Canadian Heritage Committee on Oct. 27th, 2011

[Dr. Keith Neuman]

It's an interesting question. It was not something addressed in this survey, and I'm not aware of any other research. It would be a difficult question to get a meaningful answer to at this point, because most Canadians aren't really aware of 2017, haven't thought about it, don't have any concept of what it might involve. I think if you pose the question today, they would have a difficult time answering it. I don't think there is enough understanding or awareness. There is not enough substance at this point, I think, to get a meaningful answer. Down the line, I'm sure there will be.

[Pierre Nantel, NDP, Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, QC]

Thank you.

I find it quite remarkable that on the last page of your report, you write that we have a 'blank slate' before us and we must let our imagination and inspiration guide us. That's certainly something that Ms. Shaw spoke a great deal about. It goes back to the enthusiasm and inspiration aroused by the Olympic Torch Relay. I wanted to ask, do you not think that it's necessary to try to find something that would rally the entire country, without bringing out the doubt or bitterness felt in Quebec? We can indeed see that support on this matter is certainly weaker in that province.

What is your opinion on, for example, the idea of a theme as wide-reaching as that of the waves of immigration entering Canada—which are an undeniable fact—instead of returning to dates of conflicts or battles?

[Andrea Shaw]

I'd like to speak in French, but...

[Pierre Nantel, NDP, Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, QC]

You can speak English; it's no big deal.

[Andrea Shaw]

I think I will go back to the vision of what we were trying to achieve. When you talk about multiculturalism and engagements, celebrating our incredible geographical and cultural diversity, you can achieve so much. I think it's no different from when a company is thinking about how to speak to their consumers, whether it's in French, English, Chinese, or whatever, they segment the engagement, if you will. It's no different from this committee or the group that will lead this charge needing to understand through research, through focus groups, what will resonate and what will be relevant to all these stakeholder groups. Whether it is Quebec, Ontario, Nova Scotia, or aboriginal peoples, regardless, that kind of research is your gold nugget for success, because that will inform your programming element to achieve the vision you are after.

[Pierre Nantel, NDP, Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, QC]

Thank you, Ms. Shaw.

I think that in Quebec there is still that off-putting sentiment of being part of a multicultural mix, whereas historical periods enable a better understanding of multiculturalism. They enable us to recognize that the many Chinese citizens that came to British Columbia 20 or 40 years ago are as Canadian as the French who arrived 400 years ago.

That being said, I'll refer my question to Ms. Davies.

You said that we should not impose a vision. I wonder if you think it would be necessary to consult with the various provinces that would like to have a say in the matter, to understand how they would like their past and future in Canada to be represented during the 150th anniversary?

[Dr. Helen Davies]

What I can tell you from the experience of 1967 is that the federal government made a concerted effort to engage the provincial representatives and have a dialogue with respect to what the centennial could look like in the territories and the provinces. There is always benefit in having that conversation, for sure.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Moore]

Mr. Brown.

[Gord Brown, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you to our witnesses today. I know all of us are keenly interested in Canada 150.

I was a grade two student in Don Mills in 1967. From what I can remember, one of the legacies was that it was an opportunity to learn more about our country. At that time, I believe we learned a lot more about the history. I have long been an advocate of making sure young Canadians learn about our history. I used to be the chair of the St. Lawrence Parks Commission, which operates Upper Canada Village and Fort Henry in Mr. Hsu's riding.

I know only three out of ten provinces in Canada actually require a student to have a history course to graduate from high school. How can we use Canada 150 as an opportunity to replicate what I can remember as an opportunity to learn about our country?

That question is to all of you.

[Andrea Shaw]

I'll start.

I love where you are going. There is nothing like history for children and children of tomorrow. We're probably about the same age—I'm thinking about 1967. A long time ago, I was a high school teacher. Education is our future. Education is power and is such a part of who we all should be. The history of our country only brings more equity into a future in that human legacy we've been talking about. If we set that as an objective over the vision, then what you start to do is map out how we can take this in our hands and use this opportunity to program initiatives that will do just as you're saying, Gordon, to educate and bring program elements through.

What that is, I don't know, but that's exactly how we worked with all of our objectives and what we were trying to do. It's way beyond just a two-week sporting event, as I said earlier. We wanted to do much more for Canadians. If that is an element that the group decides to pursue—that is, education of our young, which is really important—now is the opportunity to seize it and work it into one of the program elements of our 150th anniversary.

[Dr. Keith Neuman]

I have a couple of points.

To speak to some of Andrea's comments, it has to be part of the vision. To put it into the educational system, you need a lot of people in the educational system at the provincial and local level to buy in. You can't really mandate that at the federal or national level. If it's part of the vision, and you can get not only the public but the organizations enthusiastic about that, then they may embrace that and find ways to bring that in. It would be difficult to program.

The other comment goes back to something I said earlier. The potential downside is that there are aspects of Canadian history that might divide people rather than bring them together. People may see problems or issues looking historically. What it is that's taught has some minefields. It has to be approached fairly cautiously, and perhaps the vision has to be framed in terms of, yes, understanding the history but maybe in a present context somehow. That is just part of what has to be considered.

[Gord Brown, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville, ON]

In 1967 a lot of the focus was on Expo. It got a lot of people moving around Canada on their way to Montreal. We're not going to have something like Expo 67 in 2017. How might we take advantage of this for tourism and get people moving around? Off the top of my head, maybe focusing on the history of Canada is an opportunity to do that. We're going to be doing a great deal of that with the celebration and commemoration of the War of 1812 over the next couple years, because that war went into 1815. We have a few years to learn about that. Maybe we could hear a little about that.

[Dr. Helen Davies]

Perhaps I could just speak to your earlier questions with respect to weaving history into the event. You are speaking to the converted, seeing as my own doctorate is in Canadian history. So of course it flabbergasts me that anyone should be disinterested in our stories.

I think it's a matter of not being didactic. I think sometimes we miss opportunities when we don't reveal the richness of our stories and allow people to experience. And I'll use by way of example the Confederation train and caravan that wove its way across the country, which went, like a torch, to very remote communities. I was speaking to someone just the other day, a gentleman now in his fifties, who spoke about entering the caravan, a convoy of large semi-trailers that travelled across the country, one of which was a re-creation of a Second World War trench. He said, being a young boy and entering this place, where the sights and sounds and smells of a Second World War trench were up front and centre, and being engaged in that had a really lasting impact on him. It wasn't that someone was reading him something; it was an opportunity for him to experience.

So I think that idea of experiencing our stories is really important.

I have to refresh my memory with respect to the second question.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Moore]

Mr. Brown, we're a little over, so we'll go to Mr. Hsu.

[Ted Hsu, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

I have just a little bit of a follow-up question for Dr. Davies. It gets back to the idea of how the centennial celebrations were structured in 1967, and I wanted to maybe get a statement from you.

Do you think the 2017 celebration would be more authentic and memorable if we followed the same idea of letting the initiative come from the grassroots instead of imposing particular themes or a particular structure on a national celebration?

[Dr. Helen Davies]

My sense is, in the spirit of wanting to be as inclusive as possible, that if we're able to generate enthusiasm and interest in engagement at the grassroots level, we're likely to be more successful.

[Ted Hsu, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Do any of you have a feeling about that?

[Andrea Shaw]

I do. I think if you left it solely to the grassroots without giving visionary direction, you might lose the opportunity to seize this incredible time in our history to achieve greater things. The grassroots, as I've said, are critically important. But if we, as a country, have a vision of what we're trying to achieve through this thing and can give direction to the vision we're trying to achieve with 10, 20, or however many objectives while letting the grassroots execute things, then in my opinion we'll have the best model.

[Ted Hsu, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Dr. Davies wanted to say something.

[Dr. Helen Davies]

I would echo that. In my view, it's not an either/or proposition. It's complementary. It's both. There needs to be a very strong leadership role with respect to a framework and a vision, and then grassroots involvement allowing people to, I suppose, implement that vision in a way that resonates for them.

[Ted Hsu, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Okay. That's all I had.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Moore]

Mr. Brown and Mr. Hillyer want to share a question.

You have five minutes. Divide it as you wish.

[Gord Brown, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

We'll go back to Dr. Davies and maybe take the opportunity to finish up the question.

We talked about tourism and how we can get people moving around the country, since we're not going to have a focus such as Expo 67 did. I think you started on about the train in 1967. I'll throw that back to you, and you can finish it off.

[Dr. Helen Davies]

Thank you very much.

Well, I think of how much Canada has to offer Canadians with respect to our extraordinary system of national parks and national historic sites, and I think of the work under way right now to have Fundy declared one of the seven wonders of the world. There's much to celebrate within this country, and we should encourage people to travel within Canada to celebrate and appreciate what we do have.

[Gord Brown, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville, ON]

Okay.

I'll throw it over to Mr. Hillyer.