Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today, I'd like to talk about sustainable standard design for government building infrastructure. Instead of spending money on original designs for every single public building each time we build a new facility, what if we came up with a sustainable standard design? I'm talking about a modular public facility with room for expansion to grow with the population as needed. After a concept has been developed the money saved in design, fees could be put back into more infrastructure for all our communities. By standardizing or even streamlining our designs and the building materials, we would be able to realize true cost savings on these projects.
A northern design is the opportunity before us, Mr. Speaker. This would also allow us to work with our latest technology best suited for our location and environment. Efficiencies can be found through engaging our local architects and engineer professionals about what really works, what is environmentally sound, and what is technologically realistic in a northern environment.
The problem is simple and it truly is before us. Are we overdesigning our public infrastructure to look like pieces of art? Are they losing their functionality because a statement needs to be made over the quality of the design? Let's face it; for the most part, sweeping, curved roofs, rounded walls, odd-shaped windows, while entertaining to look at, do nothing for the quality of the program delivery. I know if it isn't enjoyable to look at, sometimes it's not enjoyable to be there, but that's part of the point. We could challenge each individual case, each individual community, to add their special touch by giving them a feature opportunity within that building.
Project overruns are largely due to design and inadequate site evaluations. If we eliminate one of the causes, we could save ourselves a lot of valuable resources. Cost overruns typically result from quantity overruns, correcting designing errors and addressing unforeseeable conditions. Although elimination of all cost overruns is unrealistic and even probably cost prohibitive, we can temper this by the efficiency of our design, improving negotiations, the discipline of scope management. When designers design to the maximum of our project budget, they know the government won't lose a school because of a 25 percent cost overrun. So, Mr. Speaker, who is putting pressure, market pressure, on who?
Keeping designs efficient and simple will certainly allow us to move forward. Mr. Speaker, we all know about the training costs of building designs and how they keep skyrocketing, but this would give us a solution to deal with that.
Mr. Speaker, at this time may I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement?
