Veterans Affairs Committee on Oct. 21st, 2010

[Lise Zarac, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard, QC]

But it's a bit conflicted, isn't it? Ultimately, what's been said is that this law protects a minimal number of Canadian medals.

[André Lévesque]

The difference is that it isn't mandatory to be a Canadian citizen to receive a medal of valour or bravery and so on. The only medals for which you have to be a Canadian citizen are commemorative medals, like the Jubilee Medal. That is in the Constitution, in the order in council, that you have to be a Canadian. For the others, no.

[Lise Zarac, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard, QC]

Thank you.

[Robert Vincent, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Mr. Chair, I'd like to ask another question.

[The Acting Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Mr. McColeman first, then Mr. Vincent, and then yourself.

[Phil McColeman, Conservative, Brant, ON]

Mr. Lévesque, I'm happy that you're here in your capacity. Thank you for being here.

I have this one debate going on in my mind, and I'd like you to comment on it more than me asking you a question. I think it came out the other day when we were discussing this with the Legion people. Yes, medals are objects. Many of us have difficulty with dealing with the fact that they take on a commercial value because we see them as symbols of what the individuals received these medals for; they are symbols of what they did. We've learned through our witnesses that the Order of Canada, for example, has to be returned upon the death of the recipient.

It is a symbol of what their service was to this country, just as a medal—any medal, and I don't care whether it's worth $2 or $200,000—is a symbol of what it is the individual did. It has significance to this country because of that.

I have this debate in my mind going on. I don't like the idea of seeing medals on tables at flea markets, fairs, and such. As the generations pass them down, ultimately someone sees it as a commercial object. It may not be the son of the person who received it.... Ultimately what's happening, what the reality is, is that they become commercially traded objects. That's where I think we diminish the value of this national heritage, but heritage not having a monetary sense, in my mind.

Does any of that resonate with you in terms of your understanding of what insignia medals mean?

[André Lévesque]

It does, because of the job I have. I work with the men and women of the Canadian Forces every day all over the country and all over the world. That includes our veterans, by the way, because I'm also responsible for issuing medals to our recent veterans—modern medals, not Second World War or Korea medals—from over the last 20 years or so.

The thing we have to remember is that medals are absolutely a power symbol of what they've accomplished. The thing, too, is that when we look at our Canadian military heritage, some symbols are more powerful than others. As I explain it, I can't give everyone a Victoria Cross, because then there would be no value to it.

As much as we think it's a bad thing to have people selling medals, from my point of view, when medals are being sold, you know that they're in front of you. If they had no value and were in the garbage, they would be gone forever.

A lot of collectors collect medals because they're passionate about keeping military history alive. I'll just elaborate a little more. Some people who collect medals have a concept or an idea. Some belong to a certain unit in a certain city and want to collect, say, all the medals that belong to the Royal Newfoundland Regiment. And good for them, because that means that every medal they collect they're able to bring back to the museum, as an idea.

The other thing is that, unfortunately, we don't all live forever. We get old, families eventually get rid of medals, and as well, families become extinct, which means they're gone forever.

Also, you'll find a lot of collectors not only collect and purchase them but go back to the national archives and look up the history of some of these men and women and basically make sure that this part is alive.

I'll give you two examples of collectors who have made significant contributions. In the 1930s, there was a French gentleman who purchased a huge collection of all kinds of medals in France, and everyone was wondering what the heck was going on. Eventually he donated the whole collection, worth millions of dollars, and it became le musée la Grande Chancellerie in Paris.

There was another gentleman in Britain, again, First World War, named Lord Ashcroft, who purchased something like 20 VCs, a huge number of VCs. They were saying, this is crazy, everyone's buying the VCs and we don't know what's going on. At the end, Lord Ashcroft basically donated his entire collection, all of these VCs, and they became the basis of the Imperial War Museum's collection of medals. And on top of that, he donated £5 million to build the exhibit.

Collectors are a niche. The fact that they're collecting them means that they're helping save military history. There is value in that. I think when you look at a simple service medal, a campaign medal, and those who are decorated for gallantry, bravery, and other things, these are the important, highly significant medals that we want to keep track of.

For example, the Canadian Forces Decoration was created in 1949, and 350,000 of them have been issued since then. I've just indicated that there were 20 Cross of Valour medals issued versus 350,000 long-service medals. Again, you have to look at the value of each one and protect those that are more important and maybe have less coherence than those that have lesser value.

Does that help you, sir?

[The Acting Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Thank you, Mr. Lévesque. That's a very fulsome answer.

[Phil McColeman, Conservative, Brant, ON]

Thank you.

[The Acting Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Now we'll move on to Monsieur Vincent.

[Robert Vincent, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

I will come back to you, Mr. Lévesque. Earlier, you said that when a medal is awarded, no instructions are given about what can be done with it after that. You used that maxim that ignorance of the law is no excuse.

So the Cultural Property Export and Import Act applies to members of the Canadian Forces who receive medals from Canada and ignorance of the law is no excuse for them. However, if we also award medals to people from another country who are not subject to our laws, we have a double standard. We can't give someone from another country the same medal we give a Canadian and apply the law to the recipient who is a Canadian citizen but not to the one who lives somewhere else.

Why, in this case, would we have a law that prohibits Canadian recipients from selling their decorations without first approaching Canadian institutions? And we don't tell them they aren't entitled to sell them, we don't tell them anything, but ignorance of the law is no excuse for them. However, we can fine them if they sell and export their decorations. The others can do what they want with them, for example sell them on eBay or anywhere.

Why is there a double standard?

[Tom Scrimger]

I'm going to try to answer briefly.

First, I want to do away with the idea that we are taking away a person's right to sell their medal. As Ms. Elliot Sherwood explained, for medals and insignia that have cultural importance for Canada, what is done is to call a pause in the process to give Canadian institutions a chance to buy the medals and keep them in Canada. It isn't necessarily to prohibit someone from selling a medal. It's a pause that gives Canadian institutions and buyers a chance to buy the medals and keep them in Canada.

On the second part of the question, it relates to the fact that, of course, our laws don't apply to someone who is not a citizen of Canada, who doesn't live here. To my mind, the country is deciding to honour these people for an act or a service they performed for Canada. These cases are very rare. If we really have a general desire to protect Canadian medals, we have to agree that these people, of whom there are very few, have the opportunity to sell those medals if they wish, without being subject to the same constraints as Canadian citizens.

In my view, it doesn't happen very often that a person from somewhere else receives an honour from our country.

[Robert Vincent, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

I'd like to ask you one last question.

When you give these medals, would it not be easier to provide a letter with them informing the recipients of the procedure to follow if they want to dispose of a medal some day? It isn't up to them to make the effort to try to find a Canadian buyer, whether it be a museum or someone else. People who want to dispose of them should be able to dial a telephone number, and the people at the other end should inform them of the market value of the medals and initiate the process for them. The medal owners should not have to make the effort.

[Guy André, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

We would need a more proactive government.

[Robert Vincent, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

That's right, the government needs to be more proactive, if it wants to keep the medals. The person themself who has receive the decoration, and who is liable to a fine, should not have to make the efforts to try to find a taker for the medal. The same thing applies to the third generation of recipients. Those people should be told that if they want to dispose of them, they have to dial this telephone number and the government will try to find a taker. If it doesn't find anyone, it will call them back and they can do what they like with them. It would be much simpler that way, rather than fining people who don't know the law and who are not informed, and saying too bad for them.

Don't you think that would be the best solution?

[André Lévesque]

I have two comments to make.

First, I think it is very difficult to assign a value to a medal. Ordinarily, in the course of a person's military career, they will receive first a long service medal, at the end of 12 years, and they will take part in other campaigns. The number of medals a person will receive in the course of their career may range from 1 to 10, for example. Separately, they have a particular value, but the total value of a person's collection will be different. So it isn't that simple.

Second, you are only talking about informing the recipient at the time the medal is presented. The bill proposed also deals with medals given to family members, for example. At what point are we going to start giving instructions to everyone: the father, the mother, the son? We have no idea who the medals will be given to later.

[Robert Vincent, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

It is then the responsibility of the individual.

[André Lévesque]

Exactly.

[Guy André, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

It's the responsibility of the individual, but that person may also be deceased.

[The Acting Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Merci, monsieur Lévesque.

Do we have any further questions, colleagues?

Okay. We'll move on to clause-by-clause. Please ensure that you have the right package. There were some changes in the amendments. You'll know that you have the right package if one of your pages says “4.1”.

[Phil McColeman, Conservative, Brant, ON]

Do we dismiss the witnesses?

[The Acting Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Officials, are you staying or leaving?

Colleagues, are you certain you don't need access to the wisdom of these officials while we go through clause-by-clause?

I didn't dismiss the witnesses.

We'd like to have you here for clause-by-clause, please.

[Brian Storseth, Westlock—St. Paul, CPC]

What a wise chair!

[The Acting Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

He's not as good as our new one but still pretty good.

[Brian Storseth]

I might as well suck up to the new guy, not the old guy.