[martin14]

Thanos Thanos:

Give this one enough time and money and the opposition could be having a field day with this issue in a couple of years from now.

Might not even take that long. Maggie needs to STFU, she has way too many
skeletons in the closet.

[Newsbot]

Title: 24 Sussex Drive should be torn down, says Maureen McTeer
Category: Misc CDN
Posted By: Hyack
Date: 2015-10-29 00:15:41
Canadian

[DrCaleb]

If knocking it down is cheaper, then do it! Sentimentaility is expensive.

[Newsbot]

Title: Crumbling 24 Sussex an �embarrassment� says DIY expert | Globalnews.ca
Category: Misc CDN
Posted By: Robair
Date: 2015-10-29 07:05:07
Canadian

[andyt]

Building afresh sounds sensible, but I can hear the howling now. We'd probably need to launch a royal commission to get away with something like that.

[martin14]

So, 10 million.

No, Bryan says 15 million;
but he probably voted Liberal.

Do I hear 20 million around the corner ?

And then 30 by the time they are finished.

Liberals, they never change.

[romanP]

we've already spent how much on retrofitting the Parliament buildings? what's another $10M for 24 Sussex? gut it and refurbish it. not that i think our politicians should be living in mansions while the social housing list is still a ten year wait.

[CDN_PATRIOT]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

If knocking it down is cheaper, then do it! Sentimentaility is expensive.

Okay sure. Let's keep erasing pieces of our heritage and history, we don't need to remember the past one bit, let alone preserve it for future generations. I know! We'll build a condo right there, and the new PM can live in the penthouse! Isn't that a great idea? Isn't it?



It may not be fiscally prudent to spend the millions needed for repair, but it is the right thing to do. Heritage and historical buildings need to be kept around for future generations to learn from. What does it say for us as a society to demolish all facets of our past and replace them with condos/malls/cookie cutter buildings?

Embracing the future is one thing, and complaining about money is another. However, there are some things worth keeping, and this is one of them.

A wise man once said, "You don't know where you're going, until you know where you've been." I completely concur. If we keep destroying our past, we'll have no future.

-J.

[Thanos]

Yeah, but it's only been used as an official residence since 1956 or something. And it's not like some idiot suggested bulldozing the HOC. It's not like it goes back to the time of Sir John A., with every PM having the absolute obligation to reside there. At some point costs have to come into play, especially since the rebuild has been initially set at $100 million and will probably come in a lot higher than that when it's finished. Let the PM and his party decide where they want to live in Ottawa. Use the HOC Library or the GG's residence for official receptions. Shut down 24 Sussex as a residence and turn it into a museum or something. What's more important? Using a beat up heritage building as a residence that's kind of an embarrassment, that succeeds only in consistently giving colds and flus to the people in it because it's so chilly and drafty? Or entering the modern age and thinking out of the box? It's not like 24 Sussex is ever going to have the world-recognized gravitas of the White House or 10 Downing Street anyway. Respect the past as much as we can but we're not obligated to keep living in it.

[OnTheIce]

CDN_PATRIOT CDN_PATRIOT:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

If knocking it down is cheaper, then do it! Sentimentaility is expensive.

Okay sure. Let's keep erasing pieces of our heritage and history, we don't need to remember the past one bit, let alone preserve it for future generations. I know! We'll build a condo right there, and the new PM can live in the penthouse! Isn't that a great idea? Isn't it?



It may not be fiscally prudent to spend the millions needed for repair, but it is the right thing to do. Heritage and historical buildings need to be kept around for future generations to learn from. What does it say for us as a society to demolish all facets of our past and replace them with condos/malls/cookie cutter buildings?

Embracing the future is one thing, and complaining about money is another. However, there are some things worth keeping, and this is one of them.

A wise man once said, "You don't know where you're going, until you know where you've been." I completely concur. If we keep destroying our past, we'll have no future.

-J.

What's there to learn from?

It's only been used as the PM's home for the last 60 years. It's a typical old Canadian home. It's not like it's some icon of Canadian history. It's a run-down dump of a house now.

Tear the house down and build a house that will last generations.

[DrCaleb]

CDN_PATRIOT CDN_PATRIOT:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

If knocking it down is cheaper, then do it! Sentimentaility is expensive.

Okay sure. Let's keep erasing pieces of our heritage and history, we don't need to remember the past one bit, let alone preserve it for future generations. I know! We'll build a condo right there, and the new PM can live in the penthouse! Isn't that a great idea? Isn't it?

Yes, because that's what I said. I love it when people put words in my mouth and then get all frothy at their own words.

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

What's there to learn from?

It's only been used as the PM's home for the last 60 years. It's a typical old Canadian home. It's not like it's some icon of Canadian history. It's a run-down dump of a house now.

Tear the house down and build a house that will last generations.

^^ That.

If it's going to cost $10mil to renovate the house, or $5 mil to knock it down and rebuild exactly the same house, why does it cost $5mil for the fact that it's a smelly old house that isn't up to modern code?

We burnt down the White House, and they rebuilt it and love it just as much as the first one. What's the problem here?

[Robair]

martin14 martin14:

So, 10 million.

No, Bryan says 15 million;
but he probably voted Liberal.

He probably submitted a quote...

[CDN_PATRIOT]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

It's only been used as the PM's home for the last 60 years.

Exactly. 60 years worth of stories that can be told and things there that were touched by some of the most colourful Prime Ministers this country has had. That alone makes keeping the house worth it. Who knows what other stories it has to tell?

-J.

[Lemmy]

If we need a presidential palace for our PM, sell the multi-million dollar river-front property at 24 Sussex, move the PM into Rideau Hall and punt the queen and her assorted minions the hell out for good. "Two birds and one got stoned", as Ricky would say.

[BeaverFever]

Lemmy Lemmy:

move the PM into Rideau Hall and punt the queen and her assorted minions the hell out for good. "Two birds and one got stoned", as Ricky would say.

I would support this.

I don't know about selling 24 Sussex though, better make it parkland or grounds for a new museum something, we don't need a tacky Walmart or cookie-cutter subdivision going in there.

I will also add that if repairing a crumbling 24 Sussex is too controversial for any PM to consider, rebuilding a new one would be even worse. The Sun is already writing the "Justin builds himself a new palace" headline and Levant and his tea-party type cronies are already frothing at the mouth over the thought of high-end accommodations built on the taxpayer dime. Taking over Rideau (the Hall or the Cottage) may be the only viable solution.