Canadian Heritage Committee on March 1st, 2018

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

Okay.

Another suggestion we get is that there are too many museums, that we should look at ways of consolidating resources, consolidating museums, or finding ways to have things done collectively. Is there a role for the government or the museums association to do that, to find ways of smoothing those kinds of processes to assist the viability of museums facing tough times?

[Gail Lord]

We're a very big country with a very small population scattered across this big country. That's true of the north, but really it's true of everywhere in this country.

When you get into the issue of are there too many museums, I hate to say it's a little bit like saying are there too many post offices. I think we have to balance the human return, the social return, the bridging and the bonding against the economic. Are there too many schools?

Of course, where possible, there should be incentives for people to rationalize. I think museums could benefit from provincial programs for mass purchases so as with might happen in the drug industry in the future, for example, there would be an incentive that they can purchase materials, ticketing systems, whatever they need, on a group basis rather than each one negotiating for services that, in fact, they all need.

I think maybe the health sector is a good example. Somehow the federal government did manage to take a big leadership role in defining what health means to Canadians and making sure that happens. I do think museums are part of the mental health of Canadians, and that the federal government needs to leave it that way.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

I'm going to have to cut it there. I think that's a good place to leave it, though. You might continue it later.

We will continue with Mr. Nantel, who has seven minutes.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Ms. Lord, do you hear the interpretation? We didn't hear you, but, from the look on your face, I think you did.

I'll speak in English, just to make sure.

Actually, no, because I will have to cite the study.

The mandate of the study is to review the state of Canadian museums, with a focus on local and community museums, as opposed to the major national or provincial museums, and that the committee report its findings to the House.

Madam Lord, we have people from the Inuit Heritage Trust here. If they had the opportunity to ask from you some support, some recommendations for an actual place, a venue, a museum, where they could have their own artifacts to show to their own people, and to show to tourists, and to show to me if I go there and have the opportunity to see in context, what would you recommend? I think you're a specialist, and you have a community awaiting for some infrastructure. What would you recommend to them?

[Gail Lord]

Thank you very much.

The first point is that we actually have a book that started with national museums, which explains in detail how to plan a museum. I'm going to send Eva Aariak a book. They can look at it. It's 800 pages long. Anyway, it's used all over the world. Let's do that.

You know, for Nunavut, it's very important that they right-size this. I think she has a very good grasp, from what she already said, of what they need. She's given us a list of what they need. Our job would probably be to go help make that list, I would say streamline that list: doing the calculations of how much climate-controlled space they need to look after the objects, to research the objects, and then the space about displaying, and then, of course, the community space to make sure that they don't, I would say, become like what happens in a family. You know, you buy a house and it's too big for your family, and you can't afford the mortgage. This is one issue that we would really try to work with them on, which is what I would call right-sizing, but I think she understands very well what the needs are.

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

Merci, madame Lord.

Ms. Aariak and Mr. Beveridge, would you agree that rightsizing is a key issue?

On the second point, how do you perceive the project called Qaggiavuut? I hope we have witnesses on it in the cultural hub study that we will do. For example, yesterday I was at the Walrus Talks at the BAC, with Mr. Casey. Libraries and/or museums can act as social hubs for various interactions, thematics, discussions, and gatherings. How do you react to Ms. Lord's proposal? Please tell me your impressions about the Qaggiavuut project.

[Eva Aariak]

In terms of planning these kinds of things, I have a PowerPoint presentation. It's too bad we couldn't do it here, but you will be getting a copy of what we have planned so far in terms of narrowing it down and the financing, the possibilities. This is something we have been continually working with. William and the department of culture and heritage have been working on that as well, in terms of what is needed. I think we have a very good grasp. Even a location for the building has already been identified, and the size of the building, and so on, if only we had the funds to realize it.

It is such an important entity, because everything is connected to education and cultural knowledge. We have gone as far as to plan to have elders as interpreters of our artifacts and so on, because we have in our communities such knowledgeable people today. It is urgent that we use the first-hand knowledge of these elders to interpret rather than relying on written texts to try to interpret. We have the people who know the artifacts and everything, who are out there still, but the time is ticking to utilize their expertise.

You mentioned Qaggiavuut. They have come to our board meeting to present what they are looking for. We do support their important role, because this is cultural activity as well, but at the same time—Madame Lord mentioned the plan and so on—we have the plan and we are very much waiting to see Qaggiavuut's plan in terms of how the building would look and what would be in it. Of course it's very important for Nunavut.

This cultural centre is to be in one location but supporting the other 24 communities. A lot of planning has gone into this, and we are now in the discussion of financial requirements and so on.

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

I think it would be up to potential digital coverage of the north and then back to Ms. Lord's aspect of the balance between digital and physical.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

Thank you, Mr. Nantel.

It's now Mr. Breton's turn, who has seven minutes.

[Pierre Breton, Liberal, Shefford, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you to our guests.

First of all, I want to speak to you, Ms. Lord. I am impressed with your skills and expertise with museums. I also congratulate you on the various honours you've received over the years. It is all quite impressive. I would like the museums in my constituency to know of you. In fact, I will introduce you to them. So, if they need your expertise, they can seek out your services.

Could you talk about the three most significant challenges museums face, whether it is the museums of today, or the museums of tomorrow? In my opinion, money is clearly a challenge, but, besides that, please tell me about three other major challenges museums face.

[Gail Lord]

Many, many thanks for your questions. It is a challenge.

I keep stressing the need for federal policy. Our competitors in the U.K. or in France or anywhere in the world—the United States, although the United States less so—particularly in the U.K., set a high bar for what they expect from their museums. I think it's time for our leaders nationally to say that museums have the potential to change society, to change the world. Museums are change agents. Museums are part of Canada's soft power. We have to have national leadership that places museums....

Health is the one big thing that defines Canada. We care about health. It developed over many years. This very much defines us and places us in a special place in the world with some other leading economies. I think the same thing has to happen with museums. The first challenge is federally set a high bar for performance federally. Whether people can afford it or not is almost irrelevant to setting the bar. Right now it's a kind of race to the bottom for community museums. I would except Quebec from that, where I think community museums do better. I think there are some reasons for that, which the rest of the country should learn from.

The second, of course, is that we need some form of more sustainable funding. The federal entity is the museums assistance program. That has been underfunded for 30 years. I have to say that my husband, Barry Lord, worked for that program. Our company is almost like a result of that program. When we had a robust museums assistance program, we had a robust international reputation for museums at all levels in our country because there was a more consistent funding base. Today we live in a different world. Funding needs to be private and public, but we need to have some kind of a national program that shows leadership in that.

The third area is leadership development. We have a national theatre school in Montreal. We have other initiatives in the country, but we are not really leading in the area of national leadership. Canadian lawyers lead the world in jurisprudence and especially in constitutional law because we have the benefit of biculturalism and multiculturalism. I think in our museums we have lost so much ground. We have the benefit of multiculturalism; we have the benefit of biculturalism; and we have the big benefit of indigenous people. We should be leaders, but instead we're frankly not.

Those are three things: national policy—set a high bar—private-public funding with a secure funding base, and invest in leadership. Otherwise it'll be brain drain. It already is.

[Pierre Breton, Liberal, Shefford, QC]

This is extremely interesting.

Earlier, in answering a question, you said that public investments should not be the only type of investment museums should count on, since there are also private investors.

Are you able to tell us, for each dollar invested by the government, how many are invested by the private sector? Are there studies on the topic? Can you share an experience with us that would give us more information on this?

[Gail Lord]

That's a great question, and it varies somewhat by community. I don't think there's a one-size-fits-all ratio. I can say, though, that the most inefficient way of raising money is through admission charges. Admission charges are costly to administer. They only bring in 10% to 12% of revenue, and they keep so many people away. That's very inefficient.

Corporate sponsorship is extremely efficient. More people coming in for free leads to more corporate sponsorship. Individual wealth is very efficient. It's about looking at each situation and finding the most efficient way to bring in that private money. The Canadian Museum for Human Rights is a good example, frankly, on the capital side, as is the fact that fundraising is important for them in an ongoing way.

[Pierre Breton, Liberal, Shefford, QC]

Museums are increasingly calling on volunteers to get help for their activities, and lower their costs. This obviously allows the public to contribute, and rallies people with an interest in museums.

[Gail Lord]

Yes, of course.

[Pierre Breton, Liberal, Shefford, QC]

Do you suggest models of that kind to your clients? How is this more generally done?

[Gail Lord]

Yes, there is a general model. The general model is one-third earned, and that's the category to earn money, so that's earning from a lot of things. Currently, the biggest way of earning money is through rental of space. You know we live in a world in which real estate is king, or queen, and frankly museum real estate is particularly valuable. It has a big impact on the real estate around it, and we forget the economic benefits in a very visceral way.

One third earned—

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

I'm going to have to cut you off there, unfortunately.

[Gail Lord]

Okay, one third earned, one third contributed, one third government, one third, one third, one third.

[Pierre Breton, Liberal, Shefford, QC]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

We are going to Mr. Van Loan, please, for five minutes.

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

Thank you.

One of the witnesses we were hoping to have—or at least I was hoping to have here—but I don't think we're going to get, is Mr. Jimenez, who's a contributor to your book, Cities, Museums and Soft Power, and to your organization. I'm interested in the question of economic impact. It's very hard to find stuff. If I'm looking for sports stadium stuff, it's easy to find, but museum stuff is very hard to find.

The other question is a more general one: what are the museums that are successful in Canada doing right, that the museums that are not successful in Canada are not doing?

[Gail Lord]

Okay. Thank you for referring to Javier. He's in Mexico right now where we're working on many museum projects there. I think that's important in terms of our economic development.

The data, we'll be glad to send you what we have, which is international data on economic impacts and benefits. It comes from all over and it's poorly understood. I think the economic impacts in Canada should be looked at. We have been involved in studies on the economic impact of libraries, but I think the economic impact of museums is something that needs to be understood a lot better in our own country.

The second part of your question, sir, I'm sorry, I got lost there?

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

What are the museums that are successful in Canada doing right, that the museums that are not successful are not doing?

[Gail Lord]

That's really hard. Museums in Canada today are not performing at their peak capacity. That's the fact, and it's because they lack the three challenges that I was referring to before. For example, the Canadian Museum for Human Rights is still new. It's doing well. It has fundraising initiatives across the country, and it's very motivated by personal and corporate financing. It's beginning to make a name for itself.

Our bigger museums are doing better with financing, but in a certain sense I would have to say—with government slipping so low and the huge responsibilities they bear—they're also losing out because they're not as effective in the community way. You know, we have a situation in which nobody is perhaps performing as well as they should.

Remember when our hospitals weren't performing? We're kind of in that place with museums. Now our hospitals are performing well.