The Canadian Political Thread - Page 1101 - ehMac.ca
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Advertise


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old Dec 1st, 2013, 05:38 PM   #11001
Honourable Citizen
 
screature's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Aylmer (Gatineau) across the river from Ottawa
Posts: 20,720
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonal View Post
In the private sector, it's not the property manager who is held accountable (legally speaking) but the owner.
So who is the owner?

It seems it is the federal government...

24 Sussex Drive


Quote:
The house at 24 Sussex Drive was originally commissioned in 1866 by lumberman and Member of Parliament Joseph Merrill Currier as a wedding gift for his wife to be.[1] He named it Gorffwysfa, Welsh for "place of rest."

In 1943, the federal Crown used its sovereign power of expropriation to divest Gordon Edwards of his title to the house, in order to consolidate public ownership of the lands along the Ottawa River. Edwards had fought the action, but eventually lost the dispute with the Canadian government in 1946 and died at the house later that year
Ok, so the feds own it, the NCC manages it and PWGSC is responsible for the work. That is the way I see it based on the information that I have seen.

Does this seem correct to others?

But does not the property manager not have some responsibility? I really don't see how that it could not be the case?

Please help me understand. If a water pipe burst and you are paying for property management to look after such issues and they don't do the job how is it that the owner is left with all accountability?

Last edited by screature; Dec 1st, 2013 at 05:50 PM.
screature is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old Dec 1st, 2013, 05:43 PM   #11002
Honourable Citizen
 
Macfury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Toronto Proper
Posts: 41,787
Quote:
Originally Posted by screature View Post
Ok, so the feds own it, the NCC manages it and PWGSC is responsible for the work. That is the way I see it based on the information that I have seen.

Does this seem correct to others?
That seems right to me.

In construction legalese, however, the "owner" is the party legally held responsible for what happens during a construction project.
__________________
"My life is my own."

Mac Pro 5,1 3.2 GHZ Quad Core; MacBook Pro 1,1; iPhone 4
Macfury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1st, 2013, 05:46 PM   #11003
Resident Hijacker
 
Sonal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Toronto, and proud of it.
Posts: 8,758
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macfury View Post
That seems right to me.

In construction legalese, however, the "owner" is the party legally held responsible for what happens during a construction project.
I know what you're driving at about the construction legalese, but I was actually thinking of property management legalese when I mentioned the owner is ultimately responsible, which in those terms means the party that legally owns the property. That's who gets slapped with the Work Order due to failing to meet property standards, for example.
__________________
Interested in creative writing?
Sonal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1st, 2013, 05:47 PM   #11004
Honourable Citizen
 
screature's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Aylmer (Gatineau) across the river from Ottawa
Posts: 20,720
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonal View Post
At least PET spent money on the place--beyond the pool, that is. From the timeline linked to the article screature posted, it seems like it had been neglected for roughly 20 years prior.

But I remember Brian and Mila Mulroney got into trouble for a similar issue... not a pool, however, redecorating and renovating.

And Paul Martin was chastised by Stephen Harper for complaining about his own personal comfort for suggesting they looking into what needs to be done to repair the official residences.

Really speaking, that it's stayed a political hot button is everyone's fault.
He actually spent no money. The people of Canada did...

I would be interested to see the total cost of any renovation he did when compared to the cost of his personal extravagance.
screature is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1st, 2013, 05:54 PM   #11005
Resident Hijacker
 
Sonal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Toronto, and proud of it.
Posts: 8,758
Quote:
Originally Posted by screature View Post
He actually spent no money. The people of Canada did...

I would be interested to see the total cost of any renovation he did when compared to the cost of his personal extravagance.
If we're going to credit him for spending money on the pool, we should likewise credit him for spending money on the residence.

There's a link in the sidebar of that article you posted entitled Timeline of 24 Sussex. It was about 850,000 in upgrades to the residence.
__________________
Interested in creative writing?
Sonal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1st, 2013, 05:57 PM   #11006
Honourable Citizen
 
Macfury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Toronto Proper
Posts: 41,787
Quote:
Originally Posted by screature View Post
He actually spent no money. The people of Canada did...

I would be interested to see the total cost of any renovation he did when compared to the cost of his personal extravagance.
Again, PET had the pool supplied by "anonymous donors" not taxpayers.
__________________
"My life is my own."

Mac Pro 5,1 3.2 GHZ Quad Core; MacBook Pro 1,1; iPhone 4
Macfury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1st, 2013, 06:01 PM   #11007
peek-a-boo
 
groovetube's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 15,869
Quote:
Originally Posted by screature View Post
He actually spent no money. The people of Canada did...

I would be interested to see the total cost of any renovation he did when compared to the cost of his personal extravagance.
From the Ottawa Citizen:

Quote:
1968-1979

During the Trudeau area, Public Works spends $850,345.93 on the property. In 1973 the 20-year-old kitchen is replaced with a “restaurant-style” set up.

1975

A controversial $200,000 pool house and sauna, joined to the main house by underground tunnel, are added. The addition is paid for by a group of anonymous donors, unknown to this day. With security kiosks and pool, the buildings now total more than 21,800 square feet.
A timeline of 24 Sussex



__________________
using: 2013 retina 15" MBP 16gigs of ram/1tb ssd, iphone5, 2 appleTV 3s.
groovetube is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1st, 2013, 06:01 PM   #11008
peek-a-boo
 
groovetube's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 15,869
ah was beat to it.



__________________
using: 2013 retina 15" MBP 16gigs of ram/1tb ssd, iphone5, 2 appleTV 3s.
groovetube is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1st, 2013, 08:25 PM   #11009
Honourable Citizen
 
screature's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Aylmer (Gatineau) across the river from Ottawa
Posts: 20,720
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonal View Post
If we're going to credit him for spending money on the pool, we should likewise credit him for spending money on the residence.

There's a link in the sidebar of that article you posted entitled Timeline of 24 Sussex. It was about 850,000 in upgrades to the residence.
Not IMO at all. Again, he spent nothing on the residence.

If $850K of taxpayers dollars was necessary for the maintenance of the residence it is not in any way equivalent to adding an extravagant indoor swimming pool for the delight of the PM...

I really don't see how you can equivocate the two.

They are very separate matters indeed and should not be conflated.

Last edited by screature; Dec 1st, 2013 at 08:49 PM.
screature is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1st, 2013, 08:37 PM   #11010
Honourable Citizen
 
screature's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Aylmer (Gatineau) across the river from Ottawa
Posts: 20,720
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macfury View Post
To be honest, PET's pool was paid for by "private donors" whom Trudeau would not reveal (because he claimed he did not know their names). Therefore, this expensive-to-maintain gift to the future was obtained by subterfuge and not on the public dime. Only its legacy maintenance costs affect the taxpayer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macfury View Post
Again, PET had the pool supplied by "anonymous donors" not taxpayers.
Sorry I missed your point the first time around.

Too bad we didn't have e-mail and an Access To Information Act, etc. back then...

Maybe there would be a few raised eyebrows about where the money came from to pay for PET's personal extravagance if there were.

And yet somehow this government is the most "opaque" in history.
screature is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
canadian political discussion

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What do people use to watermark pictures? krs Mac, iPhone, iPad and iPod Help & Troubleshooting 20 Oct 17th, 2010 10:17 PM
This Macbook is my first and last Mac, switching back Pat McCrotch Anything Mac 123 Apr 17th, 2009 10:13 AM
The Mythical Separation of Church and State in the USA zenith Everything Else, eh! 31 May 23rd, 2008 02:40 PM
Harpo's Little Dictator headspace surfaces..... MacDoc Everything Else, eh! 242 Mar 7th, 2008 02:46 PM
Moe Norman - Canadian golf legend MACSPECTRUM Everything Else, eh! 11 May 12th, 2005 05:15 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:56 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © 1999 - 2012, ehMac.ca All rights reserved. ehMac is not affiliated with Apple Inc. Mac, iPod, iTunes, iPhone, Apple TV are trademarks of Apple Inc. Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 RC 2

Tribe.ca: Urban living in Toronto!