I do not as a rule enjoy throwing people under the bus and I will do my best to avoid naming names that don’t need naming for that reason. Especially when the names in question belong to people who aren’t responsible for making important decisions and are instead mere messengers. Over the years of writing newspaper columns about Ottawa, I have often called on the people who toil in the city’s media relations department. As a rule, they are prompt, responsive, nice and friendly. They are in that job to help get information to journalists in time. They are not in the business of keeping information from the public. Except for the exceptions, and it bears noting that the media relations people are not the ones who decide what should be kept from you, the taxpaying public. They’re the ones stuck twisting themselves into rhetorical pretzels in an attempt to make people like me go away, with or without the information we seek. Which usually doesn’t really work, but that’s the game. A few weeks ago I got in touch with the media people at the city of Ottawa to ask if I’d missed a public explanation for the delays and cost overruns at the new central library/Library and Archives Canada building. I am on the mailing list and get many items from the city about recycling and March Break camps and budget consultations and what have you. I noticed stories in the media about the delays and cost overruns at Ādisōke but couldn’t recall seeing an email from the city telling me why. The staff sent me to the transcript of the relevant committee meeting, which is useful to have but does not constitute a public explanation for the delay, since that information was given to select councillors “in camera” (which actually means off-camera and in secret; I never understood why we kept this expression going). I said thank you, but that’s not quite what I asked. Was there an announcement? Something voluntarily offered to the public, not just something they can find on their own if they know what they’re looking for and possess the research skills necessary to navigate the city’s Byzantine record-keeping system? They sent me a quote from a senior staff member about how those responsible for the project had discharged their obligation to keep council informed. Again, not an announcement, never mind an explanation. I wrote a column in which I said there had been no announcement. A few days after that column ran, another media person got to me asking for two clarifications. First, they requested that I modify my off-hand comment to the effect that the design of the library had not been chosen by public contest between pre-selected options because it might give the impression there had been no consultation on the design. I ignored that. Being asked for suggestions is totally not the same as being offered to vote on the design for the final project and if you can’t tell the difference, I can’t help you. The second thing they objected to was that there are in fact been an email sent to the public about the library delays. Which both I and the other media staff had missed. I’m reproducing the email in question here. You can judge for yourself. Me, I think this email proves my general point that the city did not in fact properly inform citizens about the reasons behind the delay. But it is indeed very much on my case about how I phrase this. Which makes me suspect I hit a nerve and makes me totally want to know exactly what is going on with this project. So I’ve decided to research it from the very beginning and tell the whole story of Ādisōke, which — almost ironically — means “storytelling.” I want to know why there are cost overruns and delays. I don’t think we are in a position to expect perfection from any of the players in this project. Anyone who’s renovated a bathroom knows there are unknowns and plain old s**t that happens outside of anyone’s control whenever you deal with physical buildings, especially one of this size. So a little bit of cost overruns or delays, meh. We could live with that without wanting to know more. But this project is now expected to cost a lot more than anticipated, and when we ask why, we’re told, ah, that’s secret. It won’t do. I don’t know how much time and money in access-to-information requests (and gin & tonic to recover from same) it will require, but someone has to tell the story of this project. Might as well be me. Want to help me? Here are a few ways: You can read and share the story with as many people as you think will be interested. Knowledge is power. Let’s make sure we all know as much as we can. You can also send me tips or help me uncover some documents — online or in physical archives. Please get in touch if you have something to contribute. Those of you who want to help cover some of the costs of investigating this story (it’s not a lot, but the time I devote to this, I can’t devote to anything else), can consider becoming a paid subscriber, or a one-time contribution by credit card or by e-transfer at brigittepellerin613@gmail.com. Thanks. Get full access to Brigitte Pellerin at brigittepellerin.substack.com/subscribe
