Residence

Friday September 1, 2023

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday September 1, 2023

Building a New Official Residence for Canada’s Prime Minister

April 8, 2023

April 8, 2023

The current state of the prime minister’s official residence, 24 Sussex Drive, leaves much to be desired. It is no secret that the house is in desperate need of repairs and renovations, making it uninhabitable. However, while plans are being considered for a new official residence, there is an interesting twist to this story.

Recent polls have shown a surge in support for the Conservative party, with Pierre Poilievre emerging as a potential future occupant of the prime minister’s residence. It is quite ironic that Poilievre, who has expressed little interest in the refurbishment or replacement of the official residence, could find himself residing in a place that requires a gatekeeper.

News: Security concerns might finally solve the 24 Sussex conundrum  

February 6, 2018

Poilievre has made it clear that his priorities lie elsewhere, and he envisions a more basic and secure residence for the prime minister. He emphasizes the need for practicality and the ability to receive dignitaries while ensuring the utmost security. Little did he know that a gatekeeper might be necessary for a residence that requires such extensive renovations and repairs.

As the discussions about the future of the prime minister’s residence continue, it is essential to consider the aspirations of potential future occupants like Poilievre. While he may not prioritize the refurbishment, his design input could greatly influence the architecture and functionality of the new residence, from the living quarters to formal reception areas and, ironically, the gatekeeper’s role in ensuring security.

News: 24 Sussex wasn’t always a rat-infested death trap  

August 9, 2023

It is intriguing to think about the prospect of Poilievre residing in a residence that he initially deemed unimportant. Perhaps this would provide him with a unique perspective and a deeper understanding of the challenges faced by the prime minister and their need for a suitable and secure place to live and work.

As the government explores options for the future of the prime minister’s residence, including potential new locations or a complete rebuild, it is crucial to take into account the desires and input of potential occupants like Poilievre. After all, a residence worthy of Canada’s prime minister should accommodate the needs and preferences of its future residents, including the ironic necessity of a gatekeeper. (AI) 

From sketch to finish, see the current way Graeme completes an editorial cartoon using an iPencil, the Procreate app, and a couple of cheats on an iPad Pro. If you’re creative, give illustration a try:

Tuesday February 6, 2018

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Tuesday February 6, 2018

Drop the politics and fix 24 Sussex Drive

Few things better symbolize the stupid, counterproductive, hyperpartisan atmosphere that pervades Canada’s federal political scene than the on-again, off-again debate over what to do with 24 Sussex Drive.

It’s not new. The tempest in a teapot over investing in the residence intended to house the leader of the country has been blowing hot and cold for years.

Everyone agrees, this mansion is a dump. It has asbestos. Heating and cooling systems are out of date. While no national leader wants to live there, swarms of mice do. It has literally been dubbed unfit for human habitation by architectural and safety experts. Most recent estimates suggest Sussex needs $10 million in renovations and upgrades. They could have been done for much less in years past, but because no one had the guts to make the commitment, the situation has gone from bad to worse.

And even in its current unoccupied state, it’s costing taxpayers money. Between November 2015 and March 2016, it cost $180,000 to keep it heated, lit up and clear of snow. The hydro bills alone for that five-month period weighed in at $38,881. And the National Capital Commission, in charge of the residence, has let something like $133,000 in contracts related to the house since 2016.

Why? Because no political leader wants to be seen as feathering his or her own nest by investing the necessary money to make Sussex safe and respectable. The opposition would have a field day, which they did when Brian Mulroney raised the prospect of improvements. Paul Martin had the same experience. Kim Campbell said she wouldn’t touch the subject with a pole.

Justin Trudeau is much the same. But he’s trying, to his credit, to get an independent overseer to take charge and make non-partisan decisions in the best interest of preserving the monument. Even that effort is politically risky. The NDP has agreed to not go all-partisan on the matter. The PCs did too, and then broke that pledge by insisting they want something from the government in return for approving the plan.

In the scheme of things, the fate of Sussex is a trifle. But think about what our inability to maintain and preserve the official residence says about Canada. Can you picture the Americans devolving into partisan sniping over ensuring The White House is maintained?

Sussex may not be especially historic. It was built as a lumber baron’s home in 1868, and didn’t start serving as the official residence until the early ’50s. But since then, a dozen or so prime ministers have lived there. It is, after all, the official residence for Canada’s top elected leader. It’s a piece of living, if not healthy at the moment, history.

If there is collective national will, and we would argue there is, all three parties should agree to allow the National Capital Commission to make the necessary investment. It’s time to put this small but telling embarrassment to bed once and for all. (Source: Hamilton Spectator) 

 

Monday September 26, 2016

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator - Monday September 26, 2016 Encroaching Monster Homes Communities change whether we like it or not. The question of whether they change for better or worse is a matter of opinion and interpretation. Meanwhile, growing pains are inevitable no matter how a community evolves. Sometimes, unchecked sprawl outward can lead to unaffordable costs for services in future. Sometimes, unplanned growth upward can lead to inner city problems Ð anything from increased traffic to a lack of sunlight. Sometimes infill projects are simply out of place. So thereÕs nothing wrong with considered management of change and thoughtful care in planning and redevelopment.Ê But too many homeowners are needlessly concerned with sameness in their communities. And too many are unwilling to accept change as inevitable. Just because a community is built with similar homes, on identical lots with homogenous landscaping, doesnÕt mean it has to stay that way. So the current debate in places such as Ancaster about the appropriateness of so-called ÒmonsterÓ homes in already well-to-do neighbourhoods may be a useful exercise, but residents and the city will need to remind themselves that the status quo will never be acceptable. After all, the lots in that area are already huge by most peopleÕs standards, and the existing houses are not exactly small, no matter how you measure it. HumanityÕs desire for something ever bigger, ever better is unlikely to be quelled by upset neighbours, well-meaning council representatives or dialogue, however useful, at a town-hall meeting. Neither are such forces restricted to places like Ancaster. Downtown Hamilton, indeed downtowns everywhere, are facing a massive influx of new residents with new ideas and new needs. Gentrification has somehow become a dirty word, but in fact it is neither bad nor good. It simply is inevitable. We can do our best as community builders to accommodate social housing, creat

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Monday September 26, 2016

Encroaching Monster Homes

Communities change whether we like it or not. The question of whether they change for better or worse is a matter of opinion and interpretation.

Meanwhile, growing pains are inevitable no matter how a community evolves. Sometimes, unchecked sprawl outward can lead to unaffordable costs for services in future. Sometimes, unplanned growth upward can lead to inner city problems – anything from increased traffic to a lack of sunlight. Sometimes infill projects are simply out of place.

So there’s nothing wrong with considered management of change and thoughtful care in planning and redevelopment.

But too many homeowners are needlessly concerned with sameness in their communities. And too many are unwilling to accept change as inevitable.

Just because a community is built with similar homes, on identical lots with homogenous landscaping, doesn’t mean it has to stay that way.

So the current debate in places such as Ancaster about the appropriateness of so-called “monster” homes in already well-to-do neighbourhoods may be a useful exercise, but residents and the city will need to remind themselves that the status quo will never be acceptable.

After all, the lots in that area are already huge by most people’s standards, and the existing houses are not exactly small, no matter how you measure it.

Humanity’s desire for something ever bigger, ever better is unlikely to be quelled by upset neighbours, well-meaning council representatives or dialogue, however useful, at a town-hall meeting.

Neither are such forces restricted to places like Ancaster. Downtown Hamilton, indeed downtowns everywhere, are facing a massive influx of new residents with new ideas and new needs.

Gentrification has somehow become a dirty word, but in fact it is neither bad nor good. It simply is inevitable. We can do our best as community builders to accommodate social housing, create mixed-use communities, and make neighbourhoods welcoming to everyone, but we cannot stop those who can afford it from fixing up old houses and making them unaffordable for low-income renters.

We can restrict heights, plan for careful placement and perhaps even design of high-rise towers, not stop condominiums from being built downtown. Indeed, such intensification is necessary if we are to continue to keep taxes affordable.

Hamilton, as much and probably more than most cities in the current era, is facing tumultuous change which many oppose simply because it is change. If Hamilton is to continue to thrive as a city and ride the current wave of prosperity that is upon us, we must all embrace change – and embrace the future. (Source: Hamilton Spectator Editorial)

 

Thursday May 8, 2008

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, Editorial Cartoonist, The Hamilton Spectator - Thursday May 8, 2008 PM's residence needs $10 million in repairs The prime minister and his family may have to pack up and find a new temporary home if they heed the advice of Canada's auditorÊgeneral.Ê A report released by Sheila Fraser on Tuesday states that "24 Sussex Drive (is) showing signs of fatigue and wear, and (requires)Êextensive repair work."Ê The repairs are estimated to cost about $10 million, and the report notes that "prolonged access to 24 Sussex Drive will be required forÊrehabilitation of the residence." That would require the prime minister and his family to move out for up to 15 months. "We note in the report that there have been no repairs to 24 Sussex in 50 years. I think we can all appreciate in our own homes that youÊhave to do this regular upgrading and maintenance on a very frequent basis," she said.Ê John Williamson of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation says he doesn't believe most people will have a problem with making the repairs.ÊBut he said what politicians should be concerned about is going over budget, as has been the case with similar public projects in the past.ÊHe also said the $10 million price tag for repairs may baffle some taxpayers.Ê(Source: CTV News) Letters:Êhttp://mackaycartoons.blogdrive.com/archive/196.html Canada, Ottawa, Prime Minister, Residence, 24 Sussex, renovations, repair, Mike Holmes

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, Editorial Cartoonist, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday May 8, 2008

PM’s residence needs $10 million in repairs

The prime minister and his family may have to pack up and find a new temporary home if they heed the advice of Canada’s auditor general.

A report released by Sheila Fraser on Tuesday states that “24 Sussex Drive (is) showing signs of fatigue and wear, and (requires) extensive repair work.”

The repairs are estimated to cost about $10 million, and the report notes that “prolonged access to 24 Sussex Drive will be required for rehabilitation of the residence.” That would require the prime minister and his family to move out for up to 15 months.

“We note in the report that there have been no repairs to 24 Sussex in 50 years. I think we can all appreciate in our own homes that you have to do this regular upgrading and maintenance on a very frequent basis,” she said.

John Williamson of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation says he doesn’t believe most people will have a problem with making the repairs. But he said what politicians should be concerned about is going over budget, as has been the case with similar public projects in the past. He also said the $10 million price tag for repairs may baffle some taxpayers. (Source: CTV News)

 

The Ottawa Citizen

Thursday, May 15, 2008

I enjoyed the Citizen’s editorial cartoon showing Stephen Harper tied up in plastic wrap and Mike Holmes saying that “vapour barrier sheeting helps in the removal of stubborn obstacles.” I believe that it would make great sense to have the popular host of the TV show Holmes on Homes handle the needed renovations at the Prime Minister’s residence, and film the work for his TV show. The house at 24 Sussex Drive is a national heritage building and the Canadians would appreciate a good look at it. I’m sure that a monthly review of the on-going work would be of interest to all Canadians.

Denis Rondeau
Gracefield, Que.