Canada's Capital, prepare a Core Area Concept of Canada's Capital, and develop a Core Area Sector Plan. That's two plans, a vision, and a concept. On the practical side, the development of the Daly site flounders. |
Tuesday, January 30, 2001
Sneaking a peek into the NCC
An article in today's Citizen looks at the possible repercussions of the changes implemented as a result of Glen Shortliffe's tepid recommendations for reform at the NCC:
In recent years, the NCC's culture of secrecy has exploded in its face, as leaked plans for projects such as a grandiose boulevard on Metcalfe Street and secret decisions on matters of broad public interest, such as widening the Champlain Bridge and banning unleashed dogs from NCC land, provoked widespread public anger.
The communications nightmare, as well as Ottawa's amalgamation and a pending merger in the Outaouais next year, prompted Mr. Beaudry to commission Mr. Shortliffe's report, which proposed 11 changes. All were immediately adopted by the NCC board. But it will cost $1.2 million to implement them, Mr. Beaudry said, adding that a request has been made to Treasury Board for the funds. If that money isn't forthcoming, some reforms might have to be scaled back, he said.
But implementation is already proceeding in some areas: Work is under way on the Web site, Mr. Beaudry said, and a new vice- president of communications, the Hull Casino's Guy Laflamme, has been hired.
Largely ignored in December when they were adopted, the changes fall far short of what 90 per cent of area residents, polled by Decima for the Shortliffe report, said they desire. They wanted open board meetings, and 76 per cent called for seats on the board for the mayor of Ottawa and the chairman of the Outaouais Urban Community. But Mr. Shortliffe opted instead for a compromise involving an advisory committee.
Mr. Beaudry and area MPs Mac Harb, Mark Assad, Mauril Belanger and David Pratt believe the NCC should not hold fully open meetings because of the many issues it deals with that could affect land values, for example, and hinder the complex negotiations required to pull together many NCC projects.
Mr. Chiarelli argued that it would be appropriate to have meetings with a "divided agenda": an open portion for regular issues and a closed portion for confidential matters such as contracts, real estate, legal and personnel matters. Several others pointed out that land transactions, legal and personnel matters are the bulk of the NCC's work.
Mr. Beaudry and Mr. Harb argued that the mayors would be in a conflict of interest if they sat on the board, torn between their duties to area residents and the NCC's mandate to provide a capital for all Canadians.
That argument drew agreement from Mr. Croteau, who said mayors are "political animals" whose loyalties lie with the voters who elect them. But Mr. Chiarelli disagreed.
"I don't believe it would be a conflict of interest any more than it would be a conflict of interest for us to sit on a committee, as has been recommended. I think it would be extremely helpful," the Ottawa mayor said. "The mayors used to be on the board a number of years ago." The NCC board also includes, by law, several members from the capital area, he noted.
"They're no more or less in conflict of interest than a mayor would be, because they're designated to be from a geographical area," said Mr. Chiarelli.
Indeed, when asked to whom she feels accountable in her role as a board member, Ottawa resident Norma Lamont said it was primarily area residents.
Despite falling short of the general public's expectations, the Shortliffe changes are not to be shrugged off, observers say. They have a subtle prevalence that some believe will, in fact, change the way the NCC does business.
"This is an extremely important step forward," said NCC board member Marc Denhez, an Ottawa lawyer, urban planning expert and longtime NCC watcher, particularly during his time as president of Heritage Ottawa. "This is the most significant change in the way the NCC does business since it was set up in 1958."
"I certainly think it's making the board more accessible," said Ms. Lamont, a five-year board member, who is director of special projects for the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Foundation.
That Shortliffe's tepid and widely criticized reforms are "the most significant change in the way the NCC does business since it was set up in 1958" says pretty much everything that needs saying about the NCC's dinosaur mentality.
Citizen: Sneaking a peek into the NCC [30 Jan 2001]
Wednesday, December 13, 2000
Local Liberal MPs content with NCC
No surprise here, the Citizen asked Ottawa area MPs what they thought of the recently released report on the NCC and found overwhelming apathy:
A major report from the National Capital Commission on how to improve its relations with local governments and citizens has been available for almost a week now, yet most Ottawa-area members of Parliament have been slow to find out what's in it. The few who have read the report seem strangely content with the idea of the NCC safeguarding its habit of secrecy.
Ottawa Centre MP Mac Harb, whose constituency includes Sparks Street and LeBreton Flats, insists that opening NCC meetings to the public would politicize its work and make it impossible to carry out the NCC's mandate on behalf of all Canadians. If some of its decisions anger his constituents, well, Mr. Harb considers that a small price to pay for all the NCC's good work in the region.
Eugene Bellemare (Ottawa-Orleans) agrees. He says the report means there will be more openness at the NCC than before, although people with "extreme views" will complain.We disagree with these MPs' analysis. But at least they were willing to share their views when we asked.
The Ottawa-area's 10 Liberal MPs (Scott Reid, Lanark-Carleton's Canadian Alliance rookie, gets left out here) will gather today for their weekly regional caucus meeting. We hope that they have all, at last, found time to review the $250,000 NCC report so they can discuss it with intelligence and even suggest improvements.
Take Ottawa West-Nepean's Marlene Catterall, who told the Citizen during the recent election campaign that "no one has worked harder" than she to pry open the secrecy surrounding the NCC. Fine, then what does she think about the recommendation that the NCC establish a Planning Advisory Committee with the mayor of the new City of Ottawa and the chairman of the Outaouais Urban Community? Do the suggestions that the NCC hold an annual general meeting open to the public, as well as semi-annual public consultations with local interest groups, satisfy her?
Quite frankly, we don't know; Ms. Catterall never bothered to get back to us. Nor did Marcel Proulx (Hull-Aylmer) or Robert Bertrand (Pontiac-Gatineau-Labelle). Gatineau MP Mark Assad did return our call -- to advise us that he wanted to consult with his Liberal colleagues today before giving his opinion. (Whatever happened to independent thinking?)
Ottawa-Vanier's Mauril Belanger also called back, to tell us he was still in the process of reading the 86-page report and probably wouldn't be ready to comment until the end of the week.
That's better than Government House Leader Don Boudria, the long- time MP for Glengarry-Prescott-Russell, whose office informed us that the minister would not comment because the NCC comes within the mandate of his cabinet colleague, Canadian Heritage Minister Sheila Copps. But fellow cabinet minister John Manley (Ottawa South) doesn't share Mr. Boudria's qualms about jurisdiction. The foreign minister's office told us he was encouraged the NCC board had accepted all 11 recommendations, which suggested the NCC was "moving towards enhancing openness and the consultative process."
That view was shared by Nepean-Carleton's David Pratt, who wants to give the NCC a couple of years to see whether the recommended changes work in practice.
The NCC's impact on the Ottawa area is too important for so many local MPs to be so passive about a major report on its future. If the local Liberal caucus doesn't care about pressing NCC accountability to the public, neither will the agency itself.
The regional Liberal caucus has a history of parroting the NCC line instead of representing their constituents' concerns.
Citizen: Ottawa's passive majority [13 Dec 2000]