Veterans Affairs Committee on June 17th, 2010

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

That will have to be it.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

Those medals are of significant importance to our country--

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

You're way over, Mr. Storseth. Thank you.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

Mr. Chair, it's--

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

I'm sorry about that, Mr. Storseth.

Mr. Vincent, you have three minutes.

[Robert Vincent, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

This is for Mr. Griffis.

You said that medals have a historical and personal value. Some of those medals are passed down to grandchildren. The medals are from conflicts that happened 50 years ago or even the First World War, which took place nearly 100 years ago. The medals have been passed down from generation to generation. A number of them have disappeared from the radar.

You mentioned a tax benefit. You can give someone a tax credit for a Victoria Cross medal that sells for $240,000, but if the great-grandson does not pay taxes, it has absolutely no effect. If he can get $150,000 for it on the parallel market, we will never see that medal again: it will fall off the radar.

So there is no incentive for the owners of these medals to protect them and give them to a museum. An equivalent measure is necessary in order to get these medals in the hands of the museums. I do not think a tax credit is a way to do that. I see that as a real problem. I am not sure how we can fix that or what steps should be taken. That is my first question.

My second question is this. You talked about artifacts. That includes not only medals, but also badges and other things. I would like to have that list. It would help me demonstrate and promote this measure to people in my riding, to the Canadian legion or the owners of the artifacts, to try to recover them somehow to give them to a museum.

It would be helpful to be able to tell people which objects are worth the most. Sometimes people keep these things stored in their basement or elsewhere, thinking they are not worth anything. But those objects could be worth something to a museum. It would be helpful to be able to tell people that all those objects have a probative value to a museum, and it would be appreciated if they would give them to the museum. Every member could get the word out in their riding.

[Mark O'Neill]

Thank you for that suggestion, Mr. Vincent. I just want to point out that most of the medals have been given to a museum. That has been our experience with the people in the country who have medals: most of the medals are always given to a museum.

Every Canadian understands the significance of the objects they possess. They know there are museums to protect our culture and collective history.

[Robert Vincent, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

When the medal makes it way down to the fourth generation, it is a lot less meaningful. They know the medal belonged to their great-grandfather, but they do not know why he was given the medal. So it can end up in a flea market or elsewhere. People figure it must be worth something, and if they can get $5 for it, they are happy.

That is what I mean. We need to identify the value of these objects.

[Mark O'Neill]

I understand.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Thank you, Monsieur Vincent.

Thank you very much, Mr. O'Neill and Mr. Whitham, for your great work at the War Museum. I think you've heard commendation from many of my colleagues here for the great work you do.

Of course, Mr. Griffis, we appreciate your service, as we've said on occasions before, but we also appreciate your service to veterans as well. I want to thank you very much.

You can be excused now. We're just going to go into some brief business. I'm certain that I'll have to call people back to get that done.

Mr. Vincent.

[Robert Vincent, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

We received the report. Would it be possible to get more copies?

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Yes, sir.

[Robert Vincent, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Very good, thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

All right.

Most of the members are still here at the table, so let me just mention that Madam Sgro spoke to me before she left. There was some concern around the title of the report. That's why I said I'll probably make this comment and you'll want to comment.

First, I think you should understand that because of the haste in which we did the report and the fact that we really had to burn the midnight oil to do it--and I got it this morning, just before I needed to get it to the House--that is why we didn't have a lot of dialogue. And there were no comments as far as the title when we did the routine motions. I wanted to let you know that there was some concern and there were some issues.

If anybody wants to comment, go ahead.

Mr. Oliphant.

[Rob Oliphant, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

As mentioned, on behalf of Madam Sgro, I'll say that when we saw the title we were surprised. We just think it trivializes the report a little bit. It's a bit of a lightweight title. I think the title is a bit better in French than in English. I think “A Timely Tune-Up” doesn't honour the weighty evidence we heard from the witnesses. They were looking for more than a tune-up.

I think “A Review of the Living Charter” would have been better. We just wanted to record that we were a little disappointed in that title.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

It has been tabled in the House, so I believe the report in its entirety is set in stone now. You couldn't change it. But please do let everybody know that if they have that perception of the title, certainly the content of it is not lightweight at all.

Mr. Stoffer.

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

I understand what Ms. Sgro has been saying, but at the same time, I thought it was a good title, to be honest with you. A tune-up means it's ongoing. It's a living document.

I certainly appreciate Mr. Oliphant's stance on the fact that this is a serious study on a very serious issue, and an issue that won't go away, by the way. It will continue. We will be having more of these discussions. As long as we're members of Parliament, as long as this committee is alive, this charter and the care of veterans and their families will always continue.

I think it's not too bad.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Thank you, Mr. Stoffer.

Monsieur André.

[Guy André, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

I do not necessarily have a problem with the title of the charter. I think the next time, we could perhaps discuss it before it is tabled in the House. That is all.

As for the rest, the title is not a problem. With respect to the procedure, perhaps we could discuss it the next time. That is all.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Yes. Again, the haste of the need to get it in, in case we rose, was the key thing in that, but I'll take your comments. I'll make sure to caution the committee if nobody brings it up next time.

Mr. Stoffer.

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

Just as a side note, Mr. Chairman, I just very quickly spoke to Greg, the parliamentary secretary. Is it all possible if we could arrange a day in the future...? Mr. Whitham indicated that there's a behind the scenes tour of the War Museum, which many people don't get to see. I think that would be very exciting, not only on this bill and to ascertain how it all works, but to see it as a committee together in the future.

[Greg Kerr, Conservative, West Nova, NS]

Could I just comment?

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Sure.

[Greg Kerr, Conservative, West Nova, NS]

By all means, this is really worthwhile. Of course, I was there because of the PC, but their process is something that every MP should see and certainly every member of the committee.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

I'll direct the clerk that at an appropriate time we'll use a meeting to have a tour.