Canadian Heritage Committee on June 20th, 2006

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

Your silence speaks volumes.

The following is noted in the Department of Canadian Heritage's Report on Planning and Priorities, which comprises Part III of the 2005-2006 Estimates, and I quote:

To ensure that communities across the country are able to capitalize on the value of their heritage assets, a new museum policy will be proposed. Key issues that require attention include deteriorating collections and the need for institutions to adapt to a changing Canadian society characterized by increased competition for audiences and volunteers.

The discussion paper on a new museum policy refers to a policy formulation process. What is the current status of this process?

[Lyn Elliot Sherwood]

Prior to the elections, we were involved in a policy development process. Right now, we're working with the new minister and answering this government's questions.

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

In your opinion, are we in urgent need of a new museum policy?

[Lyn Elliot Sherwood]

The federal government plays an important role in this process, but there are also a number of equally important issues to consider, for instance, the whole question of fixed costs borne by institutions.

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

Thank you. That's all for now.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Mr. Angus, go ahead, please.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I'm interested in the concept of funding nationally significant programs, because it seems to me many programs that exemplify our regional diversity across the country will not meet that criteria.

For example, we met with representatives of the Écomusée de Hearst, the only Franco-Ontarian community museum in northern Ontario. This small museum is in danger of closing. It's unacceptable that the Franco-Ontarian community lacks the necessary resources to keep this facility open.

Does the Department of Canadian Heritage intend to support museums that reflect Franco-Ontarian culture?

[Lyn Elliot Sherwood]

It's certainly a priority for the department to look at minority language communities, and across the country there are a number of francophone museums that are supported. I don't have, off the top of my head, the list in Ontario or in your area.

I think the issue you're raising is in fact one of operating support for museums. At the moment, all of our programs are for project support and écomusée. One of the criteria is that museums be not-for-profit entities, and some museums may not fall into that category. They may need, therefore, to look more to an economic development agency rather than to the department.

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

One of the areas that came up when we were looking at regional museum policy in the north and at how to build a federal role is the fact that, again, by itself each collection doesn't constitute a nationally significant story, but in a regional area--for example, mine with its history of mining and the gold and silver rushes, and the multicultural development of these regions from Val d'Or to Sudbury--is a nationally significant story, and yet each piece of the puzzle will not provide for a federal understanding of that.

Is there a role the federal government could play in grouping together regional stories, whether they're in Saskatchewan or northern Ontario, to develop a nationally significant story, which would be housed not in one collection but over a series of five or six or perhaps ten various museums in a region ?

[Lyn Elliot Sherwood]

I think it may be useful to talk about the two existing heritage programs that depend on the criterion of national significance. One, which is no longer in our portfolio, is the national historic sites program in which very clearly across the country there are national historic sites that reflect quite a diverse understanding of national importance.

The other is the movable cultural property program under which, to be eligible for certification, objects and collections need to pass a national importance test. I think the diversity of objects that have been recognized through that program--which is closer to the museum experience--is quite remarkable. So I wouldn't make the assumption that because the museum is small or because it is not in a major city it doesn't possess something of national significance. I think that capacity exists in all institutions. The issue is whether they have the capacity to tell people about it or indeed the documentation to understand the importance of what they do have.

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

In terms of adapting to new media's digital opportunities, I'm wondering about how much the heritage department has moved and shifted its understanding of collections. I'll give you an example.

When I was working with the Algonquin Nation, we tried to put together an online proposal through which we would put online various historic references and artifacts of the fur trade in the Algonquin-Outaouais region. These stories have been told by the Oblates and by the Hudson Bay Company, but nobody ever put them all together from the Algonquin perspective.

Because we didn't own any particular piece of the collection, we were getting permission to borrow it from Hudson Bay. We were looking to put it online in a comprehensive story told from the Algonquin perspective, but we couldn't find funding anywhere after months and months. We finally gave up. But it seems to me there are new ways to tell history, and there are new mediums through which to tell history. I'm wondering how far ahead on the cutting edge the department is keeping.

[Lyn Elliot Sherwood]

I think there are two funding programs, one under the Canadian Culture Online program--and as I said, I'm not directly responsible for that, but I do know they have funded a number of aboriginal projects. The Virtual Museum of Canada, a number of first nations, Inuit, and I believe at least one Métis project as well have been funded by that program. A major project was a partnership between the Innu in northern Labrador, The Rooms, and the Canadian Heritage Information Network. The Haida on the west coast and a number of other exhibits across the country have had very strong leadership from aboriginal peoples.

The feedback on those exhibitions is wonderful. The power of the exhibitions to capture language as well as to reflect other dimensions of culture has been remarked on.

Apart from operating the Virtual Museum, CHIN also conducts research, develops learning resources, and is dedicated to assisting the museum community, together with aboriginal peoples, to use the new medium. Last year, the Virtual Museum of Canada attracted about 10 million visitors from around the world, so it's proving to be a very powerful mechanism.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Thank you.

Mr. Fast.

Just before I take Mr. Fast's question or allow him a question, I think what we'll do is--we can always have Ms. Sherwood back. I know it might be next fall, but I would like to hear from some of the other witnesses we're going to have here today.

On top of that, because we started a little later--I should maybe have done this first--I was wondering if by chance we did want to go on a little longer, could we accept another 15 minutes to our meeting today?

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

Mr. Chairman, I don't speak for others, but I'm okay until a few minutes before 6. I have a commitment somewhere else at 6.

Second, perhaps Madam Sherwood could stay in case we need information following the testimony of the other....

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

I would hope so, because I'm quite sure some of the other testimony here today would be beneficial to the department.

[Lyn Elliot Sherwood]

I'd be happy to stay, and that was my intention.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Okay, thank you.

Mr. Fast.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

First of all, I wanted to echo Mr. Bélanger's comments regarding the Young Canada Works program. My daughter applied to the local museum. I'm assuming they received funding, or are anticipating funding through that. In the end, because there was no definitive word as to a start date, she took a different job, not at all involved with museums or heritage. My fear is that not only are students missing out on the financial benefit and subsidizing their education and expanding their knowledge, but we're also losing out on some of our best and brightest students by plugging them in close to two months after their summer break starts.

In terms of my question, following up on what Mr. Angus focused on, support for the smaller museums, local museums across the country, my concern has been that most of the capital funding, certainly most of the operational funding, at the federal level is focused on our national institutions you've listed in your schedule. I sense local museums are hurting; they're struggling. I'm not sure we're doing enough. I'm not suggesting we throw money at them, but I want to focus on one specific aspect of the budget just recently passed, where we provided specific tax relief for donations made to arts, cultural, and heritage institutions, among others. I fear this special benefit is going to benefit, for the most part, the national institutions and not the smaller museums. We're talking about tax credits and tax benefits arising out of the transfer of listed securities. My guess is most local museums aren't going to be able to take advantage of that or aren't attractive enough to someone who's going to give that kind of benefit.

Is your department looking at ways of strengthening local museums across the country, giving them some hope that we're seriously interested in preserving that aspect of our culture in addition to the national cultural aspects?

[Lyn Elliot Sherwood]

Before I answer the latter part of the question, Statistics Canada does report on donations and sponsorships, and what it reports is that the small museums across the country, those under $100,000, actually do receive quite a lot through donations and sponsorships from individuals. As you move up to the larger museums, they are more likely to get the major donations from companies, or the major sponsorships from companies. Only one of the national museums currently has a foundation that can receive that type of gift, and that's the National Gallery. So right now, in terms of the competition between the national institutions and others, there is evidence that there is more money going into the non-federal institutions than into the federal ones from donations and sponsorships.

In terms of the small museums, it's true, currently the programs that have been established in relation to the existing policies generally require that museums be professionally managed. This means the equivalent of at least one-full time staff member. Many require the institutions to be open or at least accessible all year round, to have three-year business plans, and to have the full suite of museological policies.

In terms of what we do with the smaller museums, a number of the museum associations bring forward proposals to work with groups of museums in their areas that may be smaller, so there's benefit from that. I mentioned the community memories program under the Virtual Museum, which is specifically targeted at institutions with no more than three full-time employees. And museums that are entirely volunteer-run are eligible to make proposals to that program.

The Canadian Conservation Institute certainly does workshops and training. There are other projects. In Newfoundland last year the Heritage Information Network worked with the provincial association and the community museums in Newfoundland to develop strategies for low-cost documentation of collections so that these museums could add their artifacts to the national inventory of museum collections.

So those are the elements that are currently available.

I'm at a bit of a disadvantage to speculate on future decisions by government, but I'm happy to answer questions about existing measures.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Sherwood, for your time. I hope you will stay around to hear our other witnesses.

If our other witnesses would like to come up....

While everyone is getting in place here, I want to tell the members of the committee that in the briefing notes there is one mistake--it's too bad it is a mistake; it must be wishful thinking. In part B, “Museums in Canada”, it says the museums have earned revenue of $224.8 billion, and that should be million. Wouldn't it be nice if it was billions?

I wanted to make that correction. I didn't find it; it was our analyst who found it. They were the ones who processed this, so they found their own mistake. That's great.

Who will be first?

[John McAvity, Executive Director, Canadian Museums Association]

I'll introduce the crowd here.

But just a comment. When we heard about that $224 billion, we were quite excited as well. We thought we'd see if we could be listed on the Toronto stock market.

My name is John McAvity.

I'm the Executive Director of the Canadian Museums Association. With me today are Mr. Cal White, the Chairman of our Association and the CEO of the Toronto Zoo, Karen Bachmann, the Director of the Timmins Museum and National Exhibition Centre, and Michel Perron, the General Director of the Société des musées québécois. He represents all Quebec museums.

Dean Bauche is the director of the Allen Sapp Gallery in North Battleford, Saskatchewan, and Bob Laidler is the past president of the Association of Manitoba Museums.

We're not quite sea to sea.

We do have a very short presentation that should be just under 10 minutes. If you don't mind, we will do this, and this will be complimenting the written report, which I hope you did receive.This will be delivered by the members, except for myself and Mr. Laidler.

[Cal White, Chairman, Canadian Museums Association]

Mr. Chairman, we're delighted to be here to discuss the urgent situation facing museums in Canada. We're very pleased that you've taken immediate action to study our recommendations for a new Canadian museums policy. There's overwhelming support for a new museums policy and increased federal investment in museums. The Standing Committee on Finance made strong recommendations in 2004-05. This committee also made similar recommendations. The Auditor General has spoken out on the serious issues facing the protection of our heritage assets.

In September 2005, provincial and territorial heritage ministers unanimously supported the development of a new federal policy. The museums community fully endorses a new policy and sees it as the number one priority. The CMA has talked to just about everyone. Our approach is strongly endorsed by municipalities, including the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, the tourism industry, educators, and community leaders, amongst others. As well, there's overwhelming support from the public in our public opinion surveys. We were pleased that all political parties supported the call for a new museums policy during the federal election.

There are many good reasons for a new Canadian museums policy, and it is urgent that it be concluded in this Parliament. We urge this committee to seize the opportunity and provide recommendations in a timely manner to help secure a new policy before the end of this year. The recommendations that the CMA made to the minister are practical, pragmatic, and achievable. Our financial requests are within reason and based on a sound business framework that will assist museums in achieving greater financial sustainability for a long-term solution.

[Karen Bachmann, Director, Timmins Museum and National Exhibition Centre]

Museums are important and popular institutions in Canadian communities, attracting large numbers of visitors. There are over 2,500 non-profit museums in Canada, ranging from large metropolitan galleries to small community museums run by volunteers. They contribute to economic development, provide thousands of jobs and employ over 50,000 volunteers. Their economic impact is estimated at over $17 billion per year. Museums are also the cornerstone of our tourism strategy.

Museums attract over 59 million visitors each year. Studies show that over 60 per cent of all international tourists visit a Canadian museum during their stay in this country. Museums are dynamic centres of learning and exchange and serve as meeting points. They help members of our society acquire a better understanding of a wide range of subjects. They provide people from every generation and all walks of life with rewarding learning opportunities.

Today, museums are vitally important to improving education programs. Over 7.5 million school children visit museums each year as part of their active learning process.

Museums are bridges to improving understanding, celebrating achievements, exploring differences, and discovering what we all share.

Most importantly, museums preserve our heritage. If they don't, we lose it and it doesn't come back. The history and heritage of our communities are in our local museums. They tell the stories of our families, our roots, and our values. Our heritage is not just in federally managed museums; our community heritage is every bit as important, and we are losing it.

Finally, museums are landmarks in our communities. When we welcome world leaders and international dignitaries, we do so at our museums. They showcase our rich history and who we are.

[Michel Perron, General Director, Société des musées québécois]

It must be mentioned that museums in Canada operate based on diversified funding. We support this diversified system and have no intention of asking you to make any major changes.

Museums have, however, significantly reduced their reliance on government support over the past decade. They have extensively diversified their funding sources by seeking out independent sources, sponsorships and various types of partnerships.

Today, we're reaching the saturation point in terms of our capacity to increase outside funding sources. It's critical that we restore some kind of balance between private and public revenue sources.

Museums in Europe and most other parts of the world are more dependent upon governments than in Canada. A common perception is that museums in the United States are all funded by the private sector. That is not the case and US governments from all levels are actually beginning to increase their level of contributions to museums.

In our extensive consultations with museums across Canada, the overwhelming need identified by museums of all sizes is sustainable financial resources. We have repeatedly heard this very telling message. Unfortunately, governments too often fail to provide the operational support to the museums they wanted built in the first place.

Admittedly, this is not the sole responsibility of the federal government. All governments need to be part of the solution. Today, we are talking about the federal role that, in our view, is quite clear.

The federal government indeed finds itself in a strong, strategic position to provide leadership in developing new policies.

[Dean Bauche, Director, Allen Sapp Gallery]

The federal government can't, and shouldn't, become stewards of all museums in Canada, but neither can we deny that our national heritage is housed in museums across Canada. Unless we act to properly preserve and exhibit it, we won't have it in the future.

To address these concerns, we've developed a series of principles for a new policy, which can be found in our brief. They include: community impact, sustainability, engagement of Canadians, appreciation, and participation and inclusion.

We have outlined a series of recommendations that are sound and practical and pragmatic. Our recommendations require a new federal investment of $75 million per year for non-federal museums. As we heard from Canadian Heritage, there are several good programs in place now, which should be part of that new policy, and they should be maintained, but we need to address some key gaps.

Primarily, we need to address the inadequacy of the museums assistance program. It is insufficiently funded; it is too restrictive; it is too limiting and unpredictable, making it impossible for museums to plan on the basis of funding for only one- or two-year terms.

To address this, we recommend there be new multi-year, multi-dimensional program funding. This program would provide support to address specific business plans submitted by museums and would provide predictable levels of support over three to five years. Museums are not fly-by-night operations; you cannot transform and improve museums with unpredictable one-year projects.

This program would allow museums to plan and implement, to measure success, and to report on projects deemed to meet federal priorities, as well as to serve the mandate of those museums in their communities.

Federal criteria for eligibility should be broader than those in present programs, so as to assist more museums. We recommend that a museum be able to access investment in the range of $25,000 to $400,000.

The kinds of programs supported by MAP are still important. Museums should be able to apply for project funding for specific actions, such as travelling exhibitions, professional development, international projects, aboriginal museums, and so on and so forth.

Endowments need to be established for long-term stability, and the federal government could assist with matching incentives, with fundraising capacity, or even with innovative ideas, such as funding chairs for research or for collections.

If you, as our elected members of Parliament, do not take action, we are in peril of losing much of our heritage. In the past year alone, a handful of museums have closed, and many more are in slow and silent decline. We are in danger of losing the knowledge and the inspiration that help build communities, that help build regions, and, ultimately, that help build us as a nation. Canada's museums contribute to our sense of place and identity in a very significant way, and they are important elements of our society and need to be properly supported and properly respected.

We thank you today. We thank you for listening to us, and we sincerely hope that this committee will act and provide recommendations to ensure that a new policy will be realized by the end of this year to preserve and to present our heritage in the interests of all Canadians.

Thank you. We're available for your questions