this post was submitted on 21 Mar 2026
30 points (89.5% liked)

Canada

11774 readers
686 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 Sports

Baseball

Basketball

Curling

Hockey

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

This week saw the news that Rideau Cottage, “temporary” home of the prime minister, is “inadequate.” The house is small and insufficiently secure for a head of government.

While I’m not inclined to argue that politicians ought to be living large at taxpayer expense as a rule, I’m embarrassed that the country routinely wrings its hands over where the prime minister lives and how he travels. Politicians need certain tools to do the job of governing a contemporary mass state. Debates about housing or travel, such as they are, don’t reflect serious disagreements over public policy or even our shared or disputed values. Instead, they’re occasions for nitpicking, pettiness, and supreme displays of insecurity. They’re silly and bad for us.

Today, Prime Minister Mark Carney is living at Rideau Cottage, just as Justin Trudeau did before him. He’s there because the official residence of the prime minister, 24 Sussex Drive, is a mess. It’s literally uninhabitable. The good news is that, in February 2024, the home was declared rodent and asbestos free. The bad news is that’s a declaration one hopes a G7 country wouldn’t have to make. It’s the sort of thing that ought to be implicit. Does your head of government live in a house full of carcinogens and rat droppings? Of course not! Why would you even ask? For a long time, Canada did have to ask the question, and the answer speaks to a national smallness that ought to be understood as a big shame.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] NottaLottaOcelot@lemmy.ca 6 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

No prime minister wants to be seen as investing in their own residence. One good solution would be to allow the NCC (National Capital Commission) to take on ownership of the project. It can have tours to help support funding.

Or we just give up on this Governor General stupidity and give the prime minister Rideau Hall.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 1 points 18 minutes ago

No prime minister wants to be seen as investing in their own residence.

And no opposition leader will let them do even the most basic maintenance repairs without labeling it as self-serving government waste.

[–] CanadaPlus@futurology.today 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

I have to say, it is great that our politicians err on the side of depriving themselves. Good luck finding broken shit or no sitting space on airforce one, and the current guy straight up wants to switch to a thing petrostate royalty invented.