In a real masterpiece of stupidity, our federal government has spent
$37 million on removing mould, rats, asbestos etc. from the house at 24
Sussex Drive in Ottawa.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/24-sussex-abatement-future-plan-1.7103058

As most Canadians know, this is the official home of the Prime Minister
of Canada and has been for several decades. (Our current Prime Minister
grew up in it when his father was Prime Minister but Justin
Trudeau hasn't lived in it during his own tenure as Prime Minister
because of the many problems with the house.)

What makes this expenditure particularly stupid is that there has been
considerable discussion about the idea of tearing the whole thing down
and building something new for the PM, either in that location or
another. (Estimates to replace the building were over a BILLION
dollars!) Other voices said the existing house should merely be
refurbished, which would be *somewhat* less expensive. So the geniuses
in charge spent $37 million to clean up a house that may well be torn
down!!!

If our politicians and their bureaucratic enablers had a lick of common
sense between them, they would decide what to do about the house FIRST
and only then think about spending money on repairs to the existing
house.

And for pity's sake, find an architect and builder that can build a
replacement for less - a LOT less - than a billion frickin' dollars!

For what it's worth, a much cheaper solution is already at hand.

Justin Trudeau has been living in a "cottage" - I expect it's rather
grander than that label would imply - across the street on the same
property where the Governor-General lives. I haven't seen any
complaints from the occupants about that. Heck, it should even simplify
security since both are within the same security perimeter and it
didn't involve building anything new. Somebody needs to explain why
that can't be a permanent arrangement. It seems to have worked fine for
8 years!

I also want to see the bureaucrat who oversaw the expenditure of $37
million on a property that may never have a tenant again fired for
cause.

--
Rhino

Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

>In a real masterpiece of stupidity, our federal government has spent
>$37 million on removing mould, rats, asbestos etc. from the house at 24
>Sussex Drive in Ottawa.

>https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/24-sussex-abatement-future-plan-1.7103058

The monies haven't been spent yet; that's the proposal. It didn't say
what the remediation has cost thus far but it sounds like it's been
partially gutted.

>. . .

>For what it's worth, a much cheaper solution is already at hand.

>Justin Trudeau has been living in a "cottage" - I expect it's rather
>grander than that label would imply - across the street on the same
>property where the Governor-General lives. I haven't seen any
>complaints from the occupants about that. Heck, it should even simplify
>security since both are within the same security perimeter and it
>didn't involve building anything new. Somebody needs to explain why
>that can't be a permanent arrangement. It seems to have worked fine for
>8 years!

That makes sense.

Where does the budget for upkeep of the governor general's residence
come from, Canadian taxpayers or the monarchy?

>I also want to see the bureaucrat who oversaw the expenditure of $37
>million on a property that may never have a tenant again fired for
>cause.

In article <20240203151159.00003aa8@example.com>,
Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

> In a real masterpiece of stupidity, our federal government has spent
> $37 million on removing mould, rats, asbestos etc. from the house at 24
> Sussex Drive in Ottawa.
>
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/24-sussex-abatement-future-plan-1.7103058
>
> As most Canadians know, this is the official home of the Prime Minister
> of Canada and has been for several decades. (Our current Prime Minister
> grew up in it when his father was Prime Minister but Justin
> Trudeau hasn't lived in it during his own tenure as Prime Minister
> because of the many problems with the house.)
>
> What makes this expenditure particularly stupid is that there has been
> considerable discussion about the idea of tearing the whole thing down
> and building something new for the PM, either in that location or
> another. (Estimates to replace the building were over a BILLION
> dollars!)

How in the blue fuck would building a residential house cost that much
without massive corruption being involved?

Aaron Spelling's Holmby Hills mansion was only listed at $150 million
and it's the largest residential property in Los Angeles.

They want you to believe building a simple house for Justin Castro will
cost nearly 10 times that much?

On Sat, 03 Feb 2024 14:12:18 -0800
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

> In article <20240203151159.00003aa8@example.com>,
> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>
> > In a real masterpiece of stupidity, our federal government has spent
> > $37 million on removing mould, rats, asbestos etc. from the house
> > at 24 Sussex Drive in Ottawa.
> >
> > https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/24-sussex-abatement-future-plan-1.7103058
> >
> > As most Canadians know, this is the official home of the Prime
> > Minister of Canada and has been for several decades. (Our current
> > Prime Minister grew up in it when his father was Prime Minister but
> > Justin Trudeau hasn't lived in it during his own tenure as Prime
> > Minister because of the many problems with the house.)
> >
> > What makes this expenditure particularly stupid is that there has
> > been considerable discussion about the idea of tearing the whole
> > thing down and building something new for the PM, either in that
> > location or another. (Estimates to replace the building were over a
> > BILLION dollars!)
>
> How in the blue fuck would building a residential house cost that
> much without massive corruption being involved?
>
It's been several months since I read the article so I don't recall how
(or even if) that billion dollars was justified.

> Aaron Spelling's Holmby Hills mansion was only listed at $150 million
> and it's the largest residential property in Los Angeles.
>
> They want you to believe building a simple house for Justin Castro
> will cost nearly 10 times that much?

They'll probably pitch it as needing to be both a home for the PM and
his family and a place to greet and even put up foreign dignitaries.
That might convince people that it's got to be far more than a mere
family home to help justify the cost. But they're going to have a HUGE
challenge convincing people that a billion bucks is a good investment
for a politician.
I expect they'll also emphasize the need for extensive security to keep
the PM of the day safe and trot out numbers for what the White House
and comparable facilities cost to justify what they want to spend even
if our PM is under far less threat than the US President. But I'll bet
there's STILL a huge amount of waste if not outright graft in the
number. They'll no doubt need to hire tons of very expensive
consultants to do everything from design the place to choose a cool
name for it. If they use Quebec contractors
- Ottawa is right at the eastern end of Ontario at the Quebec
border - there will be lots of opportunities for graft because the
Quebec construction industry is reputedly controlled by the Montreal
Mafia.

Of course this doesn't reckon with the fact that people get incredibly
sick on a given PM in a few years and may not want to invest nearly
that much in security. For instance, if Trudeau the Younger got whacked
today, the chattering classes would be up in arms but the average
Canadian would tend to breathe a sign of relief, not cry their eyes
out.

--
Rhino

On Sat, 3 Feb 2024 20:52:37 -0000 (UTC)
"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>
> >In a real masterpiece of stupidity, our federal government has spent
> >$37 million on removing mould, rats, asbestos etc. from the house at
> >24 Sussex Drive in Ottawa.
>
> >https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/24-sussex-abatement-future-plan-1.7103058
> >
>
> The monies haven't been spent yet; that's the proposal. It didn't say
> what the remediation has cost thus far but it sounds like it's been
> partially gutted.
>
Damn, you're right! I misread the article. I thought that was the cost
of removing the mould, rats, and asbestos....

> >. . .
>
> >For what it's worth, a much cheaper solution is already at hand.
>
> >Justin Trudeau has been living in a "cottage" - I expect it's rather
> >grander than that label would imply - across the street on the same
> >property where the Governor-General lives. I haven't seen any
> >complaints from the occupants about that. Heck, it should even
> >simplify security since both are within the same security perimeter
> >and it didn't involve building anything new. Somebody needs to
> >explain why that can't be a permanent arrangement. It seems to have
> >worked fine for 8 years!
>
> That makes sense.
>
> Where does the budget for upkeep of the governor general's residence
> come from, Canadian taxpayers or the monarchy?
>
I would be astounded if the British monarchy paid for anything in this
country, including the Governor-General's residence. I still remember
many years back when I was just a yout how our government kicked in
several million dollars to refurbish the royal yacht Britannia. I don't
recall Canadians even getting a ride on that boat - which was later
sold by the way - but we paid for a major overhaul!

I'm probably overstating that just a bit - I expect the Brits pay for
their embassy and consulates - but I've never heard of them paying for
anything else. Of course, I could be wrong....

> >I also want to see the bureaucrat who oversaw the expenditure of $37
> >million on a property that may never have a tenant again fired for
> >cause.

--
Rhino

On Sat, 3 Feb 2024 15:11:59 -0500, Rhino
<no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

>In a real masterpiece of stupidity, our federal government has spent
>$37 million on removing mould, rats, asbestos etc. from the house at 24
>Sussex Drive in Ottawa.
>
>https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/24-sussex-abatement-future-plan-1.7103058
>
>As most Canadians know, this is the official home of the Prime Minister
>of Canada and has been for several decades. (Our current Prime Minister
>grew up in it when his father was Prime Minister but Justin
>Trudeau hasn't lived in it during his own tenure as Prime Minister
>because of the many problems with the house.)

That said 22 Sussex Drive is solely a home in a ritzy part of town -
#10 Downing Street and the White House are also the offices of the
British PM and the President. (#10 is behind a steel gate on a side
street about 1/2 mile from the British Parliament - there are often
protests there but nobody gets within 1/2 block of #10 - I've been
there and seen it through the gates with my own eyes)

I thought it would be easy and relatively inexpensive to build a nice
modern house on the grounds - they've got 20 acres after all - but I
suppose in post-911 era security is going to be the major cost.

I'm surprised they haven't dragged the former PM Stephen Harper into
this to give his suggestions but what do I know.

The CBC radio program The House dealing with the prime minister's
house is at (the broadcast is available at
https://www.cbc.ca/listen/live-radio/1-64-the-house
on the Feb 3rd tab)

On Sat, 3 Feb 2024 20:52:37 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
<ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

>Where does the budget for upkeep of the governor general's residence
>come from, Canadian taxpayers or the monarchy?

The taxpayer of course. The British Crown doesn't pay for anything in
Canada and the only time Canadians pay for the King or Queen is when
they're visiting Canada. (Which financially is a great deal for
Canada)

Buckingham Palace is mostly off limits to the public though there is
an art gallery and gift store in the basement. We visited both when we
were there in 2016 and purchased a stuffed corgi toy when we were
there. (Charles is said to prefer springer spaniels though they don't
have nearly the public profile the Queen's corgis did)

On Sat, 03 Feb 2024 14:12:18 -0800, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

>How in the blue fuck would building a residential house cost that much
>without massive corruption being involved?
>
>Aaron Spelling's Holmby Hills mansion was only listed at $150 million
>and it's the largest residential property in Los Angeles.
>
>They want you to believe building a simple house for Justin Castro will
>cost nearly 10 times that much?

I've heard a figure of roughly $100 million with 3/4 of the cost being
security related. I've also heard there's a higher quote based on the
RCMP's security wish list so that might be what you mean.

On Sat, 3 Feb 2024 20:52:22 -0500, Rhino
<no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

>They'll probably pitch it as needing to be both a home for the PM and
>his family and a place to greet and even put up foreign dignitaries.
>That might convince people that it's got to be far more than a mere
>family home to help justify the cost. But they're going to have a HUGE
>challenge convincing people that a billion bucks is a good investment
>for a politician.

Visiting foreign dignitaries to Ottawa normally are put up at the
Governor General's house which is about 2 miles from Parliament.

Again the aforementioned CBC radio show said security was expected to
be the single biggest cost though both the G-G's house and the PM's
house are well away from Sussex Drive though can be seen from the road
(been there done that about 20 years ago)

Besides that my firstborn went to Carleton (which one of
is the 2 universities in Ottawa - the other is Universite de Ottawa
which as you might expect from the name is French language) and while
there did 2 years as a parliamentary intern for a junior cabinet
minister from Vancouver (I happened to loathe the politician in
question but it was good for my daughter's resume) but gave it up in
her 3rd year as she was doing combined honors and needed to
concentrate on what was a demanding program.

She had all kinds of adventures there including getting thrown out of
the Russian embassy - she had gone there for advice on where to get a
Cyrillic computer keyboard and they thought she was there to cause
trouble - she eventually asked her professor and got what she needed.
>
>I expect they'll also emphasize the need for extensive security to keep
>the PM of the day safe and trot out numbers for what the White House
>and comparable facilities cost to justify what they want to spend even
>if our PM is under far less threat than the US President. But I'll bet
>there's STILL a huge amount of waste if not outright graft in the
>number. They'll no doubt need to hire tons of very expensive
>consultants to do everything from design the place to choose a cool
>name for it. If they use Quebec contractors
>- Ottawa is right at the eastern end of Ontario at the Quebec
>border - there will be lots of opportunities for graft because the
>Quebec construction industry is reputedly controlled by the Montreal
>Mafia.

Hadn't heard the Mafia part before but no question building a new PM's
mansion would be tailor-made for a "pork" contract. And when one of
those is up for grabs Quebec politicians demand their "share" before
during and after the contracting process. (I well remember the
contracting for the Polar 8 Icebreakers - the only Quebec company able
to do the contract was then in receivership and thus disqualified so 3
icebreakers were contacted to a BC company, 3 to a Nova Scotia company
and 2 years later the Quebec shipbuilder was out of receivership and
the government of Quebec demanded - and got - both Nova Scotia's 3
icebreakers plus one of the BC icebreakers. That meant breaking
procurement contracts (which cost millions in penalties) but by George
they got 4 of the 6 icebreakers built in Quebec even though the Quebec
company had failed in the tendering process!

That's certainly as sketchy as some of the US military contracts!

>Of course this doesn't reckon with the fact that people get incredibly
>sick on a given PM in a few years and may not want to invest nearly
>that much in security. For instance, if Trudeau the Younger got whacked
>today, the chattering classes would be up in arms but the average
>Canadian would tend to breathe a sign of relief, not cry their eyes
>out.

Nobody wants Justin Trudeau assassinated (or 'whacked' as you put it)
but no question plenty of people want an election sooner than later -
and unlike the US we DON'T have fixed election dates. If present poll
numbers continue though JT won't call an election before he legally
has to which would be fall 2025.

On 2024-02-05 21:11:30 +0000, The Horny Goat said:

> On Sat, 03 Feb 2024 14:12:18 -0800, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>
>> How in the blue fuck would building a residential house cost that much
>> without massive corruption being involved?
>>
>> Aaron Spelling's Holmby Hills mansion was only listed at $150 million
>> and it's the largest residential property in Los Angeles.
>>
>> They want you to believe building a simple house for Justin Castro will
>> cost nearly 10 times that much?
>
> I've heard a figure of roughly $100 million with 3/4 of the cost being
> security related. I've also heard there's a higher quote based on the
> RCMP's security wish list so that might be what you mean.

At least it's a house.

Here in New Zealand, the morons in the Auckland City Council's traffic
department have been wasting US$360,000 for *each* pedestrian crossing,
most of which are massively over-complicated and not even needed ...
and at least one of which got complaints from the people living near it
and is now being demolished to be replaced with a simpler one. :-\

The new unnecessary pedestrian crossing built near us has spearate
controls for cyclists and pedestrains, along with signs telling
cyclists to dismount ... so they then become pedetrians, and therefore
why the {BEEP}ing {BEEP} {BEEP} did they waste even more money on
separate controls?!? (You'd be lucky to see half a dozen cyclists on
this road in a week anyway.)

And this is a city council that has a massive budget issue (threatening
to close libraries and public pools) and a moron of a mayor who was
elected promising to cut council costs!

On Tue, 6 Feb 2024 13:28:40 +1300, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

>On 2024-02-05 21:11:30 +0000, The Horny Goat said:
>
>> I've heard a figure of roughly $100 million with 3/4 of the cost being
>> security related. I've also heard there's a higher quote based on the
>> RCMP's security wish list so that might be what you mean.
>
>At least it's a house.

Uh that's the prime minister's house not just an average bungalow. As
I said earlier foreign dignitaries generally stay at the
governor-general's place when in town or at the Chateau Laurier which
is an old dignified hotel within easy walking distance of Parliament
in Ottawa.

>Here in New Zealand, the morons in the Auckland City Council's traffic
>department have been wasting US$360,000 for *each* pedestrian crossing,
>most of which are massively over-complicated and not even needed ...
>and at least one of which got complaints from the people living near it
>and is now being demolished to be replaced with a simpler one. :-\

In our town they repainted a bunch of crosswalks in a rainbow theme -
one of which was right over a piece of pavement that had to be
replaced - and they actually APOLOGIZED for doing the roadwork! (It
was close by the main entrance to the public library's parking lot)
Apparently a rumor was going around in the gay community saying they
weren't going to replace it which is stupid as the section torn up was
roughly 3' x 3' and the crosswalk covered the whole street.

>The new unnecessary pedestrian crossing built near us has spearate
>controls for cyclists and pedestrains, along with signs telling
>cyclists to dismount ... so they then become pedetrians, and therefore
>why the {BEEP}ing {BEEP} {BEEP} did they waste even more money on
>separate controls?!? (You'd be lucky to see half a dozen cyclists on
>this road in a week anyway.)

You're talking about electronic controls for a pedestrian crossing -
around here they cost about $ 25k apiece

>And this is a city council that has a massive budget issue (threatening
>to close libraries and public pools) and a moron of a mayor who was
>elected promising to cut council costs!

Our local Council has been in the 3.5-4.5% range for most of the last
10 years and has hit us with a 7% this year ... imagine what is being
said and how unapologetic the politicos are - but with 3 years left in
their term they are shameless. They've spent $ 3 million on 'active
transportation' (mostly bike routes which are used as often as yours -
though our town is quite hilly - my place is at the 280m level and not
the highest by any means while it goes to the waterfront at sea level)

I have a niece in Christchurch though her insurance company right now
has her shuttling back and forth to Australia opening a new office for
them (can't recall whether she said Brisbane or Canberra)

On 2024-02-06 17:54:05 +0000, The Horny Goat said:

> On Tue, 6 Feb 2024 13:28:40 +1300, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 2024-02-05 21:11:30 +0000, The Horny Goat said:
>>
>>> I've heard a figure of roughly $100 million with 3/4 of the cost being
>>> security related. I've also heard there's a higher quote based on the
>>> RCMP's security wish list so that might be what you mean.
>>
>> At least it's a house.
>
> Uh that's the prime minister's house not just an average bungalow. As
> I said earlier foreign dignitaries generally stay at the
> governor-general's place when in town or at the Chateau Laurier which
> is an old dignified hotel within easy walking distance of Parliament
> in Ottawa.

But it's still a house. Someone could live there or it could be sodle
to replensish geovernment / council bank accounts. Unlike the
over-priced pedestrian crossings that weren't even needed that our
idiot city council wasted piles of mone on.

>> Here in New Zealand, the morons in the Auckland City Council's traffic
>> department have been wasting US$360,000 for *each* pedestrian crossing,
>> most of which are massively over-complicated and not even needed ...
>> and at least one of which got complaints from the people living near it
>> and is now being demolished to be replaced with a simpler one. :-\
>
> In our town they repainted a bunch of crosswalks in a rainbow theme -
> one of which was right over a piece of pavement that had to be
> replaced - and they actually APOLOGIZED for doing the roadwork! (It
> was close by the main entrance to the public library's parking lot)
> Apparently a rumor was going around in the gay community saying they
> weren't going to replace it which is stupid as the section torn up was
> roughly 3' x 3' and the crosswalk covered the whole street.

The mayor, who promised to cut council spending, is outraged and has
said (paraphrased) it is a ridiculous amount of money when all that was
needed was a new lick of paint.

>> The new unnecessary pedestrian crossing built near us has spearate
>> controls for cyclists and pedestrains, along with signs telling
>> cyclists to dismount ... so they then become pedetrians, and therefore
>> why the {BEEP}ing {BEEP} {BEEP} did they waste even more money on
>> separate controls?!? (You'd be lucky to see half a dozen cyclists on
>> this road in a week anyway.)
>
> You're talking about electronic controls for a pedestrian crossing -
> around here they cost about $ 25k apiece

Yep. The crossing near me (which is in the middle of a road, not at an
intersection) has two buttons - one for pedestrians and one for
cyclists. It also has two different coloured strips painted across the
road - one for pedestrians and one for cyclists. I have no idea why
they thought they needed two sets. If people walked a few yards down
the road, there is an intersection with pedestrian stopping areas
between each direction of traffic, so it has always been quite easy to
cross the road anyway without needing a decated pedestrian crossing
with lights to cause extra traffic congestion.

In at least one case elsewhere in the city they have even built three
unneeded pedestrian crossings along the same road within a few hundred
yards of each other!!

>> And this is a city council that has a massive budget issue (threatening
>> to close libraries and public pools) and a moron of a mayor who was
>> elected promising to cut council costs!
>
> Our local Council has been in the 3.5-4.5% range for most of the last
> 10 years and has hit us with a 7% this year ... imagine what is being
> said and how unapologetic the politicos are - but with 3 years left in
> their term they are shameless.

The new mayor promised all sorts of things, then after being elected
discovered the real problems.

The council taxes increased for 2023-2024 was 3.5%. For 2023-2024 it
will be a 7.8% increase, and that's with cuts to some council services
(e.g. mowing parks less often). The current "plan" is for council taxes
to rise by about 48% over the next decade.

And that does not include the raises for other separate council
organisations like water supply / waste water, rubbish collection, etc.

> They've spent $ 3 million on 'active transportation' (mostly bike
> routes which are used as often as yours - though our town is quite
> hilly - my place is at the 280m level and not the highest by any means
> while it goes to the waterfront at sea level)
>
> I have a niece in Christchurch though her insurance company right now
> has her shuttling back and forth to Australia opening a new office for
> them (can't recall whether she said Brisbane or Canberra)

On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 11:11:18 +1300, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

>But it's still a house. Someone could live there or it could be sodle
>to replensish geovernment / council bank accounts. Unlike the
>over-priced pedestrian crossings that weren't even needed that our
>idiot city council wasted piles of mone on.

I'm afraid I completely lost it when our city council felt the need to
apologize to the gay community when regularly scheduled roadwork
partially removed the pavement under a "rainbow sidewalk" promising it
would be restored 'as quickly as possible' (as opposed to once the job
was done).

It's not as if there was any public consultation before they painted
the roadway after all.

On Thu, 08 Feb 2024 17:19:40 -0800
The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:

> On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 11:11:18 +1300, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
> wrote:
>
> >But it's still a house. Someone could live there or it could be
> >sodle to replensish geovernment / council bank accounts. Unlike the
> >over-priced pedestrian crossings that weren't even needed that our
> >idiot city council wasted piles of mone on.
>
> I'm afraid I completely lost it when our city council felt the need to
> apologize to the gay community when regularly scheduled roadwork
> partially removed the pavement under a "rainbow sidewalk" promising it
> would be restored 'as quickly as possible' (as opposed to once the job
> was done).
>
> It's not as if there was any public consultation before they painted
> the roadway after all.

I'm just surprised that the Alphabet Mafia doesn't demand that the
rainbow crossing isn't turned into a shrine
where all passersby are required by law to bow and say a
non-denominational prayer for all the L's, B's, G's, T's and whatever
other letters they've commandeered. If it's practically a hate crime to
repair the road under their rainbow then surely they must be offended
at people driving and walking over "their" symbol....

--
Rhino