Evidence of meeting #67 for Canadian Heritage in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was museums.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Mark O'Neill  President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Museum of Civilization Corporation
David Morrison  Director, Research and Content, Special Project 2017, Exhibitions and Programs, Canadian Museum of Civilization Corporation
John McAvity  Executive Director, Canadian Museums Association
Kirstin Evenden  Vice-President, Canadian Museums Association
James L. Turk  Executive Director, Canadian Association of University Teachers
Victor Rabinovitch  Fellow and Adjunct Professor, School of Policy Studies, Queens University, As an Individual
Lorne Holyoak  President, Canadian Anthropology Society
Anthony Wilson-Smith  President, Historica-Dominion Institute

7:15 p.m.

NDP

Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet NDP Hochelaga, QC

Thank you, everyone.

I don't think anyone here is opposed to the promotion of Canadian history. What we are opposed to is the fact that Bill C-49 is limiting the museum's mandate to a large extent. Seeing as how two former museum directors have substantial concerns about this bill, I think we need to give the issue some thought. I also think that we need more than two hours to discuss this.

I would like to talk about research. Currently, the museum archeologists decide what their research will focus on, but things will be reorganized. I am a bit concerned about the future of research at this museum. Will it be based strictly on the needs of upcoming exhibits, or will the archeologists—and I am talking about archeologists because I am one myself—still be able to conduct basic research?

I would also like to point out that three ethnologist positions are still vacant at the museum and that the person currently in charge of ethnological collections is a war historian.

I see here a similarity with what happened at Library and Archives Canada, where many people have lost their job and where it is now difficult for employees to do research on site. In the first place, they have to contend with a staff shortage and, in the second place, their personnel is made up of people who are not specialists, but rather generalists. I note an underlying problem in the area of research, especially seeing as how the new mission set out under Bill C-49 does not include the word “research”.

Mr. Turk, do you agree with me?

7:15 p.m.

Executive Director, Canadian Association of University Teachers

James L. Turk

In fact, reference to research has been removed from the mandate. That's why it doesn't matter what qualifications Dr. Morrison has, or others have. As Dr. Rabinovitch had indicated, when the museum has to account for how it's spending money and has to make tough decisions in this difficult financial environment, you can't point any longer to a provision in its mandate that specifies research as one of its priorities. So that's part of our concern.

I remain perplexed. We're all in favour of the advancement of Canadian history, and we can fix the problem. This committee can make proposals that easily fix the problem. Dr. Rabinovitch gave you two of them. They're not diminishing anything. They're preserving the brand. They're preserving the focus on research and knowledge and critical understanding. They're preserving the diversity, and they allow all of the kinds of sharing that our museum colleagues are so keen about. The current Museum of Civilization has more than 200 MOUs with other museums across the country. There's nothing in the current act that prevents this. So I'm just perplexed. I don't know why we're diminishing what we currently have when we have the opportunity to preserve it, expand it, and support it.

7:20 p.m.

NDP

Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet NDP Hochelaga, QC

Thank you.

Mr. McAvity, earlier, funding allocated to culture was discussed. Yet we are about to spend $25 million on a significant change. As I already said, many small museums need money.

Don't you think those funds could have rather been used directly to help smaller museums? We have to wonder about that, especially if we compare Canadian museums' budgets for 2013-14.

The budgets for that period total $57.4 million. However, prior to the recession, that amount was $62.4 million. Some budgets have increased since, but in the case of museums, the budgets are tighter than they were before the recession.

Don't you think that money could have been spent more intelligently?

7:20 p.m.

Executive Director, Canadian Museums Association

John McAvity

Thank you for your question, Ms. Boutin-Sweet.

It's very good coming from you, because you worked in a museum, in Pointe-à-Callière in Montreal, so you know our field.

In terms of the funding question and the $25 million, it certainly would be nice, but I would point out to you that it is a one-time contribution, so it will not be repeated. We would really be looking for ongoing, continuing support.

7:20 p.m.

NDP

Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet NDP Hochelaga, QC

Of course, I feel the same way.

Mr. Turk, you raised an interesting point earlier. You talked about the Franklin expedition, which you linked to the cuts to Parks Canada. As we know, Parks Canada has undergone some major cuts. However, a very significant and expensive search is ongoing. They are trying to find Franklin's lost vessels. The same expedition is being used to chart the shoreline. That will help Canada better establish its footprint on the Northwest Passage.

I am wondering about that search. Let's say that archeological research is not the only reason behind it.

Mr. Rabinovitch, Mr. Turk, I think both of you would like to say something.

7:20 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Moore

You're over time, but we'll allow a quick response to that.

7:20 p.m.

Executive Director, Canadian Association of University Teachers

James L. Turk

I have a quick response. My point was that with a severely diminished budget for archeological work, having what is a political priority, basically, drive how that money gets expended is our concern.

7:20 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Moore

Thank you, Mr. Turk.

Mr. Calandra, go ahead for five minutes.

7:20 p.m.

Conservative

Paul Calandra Conservative Oak Ridges—Markham, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Rabinovitch, I do appreciate everything you've said, but I want to point out that you said you thought the new mandate was a bit restrictive. The Winnipeg Free Press said:

The previous title was vague, as was the museum's mission, which seemed to include multiple trajectories and themes, everything from postal history to natural science and exhibits on butterflies.

Obviously, there's always going to be a lot of disagreement on what mandate is the right mandate and what mandate is the wrong mandate. I guess that's always open to interpretation.

Mr. McAvity, I'm going to ask you this, because you seem to have the most experience of anyone on the panel when it comes to museums. Paragraph 9(1)(f) of the bill says:

undertake or sponsor any research related to its purpose or to museology, and communicate the results of that research.

That sounds to me as though research will obviously continue.

Paragraph 9(1)(e) says:

organize, sponsor, arrange for or participate in travelling exhibitions, in Canada and internationally, of museum material in its collection and from other sources.

You have the most experience of anybody on the panel. In your opinion, is the mandate too reduced? Do you think we won't be able to continue with our international desire to promote Canada and to learn more about other cultures? Is the mandate too narrow? Are we eliminating research with this new act?

7:25 p.m.

Executive Director, Canadian Museums Association

John McAvity

I'm not sure what the mandate is. I see what the purpose is, but I don't see a paragraph here that specifically says “mandate”, so the terminology being used is.... I assume we're talking about the clause that says “purpose”, because then that is reinforced in the paragraphs under clause 9.

If we can be clear on that, I think what is outlined in clause 9 is adequate. It meets the needs and it defines pretty well all of the potential issues that would come up.

7:25 p.m.

Conservative

Paul Calandra Conservative Oak Ridges—Markham, ON

Thank you.

Mr. Wilson-Smith, I really want to hear from you.

What opportunities do you see not only for small museums but also for organizations such as yours? Other organizations also have a desire to promote Canadian history and to learn more about international history and cultures.

What opportunities do you see in this that don't currently exist? Why is your organization so in favour of this new bill?

7:25 p.m.

President, Historica-Dominion Institute

Anthony Wilson-Smith

It's about the creation of a conversation, which is a phrase similar to something Dr. Rabinovitch used in a different context recently. You have to get people talking about something, for ideas and exchanges to flow.

I'll give you an example. In the last Heritage Minute we released, which was on 1812 and quite separate from the federal initiatives, we showcased a former slave who had formed an all-black regiment of former slaves to fight for the British in the Battle of 1812. The size of the Afro Canadian or Black Canadian contingent at that time, the efforts that they took, the feelings among them...that was an aspect that spoke to an element of society we hadn't seen before.

Similarly, we have another minute coming up for release in a couple of weeks, which is also about 1812, and highlights the first nations' effort there. Now, I don't know history as well as most here, but I know it better than most Canadians. I had no idea that about 10% of the fighting forces on the British or pro-Canadian side in 1812 were first nations warriors.

Through those conversations, you have outflows that create awareness of other cultures and their contributions. When you talk about World War II, it's not only about the heroism of the fighting force at the front, but it's also about the efforts of women and other people at home who helped modernize Canada's economy and workforce, through the building of factories. You create a whole rollout. Through discussions like these, you say what your priorities about history are and what issues matter. What is the relationship between civilization and history as such, and you help to define that.

It's not only through the discussions, it's also through the debates and the disagreements you get there. But first you have to pay attention.

7:25 p.m.

Conservative

Paul Calandra Conservative Oak Ridges—Markham, ON

Do I have any more time, Mr. Chair?

7:25 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Moore

You have 40 seconds.

7:25 p.m.

Conservative

Paul Calandra Conservative Oak Ridges—Markham, ON

Mr. Brown had a question.

7:25 p.m.

Conservative

Gord Brown Conservative Leeds—Grenville, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I could use a lot more than 40 seconds.

7:25 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Moore

Try to make it quick.

June 5th, 2013 / 7:25 p.m.

Conservative

Gord Brown Conservative Leeds—Grenville, ON

Before I was a member of Parliament, I was the chair of the Ontario government agency that operated Upper Canada Village and Fort Henry, two wonderful living museums that depict Canadian history.

I would argue, with all due respect to our professors on the panel, that history is not the exclusive purview of university professors and that we should be doing everything we can to teach Canadians history. Last year's commemoration of the War of 1812, in my area, was a wonderful opportunity to teach young people the history. When I hear some of the comments today about our not having an opportunity to get that out there, I think this is a wonderful way to do it. I support this bill completely, and I don't believe there's anything in it that precludes research.

I have one quick question.

What do all of you think about the opportunity to get our history out there, across the country, using the new Canadian Museum of History as the base?

7:25 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Moore

Sorry, Mr. Brown. That'll have to be a closing comment because it's 7:30 and we're out of time.

I want to thank each and every one of our witnesses. Thank you for appearing and contributing to our study of Bill C-49. Thank you to all of you for sitting through our previous testimony as well. It's been a long night for you, so thanks for your input.

The meeting is adjourned.