MacDonald: The ideal setting for the prime minister's new home
In the long sorry tale of finding a home for our prime minister, many ideas have surfaced, some more worthy of consideration than others. Andrew MacDougall's recent suggestion in the Ottawa Citizen that Rideau Hall would be just right for the job has sparked a debate we should snuff out here and now.
Article content
It is perhaps typical of Canada that neither the representative of our head of state (the Governor General), nor our head of government (the prime minister), has a residence purpose-built to their roles. But there is nothing particularly unusual or wrong about that. Like both Rideau Hall and 24 Sussex Drive, 10 Downing Street was built as a private residence. Nor is it likely that it's what anyone would choose if starting from scratch.
Article content
Article content
Article content
Indeed, even Buckingham Palace started out life as a private residence, and the familiar façade we see today was only one of the later, many additions and improvements made over the course of the last two centuries.
Article content
The same holds true for Rideau Hall, which was built originally as a private residence for Thomas McKay, but which has served as the vice-regal residence for every single Governor General of Canada since Confederation. Few at first would have thought it a suitable residence for the sovereign's representative but over the intervening decades it has seen additions and improvements with a view to making it just that, an appropriate venue for affairs of state, such as are performed by the Governor General.
Article content
The prime minister, on the other hand, has no need for a similar venue. Nor does he need the kind of office space available at Rideau Hall for the Governor General's staff and other vice-regal functionaries. He already has significantly more office space in the Privy Council Office building and in the Parliament Buildings.
Article content
Article content
Article content
What the prime minister does need, though, is a home, one that is safe and secure. And appropriate for the role, for while the prime minister does not preside over events such as Order of Canada investitures requiring venues like the ballroom at Rideau Hall, he should be able to host his international peers in a style of which Canadians can be proud. I've been to a reception at 24 Sussex. It doesn't fit the bill.
Article content
And while I'm no expert, I can well believe it wouldn't be anyone's first choice from a security perspective. But then would Rideau Hall be any better? I'm surprised it hasn't happened yet given how long the prime minister has been living at Rideau Cottage, but does anyone think the grounds of Rideau Hall would remain open to the public if the prime minister moved in for good? (And does anyone remember the outcry the last time the grounds were closed to the public for 'security reasons?')
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
11 hours ago
Donations to Sean Feucht groups via B.C.-based charity add to financial transparency concerns raised in Canada
A non-profit watchdog says Canadians have no way of knowing how much money is being donated to an evangelical group founded by an American who is making headlines across the country for event cancellations and questions about his views. Permits for Sean Feucht's summertime worship concert events organized by his Burn 24/7 group in major cities across Canada — including Winnipeg, Halifax, Charlottetown and Abbotsford, B.C. — were cancelled recently amid public backlash. The Canadian arm of Feucht's Burn 24/7 organization accepts some donations via the Great Commission Foundation, a B.C.-based registered charity that provides tax receipts on behalf of hundreds of unregistered Christian organizations. Charity Intelligence says the foundation's finances are opaque, and the only way to get audited statements is through access-to-information requests. This charity is not financially transparent, said Kate Bahen, Charity Intelligence's managing director. When charities are not transparent and are not accountable and they're not open and disclosing where the money goes, that opens them up to these questions. Enlarge image (new window) The project page for Burn 24/7 Canada on the Great Commission Foundation's website welcomes donations. The B.C.-based registered charity takes donations on behalf of hundreds of unregistered Christian organizations. Photo: CBC / Arturo Chang MAGA-affiliated musician and preacher Feucht has drawn condemnation over comments he's made online and in past interviews about abortion, 2SLGBTQ+ rights, critical race theory and gender diversity (new window) . Charity Intelligence's criticism of the foundation comes as others note that news articles about Feucht's cancelled worship concerts have likely raised his profile among potential donors. Kate Bahen of Charity Intelligence says the foundation's finances are opaque. Photo: Submitted by Charity Intelligence The attempt to censor has backfired in a way that's … brought him attention that $1 million in advertising would have never brought him, said James Turk, director of the Centre for Free Expression at Toronto Metropolitan University. Burn Canada Ministries previously held registered charitable status in Canada, but it was revoked in 2021 over a failure to file required documents. Then in 2024, the Great Commission Foundation announced Burn Canada was one of its projects (new window) . Canadians can also donate directly to Burn Canada without receiving any tax receipts. In a 2024 annual report (new window) , the organization says broadly how it's spending funds on such things as recruitment, worship events and Feucht's Let Us Worship tour, but there is no detailed breakdown of its spending. CBC reached out to the Great Commission Foundation and Burn Canada for comment, asking them how much money the foundation processes on behalf of Burn Canada. They did not respond. Miles Howe, a Brock University sociology and criminology professor who studies charities, said oversight in the Canadian charity sector is too lenient, and the Great Commission Foundation should be scrutinized. Any time that you have a Canadian charity operating in this fashion of … an amped-up GoFundMe campaign for dozens of other intermediaries, be they qualified or non-qualified donees, it's certainly cause for further investigation, he said about the foundation. Audited Great Commission Foundation financial statements from 2022 obtained by Charity Intelligence through an access to information request show only consolidated results. There was $31.1 million in total agency program costs, but no disclosure of which organizations got the money. The foundation does break down how much it spends on individual international programs in publicly available filings. CRA not doing enough audits: Lawyer Toronto-based charity lawyer Mark Blumberg wouldn't speak about specific charities, but he said public filings usually have more information on foreign activity than on what charities manage inside the country. Guidance from the Canada Revenue Agency says while registered charities can use intermediaries or make grants, they cannot act as a conduit that merely funnels resources to an organization that is not a qualified donee. The CRA says charities must keep adequate records showing that's not the case. But Blumberg said most of the time, charities don't make it clear enough to the public that they're following the rules. A charity may be publicly talking about doing certain work, he said, but is there all the backup for it? Did they do the due diligence? Blumberg says transparency is an issue because Canadians may question why some charities get special tax privileges. He believes the CRA does not do enough audits, saying the agency only performs about 200 a year, even though there are about 86,000 registered charities. The CRA said in an email that its enforcement is based on the risk of non-compliance, and a charity may be chosen for an audit based on things like public complaints and media coverage. The CRA claims to have checks in place, Howe said, but to me … there's a lack of even baseline reporting there that the CRA appears comfortable with. Ex-Feucht volunteers urge caution Questions are also being raised in the United States about some of Feucht's charities. Burn 24/7 is only one of several charities led by Feucht, whose main organization — Sean Feucht Ministries — was given a withhold giving rating by U.S.-based Christian charity watchdog MinistryWatch (new window) , which gave it an "F" grade for transparency. Sean Feucht Ministries changed its Internal Revenue Service tax-exempt status to church in 2022, exempting it from filing some documents that provide financial information to the public. Another Feucht charity, Let Us Worship, is also exempt from disclosing that information because it has church status. Two other organizations, Burn 24/7 and Light a Candle, do file the U.S.-based tax Form 990, which can increase financial transparency. But for Burn 24/7, the most recent annual filing available is from 2021. In 2020, the last year in which Sean Feucht Ministries, Burn 24/7 and Light a Candle all reported publicly available financial details, the disclosed compensation for Feucht himself is listed as $167,000 US, $17,500 US and $37,467 US respectively. That equals over $221,000 US a year. Earlier this year, a group of former employees and volunteers who worked for Feucht called on the U.S. government to formally investigate Feucht's financial practices. 'Sean was like a hero,' says Richie Booth, who worked as an administrative staff member for Burn 24/7. Booth is part of a group of former volunteers and staffers calling for an investigation into Feucht's finances. Photo: Submitted by Richie Booth I was someone that believed in his cause, said Richie Booth, who worked as an administrative staff member for Burn 24/7. Sean was like a hero in the worship and prayer movement. He cautioned people who may agree with some of Feucht's views about donating to his ministries. The group of former supporters raises concerns about real estate owned by Feucht and his ministry, asking why a charity needs such expensive real estate. Public records say Sean Feucht Ministries is owner of a residential property in Washington, D.C., that was purchased for $967,000 US in 2022; a mansion in Orange County, Calif., that, according to real estate site RedFin, was bought for $3.5 million US in 2024; and a cabin and 40 acres of land in Montana with a market value of over $1 million US purchased in 2023. The Washington property is home to Camp Elah, which Feucht has described as his ministry headquarters in D.C. Enlarge image (new window) This mansion in Orange County belongs to Sean Feucht Ministries. Photo: Public disclosures from the D.C. licensing department show the non-profit status for Sean Feucht Ministries — which would allow it to operate in the U.S. capital — was revoked in 2023. A department spokesperson said in an email Tuesday the organization failed to submit a required filing. CBC News could not reach Feucht for comment. Feucht unsuccessfully ran for Congress as a Republican in California in 2020. Documents say the singer's campaign made two contributions (new window) to Burn 24/7 despite U.S. regulations barring electoral committees from making donations to charities that have previously compensated candidates. The contributions to Burn 24/7 totalled $22,844 US in 2020 and 2021 — both years when Feucht received compensation as president of Burn 24/7, tax filings say. More than half of the donated money ended up being returned to the campaign after regulators told the campaign committee that a number of prohibited contributions had to be refunded to donors, U.S. Federal Election Commission documents say. Christy Gafford appears at a Burn 24/7 'furnace' in Corsicana, Texas, in 2021. Gafford served as national director for the U.S. non-profit. Photo: Submitted by Christy Gafford Christy Gafford, who served as a national director for Burn 24/7 at the time, said she did not have any information on the campaign, but that she has serious concerns regarding how Feucht operates through his organizations. He's very charismatic. He is very influential. But I also believe that he utilizes his platform to dictate a narrative that is going to be beneficial to him, she said. I believe that he uses that platform to increase the controversy, instead of actually using the platform to properly tell the gospel. Gafford said that the controversy in Canada has played into Feucht's hands. He creates a narrative that is going to, in the long run, make him look as though he is persecuted and utilize that to increase his own enrichment, she said. Arturo Chang (new window) · CBC News · Reporter Arturo Chang is a reporter with CBC Manitoba. Before that, he worked for CBC P.E.I. and BNN Bloomberg. You can reach him at
Toronto Sun
11 hours ago
- Toronto Sun
LAU: Canadians should reject suggestion of mandatory military service
Prime Minister Carney tours military equipment at the Fort York Armoury on June 9, 2025 in Toronto. Photo by Cole Burston / Getty Images According to a recent Angus Reid poll , Canadians overwhelmingly support imposing a year of 'mandatory service' on those under the age of 30. This high support is consistent for mandatory service in public health support (74%), environmental support (73%), youth services (72%) and civil protection, such as disaster response or firefighting (70%). For a year of military service, the public is split — 43% support, 44% against (12% unsure). This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. SUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account. Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments. Enjoy additional articles per month. Get email updates from your favourite authors. THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK. Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments Enjoy additional articles per month Get email updates from your favourite authors Don't have an account? Create Account First, a caution. What polls seem to show can vary significantly based on how the question is posed. The preamble to the survey questions began by saying that in some countries — such as Sweden, Norway and South Korea — young adults must complete 'national service.' Had Angus Reid given Algeria, Russia and Sudan as examples of countries with mandatory national service, the poll results might be quite different. But that's beside the point. Whatever the actual public support for 'mandatory service,' it's a bad idea in Canada. And ironically, if it were imposed by the government, its most justifiable form is the one with the lowest public support. The military is the only item on the list that's clearly a government responsibility. Yet, even for the military, the argument for mandatory service fails. Your noon-hour look at what's happening in Toronto and beyond. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. Please try again This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Indeed, the United States, a country with a decidedly more active military, debated mandatory military service more than 50 years ago — and decided in favour of voluntary service. Back in 1968, Richard Nixon campaigned in the presidential election to end military conscription. Shortly after becoming president, he struck a commission of 15 people to advise on the issue. The commission began evenly divided, with five avowed proponents of conscription, five avowed opponents, and five who were undecided. However, less than a year later, the commission issued a 211-page report with a unanimous recommendation: end conscription. There was a famous moment in the debate when General William Westmoreland, chief of staff of the U.S. Army, appeared before the commission to explain his support for the military draft. He preferred mandatory enlistment over the government having to pay higher wages for people to enlist, he said, because 'I do not want to command an army of mercenaries.' This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Economist Milton Friedman, a member of the commission, famously replied : 'General, would you rather command an army of slaves?' If Americans who decided to enlist and were paid for their services were mercenaries, Friedman argued, 'Then I, sir, am a mercenary professor, and you, sir, are a mercenary general; we are served by mercenary physicians, we use a mercenary lawyer and we get our meat from a mercenary butcher.' Friedman, an opponent of conscription, explained in a New York Times essay that a voluntary force would be more militarily effective because then the military would be manned by people who wanted to be there and who were well-suited for the role. It would enhance freedom for all. And it was good economics. Government dictating how labour is used, whether for the military or another purpose, leads to all sorts of awful allocation decisions. By 1973, the military draft in the U.S. was gone. It was simply a bad idea. And so is mandatory national service in Canada today — whether for the military, the environment, elderly care or youth tutoring programs. It would diminish freedom and make us poorer. Matthew Lau is an adjunct scholar with the Fraser Institute Toronto Blue Jays NHL Canada Sunshine Girls World
Toronto Sun
11 hours ago
- Toronto Sun
TERRAZZANO: Carney should listen to Canadians and cut bureaucracy
Centre Block on Parliament Hill in Ottawa on Sunday, May 25, 2025. Photo by Bryan Passifiume / Toronto Sun Canadians know the federal bureaucracy costs too much and delivers too little. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. SUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account. Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments. Enjoy additional articles per month. Get email updates from your favourite authors. THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK. Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments Enjoy additional articles per month Get email updates from your favourite authors Don't have an account? Create Account The federal government has added 99,000 bureaucrats since 2016. And it's not just the number of bureaucrats that ballooned; the cost did too. The bureaucracy cost taxpayers $40.2 billion in 2016, according to the parliamentary budget officer (PBO). The bureaucracy cost taxpayers $71.2 billion last year. That means the cost of the federal bureaucracy has increased by 77% since 2016. The good news for taxpayers is that Canadians want the federal government to cut the size and cost of the bureaucracy. In a Leger poll commissioned by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, 54% of Canadians said they want the government to cut its bureaucracy. Just 4% of Canadians said the bureaucracy should increase, while 24% want to maintain the current size of the bureaucracy. The rest were unsure. Your noon-hour look at what's happening in Toronto and beyond. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. Please try again This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Among Canadians with a firm opinion, two-thirds support cutting the size and cost of the bureaucracy. After Prime Minister Mark Carney's government announced a spending review, government union bosses were quick to fearmonger about potential savings. The Canadian Union of Public Employees promised to 'fight to defend against the devastating impacts that Mr. Carney's cuts will have.' The Public Service Alliance of Canada says government savings 'will hurt everyone in Canada who depends on vital public services.' But these scare tactics aren't convincing Canadians. Half of Canadians say federal services are worse now than they were in 2016, according to the Leger poll . That's despite the cost of the federal bureaucracy growing 77%. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Only 11% of Canadians say federal services are better than they were in 2016, and most of those people acknowledge that services 'should be better.' This is a huge blow to the unions' spin. Government union bosses want people to think the sky will fall if bureaucrats get fired. But the government added 99,000 bureaucrats over the last 10 years and half of Canadians still say services are worse. After a decade of out-of-control bureaucratic hiring, cutting the cost of government through attrition doesn't go far enough. The Carney government must fire bureaucrats. The number of federal bureaucrats has increased 38% since 2016, while Canada's population grew by about 16%. There would be nearly 60,000 fewer federal employees had the bureaucracy grown in line with the population over the last decade. The average bureaucrat costs taxpayers $125,300 a year . That means taxpayers would save about $7 billion annually had the bureaucracy grown in line with the population. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. The government should also scale back the pay and perks of federal employees. That means ending taxpayer-funded bonuses. For starters, why are government employees getting bonuses? And why would an organization that is more than $1 trillion in debt think it has money for bonuses? Yet, the federal government has rubber-stamped more than $1.5 billion in bonuses since 2015, despite a report from the PBO that found that 'less than 50% of (performance) targets are consistently met.' Let's recap. The size and cost of the federal bureaucracy have spiralled out of control. Canadians want the government to cut the bureaucracy. And Canadians know that adding more government bureaucrats does not mean better services. Carney should listen to Canadians and cut the size and cost of government bureaucracy. Franco Terrazzano is the federal director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation Toronto Blue Jays NHL Canada Sunshine Girls World
