Canadian Museum of History Act

An Act to amend the Museums Act in order to establish the Canadian Museum of History and to make consequential amendments to other Acts

This bill was last introduced in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session, which ended in September 2013.

Sponsor

James Moore  Conservative

Status

Third reading (House), as of June 18, 2013
(This bill did not become law.)

Summary

This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament often publishes better independent summaries.

This enactment amends the Museums Act to establish a corporation called the Canadian Museum of History that replaces the Canadian Museum of Civilization. It also sets out the purpose, capacity and powers of the Canadian Museum of History and makes consequential amendments to other Acts.

Elsewhere

All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from the Library of Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.

Votes

June 18, 2013 Passed That Bill C-49, An Act to amend the Museums Act in order to establish the Canadian Museum of History and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, be concurred in at report stage.
June 18, 2013 Failed That Bill C-49 be amended by deleting Clause 1.
June 17, 2013 Passed That, in relation to Bill C-49, An Act to amend the Museums Act in order to establish the Canadian Museum of History and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, not more than five further hours shall be allotted to the consideration at report stage of the Bill and five hours shall be allotted to the consideration at third reading stage of the said Bill; and that, at the expiry of the five hours provided for the consideration of the report stage and at the expiry of the five hours provided for the third reading stage of the said Bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this Order, and, in turn, every question necessary for the disposal of the said stages of the Bill shall be put forthwith and successively, without further debate or amendment.
May 29, 2013 Passed That the Bill be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage.
May 29, 2013 Failed That the motion be amended by deleting all the words after the word “That” and substituting the following: “the House decline to give second reading to Bill C-49, An Act to amend the Museums Act in order to establish the Canadian Museum of History and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, because it: ( a) represents the government’s interference in Canadian history and its attacks on research and the federal institutions that preserve and promote history such as Library and Archives Canada and Parks Canada; ( b) transforms the mission of the Canadian Museum of Civilization, the most popular museum in Canada, to give a secondary role to temporary exhibitions on world cultures when it is precisely these exhibitions that make it a major tourist attraction, an economic force and a job creator for the national capital region; ( c) removes research and collection development from the mission of the Canadian Museum of Civilization, when the Museum is an internationally renowned centre of research; ( d) puts forward a monolithic approach to history that could potentially exclude the experiences of women, francophones, First Nations, Inuit and Métis, and marginalized groups; ( e) was developed in absolute secrecy and without substantial consultations with experts, First Nations, Inuit and Métis, Canadians and key regional actors; ( f) attacks a winning formula at the expense of Canadian taxpayers; and ( g) does not propose any measure to enhance the Museum’s independence and thereby opens the door to potential interference by the minister and the government in determining the content of Museum exhibitions when this should be left to experts.”.
May 28, 2013 Passed That, in relation to Bill C-49, An Act to amend the Museums Act in order to establish the Canadian Museum of History and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, not more than five further hours shall be allotted to the consideration of the second reading stage of the Bill; and that, at the expiry of the five hours provided for the consideration of the second reading stage of the said Bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this Order, and, in turn, every question necessary for the disposal of the said stage of the Bill shall be put forthwith and successively, without further debate or amendment.

June 5th, 2013 / 5:05 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Paul Calandra Conservative Oak Ridges—Markham, ON

On a point of order, Mr. O'Neill was quite clear that he sees the minister at events that we're all at. Go figure: they might actually talk to each other at an event where they come across each other.

Mr. O'Neill is not here to discuss his datebook. Could we bring it back to BillC-49 just for 30 seconds. If they have no more question for Mr. O'Neill with respect to Bill C-49 then let's move on. We have a lot of questions for the president and we could get some value out of this.

June 5th, 2013 / 5:05 p.m.
See context

NDP

Andrew Cash NDP Davenport, ON

I would bring it on to Bill C-49

June 5th, 2013 / 5:05 p.m.
See context

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Moore

Mr. Cash, you've got to bring it back to Bill C-49.

June 5th, 2013 / 5:05 p.m.
See context

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Moore

Mr. Cash, as I said before we do want to try to stay on Bill C-49. You have actually two minutes left.

June 5th, 2013 / 5:05 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Paul Calandra Conservative Oak Ridges—Markham, ON

I'm sorry, Mr. O'Neill.

We didn't ask him to bring his datebook with him. The line of questioning is almost ridiculous. Obviously we are here on Bill C-49, and if they want to bring him back to talk to about his datebook, they can do that at a different time. Our time is limited, so let's ask him about Bill C-49, Mr. Chair. It's truly unfair to ask him what his datebook has included over the last five years that Minister Moore has been the minister.

June 5th, 2013 / 5 p.m.
See context

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Moore

Mr. Calandra has made a point of order. When we invite witnesses we generally do want to focus on the subject matter on which we invited them. We allow a bit of latitude, but if you could bring it back to Bill C-49

June 5th, 2013 / 5 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Paul Calandra Conservative Oak Ridges—Markham, ON

I wonder if you could get the member opposite under control.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

If we could try to be specific on Bill C-49 that would be helpful.

I know the last time the president was here members had an opportunity to talk about all kinds of different things, but the opposition decided to use up his time by trying to pass motions. Right now we have an opportunity on Bill C-49. Let's do that. If we want to have the president back on other things later, we can do that as well.

June 5th, 2013 / 5 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Paul Calandra Conservative Oak Ridges—Markham, ON

On a point of order, Mr. Chair, he's here to speak about the bill that's before us. I don't think he was advised to do his research and homework on other topics. He's here specifically on Bill C-49

June 5th, 2013 / 4:50 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Blake Richards Conservative Wild Rose, AB

Thank you very much for being here.

Mr. O'Neill, there seem to be some misconceptions about this bill, certainly on the other side of the table at least. I want to take a moment to clarify a few points with you. Certainly, when we had the Minister here earlier, he was very clear that many of the decisions about the museum and its contents and its curatorial decisions would obviously remain in your hands at the museum. But the opposition seems to be inferring that there will be some interference with the independence of the museum. That's certainly what their inference is.

I wonder if you can tell us a little bit about Bill C-49 and if it will still allow the Canadian Museum of History, as it will be called, to maintain its curatorial independence, and if you could indicate if that would be the same independence currently enjoyed by the Canadian Museum of Civilization, as it's currently called. Also, perhaps you could even point to the sections or parts of the bill that explain that particular point.

June 5th, 2013 / 4:40 p.m.
See context

Mark O'Neill President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Museum of Civilization Corporation

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Good afternoon, committee members. I greatly appreciate this opportunity to discuss Bill C-49 and the proposed establishment of the Canadian Museum of History.

I believe the proposed changes will strengthen our institution and greatly enhance its contribution to the public life of this country in some very significant and constructive ways.

At the outset, however, I would like to talk about some of the things that won't change, and that have been the subject of some debate and discussion in the media and elsewhere.

First, the proposed Canadian Museum of History would continue to present outstanding temporary exhibitions that illuminate world history and cultures. They will remain part of our mandate and an important part of our programming.

In fact, we are currently working with our colleagues in Greece on the production of a major exhibition about that country's ancient history. This exhibition, “From Agamemnon to Alexander the Great”, will feature over 500 exceptional artifacts and will be launched at the Royal Ontario Museum, our partner next year, and will travel to Ottawa, Chicago, and then Washington.

Second, we will maintain the ever popular Canadian Children's Museum.

Third, our First Peoples Hall and Grand Hall will continue to explore the historical achievements and contemporary contributions of Canada's aboriginal peoples. They are the finest exhibitions of their kind in Canada and so they shall remain as integral parts of the new museum should the legislation be passed into law.

Finally, we will continue building our national collection, and undertaking scholarly and other types of research, despite claims from some to the contrary. In fact, our national collection fund now totals $9 million and in consultation with academics across the country, the corporation has developed a research strategy, the first in the museum's history. This strategy will guide the work of the museum in its research activities over the next 10 years.

I would like to turn now to the engagement process we used to solicit public input.

It began last October. We engaged with Canadians across the country and invited them to think about their history and how it should be told in their Canadian Museum of History.

We set up an interactive website and designed an online survey. We organized roundtable discussions in nine cities from St. John's to Vancouver. We set up an interactive kiosk in public places across the country. We held meetings with school students and other groups. And we had questions placed on an independent opinion survey. Over 24,000 people became directly engaged in the project, either in person or online.

The results are detailed in a report that will be released shortly, but I am very happy to share with you, the members of this committee, some of what we have heard from Canadians.

Canadians told us that visiting museums and historic sites, and encountering real artifacts are by far their favourite ways of connecting with history. Many stress the unique role that museums play in educating children and youth, and in providing shared learning opportunities for family and friends.

Canadians have said that they trust museums more than any other source of historical information and that they value museums for the way they allow them to interact with each other and their common history.

Yet, Mr. Chair, we've never had a museum that tells the pan-Canadian story from earliest time to present day. The Museum of Civilization has indeed been trying to fill that void and has been doing so despite a very different legislative mandate. Its central purpose, as described in the Museums Act, is to enhance understanding of cultural achievements and human behaviour—not Canadian history and identity.

Nevertheless, since at least 2005 and on the heels of the overwhelming success of our sister institution, the Canadian War Museum, the museum has been working to broaden and deepen its focus on Canadian history. It has been trying to do a better job of telling the story of this country and its people from the pan-Canadian perspective. It has been working to share that story with as many Canadians as possible.

Currently, the museum is a key centre for historical research and scholarship through its artifacts, exhibitions, and its other programming. The museum explores many aspects of our country's past and disseminates the results of that research in many forms across the country, such as print publications and other forms of research. All of this will continue under the new mandate.

The museum’s work and achievements are impressive. But it has serious shortcomings, which are most evident in our largest permanent gallery, the Canada Hall.

The Canada Hall was not designed to be a narrative history exhibition. Inspired to some extent by the success of the streetscape of the Epcot Center in Florida, the museum staff designed the hall to offer a vision of Canada's social and economic history that moved temporally and geographically from 1000 A.D. in the Atlantic provinces to the present day in British Columbia and the Northwest Territories.

While that approach makes for an interesting and informative visit, it can't help but produce a disjointed and narrow picture of our country's dynamic past. In the Canada Hall, the regions of the country presented are frozen in time and exist entirely independently. Whole categories of endeavour—politics, sport, culture, our contributions to the world—are poorly covered or not covered at all. Women's history is at best peripheral. The journey through time ends in the 1970s, so almost half a century of our history is left unexplored.

As a result of this, while walking through Canada Hall you will learn about life in New France, but you'll find no mention of the Quiet Revolution or anything else about Quebec. You'll learn about the early whaling industry in Newfoundland, but nothing about why, how, or when the colony joined Confederation. You'll see re-creations of grain elevators and oil rigs, but you won't learn about the phenomenon called western alienation.

Although modules on the rebellions in Upper and Lower Canada have been added very recently, Confederation itself is reduced to a multimedia timeline. You'll find no mention in Canada Hall of the flag debate or the Constitution, no mention of Paul Henderson's goal in Moscow, or the wartime internment of Ukrainian or Japanese Canadians. You'll find no reference to residential schools or peacekeeping, or Terry Fox and his Marathon of Hope. There is no meaningful reference to the Great Depression, the conscription crisis, or even a hint as to where Canada might be headed. But perhaps the most egregious flaw in the Canada Hall is its starting point. If you've been there, you will know that its telling of our national story begins not with the arrival of the First Peoples but with the arrival of Europeans in the eleventh century. Colonization as a term or concept is not mentioned in Canada Hall.

This is something we intend to correct. Canadians made it very clear to us during the public engagement process that the voices and the experiences of First Peoples must have a place in any narrative of Canadian history. We want to focus more of our attention on the telling of Canada's story in all its richness and complexity. And we believe the task is best accomplished under a new mandate and a new name—a name that better reflects what we aspire to become.

Here is the vision we have for the new Canadian Museum of History.

It will feature the largest and most comprehensive exhibition on Canadian history ever developed. The new permanent gallery will replace both the Canada Hall and the Canadian Personalities Hall. It will be a place where Canadians can go to retrace their national journey and encounter their national treasures. It's where they can go to learn about the people, events, and themes that shaped our country's development and defined the Canadian experience. It will underpin our national identity. It will include seminal events and episodes from our past, and some of the greatest Canadian stories never told.

We are also establishing a network of history museums across the country. Members of this network will have a permanent gallery devoted to the presentation of their exhibitions. Those exhibitions will complement and enhance our national narrative by adding regional content and perspectives. The new gallery will also broaden the reach and the profile of the contributing institutions, and members of this network will have better access to the national collection to enhance their own work.

During the public engagement process, Canadians told us what they expect of those exhibitions and the museum in general, especially the new Canadian history hall. Here are some highlights.

Canadians want us to be comprehensive, frank, and fair in our presentation of their history. They want us to examine both the good and the bad from our past. We were urged to foster a sense of national pride without ignoring our failings, mistakes, and controversies. Canadians want us to present various viewpoints and voices, recognizing that people and events can be interpreted in different ways when seen through different eyes. They want us to connect with them on a personal level. They want to see themselves and their neighbours reflected in the museum—whatever their heritage, whenever they joined the Canadian family, and wherever in this country they live. They have told us quite clearly not to ignore the world beyond our borders.

Those comments, suggestions, and pleadings will inform our every decision going forward. The content for this new exhibition is being developed by a multidisciplinary team of experts at the museum, led by Dr. David Morrison. This team is made up of researchers, curators, and museologists working in close collaboration with advisory committees composed of historians and experts from across Canada.

Creating a new gallery is going to be a major challenge. Our experts will first have to develop a comprehensive and cohesive storyline, which they have begun to do. They will have to identify the themes, events, and artifacts that merit inclusion in the gallery. They'll have to make some difficult choices and grapple with some very contentious issues, and they'll have to do it all in full knowledge that their every decision will be scrutinized by scholars, lay people, advocacy groups, the media, and politicians from coast to coast to coast. But our professional staff are the best in the country at what they do, and they're certainly up to the challenge.

Mr. Chair, the call for a national history museum is hardly recent. Over 60 years ago, the Royal Commission on National Development in the Arts, Letters and Sciences stated in its final report, “On the necessity for an historical museum, we can hardly speak too strongly.” In 2003, the Government of Canada announced a $50-million plan to convert the Government Conference Centre in Ottawa into the Canadian History Centre.

Mr. Chair, should Bill C-49 be passed into law, the corporation will create a museum worthy of Canadians' support and deserving of their pride.

Thank you. I look forward to your questions.

I would be happy to answer them.

June 5th, 2013 / 4:30 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Paul Calandra Conservative Oak Ridges—Markham, ON

Maybe offline they can ask Mr. O'Neill and Mr. Moore what movies they like and what they like on their hot dogs. But if we could talk about Bill C-49, that would be a real change.

June 5th, 2013 / 4:30 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Paul Calandra Conservative Oak Ridges—Markham, ON

On a point of order, Mr. Chair, we have the minister for a short period of time. We're talking about Bill C-49, not Mr. O'Neill's e-mail address.

June 5th, 2013 / 4:25 p.m.
See context

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Moore

Mr. Cash, we're on Bill C-49.

June 5th, 2013 / 4:20 p.m.
See context

Conservative

James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC

Yes, it's an important point. This is one thing we envision as well, that not just will local museums be able to draw down items from the national museum and host them locally; local museums can also take some of their collections and move them to other parts of the country, or to the national museum as well.

So the idea of a partnership isn't just stuff moving from the national museum to locally, but stuff locally moving up nationally, or moving to other parts of the country.

I've had the privilege—it's been an incredible privilege, I can tell you—to visit all kinds of museums across this country. We have thousands of museums across the country, I can tell you. I've gone through them in painstaking detail—sometimes with lots of boredom on the face of my wife as I go through some of these things—and aggravating some of the people who are with me by how much time I like to spend in museums. But the truth is that when you go to museums around the country, you realize there are some incredible gems out there. There are some incredible things and stories that should be told.

I think I told this committee this story about one of the catalysts that drew me to this idea of networking all of our museums together. It was when I visited the museum in Midway, British Columbia.

If you haven't been to Midway, it's a very small town. And it is where it sounds like: midway across the border between Alberta and the Pacific Ocean, on the southern border of British Columbia. It's a small little town, with a population of I think 2,500 persons. They have a small little museum there, and I went in. Against the back wall they had this display by the Japanese Canadians of Midway, British Columbia. It's a small association. This was a display of people of Japanese descent who still live in the south Okanagan, who decided, after having been displaced and put in internment camps in the Second World War, to stay in the south Okanagan and make lives for themselves.

There are all kinds of items there that talk about the hardships they faced, the racism they went through, the difficulties in establishing themselves, the pride they now feel in having gone through all that, and the successful lives they've made for themselves and their families.

It's not a big display, but it's very impactful. I looked at it and I thought, “This is really quite something.” I left the museum, and when I signed the guest book I was saddened to see that I was about the sixtieth person to visit that museum in the last two months. I thought, “What a waste. This is a great story to tell.” As I went on with the rest of my road trip, I thought to myself that there had to be some way....

I know that the Canadian Museums Association advocates for local museums, but they don't really have the capacity to do these things. I thought about it: what can we do so that people in other parts of the country can see this display and understand its impact, and maybe host something in an exchange? Maybe a national museum should see this display. Japanese internment is spoken about in the Canadian War Museum, but it's not talked about in that kind of personal way, with individual stories of people who talk about what they went through, how they came out the other end, and how they ended up being very successful and proud Canadians in spite of the suffering they went through. It's a great story.

So I started thinking about it, and where we arrived at is where we are today. I'm very proud of that. From those early moments of thinking about how we can tie these institutions together, here we are. We're now at—hopefully soon—report stage of Bill C-49 to create the Canadian Museum of History.

That little museum in Midway, British Columbia, can be a partner now. That little collection I saw those couple of years ago can now be hosted at the national museum, and those Japanese Canadians who are telling their story in the south Okanagan might now have the opportunity to share that story with other Canadians.

That's what we're doing.

June 5th, 2013 / 3:45 p.m.
See context

Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam B.C.

Conservative

James Moore ConservativeMinister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would also like to thank my colleagues.

I am pleased to be here today to discuss with you Bill C-49, the Canadian Museum of History Act, and to respond to questions you may have. Accompanying me today are Daniel Jean, Deputy Minister of Canadian Heritage and Hubert Lussier, Assistant Deputy Minister of Citizenship and Heritage.

I will keep my remarks brief to allow as much time as possible for discussion and to answer your questions on the bill.

Bill C-49 is a very short bill. It's not a tough read, of course. It spells out the mandate for the proposed Canadian Museum of History. The mandate is very simple and clear. It reads:

The purpose of the Canadian Museum of History is to enhance Canadians' knowledge, understanding and appreciation of events, experiences, people and objects that reflect and have shaped Canada’s history and identity, and also to enhance their awareness of world history and cultures.

That's what the bill says. There is nothing ideological about this. It's actually quite straightforward.

In 2017, we will be celebrating Canada's 150th birthday. This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to celebrate all that Canada has accomplished, to look back at 150 years of history, to be thankful for our past, and to think ahead to the next 150 years.

We have in Canada today, sadly, an entire generation of Canadians who are largely illiterate about Canada's history. It's the truth. With the proposed Canadian Museum of History we are going to start building the national infrastructure that I think this country so desperately needs, so that we can tell our stories one to another so that Canadians can better understand our local histories and our shared histories.

I feel that we've had a constructive debate on this legislation in the House. Some members of Parliament have raised some concerns about what this museum could lead to, and I just want to respond to a couple of the specific concerns that I know were raised in the House by Mr. Simms and Mr. Nantel.

First, let me quote from the Museums Act, particularly on the issue that has been raised that the museum could be interfered with by the government, the minister, or, frankly, any member of Parliament. The Museums Act is very clear. It spells out in a straightforward way the independence of all of our museums, including this museum. Section 27 spells out the independence of our museums when it states: “No directive shall be given to a museum...with respect to cultural activities, including...its activities and programs for the public, including exhibitions, displays and publications; and...research”.

Section 27 of the Museums Act is very clear, it's straightforward, and it dispels any false accusations that this bill or the creation of this museum would be in any way a politicization of Canada's history, because it's the law.

In fact, I am pleased by the widespread, non-partisan support this project has received from historians and historical associations across the country.

I want to say that I'm very pleased with the broad-based support that the proposal of creating a Canadian museum of history has received. Of course, no support for a proposal is ever unanimous, as I said to Mr. Simms in the House.

I remember the debate when the Liberals, at a time of recession, made the decision to create the Canadian War Museum. That was a very controversial decision, and it turns out that today the Canadian War Museum is indeed one of the best museums in this country. It has, as its only peers in the world, Les Invalides in Paris, and the Imperial War Museum in London. It's a fantastic museum that I think all Canadians, regardless of ideology, believe in.

That museum was launched with a great deal of difficulty and if you look at the proposal that we have here to create a Canadian museum of history and the broad-based support this museum has received, I think it's important that this be pointed out. This museum has been supported, for example, by Douglas Cardinal, the original architect of the Canadian Museum of Civilization. It's supported by the Mayor of Ottawa, Jim Watson. It's supported by the Mayor of Gatineau, Monsieur Bureau.

This project also has the support of celebrated historians from across the country, including award-winning historian and author, Michael Bliss, who had this to say about this bill. He said:

it is very exciting that Canada’s major museum would now be explicitly focused on Canada’s history, thanks to this government for making the museum possible.

Jack Granatstein, of course the former chair of the Museum of Civilization, supports this legislation and the creation of this museum. He said:

This move is exactly what I thought should happen. I'm delighted the government and the museum are doing it.

John McAvity, who is going to be with you later this afternoon, also supports this because he recognizes the value of this large national institution, the largest museum in all of Canada, and the value of creating a pan-Canadian network of all of Canada's museums, which can teach and disseminate information about Canada's history and share resources and collections and move items around the country.

This will be of benefit not only for this great institution here in the national capital but also for every museum across the country, as they could potentially become official partners of the museum, thereby allowing them access to the 3.5 million items that are in the collection of this museum, of which more than 90% are in storage and to which no Canadian now has access.

The Historica-Dominion Institute is also supporting this—which, by the way, is also one of the great organizations across this country, working with and reaching out to children across this country—and recognizes its value as well. The Ontario Museum Association has come out in support of it—also, by the way, important historians who are not Conservative and probably would chastise me or anybody for suggesting that they might in any way be Conservative.

For example, as I noted in the House, John English, a former Liberal member of Parliament and a biographer of Pierre Trudeau, has come out in support of this legislation, congratulating the government for supporting this initiative, as has Richard Gwyn, who is a biographer of both John A. Macdonald and Pierre Trudeau.

Deborah Morrison, the head of Canada's national history society, has said, “the potential for the new Museum to help create a national framework for our history is compelling. And the time is right.”

I agree with her. I have to say as well that I was very pleased, when we had the second reading vote in the House of Commons, that an independent member of Parliament, one of our colleagues from Thunder Bay, supported this legislation, as did Elizabeth May, the leader of the Green Party. They support this legislation, as do, by the way, New Democrats on the provincial scene in British Columbia.

I'm also pleased to say that this past weekend I spoke at the national meeting of the FCM, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, in Vancouver. As part of my lunchtime speech to more than a thousand delegates, I presented this project, which was entirely well received; there were no complaints. When I met with the executive of the FCM in a closed-door meeting before my speech, there was unanimous support for this from mayors across the country—from Mayor Nenshi of Calgary, from Gregor Robertson of Vancouver, a former MLA in British Columbia who sees the big value of this project and what it would mean for the city of Vancouver and, indeed, for all of this country.

This is a proposal that we've put forward as we go toward Canada's 150th birthday in 2017. It has broad-based support from Canadians of all kinds of ideologies and all kinds of backgrounds—and, by the way, of non-ideologies, just people who are passionate about the teaching and the learning of Canada's history, who think that we deserve to have our own Smithsonian; that we deserve to have a large national museum about which we can be incredibly proud. We do have that in the Museum of Civilization, but we can do so much better with a new Canadian museum of history, by tying all of our institutions across this country together as we head towards our 150th birthday and celebrate the incredible stories of Canada's history gone by.

Many of you have been in the House and have heard me speak in the House on the details of the reforms we are putting forward. There is $25 million to do the changes of half the floor space in the existing museum. The Children's Museum, which is in the museum itself, will stay as it is. The Canada Hall will be reformed, in the back. The First Peoples exhibit, which is award-winning and spectacular, will stay as it is.

We're reforming the floor space as well, because it hasn't been updated in over 20 years. As a matter of fact, in the Canada Hall there is virtually no representation of aboriginal Canadians whatsoever, and that needs to be updated and improved.

We can do better; we should do better. We're heading towards our 150th birthday. We have great stories as a country to tell. I think we ought to do a service to them.

I would close by saying to my colleagues that I understand that there are some concerns about this. Maybe this will be a circumstance of “hear me now, believe me later”, but I'm here to tell you that this is a project that has broad-based support across the country; it's self-evident in the votes we've had in Parliament and in those who have publicly come out to endorse this project. It's time for this country to think big and to do something bigger than just the obvious stuff and to have great national institutions that bind us together.

As I said to Scott, those are the great moments. I'll say this: in the sweep of Canada's history, the best of the NDP has been seen when they have supported national projects that they thought were national in scope and national in consequence; for example in the support of medicare. That was a national idea, an idea that was good for the entire country and that they advocated, and they went beyond partisanship and reached out to get support. Of course, it was a Liberal federal government that did it, but it was a national idea that they worked with others to get done, because they believed in it.

This is equally true with the Liberal Party; they have had some national projects and national efforts. And Conservative governments in the past, we've had ours as well. Along with the other institutions that we have in this country, I think this museum will be a part of the fabric of what we're trying to do: to strengthen the fabric that binds this country together.

When you think about it, Canada is the second largest country in the world in size, but in terms of population we're the 34th largest country in the world. What unites us as a country? It is language, the arts, culture, a shared sense of history, an understanding of one another, an understanding of our grievances, of the difficulties of the past and how we got over them and how we still struggle, our shared sense of identity.

In a massive country like this, that has historically been divided—English and French, east and west, north and south, aboriginal and non-aboriginal, labour and business, Protestant and Catholic in the early days—we've been able to overcome these divisions through the sweep of Canada's history because we've had a better understanding over time about what it is that we can accomplish.

We are moving forward as a government with this. We're very proud of this project. I deeply and sincerely thank all those who have come on board across this country, from all kinds of different political and ideological backgrounds, to support this effort. I would urge my colleagues on this committee, and indeed all members of this House, to look at it that way. That's how I presented this.

My colleagues know that I presented and discussed this legislation with them. I talked to my colleague, the heritage critic from the NDP, before we tabled this legislation. I told you about this idea. I showed you the legislation. I showed you what we had in mind. I showed it as well to the Liberal critic. I showed it to Elizabeth May, as the leader of the Green Party in the House. It's one of the reasons that she's supporting this bill. I want to work with other members of Parliament to get this project right.

I'll turn it back to you, Chair, and to colleagues for questions about this project. I would urge you all to give this serious thought, to support this institution, to support this effort to build this network, this pan-Canadian network, of great history institutions that will keep this country united and better educated, with a better understanding about our past, so that we can stay united going forward.

Thank you.