Canadian Heritage Committee on April 17th, 2018

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

Good morning, everyone.

Welcome, everyone. Thank you for coming. This is the 102nd meeting of the standing committee.

I would like to welcome our witnesses.

To begin, we must consider certain matters, including the project budget request, which the clerk has distributed to everyone.

This is the budget for cultural hubs and cultural districts in Canada, which is our next study. Does anyone have any comments about this budget?

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, York—Simcoe, ON]

I see no need to travel. I think all of this could be done adequately with the witnesses coming here or as we are doing it today.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

I don't believe there's anything in this budget that would have us travelling.

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, York—Simcoe, ON]

Is that for them to travel to visit us? Okay. That's fine.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

Are you okay with the budget as it is?

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, York—Simcoe, ON]

I shall make no further comment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

All right.

Mr. Nantel, have you had time to look at the project budget request?

[Pierre Nantel, NDP, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

I have no further questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

Would you move for the approval of the budget, Mr. Hogg?

(Motion agreed to)

Excellent.

Our morning is off to a good start.

We will now start with our witnesses, who are from three organizations.

This is for the study of the state of Canadian museums. We have with us Ms. Heidi Reitmaier from the Museum of Contemporary Art Toronto Canada. We also have with us, from the Hockey Hall of Fame and museum, Jeff Denomme and Phil Pritchard. We also have, by video conference, Ms. Elaine Hruby, from the Bellevue Underground Mine.

Each of you will have 10 minutes to make a presentation.

Why don't we start with video conference? We have you there, and you never know how technicalities will work. Why don't we start with the Bellevue Underground Mine, please, for 10 minutes?

[Elaine Hruby, Past Executive Director, Bellevue Underground Mine]

Thank you, Madam Chairman and committee members. I feel honoured for this opportunity to present evidence to the standing committee on the state of museums.

The Bellevue Underground Mine, of which I am Past-President, is an Alberta provincial historic resource and a recognized museum by the Alberta Museums Association. I am the Past-President, Past Executive Director, for the Bellevue Underground Mine in Crowsnest Pass, Alberta. I'm currently completing a diploma in cultural resource management. I was the first director at the mine with any prior knowledge or experience of museums.

The Bellevue Underground Mine is the only historically authentic underground mine that is accessible to the public in western Canada. It is open from May to early September for walk-in tours, and the rest of the year it takes pre-booked tours. Staff interpret the history of coal mining in the Crowsnest Pass in relationship to immigration, community building, economic growth in the area, and the CPR. The Bellevue Underground Mine receives 22,000 visitors a year. This is a significant achievement, considering that the sight is 200 kilometres away from the nearest urban centre and is in a community with only 5,589 people.

As indicated in the evidence by previous witnesses, museums, historic sites, and cultural institutions benefit Canada's health, well-being, economy, and the environment. The mine supports spin-off revenue in a town that is small and has a dwindling commercial tax base.

The mine's situation is comparable to the circumstances faced by other rural museums and historic sites. However, it has the additional burden of maintaining 1,000 feet, 300 metres, of authentic haulage tunnel, and concrete entry portals. The prime concern of the Bellevue Underground Mine is retaining its authenticity while securing the site's longevity and sustainability. Some of the challenges we face are that, in addition to maintaining the tunnel, the organization must also raise funds for the rehabilitation of concrete mine portals. Both are expensive projects. However, the volunteer work of skilled coal miners reduces the cost of labour and materials in the tunnel.

These aging volunteer miners spend thousands of hours retimbering and sourcing materials and equipment. During the last 10 years, they have kept the cost of maintaining the tunnel to under $30,000 a year. Should their expertise be lost, the alternative would be engaging consultants, engineers, and contractors, which could conceivably run into millions of dollars.

Cost is one of the reasons that the tunnel and the portal have not had the benefit of an engineering study in recent years. It's disconcerting to see these men—many of whom are over the age of 60—striving to keep the site running with little outside support. The miners would also maintain the portals in addition to the tunnel, but this is a separate rehabilitation project requiring geotechnical studies, engineers, architects, and historical conservationists. A significant injection of funding is essential to the rehabilitation of the portals and the mine tunnel. It's unrealistic to believe that eight people—and that's pretty much it—can raise the capital to secure and rehabilitate this site.

While the Bellevue Underground Mine's visitorship and popularity continue to increase, with national and international visitors, there is a complacency about its future. It is inconceivable that this small group will ever be able to have the capacity to meet the overwhelming financial needs of the Bellevue Underground Mine. Without a significant infusion of capital, Alberta will lose this historic site.

There's a large discrepancy between our funding and resources and those of government-operated national museums and not-for-profit sites. For example, the Frank Slide Interpretive Centre, a provincial site two kilometres from the mine, receives the same school tours and visitors as the Bellevue Underground Mine. As a government-run centre, Frank Slide employs greeters, janitors, and programmers. They also have spacious facilities that can accommodate large tours.

In contrast, the mine's orientation building is a series of two-garage packages. It barely holds 30 people, or one average-sized school tour. When there are back-to-back tours, the second group must wait outside regardless of the weather. The two washrooms are substandard and inadequate for average-sized school and bus tours. The executive director does everything from administration to cleaning washrooms. The Frank Slide Interpretive Centre pays their interpreters $18 an hour, while the mine stretches to pay theirs $15. The mine's executive director receives $3 more per hour than an interpreter at the Frank Slide. The gap in pay rates and working conditions between the two sites makes it challenging to entice professional museum staff and to retain trained interpreters.

Even though the Bellevue Mine does not have the benefit of a programmer or professional exhibits, it gets consistently high ratings and return visits. It's disheartening for the staff and volunteers to know that despite their diligence and the popularity of the site, they have been unable to offer new programs or services after 30 years of operation. The inadequate infrastructure and insufficient number of staff cannot continue to cope with yearly increases in visitors. This is a popular site.

However, this is secondary to the problem of raising funds to keep the tunnel and the portal safe. At one time, local mining companies gave the Bellevue Underground Mine large corporate donations and sponsorship. Currently, their focus is on health and wellness, which is admirable but doesn't help the mine with long-term sustainability. Conversations with a B.C. mining company revealed that before they could commit large donations they would need to confirm that there's a substantial commitment from the government.

We have a few recommendations, mostly for all museums.

First, we need grants that are flexible and fit the needs of Canadian museums of all sizes. On page 3 of the Canadian Museums Association's brief to the standing committee is a sample of museum sizes and operational budgets across Canada. The sample shows that 62% of museums operate on budgets of less than $500,000. Given the number of small museums existing on subsistent funding, it would be welcome news to see a fairer disbursement of funds between government-run and not-for-profit museums. New grants allocated to meet the specific needs of rural museums would be a bonus.

Grants that support each stage of growth in museums or historic sites are also needed. They should support an organization's development toward becoming a recognized museum. The library model could be incorporated to raise additional funds for museums and historic sites. Endowment funds, like those set up for visual and performing arts, could give tired museums and historic sites a boost.

The above recommendations are general, and would be helpful to museums in the long term. However, time is running our for the Bellevue Underground Mine, which is a shame when it has such a compelling history and the number of visitors to justify investing in its future. It will never reach its full potential if it doesn't get timely and substantial funding from the provincial or federal government.

Thank you once again for initiating this important study and for your time this morning.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

Thank you for that.

We will now go to Ms. Reitmaier of the Museum of Contemporary Art Toronto, please.

[Heidi Reitmaier, Executive Director and Chief Executive Officer, Museum of Contemporary Art Toronto Canada]

Many thanks for your invitation to speak today. I feel honoured to be here and share my thoughts.

I thought it would be useful to provide some biographical information. I was born in Toronto and completed an undergraduate degree in fine arts. I moved to the U.K. in the 1990s to complete a graduate degree in art history at the University of Leeds, and subsequently held management and leadership positions in Vancouver, at Tate Gallery in London for eight years, and most recently at the Museum of Contemporary Art in Chicago, before returning to Canada to take on the role of executive director and CEO of the Museum of Contemporary Art Toronto Canada.

As many of you may know, MOCA will soon open a new five-storey space to the public in an industrial heritage building with over 55,000 square feet of exhibition, public programs, learning, and office space. The museum will boast a full-time permanent staff of 20 and an annual operating budget of $8 million.

My career migration and breadth of experience within different institutions across different disciplines, with international colleagues and in various countries, has shaped my sensibilities and I think made me an unusual hybrid in the museum world. Though my outlook may be viewed as progressive or even groundbreaking, I know that museum professionals around the world are attempting to understand a new world context for the 21st-century museum. There is a lot to think about.

I believe the experience of art, the inspiration, and the instigation that art provokes can serve as a way for people to understand themselves and the world. I think contemporary art and artists ask hard questions and provoke audiences to think and imagine in new and different ways, with more curiosity and, we hope, with more civility.

Museums are the vestibules where an exchange between art, artists, and visitors happen. Our job as professionals really is to create relevant spaces that ensure that museums reflect the world we're in and the diversity and plurality.

At the moment, I'd suggest that museums are in trouble, because they aren't nimble enough to reimagine themselves. They hold too much currency in their expertise and thus purport to be authorities on cultural relevancy. I believe they either haven't considered how the world has changed around them or they don't know how to evolve with these changes. It's worth highlighting that many small and mid-sized museums are slow to change.

For me, the question of relevancy has been top of mind for decades, and it's fairly exciting. The need for museums to consider this has been formative in many best practices in the world. I think it's worth considering, and asking the question in our own context, how museums can become more relevant in the 21st century for Canadians.

I'd like to suggest first that we have to consider the audience, the public. Most large-scale and mid-sized museums are struggling to retain audiences and attract a younger visitor base. The visitor demographic of most museums is predominantly white and mature, at least in the visual arts, not to mention the demographics of the staff, the board, and the individual donor base. In all of these cases, numbers and support are dwindling. If we don't fulfill a cultural contract that demands we serve audiences beyond traditional patrons, our continued relevance into this century will be seriously at risk because it's not reflective of the plural and diverse cultural practices or of the diverse communities we serve.

According to the 2017 “Culture Track” study, an initiative of the U.S.-based consultancy company LaPlaca Cohen—which I know you've heard about—audiences no longer distinguish between high and low culture. For the cultural consumer, going to a street fair is of equal value to attending an opera. The visitor measures a successful experience by way of learning, doing something new, finding enjoyment and fun, and being socially engaged. Museums that uphold an idea that their sole responsibility is to be the singular and notable custodians of objects and those that believe that theirs is a special and unique position are potentially out of step with the contemporary public.

I believe the challenge for museums is figuring out how to differentiate an experience from other opportunities, to do this with integrity, and to figure out how best to connect art and ideas with interests and ambitions of relevant communities in the world. At MOCA we aim to be a listening museum, a welcoming place in which we will seek a reciprocal relationship with our community, public, and the world, and we are committed to ongoing dialogue through everything we do. Museums need to listen.

Twenty years ago, the Harvard Business Review ran an article entitled “How the Arts Can Prosper Through Strategic Collaborations”. The piece declared,

The arts have been hard hit by shrinking audiences and rising debt. Cuts in government funding have become severe, and many sources of funding....have been earmarking grants for specific programs so that less is available for general operating budgets.

This looked specifically at the U.S., yet the sentiment could be relevant today in Canada. Arts and cultural organizations around the world have to up their game when it comes to forging collaborations with business, industry, and tech companies. They need to seek engaging and relevant visitor experience and generate much-needed revenue.

As our industry seeks to create relevancy and connect with audiences, it would benefit us immeasurably to have the government play a role in facilitating collaborations between culture and the private sector with a mind to sharing best practices. These practices could include technological advances, expertise in customer experience strategy, research intelligence, consumer psychology, and so forth.

A dynamic example of such collaboration is one that the Cooper Hewitt design museum launched in 2014 in New York. It was an interactive pen that allowed visitors to design new projects in response to the permanent collection and to contribute this work to an ongoing archive. It was created in partnership with Hewlett Packard, Local Projects, and Sistelnetworks, a company leading in wireless technology. The federal government could nurture such partnerships by building cross-disciplinary networks in leading the charge to collect data on new and best practice, best-in-class research.

I'm interested in how the government might lead a national conversation about culture and economic growth. A very well-documented example is the U.K.'s New Labour party launch of the “Cool Britannia” brand in the nineties. This was an interesting model of a campaign that celebrated a modern public face for Britain with a new kind of industry and workforce. Living in London at the time, I think it was seen as a chance to redefine what the economic future would be about. It was an attempt to reimagine England, not just as a place of factories and Fleet Street bankers but creative entrepreneurs from across society.

“Cool Britannia” fuelled the creative industries and increased prosperity. It turned once ordinary industrial cities like Manchester into cultural destinations, interconnected the arts and businesses, revitalized urban areas, and attracted skilled workers. Cultural Capital: The Rise and Fall of Creative Britain by Robert Hewison, published by Verso in 2014, is a great read and worth citing here.

Museums like MOCA are committed to generating and supporting Canadian content. Our role, as we nurture young artists and cultural producers, would be assisted by an ambassadorial international spotlight that advocates and underlines the unique qualities, benefits, ingenuity, talent, and plurality of Canadian culture on a global scale.

Finally, leadership and mentorship is a common theme across the many presentations you've heard to date, and is something that I feel would be beneficial to Canadians as well as to MOCA. To that end, there are two stellar leadership programs to be considered or looked at, and one has opportunities for Canadians. The U.K. Clore Leadership Programme aids the professional growth of museum professionals, and in the U.S., the Getty Leadership Institute, which I have completed, assists experienced top-level museum and cultural executives from around the world in becoming better leaders, with the aim of strengthening their own institutional capabilities as well as advancing the international museum field.

I also think there's an opportunity, as so much talent has migrated to Canada in recent years, for the government to initiate a formal mentorship program whereby directors from large to mid-sized museums, especially those who have gained experience elsewhere, are encouraged to partner with mentor colleagues from smaller institutions. Mentoring is a key element of programs like the Center for Curatorial Leadership in New York, and extends learning outside the classroom.

Towards the same notion is the subject of capacity building and philanthropy in Canada. Although they're a different history and system, we know that $373 billion is handed out by individuals, foundations, and businesses in the United States, and rates of giving are two to 20 times higher in the U.S.

From my years at MCA in Chicago, I developed an appreciation of the history of philanthropy in America, and the social and political traditions behind it. I think it would be advantageous for Canada to learn from this best practice, and I think professionals in mid-size museums could gain, and need to gain, more proficiency skills in donor cultivation.

Lastly, on the question of access, equity, and inclusion, it's a challenge, as we know, of deepening the talent and leadership pool within the Canadian museum sector. There's a small pipeline in this country. The challenge is also great, in that the museum profession does not represent the socio-economic and racial demographics of the country. As someone building a leading international contemporary art museum in Canada that hopes to lead with best practice, it's challenging to find the skills and industry expertise within the country. It's also challenging to build the team that reflects the diversity and plural voices of this country. An initiative that allows for the growth of mentorship and leadership, as well as helping to diversify the museum field in Canada to reflect the complexity and brilliance of this country, would be welcome.

I want to thank you for the invitation and this opportunity to share my thoughts.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

Thank you very much.

We will now go to the Hockey Hall of Fame and Museum, Mr. Denomme and Mr. Pritchard, please.

[Jeff Denomme, President and Chief Executive Officer, Head Office, Hockey Hall of Fame and Museum]

Madam Chair and members of the committee, thank you for inviting us.

Given the Hockey Hall of Fame's position as a very well-funded not-for-profit corporation and registered charity that honours and preserves the history of our great national winter sport, when first asked to appear before the committee it wasn't clear to me what meaningful value we could bring to this discussion. Both Phil and I are sports management graduates. Phil is our Vice-President and Curator. He's been with the Hockey Hall of Fame for 30 years. I'm in my 32nd year, and for 20 of them I've been President and CEO of the corporation.

As I mentioned, we are in a unique position in our country, not only in the country but in the museum field as one of the “big four” major single sport halls of fame in North America. Our counterparts in basketball, football, and baseball are all based in the United States. The foundation of our success is certainly built on strategic partnerships, not only within the hockey world but within the corporate world, and certainly in our strong relationship with the City of Toronto that dates back to the first museum, which was opened on the Canadian National Exhibition grounds in 1961.

We have already circulated a background summary, so I won't spend a lot of time on it this morning. It certainly answers a lot of questions and gives background that we thought was relevant information. We compiled for the committee the public benefits; the government support, which has been minimal certainly at the federal and provincial levels; and the support we get from the City of Toronto through tax exemptions and the development agreement that established the Hockey Hall of Fame, which are certainly valuable to our existence.

As a self-sufficient operation, success and sustainability stretch far beyond the gate admissions. Being self-sufficient and well funded does not come from a lack of effort. We have a retail merchandising business, corporate events and hospitality, sponsorships, and the licensing of our intellectual property rights. Leveraging those rights is certainly something we enjoy that perhaps other museums do not have privilege to, because of our position in the national game and certainly the professional game.

Outreach is a key to our success, with travelling programs and education. We have a curriculum with Seneca College called “Hockey Hall of Fame Presents”. We provide field services. We're the official photographer of the International Ice Hockey Federation, responsible for all photographic assignments at their major five world and Olympic championships. Another example is our new relationship and long-term partnership with the Edmonton Oilers. They built their new arena facility two years ago. We were involved in designing, in part, some of their exhibition facilities, and we have an ongoing curatorial relationship.

Having said all that, we do face similar challenges to those in the museum industry, particularly in the cataloguing and preservation of our vast archival and museum collections. In 2009 we established the D.K. (Doc) Seaman Hockey Resource Centre. Doc Seaman was the former owner of the Calgary Flames and a great philanthropist. Through the Calgary Foundation and the Doc Seaman Canadian hockey fund, we were able to receive funding to build a new remote archival facility to house our collections. In fact, with the Canadian cultural spaces program, through specialized equipment, we were able to receive some funding for that particular project. Still, as our collections grow, financial resources are limited and reinvestments in the public museum attractions generally take priority. It really is a challenge to keep up with the cataloguing and preservation of our collections.

With that, this is a special year for the Hockey Hall of Fame. It's our “75/25” anniversary, 75 years since the inception of the Hockey Hall of Fame and 25 years at its present location in downtown Toronto. It's been a great success at the corner of Yonge and Front streets. This is a major year for us. We recently established a new endowment fund, called the Hockey Hall of Fame development and preservation fund. This anniversary year we will fund our inaugural fundraising campaign. We've been successful in getting seed contributions from the National Hockey League. We have a major gala fundraiser this June. Our first named endowment program, from the Tanenbaum family, will create the legends of hockey scholars fund in support of indigenous youth educational initiatives. We're quite proud of that program.

In talking about what matters to the Hockey Hall of Fame in this discussion, it is really relationships with donors and enhancing the benefits to donors, both from an endowment and a sustainability perspective, but also particularly with respect to gift-in-kind collections. This is Phil's domain as our curator. He can speak to that and certainly answer any questions.

When I look at key recommendations, certainly on the endowment side, expanding the mandate of the Canada culture investment fund, which is generally, I believe, directed towards arts organizations, is certainly something the museum sector could benefit from. It's quite relevant to what we're doing in this early stage of developing this endowment fund.

On the gift-in-kind donation side, for our marketplace it's highly competitive in terms of sports memorabilia. I believe that some of the benefits that accrue to cultural property that's certified under the Cultural Property Export and Import Act ought to be considered as general to museums because of the competitiveness and certainly the tax benefits such as the elimination of capital gains tax and the extended deduction limits. Those sorts of things would matter a lot to the Hockey Hall of Fame because I think we're losing a lot of great material from our collections to private collectors. Not only that, but the Canadian Museum of History recently purchased a collection for $3 million from a Toronto-based collector, and I would think that a lot of that collection should be with the Hockey Hall of Fame.

We really appreciate the opportunity to be here today. Hopefully there is some value we can add, certainly from a philosophical point of view, museology. We do have people on staff who are engaged in that particular area.

I commend the eloquence of the other two speakers. In terms of museums generally across the country and their challenges, we can appreciate that certainly from a collections standpoint. We are well funded and well supported, not only, as I said, in the hockey world but outside. Our government funding is very limited. Really, that's not why we're here today. We're here more to talk about donor relations and enhancing those benefits.

Thank you to the committee for inviting us.

[Phil Pritchard, Vice-President, Resource Centre and Curator, D.K. (Doc) Seaman Hockey Resource Centre, Hockey Hall of Fame and Museum]

I'm going to speak on behalf of our archives. First of all, thank you very much for having us here. We are thrilled to be here. I think halls of fame and museums in Canada play a special place in our society.

Speaking from the Hockey Hall of Fame side, hockey has grown up with Canada. There is a special bond with Canada. It's Canada's sport. It's played in over 80 countries around the world now. People who move to Canada love the sport, and they become part of it because of what it means to Canadians.

We've seen in the last week across Canada how Canada and society have grown together, but as Jeff mentioned, we do a lot with archives and outreach. We have a course at Seneca College that teaches about the history of the game. That course is fully multicultural. We talk about diversity. We talk about the history of the game and how the game has grown within Canada and around the world.

We've been fortunate in the past couple of years to be contacted by the Chinese government, the Czech Republic's government, and the Kazakhstan government, and next week we're going to Hungary to do a display on what hockey means to Canadians and how it can influence their country. They're hoping it can influence their countries as well.

On behalf of the archives, we are a member of the Canadian Association for Sport Heritage and a member of the international sports halls of fame and museums. We speak as a whole on preserving sport. It's an important part of our society. Hockey is obviously close to us, but every sport plays a different role within Canada, and preserving that history and preserving the archives is one of our main goals.

As Jeff mentioned, the collectors' world plays a huge role in artifacts these days, and the mighty dollar is always at stake. We have to somehow compete with that, and as Jeff mentioned, with work from the government and Canadian Heritage, I think we could all work together on preserving not only our national sport but every museum and hall of fame across Canada, and show Canadians what it really means to be a Canadian.

Thank you very much for your time. We look forward to talking with you and answering questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

That's a great lead-in to what we're doing next, which is questions and answers. It's a seven-minute round right now, and we're beginning with Ms. Dzerowicz for seven minutes, please.

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Thank you so much.

Those were three excellent presentations, three very different presentations, so I want to say thank you very much.

I only have seven minutes, which sounds long, but it isn't, so I'll probably direct most of my questions to Ms. Reitmaier.

You make a lot of recommendations. You said them quite quickly, so I want to delve into them a little, just to have you flesh them out a little. I'd be really appreciative if you could submit your notes formally to the committee so that we could look at them in more detail.

One of the first things that you mentioned is that the world is changing very quickly, and I think some museums can be slow to change, but they're always trying to find ways to stay relevant. You also mentioned that there's an aging population for most museums. We're looking at the state of museums in Canada, but we're also looking at how the federal government can be helpful.

When you have an aging audience, I think you're always trying to build an audience 30 years from now, 50 years from now, and there's probably some data that you need to do that. It would be important, as well, to know the state of play of what's happening in the world.

What type of data can the federal government help gather that might be beneficial to the museum sector, and particularly for museums like MOCA?

[Heidi Reitmaier]

When I speak, I speak predominantly from a visual arts, contemporary arts museum perspective, so I have to keep qualifying that. I come from a learning and public programs education background.

There has been a lot of work with youth programming and youth development, and integration within the schools. A great piece of work has been done by the Whitney Museum, ICA Boston, and LACMA in L.A. It's called “Room to Rise”, and it looks at the impact of youth and how to cultivate a youth audience, and also the application of 21st-century skills.

I think what's interesting about contemporary art is that it allows the possibility of increasing curiosity, increasing leadership skills, and certainly in my previous work I've seen how that impact can lead to kids becoming better scientists or better artists.

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

I need to focus your answers. Can we gather some data at the national level that would be helpful, in attracting new audiences?

[Heidi Reitmaier]

I think the impact is looking at teen programs across the country and understanding the impact those teens have had in changing audiences inside museums, but also where those teens have gone and what skills they've learned inside museums, and how that's impacted their higher education.

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

That's helpful.

You also talked a little about government helping facilitate collaborations across different sectors, and that government can gather data on best practices.

Can you elaborate on that very quickly?

[Heidi Reitmaier]

One of the struggles museums have, because we're always limited in resources and we're also limited in our skill sets, is to understand what best practices are happening.

We're fascinated by Disney, Google, and Starbucks loyalty programs. Those programs are transferable into the work we're doing in museums.

If the federal government could help us, through creating a network where we can understand what practices are going on across the country, and then also by setting up systems where we can exchange and collaborate with industry, that would be incredibly helpful. If we're doing something on, let's say, visitor experience and visitor satisfaction, having a connection with Starbucks Canada would be incredibly useful. They're usually ahead of the field for us, because they have the resources to invest in developing new ideas and best practice.

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

That's excellent.

One of the things I think MOCA does fairly well is that you have a nice mix between private and public funding, and then going out to your membership. In general, because we're looking at the state of museums across Canada, is there anything else the federal government can do to help leverage the private sector, to get them more engaged within the cultural and artistic industry in Canada?

[Heidi Reitmaier]

I'm going to qualify this by saying I've only been back in the country four months and I came from a place like Chicago, which obviously has a completely different history of philanthropy, so I might not know what you can do. But donors should understand that when they invest, they're not investing in single institutions and to think more broadly about how they're investing in ecosystems.

In our case in Toronto, giving money to the AGO doesn't prevent you from giving money to MOCA. There might be different numbers, but donors must understand that it's important. It's our job to figure out what we can provide for them and give back, but I think donors must know it's important to give, and that in giving, they're investing in a larger ecosystem.

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Okay. Thank you.

Lastly, you're right. We have heard quite a bit about the lack of pipeline in terms of developing talent within the sector. You've mentioned a number of amazing programs in the United States as well as a mentorship program. I wonder if you could elaborate maybe on some key aspects that you think the federal government should be focused on and supporting.