Evidence of meeting #22 for Canadian Heritage in the 39th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was policy.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Executive Director, Alberta Museums Association
Well, I mean across provinces in terms of who can apply for what. I know that for a fact, from first-hand knowledge.
So in using arm's-length bodies, we can ensure there are clear, transparent criteria for grant applications and adjudications, and it takes the politics out of those decisions.
Liberal
Francis Scarpaleggia Liberal Lac-Saint-Louis, QC
Let me see if I understand you correctly. You mean within the federal program there are different criteria and different--
Executive Director, Alberta Museums Association
I've been told different things.
Liberal
Francis Scarpaleggia Liberal Lac-Saint-Louis, QC
That's an interesting point, and I don't disagree with you in terms of your concern, but I would suggest that it should be possible for parliamentarians and yourselves to shed light on this and for government officials to work this out. I don't think that because it resides in government it's not transparent and somehow it will be more transparent in a third-party trust.
Anyway, I think your point is interesting. Thank you.
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Peace River, AB
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you very much to every one of the witnesses. It's certainly great to have you here today to share with us your expertise in this area.
First, I should just thank you, Mr. McAvity. I know this summer you worked with museums across the country to be involved in the campaign and to inform. Many of us would have met with local museums who talked to us about these important issues. And even before that, you're aware that I was quite involved in trying to push the museums agenda here in this committee, and I'll continue to do that with the hope that we'll get some movement towards a resolution.
Certainly I enjoy the time that I spend in my community at my museums, and I know that each member of this committee does the same.
You talked earlier about the important step that was made in the last budget with regard to the exemption of capital gains on donations of stocks to charitable organizations. Can you explain to the committee your sense of whether that has changed the propensity for people to make donations, and if it has, if that's a step that you feel would be important or if we would be well advised to continue to encourage our finance minister to work towards increasing those types of tax exemptions for donations to charitable organizations?
Executive Director, Canadian Museums Association
First of all, with respect to the latest changes that the Minister of Finance made on exempting capital gains for listed public stocks, not very many museums have benefited from that so far. Most likely some have, and they probably have done it where there have been major capital campaigns, such as in Edmonton and Toronto.
Most of the very high-profile donations, such as the one last week in Toronto, have been to a hospital. So those are all good causes as well.
I think museums, as part of this new museum policy, need to be better positioned to be more effective at fundraising, themselves. Many are very good at it, and some simply have not had that experience. In my opinion, it's almost as good as it gets with tax incentives right now. So how do we ensure that we're benefiting from those?
Some museums need development staff. They need people in place and systems in place to develop. It takes time and it takes money to raise money over a period of time. You have to have a climate that's established. It's developing relationships, friendships--
Executive Director, Canadian Museums Association
--and networks. It takes time, and for that reason, we think this public-private endowment, sort of the national United Way for museums, would have appeal.
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Peace River, AB
It's very interesting that you mention that. We've talked about endowments today, and obviously that's an important step forward.
I've been advocating this whole endowment idea for quite some time, both within this committee and also in my community, and the issue there is obviously that it's tough to get it started.
I'm curious as to whether there is anything that you could see the government being involved in. Obviously the government, if it chose, could make huge contributions, museum by museum, but I think that may be more difficult. Other than that, is there something the government could do to help with the creation of endowment funds?
Executive Director, Canadian Museums Association
There are a couple of ideas. There is a small endowment-matching program right now, but museums are not eligible to participate in that. It is benefiting performing arts events and organizations. We're not in that. Basically, for every dollar, another dollar or so is matched. It is subject to a capacity. That's one thing. So that would be a major effort.
The other thing would be to help some of the truly small museums. They're the ones that do not have a fundraising capacity. Place a development officer--I'll call them that--a fundraiser, in their organization for a period of three years, on a declining fund basis. The first year, you pay 100% of the salary. Then they raise a little bit of their salary, and by three years it's at least self-sufficient. And then you have something going.
For the very small museums, you could have one person who would serve an umbrella of five or ten such organizations in a given area, and they could work together and rationalize their roles.
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Peace River, AB
Talking about that, you bring me to another question. It's a question that I ask with some sensitivity, because I'd hate to ever be seen as wanting to limit the number of museums that are developed within a community.
Every other week I'll be driving through a constituency and there's somebody talking about possible new museums. I'm wondering how we decide how many museums the country could sustain and if there's any involvement that the government should have in terms of trying to decide which ones the federal government is going to assist and which ones it is not. How do we get away from choosing winners and losers and ensure that there are not a whole bunch of losers?
Executive Director, Canadian Museums Association
It's a very good question. I don't have very firm answers for you on that, but I think a couple of things are paramount. We have to recognize that as time moves on, knowledge grows in our society. Libraries don't get smaller, they get bigger. It's the same thing. Museums are the places for things, and they do grow.
We've debated this ourselves, and in fact one time we even called for a moratorium on new buildings, because the priority to us is what we already have. Let's maximize and better use the facilities that are in place. If they need an elevator, they need an elevator. They need a new roof....
Let's build upon what we have instead of creating new institutions. Yet there is a thirst and a popularity for these major ones, like in Winnipeg. I don't have to mention names. I had a phone call two weeks ago from a group in New Brunswick that wants to set up the national beer museum.
So I don't know where you put the boundaries on this. I honestly don't know. But that's a good place for peer juries.
To some extent, the collections in museums should be unique. They should not be duplicating what exists elsewhere. Many of these new institutions could be encouraged to work within an existing facility, rather than to have their own stand-alone place.
I think we just need to be reasonable.
President of the Board, Société des musées québécois
Such a question calls for the answer of the Jesuit.
President of the Board, Société des musées québécois
Or a Spanish answer perhaps. It calls for the answer of a Jesuit, as we say in Quebec.
Most of our institutions come to being because of a community desire to establish them. Some people say that it is important to honour their heritage by building an institution called a museum, and no one can do anything about that.
The state must determine whether this museum in the current context has merit or not. Should it be given a few years to assume its position, to get established to collect resources, to prove its professionalism and so on in order to finally reach the time at which the local, provincial or federal government will perhaps have to support it in one way or another?
This situation has always existed and there were historic times in the 70s and 80s when a number of museums came into being. These initiatives originated in the public. People decide on these things among themselves. We cannot tell them that they do not have a right to do this.
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Peace River, AB
That's the question: how do we ensure that there is sustainable funding for the museums that exist, without creating too many so that they're pulling resources from one another?
In my own community, I see situations in which there are announcements of possible new museums, and then museums that are already there say, “They may be addressing a different part of society, or a different issue, but it's going to pull resources away from us”. So now we're just spreading it too thin, and then it causes even more of a problem. I'm just wondering how we resolve that, because obviously there is a limited amount of funding in every level of government.
Executive Director, Alberta Museums Association
One of the challenges in addressing that question is that there are no restrictions on the use of the term “museum”.
Executive Director, Alberta Museums Association
So anyone can get a building and call themselves a museum.
We do have definitions at the national level and at the international level of what a museum is, but they're never enforced. So there have to be some criteria at some level to say, “You know, what you're doing is great. It's wonderful. It's grassroots. It's fantastic. But it's not a museum.” We haven't come to that point yet. So the challenge is what is a museum as a starting point?
Executive Director, Heritage Canada Foundation
I'd like to just add another perspective.
Often the impetus for starting a new museum is that there is a historic building that has no other use, and the community wants to make sure that it's protected. The tax incentive, the CHPIF program that I spoke about, is one way to attract developers to those buildings and to give them a new life that does not represent a long-term drain on the public purse. It puts them into a revenue-generating occupation. So that's again something that I think we need to consider in this discussion.
Conservative
Executive Director, Société des musées québécois
I would like to make a few comments regarding your questions. It must be said that in Canada, there are neither nor fewer museums than there are in other countries in the world. Similarly, the number of museums in Quebec compared to its population is in keeping with the average in the United States, America or Europe. Generally speaking, it can be said that in Quebec and Canada there are not more museums than elsewhere in the world. We fall in the average range.
As regards the other issue, I find it extremely interesting, but it must also be said that culture comes from the people, and that it is in constant evolution. That is all that must be considered. This is maybe an argument that is even more important than that for having a good policy, because a good policy is a way of managing the demand. So it is a reference framework, and when we say we want a policy, we are saying we want a more attractive and more established reference framework.
