In Drummondville, the demolition of an almost century-old house on the perimeter of the Hemming hydroelectric power station, which has housed generations of electricity workers, was to be carried out by Hydro-Québec in early December. So had decided the state company. She even thought she could proceed without the consent of the municipality, despite the provisions of the Cultural Heritage Act. To do this, Hydro-Québec invoked its “immunity” from municipal regulations. Is a government corporation entitled to evade its obligations related to heritage protection measures?
The building targeted by Hydro-Québec is an inventoried heritage building. Built in 1926, it is closely linked to the history of the local power station, erected after the First World War. Before the nationalization of hydroelectric resources by René Lévesque, the site of this energy production complex was the property of a large private company: Southern Canada Power.
This plant is cited by the municipality for its historical and architectural interest. These places partly explain the industrial development of the region, including the textile industry. Without these houses occupied by workers, the “water powers”, as the dams were called, simply could not have existed.
“The City of Drummondville was indeed aware of Hydro-Quebec’s desire to deconstruct the former house of the operators of the Chute-Hemmings power station”, indicates the municipality. However, Drummondville saw fit to remind Hydro-Québec that “any request for demolition of a building constructed before 1940 must be submitted to the Ministère de la Culture et des Communications du Québec in order to obtain an opinion from it before the City can issue a demolition permit.
Hydro-Québec replied that it did not have to submit to these measures since it could “proceed under legal immunity”.
This wooden house built by Southern Canada Power to house its employees has always been occupied by the hydroelectricity industry. Its historic character and uniqueness have been preserved over time. This type of house, which has become rare, served the operators of the plant; the company housed its men and their families there. The house then served for many years as a fraternity center for retirees from Hydro-Québec.
In correspondence sent by Hydro-Québec to the municipality of Drummondville, the Crown corporation referred to its immunity from municipal by-laws to justify that it could proceed with such demolition without requesting a permit to do so.
The need to be exemplary
However, no one is supposed to escape the laws on the protection of heritage, at least if we are to believe the opinion given to the To have to by the Ministry of Culture and Communications (MCC).
The measures of the Cultural Heritage Act are very clear, according to the MCC. They “bind the government, its ministries and the agencies mandated by the State”. Thus, the ministry specifies that, “as for all owners”, it receives “demolition notices from municipalities for buildings owned by the State or its agencies”.
In June 2020, in a report that brought to light the mismanagement made by the State and its creatures of the real estate heritage of Quebecers, the Auditor General pointed out that “the government is committed, in the action plan in culture 2018-2023, to bet on the full potential of heritage and to act in an exemplary manner to transmit this heritage to future generations”. In this regard, noted the Auditor General, several reports commissioned by the State since 1992 have repeated that it is necessary to rely on “the need for an exemplary State” in terms of the preservation and enhancement of Quebec’s heritage.
The municipality of Drummondville has confirmed to the To have to that it had been informed by Hydro-Quebec of its intention to “deconstruct the former house of the operators of the Chute-Hemmings power station”. With or without his approval.
Hydro-Québec does not deny having embarked on the path of “deconstruction” of the heritage building, and it insistently uses this term rather than that of “demolition”. “It is not a question of demolition in this case, but of deconstruction”, affirms the spokesperson of the State company, indicating that this way of removing the building could make it possible to recover materials, but without provide details to this effect. However, even if materials are supposed to be reused – in a way which is not specified – it is indeed a question of making a public building disappear.
The “deconstruction” was to take place at the beginning of December. But the questions raised by Hydro-Québec’s way of proceeding encouraged the state corporation to evaluate other scenarios without abandoning this one. Hydro now says ‘deconstruction’ is a last resort scenario, if they can’t find someone willing to move the house and take it over entirely.
What standards for Hydro?
Doesn’t Hydro-Québec have a responsibility towards Quebecers in terms of heritage preservation, just like other creatures of the state? “We do indeed have standards for the preservation and protection of heritage, in compliance with the legal requirements of the Cultural Heritage Act and the Sustainable Development Act”, we replied to the To have to. This fall, the CEO of the state corporation, Sophie Brochu, even formulated a commitment in favor of standards for heritage conservation.
However, specifies Hydro-Québec in the same breath, if “these standards aim to ensure the enhancement of heritage components”, they are subject to the search for “a fair balance between the economic, cultural, environmental and social impacts and benefits “.
The state-owned company has not further specified where this dividing line that it draws between “economic benefits” and “cultural, environmental and social” commitments is located. In the equation, one thing is certain, this witness to the lives of the hydroelectricity workers of Drummondville falls by the wayside.
Hydro-Québec does not intend to ensure the preservation of similar heritage elements: it is not its role, they say To have to. “Although Hydro has several heritage facilities that have a tourism function, its primary mission remains to generate, transport and distribute electricity. It is therefore permissible to wonder what will happen, in the more or less short term, to other buildings that bear witness to the place that hydroelectricity has occupied in the development of Quebec.
Other buildings of the state corporation, yet closely attached to the history of the Quebec community, could experience the same disastrous fate. Among the abandoned historic Hydro-Québec buildings is, for example, the old building on boulevard des Chenaux in Trois-Rivières. Another building, very old, is abandoned to its fate at the Saint-Narcisse power station, in Mauricie. Same thing in the village of Rapide-Blanc, on the edge of a dam that has been in operation for more than 80 years on the Saint-Maurice River.
There are secondary buildings that bear witness to the human dimension of hydroelectricity production activities. Are these buildings — and others — likely to suffer the same fate as that reserved by Hydro-Québec for the building of the Hemming generating station in Drummondville?