Canadian Heritage Committee on June 22nd, 2006

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

And you have some ammunition to work with.

[Voices]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

I must say, again, thank you so much to everyone for coming out to this short meeting today. Have a great summer....

Yes, Mr. Scarpaleggia.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

Mr. Abbott mentioned, when the Museums Association was here, that they had a very tight organization, that they had the capacity to contact their members with lightning speed. That indeed is the case. In fact, as a result of their communication to their members, I have received two e-mails--both, incidentally, from railway museums.

I'm not quite sure what's at the root of this, but they feel that the museums policy somehow overlooks their specific needs. I don't know if it's because railway museums are cultural but also tied in with the transportation industry that they are somehow on the margins of museums funding programs.

So I don't know what the issue is, but I would like to suggest that at our first meeting in the fall we invite two railway museums--in particular, one from the east and one from the west, from Delson, Quebec, and from Revelstoke, which I believe is in Mr. Abbott's riding--even just for an hour and a half. There's something there, under the surface, that I don't know enough about, and I'd like to hear from them.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Mr. Abbott.

[Jim Abbott, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

I might be able to add a very small amount of enlightenment there.

The interesting thing with most museums--there are always exceptions to collections--is that there is a degree of portability for an awful lot of artifacts. Obviously the amount of portability for an 1897 locomotive is rather limited. There is also a culture, as you've referred to it, of people who really enjoy taking a look. I have the Canadian Museum of Rail Travel in my constituency, and I indicated that we have about a mile and a half of passenger cars, some of which have been restored. There is a strong desire, as I understand it, on the part of the rail museums to create not necessarily a virtual museum but a stronger public awareness and an alliance so that people would be more aware of.... It would just be easier to access the information, and a stronger pooling of information would add a certain synergy. Rather than one plus one equals two, it would be one plus one equals three, just because of the synergy between the museums.

So your perception I think is very accurate. However, if I go to the Revelstoke museum and say that we'd like to invite them to Ottawa to tell us all about it, and my friend in Cranbrook catches wind of this, I'll have one heck of a time, because both museums are.... I think it's a great idea, but it's....

There's a rail travel museum and then there are locomotive museums and so on and so forth. If the researchers could give us some background on this, it would be really helpful in terms of moving that particular item forward. So I'm very excited about that suggestion.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

Do I understand, Mr. Abbott, that you would not want to have a meeting on this?

[Jim Abbott, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Oh, no, I think we should; I just think we have to make sure that we do it well, particularly with some more research.

[An hon. member]

So decide in the fall.

[Jim Abbott, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Mr. Martin.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

The only comment I would make is that Mr. Angus probably wouldn't recommend that it be the first meeting of the new session. He did send direction to me that if this got to be a planning meeting for meetings in the fall, when it comes to museums specifically he would rather deal with some of the other pressing issues facing--

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

And I agree; I'm suggesting just one meeting, not a full-length study of museums. It would be one meeting at some point, not necessarily the first meeting.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

I see.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

This meeting is getting a little longer here, and we are getting....

Yes, Mr. Kotto.

[Maka Kotto, Bloc, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Mr. Chairman, I was somewhat surprised that we were so confused as to adjourn the meeting when we hadn't debated the motion we were to discuss today, a motion I introduced at the end of the last meeting we held here.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Okay.

We have two motions here, including one from Mr. Warkentin. This is going to take us into a full meeting if we work on these two motions. As I had suggested, the biggest thing to do today was to get a new vice-chair. The second thing was to give some direction to our men here.

Yes.

[Maka Kotto, Bloc, Saint-Lambert, QC]

With all due respect, Mr. Chairman, I agreed to come to this meeting today because we had agreed, as stated in the blues, to debate this motion today, a motion on the museums policy. That's what was agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

This is the motion:

That, in the Committee’s opinion, the government implement as soon as possible the new museum policy discussed in 2005 and respect the work and consultations undertaken by the Department; that this new policy, once developed, be studied by the present Committee before its introduction in the House; and that the Chair report to the House.

To the best of my knowledge, there was no policy. No policy was presented. There was work done on the policy, but there was no policy.

Am I correct?

[Maka Kotto, Bloc, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Mr. Chairman, there are figures. Wouldn't it be appropriate to review all those figures, since you are part of the continuity of a government history? The previous government was about to establish a museums policy, with the consent of the Canadian Museums Association. Instead of wasting our time playing at being tourists in all the museums of Canada and Quebec, we could refer to those documents, develop a draft policy that would be submitted to our committee and move forward, in order simply to save time.

My NDP colleague, Mr. Angus, pointed out that there were urgent issues that had to be dealt with because they absolutely have not been addressed. I'm referring to the subjects he put forward. Furthermore, as regards the museums, the essential work has been done. Witnesses have appeared before the committee and one official came to testify. I don't see why that poses a problem.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Mr. Chairman, I'm going to make a suggestion which I hope we may be able to agree to. It won't have escaped our notice, on both sides of the table, that there appears to be an infatuation with, an enthusiasm for, a museums policy and a desire to do better for our museums, large and small.

I ask Mr. Kotto whether it would be acceptable for one or two or three priorities for this summer to be that our researchers do an in-depth job that would lead us to adopt a report on a museums policy very early in the fall. It would be a document that could thus become a substantive report that would state everything that has been done, what has been agreed upon and what has been concluded.

I'm speaking to you as a member of the former government at a time when there appeared to be a consensus between the Canadian Museums Association, the Department of Canadian Heritage and the various political parties.

If they could put that all together for us early in the fall, would that be enough? Then we could review everything and turn it into a report, which would encourage the government to move forward more quickly.

That's a suggestion, Mr. Chairman.

[Maka Kotto, Bloc, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Mr. Chairman, there is a report on the discussions on the museum policy, and I believe it is available. It isn't a secret document.

I think it's imperative that the government do its homework. The figures are there. The museum community agrees on that report and on the recommendations it contains. It isn't up to us to redo the work from scratch.

I thought that there was a consensus the last time and that debate on the motion was postponed for lack of time. So, to save time, I would move that we put the motion. In that way, everyone will shoulder their own responsibilities.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I tend to concur with you. I think the issue here is the way the motion has been worded. There are two parts to it. The first part alludes to the implementation of a policy, and the second part alludes to the fact that this policy has not yet been developed. We may have a working paper or a discussion paper, but you can't implement something that hasn't been completed.

I'm prepared to accept Mr. Bélanger's suggestion, but if in fact that doesn't fly, if Mr. Kotto is prepared to delete the first part of the motion, and simply say that “a new policy, once developed, be studied by the present committee before its introduction in the House; and that the Chair report to the House”, I believe that would be acceptable.

[Jim Abbott, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

I would be hard-pressed to see a minister--whether it's my minister, my government, or whatever government--being prepared to comply with bringing his or her legislation before a standing committee for that committee to approve it before the person takes it to the cabinet for approval. And that's really what the second part of this is asking for.

That is not going to happen. We can ask for it until we're blue in the face, but it is not going to happen.