The Ministry of Culture and Communications (MCC) has indeed given the green light to the demolition of one of the oldest historic buildings on Anticosti Island. He ended up confirming it to To have to.
“Following the analysis of the request [incluant la valeur du bâtiment], and considering public safety issues, the department did not oppose the municipality’s decision to issue a demolition permit for this building. The “analysis” invoked by the MCC was not disclosed to the To have to.
The old Anticosti prison, built around 1911 under the leadership of chocolate magnate Henri Menier, could be demolished within two months, at the request of the Ministry of the Environment, the Fight against Climate Change, Wildlife and Parks.
In a letter addressed to Prime Minister Legault, the Fédération histoire Québec (FHQ) denounces the attitude of the State in terms of heritage preservation and reminds him of his duty to set an example. The former Anticosti prison is one of the “priceless assets” belonging to the State, indicates the FHQ. However, it has been left for years “in a lamentable state by its owner, the Ministry of the Environment, the Fight Against Climate Change, Wildlife and Parks. For this reason, this owner demanded its demolition and received the approval of the Ministry of Culture and Communications, which here neglected to apply its own regulations. »
For the FHQ, “we have here an example where the Quebec State is incapable of demonstrating exemplary behavior in one of its major missions related to culture and our history”. What image can we have “of a government that proves incapable of protecting its territory and its heritage? asks the FHQ.
The FHQ federates more than three hundred historical and heritage societies across Quebec.
Badly rated?
In the inventory just produced by the MRC of Minganie, the old Anticosti prison wrongly appears to have been built in 1952. However, according to the law on the protection of cultural heritage, buildings built before 1940 are subject to demolition procedures that are in principle more closely monitored.
What’s more, two citizens offer to buy the building and restore it at their own expense. However, neither the MRC, nor the municipality, nor the MCC reconsidered their decision to demolish.
Why, despite everything, do you want to persist in destroying this building? For any response, the MCC referred The duty to another department. “We invite you to contact the Ministry of the Environment, the Fight Against Climate Change, Wildlife and Parks. This one did not answer the To have to.
A denounced situation
For Liberal Michelle Setlakwe, official opposition spokesperson for culture and communications, “our heritage is once again threatened by the inaction of the CAQ government”.
According to the MNA for Mount-Royal–Outremont, “it is essential that all avenues be considered for the preservation of this building because the last thing we want is to see our heritage demolished”. As “there seem to be citizens who want to restore it”, it seems to him that “the government must absolutely examine with them the feasibility of this project”.
The duty reported that two island residents, who are otherwise engaged in other heritage building restoration work, have shown willingness to buy the old prison, which once served as a local museum, to restore it to their costs.
In other words, “the Minister of Culture and Communications must look again at this file”, indicates Michelle Setlakwe.
Ruba Ghazal, new spokesperson for Québec solitaire for issues concerning heritage, cannot believe it. “Why is the government letting this building be demolished if people want to take it over? There seem to be people in good faith who want to restore this building. She also cannot explain why the state is reluctant to trust citizens to protect what is important to them.
“Why not let them?” asks MP Ghazal. “Why are we not giving citizens a chance? The state must back down. It is unacceptable to sacrifice a heritage building when there are real possibilities of saving it. We cannot just destroy for the sake of destroying, while also knowing the ecological costs that the destruction of our old buildings entails. It is not logical. »
The example of the state
The Member for Mercier recalls that demolitions are expensive and that these costs are often overlooked when decisions are made. “And when citizens want to take care of a building, as is the case here, let them have a chance! In the opinion of the deputy, “just for a question of exemplarity, the State should back down in this file”.
The Group of initiatives and research applied to the environment (GIRAM) points out in an open letter, as does the Fédération Histoire Québec, that the management of heritage by the State has already been the subject of a damning report by the auditor General of Quebec. “Our Quebec ministerial cabinets [ont-ils] already forgotten the recommendations of the Auditor General of Quebec in terms of safeguarding heritage? »
In this report, published in June 2020, the auditor castigated the poor management of old buildings by Quebec, while repeating that the MCC should be exemplary. “This auditor’s report, underlines the GIRAM, directly targeted the departments and municipalities for their carelessness and their laxity in the face of the wave of demolitions of heritage buildings that has hit Quebec for too long. »
Striving to save historic buildings is “an integral part of Quebec’s Sustainable Development Policy”, also notes GIRAM, while recalling that “this policy is the responsibility of Minister Benoit Charette”.