Support strong Canadian climate journalism for 2025
It’s been years now since someone actually lived at 24 Sussex Drive, the Prime Minister’s official residence. At least, it’s been years since people lived there. But as a new report in the National Post reveals, the residence has plenty of other occupants. “Attempts to control a significant rodent infestation at the prime minister’s official residence left so many carcasses within the walls and basement that serious questions were raised about the home’s air quality,” Bryan Passifiume wrote.
Yuck.
This is hardly the first sign of decay for the once-grand limestone home, which was completed in 1868. Since then, it’s been neglected by almost everyone who had the privilege of living in it — especially its more recent tenants. National Capital Commission chair Marc Seaman, whose organization is responsible for the upkeep and maintenance of federal properties like 24 Sussex, told reporters last year that the sorry state of the prime minister’s official residence “is a legacy of decades of lack of investment in the properties.”
That legacy includes an electrical system that’s a fire hazard, walls filled with asbestos and mould, and plumbing that fails on a regular basis. According to a recent report from the NCC, it needs $24 million just to cover so-called “urgent repairs,” which include replacing the electrical systems, restoring the building envelope and creating bathrooms and entrances that are actually accessible.
Turning 24 Sussex into something Canadians can actually be proud of will cost far more than that. The reason why it hasn’t it because it’s become an impossibly hot political potato. Both Liberal and Conservative prime ministers have allowed the building to deteriorate, almost certainly because they didn’t want to appear as though they were feathering their own nests. The furious reaction from CPC MPs like Pierre Poilievre to recent upgrades made at Harrington Lake, the prime minister’s official summer residence, bears out those concerns.
So how can we cut this Gordian knot and actually make progress in either repairing or replacing 24 Sussex? It’s simple, really: both Justin Trudeau and Pierre Poilievre should commit to properly funding the necessary improvements and pledge they’ll never spend a night in the upgraded building. By promising not to benefit personally from the changes, they can inoculate themselves against accusations they’re trying to upgrade their own circumstances on the public dime. Both have little to lose here: Trudeau and his family have lived at Rideau Cottage since 2015, and Poilievre should be allergic to the idea of living in government-funded housing — much less a structure that once housed Pierre Trudeau.
The next question is whether to restore and repair 24 Sussex or tear it down and start anew.
The headline on a 2022 column by the Toronto Star’s Althia Raj described it as a “national treasure,” although she conceded it wasn’t exactly an “architectural masterpiece.” Still, Raj argued, it’s “historically significant” and should be salvaged on that basis — and on behalf of Canadians. But as her colleague Susan Delacourt wrote, the house — built in the mid-19th century and formerly home to a lumber baron — wasn’t the official residence for the prime minister until the 1950s. “So we are talking here of 70 years of history — not insignificant, but at least 30 years of it wasted in adequate upkeep and political apologies for its existence.”
In other words, it’s a dilapidated monument to the political cowardice of our elected leaders, who are more interested in doing what’s popular than doing what’s needed.
And while there’s some value in remembering that, it’s hardly something worth spending millions on. Instead, let’s tear it down and build something that actually inspires us as Canadians. Why not a zero-emissions home featuring the best in Canadian architecture and design, one that showcases the kind of world we’re trying to build?
To borrow from that famous Wayne Gretzky quote, when foreign leaders and dignitaries visit, they should get to see where the puck is going in Canada, not where it’s been.
Doing this would take some courage. But it’s the lack of courage that got us into this pitiful situation in the first place. Now is as good a time as any to change that.
This story was changed to clarify it was the headline on Althia Raj's column that called 24 Sussex Drive a "national treasure."
Comments
Tear down something durable and replace it with something ‘green’.
I agree that this would be symbolic of Canada’s response to climate chaos.
But reusing the limestone shell and replacing the interior with something efficient would be more representative of the other, oh… 10 million houses that also need to be brought up to ‘stop heating with fossil fuels’ standard.
Yep, what Banana Parfait said. Tear it down and make the rebuild a showcase for Canadian architecture and (green) design, and an emblem for a forward-looking country.
No real consideration of retrofitting that building. It could be made a shining example for the nation to follow. Instead, all that material would go to the landfill. Might be sensible in other times, but in a climate emergency we need to stop tearing things down. We don’t have that choice any more.
Agree with the comments. Most definitely a complete tare down and rebuild would be the best avenue. Design and rebuild a green structure would certainly be the best direction. THE BIG PROBLEM - WE DO NOT HAVE LEADERS CAPABLE TO MAKING DECISIONS, LET ALONE GOOD DECISIONS.
No way...we tear done too many historical buildings...I am sure it could be update to meet green standards, and reuse, repurpose the materials to make it more 21st century interior design.....And even that should wait for more appropriate timeto be spending millions....start with making it GREEN , energy efficient.....there must have been some energy efficient upgrades completed........Right?
Just because a building is old it doesn't mean it has historical value.
Tear it down and re-use whatever cab be re-used. There are a lot of secondary uses for limestone bricks. Build a new residence and make it a shining example of a sustainable, environmentally friendly home for all future homes to be built in this country.
The cost to repair and renovate is not worth it.
Historical significance is vastly over-rated. Consider the new sensibility that renames buildings memorializing characters found woefully wanting in the current era. Tearing down 24 Sussex might help to redress the many wrongs perpetrated by politicians who lived there in baronial disarray at taxpayer expense throughout the many crises, hiccups and malfeasance that is Canada's colonial history.
Tear it down, Replace it with a Canadian architect designed , fully sustainable, non fossil-fueled edifice that honors the Canadian landscape, the ecosystems of Canada that European settlers and predatory capitalists have degraded and exploited. There is plenty of talent in Canada capable of achieving those goals.
There is very little in this house's design [24 Sussex] that would contribute to making it energy efficient. By all means recycle the copper wire, donate the windows to an allotment for cold frames and save what can be recycled into a functional but attractive cladding, or landscape walls and paths, but PLEASE: Build a new Passive House with enough solar arrays on the roof to make it Net Zero.
And, given that the land is already paid for, do this for less than $5 million. There are more than several firms in Vancouver who could do this without breaking a sweat.
Feels like the timing is right to dismantle it. And put the NCC in charge of rebuilding it, without time pressure and political influence, in the national interest.
I know that the NCC takes a lot of heat in Ottawa and environs but they’re the best org out there now to keep the big picture and ling view in mind and operate apolitically in the national interest.