Canadian Heritage Committee on Nov. 20th, 2006

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

Mr. Chairman, there were two documents distributed concerning the consultations that were conducted by the department at that time with museums associations from across the country, and the conclusions of those consultations. It's on the basis of that work that we heard the representatives of the museums associations say here twice that as far as they're concerned all the consultations have been done.

We're getting into things that have not been discussed here. The previous government had a policy prepared, so that's internal documents to the Department of Canadian Heritage that Mr. Abbott, I presume, can access. Those are the documents that the people from the museums associations are referring to in terms of the work having been done. We haven't seen that end result, I agree with you. The consultation papers and the result of the consultation are documents that were circulated to us.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

There was no report, then.

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

By our committee? I don't believe so.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Were witnesses heard at the time?

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

By the committee? No--by the department.

Mr. Chairman, what I'm saying here is that I'm still open to that concept. Because we now know that the department, the minister, is heading another effort to come up with a museum policy early, as in by the end of this calendar year, I don't want us spinning our wheels, redoubling what the minister and her department are doing. If the minister wishes to share with this committee in January the results of the work that she's undertaking now, that would be great. That might trigger us into a policy review of our own. I don't want to do all these meetings if I know there are people who are far more qualified than I am who are currently doing it, which seems to be the case.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

The only reason, Mr. Chair, if I can complete.... Mr. Kotto's motion, of course, essentially forecloses any further witnesses appearing before this committee. I would hate to do that, because there may be reasons for us to bring others to this table.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Before I hear from anyone else, let's be clear of one thing. If we're going to do this review we're talking about, it will be in February. The agenda is set from now until the recess, and the budgets have been struck. We've gone through that. We can't keep revisiting that. So what we're talking about is if there's going to be any committee work done on museums, that will be in the new year. That's where we stand.

Mr. Kotto.

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

Mr. Chairman, as a result of the work previously done, there's nothing preventing the Minister of Canadian Heritage from tabling a bill on museum policy. If she wishes to do so, she can also desist because that's why she's there. The government didn't seek the committee's opinion before cutting the budgets of the organizations and programs. We weren't consulted for that. That was unilateral.

I'll take another example: the government's foreign policy isn't drafted in committee; it's the government that decides it. Serious work has been done on the museum file. The minister can make a proposal on the basis of that work, with a team consisting of competent people, as Mr. Bélanger said. At that point, if we want to amend a particular aspect of the bill, we can invite witnesses, who will either support or oppose the bill or an aspect of the bill.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

There's just one thing I have to say: I find this quite ironic here today, as we debate some of this. We had some people who might have been able to answer some of these questions we've come across today, in the deputy minister and two bureaucrats we had here not too long ago. We had half an hour—or three-quarters of an hour, almost—at that meeting when we could have asked those people some of the questions that have been asked or talked about here today.

I find it ironic that there were no questions to be asked of those people that day. I just wanted to interject there, a little, wee bit, that maybe we would have found out where they were on some of the policy.

We have five minutes left and we're going to vote on this motion before five minutes are up.

Mr. Angus, and then Mr. Malo, and keep your questions short, please.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

I've just been saying, Mr. Chair, that yes, there has been a great deal of input in this. It wasn't all at committee. For example, on an issue of national significance in 2005 I held a forum with all kinds of small regional museums, and we submitted it to Heritage. We never knew what happened with it, but issues were raised about how the small museums tie into national policy.

What I find interesting about this motion—and I don't think we're all at opposite ends here, but are just talking about timing and how to go about this—is that I've never been in a situation where I've phoned stakeholders and asked whether they wanted us to invite them to come to speak and had them say no, please; we've spoken, we've submitted, we understand that a policy is coming down, and let's see what that policy is.

What I'm hearing from those stakeholders is that they would like to see the policy. That then gives us at committee a chance to review it and a chance to draw witnesses. If it's a great policy, it's going to be very good; if there are problems with it, we'll find out and can then bring back recommendations to the minister. But I believe that if we at this point are doing something when we know another process is under way, we're going to end up having to draw further witnesses when the policy comes down anyway.

So just in terms of finally getting something done here, I would say that I support Mr. Kotto's motion, because we're not saying we're not going to hear witnesses, but we want to hear what's coming first, so that we know how to set our agenda.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

I'm prepared to call a vote on—

Oh, Mr. Malo, I'm sorry. Be very quick, please.

[Luc Malo, Bloc, Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC]

Mr. Chairman, before we vote on the motion before us, I'd like to point out a minor error in the wording of Mr. Kotto's amendment. I'd simply like to correct it. So I want to move an amendment to make the motion clearer.

The fifth paragraph reads as follows:Whereas the witnesses from the Canadian Museums Association, Alberta Museums and the Société des Musées Québécois feel there is no point in a new study that would inevitably lead to the same conclusions;

I would delete the word "that" and add the words "because it". The sentence would therefore read: "...feel there is no point in a new study because it would inevitably lead to the same conclusions".

The clerk has already received a copy of the amendment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Did everyone get the amendment to the motion that Mr. Malo presented?

Mr. Thibault.

[Robert Thibault, Liberal, West Nova, NS]

Just a point in my understanding of it, Mr. Chair, is that it doesn't change in any way the English version of it. I think it makes it more consistent.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

We'll take a vote on this.

The vote is on the motion put forward by Mr. Kotto, as amended.

(Motion agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

It being 5:30.... Should we deal with the other two while we're here?

[An hon. member]

Why don't we just vote?

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Let's just vote.

Mr. Abbott's motion is mooched; it's done. It doesn't have dates, so it can't go forward.

We have Mr. Angus's motion:

That this committee undertake a full investigation of the role for a public broadcaster in the 21st century, an examination of the various services, including the adequacy of regional programming, and an examination of the issues posed by new media; the study will gather public input from stakeholders and deliver a report to the Minister advising her of our findings; this undertaking shall commence upon the return of the House in January 2007.

(Motion agreed to)

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

The meeting is adjourned.