Barracks boondoggle a waste of time, money

No reason for the wrangling

Advertisement

Advertise with us

It's a complicated story, involving arcane legal principles and multiple parties. However, it's impossible to get beyond the simple fact Friday's court decision involving the future of Kapyong Barracks is incredibly unflattering for the federal government.

Read this article for free:

or

Already have an account? Log in here »

To continue reading, please subscribe:

Monthly Digital Subscription

$1 per week for 24 weeks*

  • Enjoy unlimited reading on winnipegfreepress.com
  • Read the E-Edition, our digital replica newspaper
  • Access News Break, our award-winning app
  • Play interactive puzzles

*Billed as $4.00 plus GST every four weeks. After 24 weeks, price increases to the regular rate of $19.00 plus GST every four weeks. Offer available to new and qualified returning subscribers only. Cancel any time.

Monthly Digital Subscription

$4.75/week*

  • Enjoy unlimited reading on winnipegfreepress.com
  • Read the E-Edition, our digital replica newspaper
  • Access News Break, our award-winning app
  • Play interactive puzzles

*Billed as $19 plus GST every four weeks. Cancel any time.

To continue reading, please subscribe:

Add Winnipeg Free Press access to your Brandon Sun subscription for only

$1 for the first 4 weeks*

  • Enjoy unlimited reading on winnipegfreepress.com
  • Read the E-Edition, our digital replica newspaper
  • Access News Break, our award-winning app
  • Play interactive puzzles
Start now

No thanks

*$1 will be added to your next bill. After your 4 weeks access is complete your rate will increase by $0.00 a X percent off the regular rate.

Opinion

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 15/12/2012 (4674 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

It’s a complicated story, involving arcane legal principles and multiple parties. However, it’s impossible to get beyond the simple fact Friday’s court decision involving the future of Kapyong Barracks is incredibly unflattering for the federal government.

In review, Ottawa spent more than $10 million over the past decade maintaining an abandoned military barracks and accompanying base housing while it fought four First Nations that wanted the first right to buy the land. On Friday, a federal court decided Ottawa failed to meet its duty to consult with and offer the land to those First Nations.

The kicker? The land and buildings were valued at $8.5 million. That valuation is a few years old, and the value could have risen. Even so, it appears Ottawa spent more than the land was worth to keep it from falling into the hands of First Nations.

Boris Minkevich / Winnipeg Free Press
An aerial view of Lipsett Hall and the land at the northwest corner of Grant Avenue and Kenaston Boulevard. The building and land, part of Kapyong Barracks, has sat vacant since the 2nd Battalion Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry consolidated at CFB Shilo in the 2000s.
Boris Minkevich / Winnipeg Free Press An aerial view of Lipsett Hall and the land at the northwest corner of Grant Avenue and Kenaston Boulevard. The building and land, part of Kapyong Barracks, has sat vacant since the 2nd Battalion Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry consolidated at CFB Shilo in the 2000s.

If you’re confused, you’re in good company. Almost no one following this story can imagine a sane and rational explanation for this colossal waste of money. How did we get here?

In 2000, Ottawa decided to abandon Kapyong Barracks, then part of CFB Winnipeg, as part of a massive plan to re-organize military assets. In this case, the plan was to consolidate the 2nd Battalion Princess Patricia’s Canadian Light Infantry at CFB Shilo, near Brandon. From the moment that decision was made, talk started about uses for the barracks land and accompanying base housing that extended north along Kenaston Boulevard. The initial plan was to sell the land to the Canada Lands Co., a Crown entity that specializes in the redevelopment of federal assets. The CLC envisioned a mixed-use development involving private developers.

The problem was that there was a legal obligation to offer the land to First Nations before other plans could be discussed or approved. A 1997 agreement with the Treaty One bands gave them the right of first refusal on surplus federal lands. Seems simple; offer the land to First Nations, contemplate offers, move ahead with redevelopment.

Unfortunately, Ottawa didn’t fulfill that obligation. The federal court on Friday made it clear that although there was some contact between the federal government and the affected bands from 2001 to 2004, it did not warrant a thorough consultation. Later, from 2006 onwards, the court found Ottawa simply “ignored” the applicants and their claims, and transferred the land to the CLC.

If the duty to consult was so clear, and there is little doubt from the case laid out by the court that it was, how could Ottawa have swept aside the interests of First Nations? There are, perhaps, three explanations.

First, a bureaucratic brain fart of some sort. Although not the best excuse, perhaps bureaucrats did a poor job of consulting, assumed that would satisfy the First Nations, and recommended a sale to the CLC without considering the consequences. It’s possible but not probable.

The second scenario involves poor or reckless political oversight of the bureaucrats. Our political leaders cannot make up the rules as they go along, but they can help the bureaucracy make the best decisions possible if and when a process runs off the rail. This responsibility fell to ministers from two different governments.

In the early 2000s, the Liberals were in power and ministers such as Lloyd Axworthy, Ron Duhamel and Rey Pagtakhan would have been responsible for ensuring that DND was fulfilling its obligation to consult with First Nations. From 2007 onwards, that responsibility fell to current Tory regional minister Vic Toews. Using the court’s own analysis, the real problems began under Toews’ watch. During this period, the DND simply swept aside the interests of First Nations and proceeded with a legally untenable plan.

And this brings us to a third scenario, in which Toews and the Conservative government deliberately ignored the legal claims of First Nations with full knowledge of what they were doing. It is hard to dismiss this scenario after reading the detailed chronology of the federal government’s actions. In correspondence from Treasury Board, Ottawa clearly acknowledged First Nations had first shot at these lands. In that light, Ottawa’s behaviour from 2006 on begins to take on a nefarious tone.

At the very least, this is a problem that should have been solved, a long time ago. But it was not, and now millions of dollars, and an incalculable amount of goodwill, have been wasted for what appears to be no good reason.

It’s not the biggest file to sweep through this province, nor is it the biggest example of mindless government waste. What makes this story so maddening is the fact that a solution was, at all times, close at hand. It only took someone with the political maturity and basic sense of justice to reach out and do the right thing.

Take away all of the legalese and complex history, and what do you have? A story about an absence of political maturity, or a sense of justice. And a lot of waste for no good reason.

dan.lett@freepress.mb.ca

Dan Lett

Dan Lett
Columnist

Dan Lett is a columnist for the Free Press, providing opinion and commentary on politics in Winnipeg and beyond. Born and raised in Toronto, Dan joined the Free Press in 1986.  Read more about Dan.

Dan’s columns are built on facts and reactions, but offer his personal views through arguments and analysis. The Free Press’ editing team reviews Dan’s columns before they are posted online or published in print — part of the our tradition, since 1872, of producing reliable independent journalism. Read more about Free Press’s history and mandate, and learn how our newsroom operates.

Our newsroom depends on a growing audience of readers to power our journalism. If you are not a paid reader, please consider becoming a subscriber.

Our newsroom depends on its audience of readers to power our journalism. Thank you for your support.

History

Updated on Saturday, December 15, 2012 10:22 AM CST: replaces photo

Report Error Submit a Tip

Local

LOAD MORE