24 Sussex Drive in Ottawa is technically the official residence of the Prime Minister of Canada. However, the last time it was used for this purpose was in 2015 by Stephen Harper. When Justin Trudeau took office, he opted to live at Rideau Cottage because of the house's current state of disrepair. In 2021, the National Capital Commission listed the property as being in "critical condition," and the following year it was officially closed for "health and safety reasons," including a rat infestation. Since then, the 35-room, 12,000-square-foot house has had its interiors stripped down and has sat there in an uninhabitable state.
The political reasons for doing so are obvious. Going back to the 1950s when it was first used as a residence, no Prime Minister has wanted to spend taxpayer money on what effectively amounts to a house reno for themselves. And so the status quo has persisted. But then last Friday, Prime Minister Mark Carney announced that the house will finally be renovated by way of (1) a design competition and (2) private donations. Importantly, only individuals will be able to donate (no corporations), all donations will be made public, and no single donation can exceed 10% of the total project cost.
Not surprisingly, opposition leader Pierre Poilievre responded by arguing that renovating 24 Sussex should absolutely not be a government priority while Canadians face a housing and overall affordability crisis. My view is that it makes a lot of sense to have an official prime ministerial residence that is actually habitable by human beings. I also think that Build Canada raises an interesting point about this: What does it say about Canada that we have not been able to achieve this for one of our national symbols?
Excerpt from Build Canada:
In countries with confident, reasonably secure national identities, the maintenance of official institutions isn’t a political risk, it’s an expectation. Nobody asks the French president to apologize for maintaining the Élysée. Nobody expects the British prime minister to crowdfund Chequers. These are national institutions, and their upkeep is understood as a basic obligation of government. Citizens in those countries would be more alarmed by neglect than by expenditure. Even in the United States, the concern over what Donald Trump is doing to the White House and the National Mall stems from the fact that these things are seen as belonging to all Americans as a meaningful part of their national symbolism. The fact that Canadian politicians spent decades calculating that voters would punish them for fixing 24 Sussex reveals something very disturbing about how this country sees its own symbols and institutions.
Raising money from private donors is the obvious hack to try and make this politically palatable. But all of this remains a fascinating design and political problem. What should 24 Sussex be? The Élysée Palace is 118,000 square feet of lavish opulence on 3.7 acres, and the White House is 55,000 square feet on 18 acres, excluding the wings and Trump's gold Home Depot decorations. Should 24 Sussex be something equally impressive and internationally significant? Then maybe it would appear in movies and get blown up by alien invaders from Mars. We have 5.3 acres to work with here.
Alternatively, the government could be frugal stewards of Canadian taxpayer money and either leave the house vacant (or maybe the Ottawa rats still live there?) or opt for a simple interior renovation using only materials and finishes readily available from the local Home Hardware store. We could hire a guy with a dog and a van from the neighbourhood and make it as cheap as possible to ensure that no Canadian gets too bothered. Yeah, I suppose we could do that, but let's not forget that architecture is always a reflection of the zeitgeist of the time and what a society values the most.
What do Canadians value the most?
Cover photo by Robbie Palmer on Unsplash