Evidence of meeting #33 for Canadian Heritage in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was cbc.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL
Thank you, Chair.
Good day, skipper. How are you? Skipper's a term of endearment, by the way, from the east coast.
I want to acknowledge your comments about the Canada Council for the Arts. I agree, very well done. I look forward to you guys using it against me some day.
Conservative
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL
Yes, that's what I figured. I can see the smoke.
But I do want to dive into the topic that was just here. We're talking about the Library and Archives because I think that yesterday, when we went to the demonstration, there was a fundamental gap between what people do in telling our story as Canadians as opposed to what we think is a place to cut for reasons of inefficiencies.
I know what you said in the House, and you just discussed that, but you've got to realize when it comes to digitization, it's not a question of just piling a bunch of photographs at someone to put them on a repository when there's a story to tell.
The NADP, the national archival development program, was an essential part of telling a story in the smallest of communities. I have 200 communities in my riding, and some of them took advantage of this. They're in a situation now where the expertise is not really there.
I feel that we've fundamentally, just by the sake of digitizing something, missed the narrative, the fact that archiving is something more than we give it credit for. Would you agree?
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
I think it can be seen by some obtusely as just sort of a bureaucratic function, but I think you're right. I come from a family of teachers. My mom is a teacher. My sister is a teacher. My brother-in-law is a teacher. I've taught. I understand that this is about protecting, not just digitizing. Digitizing often becomes a blanket platitude for seeming like you're à la mode and it seems like it's sort of a catch phrase. But you're right, it's about protecting and ultimately championing Canadian culture and history through archives, so it's an important tool of learning.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL
But the NADP was a vital tool of that, and it almost seems like we've taken something extremely vital to the core of what you believe in. So you have to question, do you really believe in what it is they're doing?
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
We do, but you know, look, there are going to be other initiatives that Library and Archives is going to be announcing and we are going to be providing—
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
No. I'll leave that for Library and Archives to talk about.
But also with regard to the macro-subject that you're raising, which is the responsibility of the government not only to protect Canada's archives but to protect their information, to work in the pan-Canadian network of archivists and libraries all across the country, I believe in that. I'll just put it this way: soon we will have more to say on the subject.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL
Okay. But the inter-library loans issue, how did you come to that decision?
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
Through Library and Archives Canada?
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
That was their decision.
I think it's important to understand, the way in which the draft process comes, this is not I as the minister going to the organization and saying here's how you're going to absorb a 5% to 10% reduction and here's how we're going to force it upon you. We ask them to come up with 5% and 10% of the money that they think is the least effectively spent or the least related to their core mandate and responsibilities.
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
So they come to us and they say, “If our budget is reduced, this is what we think is the least effective 5% of the money that we're spending.”
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL
I'm sorry, Minister, but I have to keep moving here.
I'll cut to the CBC. One of the things they've talked about is based on what they do with the BBC in the U.K., and that is a funding model that is over a five- to ten-year period, something that's longer term. Would you consider doing something like that?
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
The funding that we have for the CBC.... As you know, all these reductions are over three years. The CBC's macro-budget for this year, including all ad revenue, is $1.6 billion, if memory serves me. The reduction for this year is 2.4%. It ramps up to a total 10% reduction between now and the three-year period. So they do have certainty over—
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL
But you're talking about including the $60 billion, right? You pulled that into the—
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
That's included in the overall amount.
So, certainty over five years.... Look, they have certainty over three years, and this is.... Actually, I agree with you, and this is something the opposition has raised before, as has the CBC and as has the public: that certainty in funding is an important thing, which is part of the problem of the $60 million recurring programming fund. Every single year with the Liberal and Conservative governments there was always a doubt as to whether or not the $60 million would get renewed.
The truth is, and you can speak to members of the cabinet of the former Liberal government, that there was always a debate about the $60 million and whether or not.... There was a bit of a carrot and stick game with the CBC about how they were managing things, and that shouldn't be part of it. We should take the politics out of it and we should just make sure that they have a base funding, lump in the $60 million, and have the 10% reduction phased in over three years. It's a 2.4% reduction in year one and the 10% will be absorbed over three years.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL
But if you take that to its logical conclusion, then you would think that a five- to ten-year funding model that gives them some security as to what they could do.... I mean, you talked about getting into digital and the like and getting into the digital realm, which is changing all the time. This steady funding would certainly allow them to be far more flexible going forward.
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
That's true. However, there's a flip side to that. In government, you also have an obligation—are we going to say to every single crown corporation and every single agency in the government that they'll get 5% and 10% funding? What's the point of Parliament? What's the point of your oversight of my decisions? If you're just going to lock in funding and say “Well, there you go”, then what's the point of having Parliament discussing these issues? Plans and priorities change.
Liberal
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
Also, you appoint different boards, you appoint different chairs, and you appoint different presidents to crown corporations and agencies. They want to have different flexibility and different approaches to things. If, for example, people are going to be replaced at museums, if they want to have a new approach to things, if you lock in their budget for five or ten years and you say, “You're going to be absolutely isolated from any kind of budget reduction, or even consideration of your mandate and approach to things”, I think that frankly neuters the obligation that we have on behalf of taxpayers to ensure that organizations are being as effective as possible in their approach to governing and spending taxpayers' money. If you just lock everything in for ten years, then what's the point of Parliament?
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL
Well, it may not be ten years, but nonetheless you get the idea about how they're dealing with them. Obviously the funding model's out there, and it has proven to be successful.
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
There's not one single crown corporation or agency or museum or anybody who wouldn't say, “We would really love five to ten years of locked-in, guaranteed funding so we can have certainty for the next generation”. Everybody would want that, but I don't think that's prudent governing.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL
You don't, for the simple reason that it takes control out of Parliament.