Evidence of meeting #29 for Canadian Heritage in the 40th Parliament, 3rd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was money.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Senior Vice-President, Marketing Strategy and Communications, Canadian Tourism Commission
No. But we always have a back pocket idea that, if we had incremental investment, this is where we believe Canada's tourism industry could most benefit, and were there extra funds available to support it, we believe we could show a strong return on investment.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL
You have to explain the “back pocket” fund. I'm sorry, but could you just explain that?
Senior Vice-President, Marketing Strategy and Communications, Canadian Tourism Commission
We have our base funding, we have Olympic funding, and we have the other funds we have. We invest those as wisely and smartly as we know how to do. But if there is incremental investment, especially during a challenging year like 2009, we have opportunities for ideas for future investment in other marketing programs. That allows us to open up new markets, such as India and Brazil, for instance, or to leverage China.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL
I'm assuming that the genesis of the money you received from the marquee tourism program was probably in more or less the same fashion, was it?
Senior Vice-President, Marketing Strategy and Communications, Canadian Tourism Commission
It wasn't looking for a source of funds; it was that we have an opportunity that is currently unfunded.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL
Was there a decision, say an executive...? Was it a cabinet decision, where they said, okay, we need extra money for the Olympics, and obviously the CTC is a good place to go forward?
Senior Vice-President, Marketing Strategy and Communications, Canadian Tourism Commission
I don't know. I don't know how that decision came about.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
We have lots of time today.
Would you like to ask a question, Mr. Rodriguez?
Liberal
Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
As I understand it, the government spent approximately $5 million on administrative costs to determine how the money would be managed. There is some $5 million in administrative costs for the entire process, in order to determine which festival would or would not receive money, and yet you received $8 million, $5 million of which was not included.
In the $8 million that you were given, was there a portion set aside for administrative costs?
Senior Vice-President, Marketing Strategy and Communications, Canadian Tourism Commission
With that $8 million we did not incur any additional administrative costs in investing the money. We invested it out of the administration of our regular program.
Liberal
Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
So, you received the $8 million and spent the entire amount on programs or for different priorities. That is what you did with 100% of the money; there were no administrative costs. Is that correct?
Senior Vice-President, Marketing Strategy and Communications, Canadian Tourism Commission
We had the infrastructure in place to invest that incremental budget. I imagine there were some small administrative costs; I don't have those details. But they're probably too insignificant—maybe to the tune of up to $10,000 or so.
Conservative
Bloc
Carole Lavallée Bloc Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC
I would like to come back to the sequence of events. On May 10, newspapers in Quebec announced that the budget for the FrancoFolies had been cut by $1.5 million. In fact, we learned at that time that the FrancoFolies had not received the grant they were perfectly eligible to receive. They met all the criteria and more so. For example, the first criterion is to have at least 250,000 participants; there were 823,400 festival participants in 2009. So, as we all know, the FrancoFolies met all the criteria. There was no reason to exclude that event. The organizers found out less than a month before the event was to begin that they would not be receiving the $1.5 million they were counting on and had expected to receive, given that they met all the criteria and it was normal to operate along those lines under the circumstances.
You said earlier that you found out in June and that you subsequently went to Treasury Board to defend your plan. I'd like to know when you had initial discussions with the Department or officials with respect to this program. What was the sequence of events? How is it that you were able to secure this funding?
Senior Vice-President, Marketing Strategy and Communications, Canadian Tourism Commission
We submitted to Treasury Board shortly after we knew of the availability of the funds--
Senior Vice-President, Marketing Strategy and Communications, Canadian Tourism Commission
I don't know the date exactly. We certainly could find out.
Bloc
Senior Vice-President, Marketing Strategy and Communications, Canadian Tourism Commission
Yes, of course.
Bloc
Carole Lavallée Bloc Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC
When did you appear before the Treasury Board? That is extremely important, and I am going to tell you why. It's important to know if you presented your project to Treasury Board after finding out, like everyone else, that at least two major organizations in Quebec—and other organizations in other provinces—which were benefitting from the Marquee Tourism Events Program—had not received a grant, because their grant had been given to you. So, it is extremely important to know that, because when you, the Canadian Tourism Commission, realized that the share of money you had been given had been taken away from your partners—if you still consider them to be partners—at the very least, you should have told someone in the Department that you should not benefit from the program because that would cause special problems which would result in your having extra-ordinary experiences, such as is the case now.
I imagine that you must have been thinking of them this morning when you were on an airplane coming from Vancouver to Ottawa, and that you probably were thinking that there was no reason for you to have to come here to defend your right to that grant. And you would have been absolutely right. Except that this grant did not meet the criteria set for the Marquee Tourism Events Program. That money was taken away from marquee events which deserved to receive it.
I said earlier that the FrancoFolies had attracted 823,400 participants in 2009, that this event lasts for 10 days—that was the case in 2010—that it has been around for at least three years and that it has an international marketing and packaging strategy.
So, when you realized that you were diverting program money from your tourism partners who needed it, did you not ever think for one second that you should tell the Minister that you could not accept that money because of a need to maintain harmony within the Canadian and Quebec tourism industry? It's a matter of professional ethics.
Senior Vice-President, Marketing Strategy and Communications, Canadian Tourism Commission
We work in partnership with the entire tourism industry in Canada. We work with all levels of government, with provincial governments, with the city destinations like Tourisme Montréal, and Tourism Vancouver. We work with the regions, and we work with a multitude of experiences and events that go on across the country. We do not often hear that an investment in this area doesn't support an investment in that area. So we didn't hear any of those kinds of ideas or stories, in fact. We didn't. We simply took the confidence that the government had—
Bloc
Carole Lavallée Bloc Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC
Yes, you knew. I'm sorry, but you did know, because on May 10, the first question about this issue, and about the fact that the FrancoFolies had not been given any money, was raised in the House. You knew at that point that marquee event organizations were literally losing their grant under the Marquee Tourism Events Program. So, you did know. You said earlier that you made your submission to Treasury Board in June.
So, looking at the sequence of events, it is clear that you knew, when you accepted or requested the $8 million, that you would be taking money away from organizations which were severely in need of it. Indeed, they needed it so much that they were forced to cancel several shows.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
There wasn't a question in there, but, Mr. Klassen, do you have anything to add? If not, I'll go to Mr. Armstrong.
Do you have anything to add?