Debates of April 17th, 2008

Airline Passenger Bill of Rights

[The Acting Speaker, Royal Galipeau]

The time provided for the consideration of private members' business has now expired and the order is dropped to the bottom of the order of precedence on the order paper.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I wish to address this evening the matter of the exhibition transportation service program that was eliminated by the current government just a few days ago.

At the outset, I should ensure people understand that these are comments that I am making on a personal level, not as a critic. This is a function I no longer exercise. However, I believed then and I still do believe that we are making a big mistake here.

In March of last year, the government announced that it would basically abolish the exhibition transportation service, a service that had been working since 1976 through the aegis of the Canadian Conservation Institute and serving well over 100 institutions: galleries, exhibition centres and museums, large and small, throughout the land. It was mostly useful to ensure that works of art and exhibitions of interest to Canadians could move from larger centres, sometimes national collections from the National Gallery of Canada, and be seen throughout the land in smaller places, whether it be in the Northwest Territories, Yukon or Prince Edward Island.

The program was designed to do that and it did that very well. However, in March of last year an announcement was made, and I will quote the government document, which I would be quite prepared to table, in which Jeanne Inch, CCI director general, said:

We regret shutting down this service, and in fact, examined every option to keep it going. Unfortunately, we had no choice. It is, as one of our clients said, the end of an era.

This is where I have a problem. On November 19, I asked for a briefing from departmental officials and I did receive it. During that briefing, I asked them if they had considered one particular option. It is an option that members would be quite familiar with. In the nineties, the Government of Canada at the time had wanted to reduce the size of its public service, and there was an example that worked very well in terms of another approach.

The example was at the National Capital Commission where the people who worked at the park at the time were offered the option of creating a corporation of their own, which became Lafleur de la Capitale. They were given, on a sole-source basis, a first contract of five years, after which it would have to be renewed on a competitive basis. I believe it was once and now the corporation is working around town. It is actually doing some work on the Hill. I do not believe it has the contract anymore but it is still a going concern.

I was told at the time by the officials at Heritage that they had not thought of that and that they had not considered it. On December 6, I believe, I asked a question in the House and I was given an answer that they were working on it.

When the minister came to the committee in December, I repeated the suggestion personally to her and her deputy minister. However, it has been confirmed to me by the people at the exhibition transportation service that this was never considered and never discussed with them. I think at some point we need to start asking what the intent really was.

Did the government really want to save this useful program, which costs, not in the hundreds of millions, not even in the tens of millions and not even in the millions? It costs in the hundreds of thousands of dollars and serviced well over 100 institutions in the country and yet to no avail. The government shut it down and that is a terrible loss for--

[The Acting Speaker, Royal Galipeau]

The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and for Status of Women.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and for Status of Women]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to be here this evening on behalf of the Department of Canadian Heritage, which takes its responsibility to exhibit and preserve Canadian heritage very seriously.

A number of existing programs support museums in their presentation of Canadian heritage to the public. For example, the Canada travelling exhibition indemnification program helps Canadian museums save millions of dollars a year on the cost of insurance for travelling exhibitions. The museums assistance program provides financial assistance for the development and circulation of travelling exhibitions throughout the country.

Our government is responsible for ensuring accountability and transparency. That is why this decision was not taken lightly.

Following an audit of the Canadian Conservation Institute's financial and contracting procedures, it was found that the fine art ETS contract workers could no longer be hired under contract. The practice did not comply with Canada Revenue Agency rules for employer-employee relations.

Rest assured that we examined all options that would allow the ETS to continue operations, including hiring truckers and handlers of artwork as employees of the Government of Canada. The possibility of creating a corporation of their own, as was done at the National Capital commission some years ago, was also considered. However, the situation of the ETS is quite different from that of the NCC. The NCC was able to provide a contract that guaranteed that the NCC would provide former employees with a specific amount of work over a period of several years. In the case of the ETS, the means of transportation is decided by the museums. Thus, the Canadian Conservation Institute could not provide the same guarantee. Neither the ETS employees nor the contract truckers and handlers of artwork expressed an interest in taking over this service.

The decision to cancel the exhibition transportation service was made for operational reasons when it became obvious that there was no other option.

The Canadian Conservation Institute announced that it was cancelling this service in March 2007 so that the museum community would have one year to adjust to the use of commercial shipping for artwork.

The Canadian Conservation Institute organized a two-day workshop in order to help the museum community make cost-effective choices when planning and managing the shipping of artwork and artifacts. Free workshops were offered to all museums across Canada in the winter.

Various commercial shipping services have been available to the museum community for a long time. On April 1, the National Post wrote:

The managing director of the country's largest private art shipping company said the price differences between ETS and his company are smaller than have been reported. Mark Starling, managing director of Pacart, a Toronto-based company that specializes in the transportation of art, said private shipping prices will eventually come down as public museums use the private sector more often. Starling said his company was already lowering its charges by bundling multiple jobs together as its trucks crisscross the country and that museums will be satisfied. In fact, he had just come back from St. John's last week—

[The Acting Speaker, Royal Galipeau]

I am sorry to have to interrupt the hon. parliamentary secretary.

The hon. member for Ottawa—Vanier.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, what we have just heard basically shows a complete lack of imagination on the part of the government to try to come up with a solution. Based on the existing budget, it could have reached an agreement with those people. Incidentally, I spoke with some of them and they expressed their agreement. They were interested in doing so. I am very surprised to hear the reverse.

Thus, it shows a lack of imagination, but it also shows a fierce determination to privatize everything. There was an allusion to private services. I could give loads of examples of museums and galleries all over the country that are complaining that the cost of services that will be provided from now on is going up by 30% or more. Thus, it shows a lack of imagination, as well as a desire to let the private sector do everything.

This really shows an unwillingness when it comes to having pride in these cultural instruments and this is causing a gradual, sometimes very underhanded, dismantling of the support given to culture and our institutions—

[The Acting Speaker, Royal Galipeau]

I am sorry to have to interrupt the hon. member for Ottawa—Vanier. The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and for Status of Women.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I must admit, I find it unfortunate that the Liberal Party still refuses to respect the rules of fiscal responsibility.

As we speak, museums across the country are presenting travelling exhibitions that have been made possible thanks to the support of the Department of Canadian Heritage and the Canada Council.

The department and the council will continue to support the creation and circulation of travelling exhibitions. The decision to discontinue the exhibition transportation service was made official when it became clear that no other option could guarantee the maintenance of those services. The Canadian Conservation Institute is working closely with the museum community to ensure that museum staff have the knowledge and skills they need to take advantage of the transportation services offered by the private sector.

The institute developed special courses that have been offered to museums across the country. Seven training sessions have been presented across Canada this winter and spring.

[The Acting Speaker, Royal Galipeau]

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 6:41 p.m.)