Thank you, Chair.
I thank my colleague Mr. Casey for shedding light on this.
Look, when we do a process and we don't consult veterans and we don't consult the stakeholders in it, the product you get might be artistically great, but it won't be something that people want. The previous government and the previous minister for veterans decided to put a monument under a bridge and tuck it away where only cyclists could possibly drive by and wave to it. The opposite was done when, as an article said, “The victims of communism get a huge, glorious spot on Wellington Street—for the whole world to see—and those who served or died in Afghanistan get a spot below the Portage Bridge for cyclists to wave at.” Veterans were in an uproar. They said they didn't get it; they didn't get it at all.
But this was done, and if you look at who was conversed with, at who knew, they said it was virtually no one.
We checked with several veterans’ groups and none said they were consulted about this spot as an appropriate location to honour the 158 Canadian Forces members killed and the 40,000 who served during the 12-year mission.
The Royal Canadian Legion said it didn’t know a thing about it, except that Dow’s Lake was once a candidate.
Bruce Moncur, president of the year-old Afghanistan Veterans Association of Canada, said his group was not contacted. He’s not entirely sold on the site, because it appears to be tucked away.
“I believe accessibility is everything,” he said this week. “If it is too far off the beaten track, pretty soon you can see the dandelions creeping in and skateboarders doing tricks off it, and the jogger running by and not looking at it twice. It might be like the war itself, another forgotten war.”
These were the comments that the Veterans Affairs office and the public heard after the previous decision was made. The main problem they had was that they were not consulted. They were not consulted on the final product, on the commemoration of the sacrifices or on the location.
That's why, in May 2021, the Government of Canada posted a survey. They asked veterans, families of those who participated in the mission, Canadian Armed Forces members, other stakeholders and the Canadian public to share their thoughts on the design concepts proposed by the following five finalists: team Daoust, team Hapa Collaborative, team Lashley MacDonald, team PFS Studio and team Stimson.
In terms of results, 12,048 valid surveys were analyzed, 10,829 in English and 1,219 in French. In cases where multiple surveys were submitted from the same IP address and were deemed to be overly similar, all but one survey was removed. We can say that it was a fairly free vote and no manipulation occurred in that regard.
The questions were pretty thorough. The first question was on “monument theme”. Each respondent could select more than one answer. As a result, percentages may have added up to more than 100%, but you got to see how people felt about each. The monument had several related themes. You were asked which designs you thought most effectively expressed those themes. You were able to select the theme appropriate for you.
On the theme “To express Canada’s deep gratitude for the sacrifices made by Canadians who served in Afghanistan, including those Canadian Armed Forces members and civilians who lost their lives or were injured”, there were 11,807 respondents. Team Daoust got 26.5%. The people surveyed thought that reflected it well. Team Hapa Collaborative got 13%. Team Lashley MacDonald got 20.5%. Team PFS Studio got 16.8%. Team Stimson got 63.9%, or 64%, more than double that for the closest, team Daoust at 26.5%. It was two and a half times the response.
The next question that was asked with respect to the teams was, “To recognize the strong support offered by families, friends and communities at home during the mission.” Again, of the 11,299 people who responded, 27% thought team Daoust had the best in that regard, 15.5% thought it was team Hapa Collaborative, 17% thought it was team Lashley MacDonald and 14% thought it was team PFS Studio. Team Stimson got 52%, which was double the amount of the closest one to reflect on that.
When we go to “To acknowledge the efforts of Canadians in standing together with the Afghan people to help rebuild their country and encourage understanding of the significance and scope of Canada’s mission in Afghanistan”, again, of 11,500 people—these are pretty comprehensive surveys, I might add, with a very strong response—31% were for team Daoust, 13% were for Hapa Collaborative, and team Stimson was at 56%, which, again, virtually doubled the second-highest amount.
The second thing, besides commemoration, is how many people will see it and what the visitor experience is. There were questions with respect to which design “effectively performs the following Visitor Experience functions”. Again, over 11,500 responded. Team Daoust got a good response of 37%. Others were 19%, 19.5% and 22%, but team Stimson got 54% of the response in favour of it giving the best visitor experience when one came to see it.
The other question was about encouraging visitors to learn more about the mission. For museums and commemoration, an important thing to do is raise the inquisitiveness of a visitor to learn about what has happened and what is being commemorated. Again, out of the 11,334, team Daoust got 22.8%. I won't go into the other ones, but they range between 12% and 18%. Team Stimson got 65%. There were 65% who thought it gave more of a visitor experience.
There's the setting, which provides for gatherings and ceremonies. That's a very important part. Team Daoust got a good response of 40%. Others were 12%, 27% and 13%, but again, team Stimson stood out with 51.9%.
These effectively show that the effect of the design by team Stimson on the visitors, location and commemoration had an overwhelming impact. It wasn't even close when we look at the others.
The other questions were on impressions of the proposed monument design. Was one more cold, more peaceful or more solemn? Again, team Stimson's design showed a very high result in that regard.
When we look at the French results—I assume that a particularly high majority would have come from Quebec to reflect those—the results were not any different from those that came from anglophone Canadians and other parts of Canada. I think this clearly reflects that these were neutral designs. They were great designs. However, some attested to people's feelings, affections and responses more. That was always the team Stimson design.
Even finding out how many of these were from the national capital region—because sometimes people from my neck of the woods will say it's a little biased—I think only 2,700 responses came from this region. That's obviously still a high veteran population. The Ontario and Quebec population also would have had a strong government, bureaucratic and military presence. That was about 25%.
British Columbia received 1,084 responses. That's 13.64%. I think that is quite reflective of our population with respect to the rest of the Canada, so it seems like the diversity and the demographics of Canada were respected well. Alberta had 1,200, which was 15%. In fact, I'd say that's a bit overly representative. When you go across the spectrum, including Atlantic Canada, I think it was fairly [Technical difficulty—Editor], so all provinces, all jurisdictions and all demographics were respected.
Lastly, I would like to say that, when it came to the category of.... There's a lot of debate and there are a lot of questions that this committee has looked at in terms of how many were veterans and whatnot. When people were asked whether they participated in Canada's government mission in Afghanistan, as a Canadian Armed Forces member, police officer, public servant or civilian, 28% or 3,000 of the respondents stated they did. When they were asked whether they were a “family member of an individual who participated in Canada's whole-of-government mission”, which included CAF members, police officers, public servants or civilians, there was another 12.5%, or 1,300 members. The third-highest category was for veterans of Canada's military—again, people who have served: 26%, or 2,800, stated they were. Asked if they were current members of the Canadian Armed Forces, 2,500 or 23% were serving Canadian Armed Forces members. About 300 were current or former Canadian police officers, whom we respect like veterans. The general public was about a third, 3,876.
I think this gives you the perspective that this was not a small consultation. It was not a small poll. This was a very comprehensive study.
I think we should move on with the wishes of the veterans and get to the real work, which is building this monument.