House of Commons Hansard #257 of the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was heritage.
Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC
Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out that the hon. member for Davenport is entirely on point. It seems his party wants to make the Senate history.
The Canadian Museum of History ActGovernment Orders
The Deputy Speaker
I will address the point of order from the Minister of State for Western Economic Diversification. Given the range of debate we have had on this topic and the other bill earlier today, the member's speech, in fact, is probably a bit more relevant than some of the other speeches we have heard. There is a theme that is running through his comments that make it at least indirectly relevant. However, I would encourage him and all other members to try to address more specific points in the bill before us for debate this evening.
Andrew Cash NDP Davenport, ON
Mr. Speaker, I am referring to the public trust. When we are dealing with sensitive issues like the telling of our story and the mandate of a museum, which has been the most popular and well-attended museum in the national capital region with professionals who worked there for years and years to build up its reputation not just in Canada but internationally, it suggests that if the Conservatives are to make these changes, they better have some good reasons which would benefit all Canadians.
I bring up these issues because we see time and time again a government that lacks transparency and has no commitment to accountability. I mean, the Conservatives have lost $3.1 billion. It has fallen away somewhere and they cannot seem to find it.
I also want to talk about the way in which the bill came about. I see some hon. members across the way shaking their heads because they do not like the truth about how they spin Canadians.
We in the heritage committee were sent on a journey to study how best to celebrate Canada's 150th birthday. We interviewed countless Canadians. They said many interesting things, but never did they say that we needed to change the name of the Museum of Civilization. No one came to us and said, “Folks, you really do this. There's a real problem here”. No one ever said that, not once.
However, we did hear from many people who came before our committee from small archives and museums across the country. They said that if the government did not do something to help them out, that their archives and museums were on the verge of dying. Their curatorial workers are getting older, and the average age is well into the fifties, but because of deep cuts that the Conservative government has made to cultural industries in our country, and its contempt for the independence of third party agencies, fewer young people are going into this sector.
Now the Conservatives are telling Canadians that they are going to share this vast treasure trove of historical artifacts with all the little museums and archives across the country, but none of them have the capacity to receive that stuff. Not only that, there is no cost attached to the bill. This from the prudently fiscal government, but, oh yes, it lost $3.1 billion. I do not know if I mentioned that.
However, all of a sudden, out of thin air, the Minister of Canadian Heritage said that he found $25 million in the Department of Heritage to spend on this museum. He said that it was not coming from any other program and no other program was going to suffer. However, he does not tell us where the heck the money was in the first place. Not one time have we actually had accountability and transparency on Bill C-49.
When we start to talk about bills, especially ones that change the narrative or at least try to describe it in a different way, we want to consult with Canadians. That is what the heritage committee is supposed to do and, in fact, we did. Then, the minister, while riding his motorcycle, had a vision. His vision was to change the name and the mandate of the Museum of Civilization. Then he doubled back, maybe he popped a wheelie, drove back to Ottawa and announced that the government was changing the name of the Museum of Civilization. He announced how much money the government would spend on it. Then, after that, he proceeded to public consultation. I know I am still kind of new here, but that is a little on the backward side.
The entire $25 million one-time contribution comes directly out of the Canadian Heritage budget, but the minister has refused to explain where exactly the money comes from or what heritage programs will lose funds to finance the contribution.
This is the game of deception the government is now famous for. The Conservatives cannot find $3.1 billion. It is lost. No one can say where it is.
This is a government that guts environmental protection of our lakes, rivers and streams but spends millions on a fake lake in Toronto. It refused to support the NDP's national housing strategy, but spent millions on gazebos in Muskoka to help re-elect one of its vulnerable ministers.
In fact, the minister responsible for housing told Canadians that the issue of affordable housing had been solved, since interest rates are at historic lows and Canadians can now buy houses. This shows a complete lack of understanding of the reality of life for folks who live in Toronto, who live in my riding of Davenport, who struggle day in and day out to afford their apartments, their homes. Families cannot find suitable and affordable housing. Seniors are barely hanging on in their homes, and young people are facing an incredibly unstable future without access to full-time, stable jobs.
The government decided the change the name of the museum at a cost of $500,000. It added about $400,000 more for its bogus consultation, which happened after the fact. That is why I call it bogus. It had already made its decision. It already knew exactly what it was doing. The plan was in the minister's motorcycle satchel.
This is how things are supposed to work in the House of Commons when it is not dominated by the anti-democratic reflexes of the government. We consult Canadians. We craft legislation based on the consultation. We table legislation in the House, debate it and finally, if the legislation passes, earmark the money and spend it on the program.
The government says it is going to spend $25 million to narrow the mandate and change the name of the Museum of Civilization. It says that the money is just lying around. Where was it all this time? It spent almost $1 million on a party and a consultation process, but the consultation came after the decision had already been made. This is an insult to Canadians. However, this is what we have come to expect from Conservatives.
In Davenport, for example, and this is on the point of consultation and transparency, people are only too familiar with this lack of consultation. For 50 years after a nuclear fuel processing facility had been operating in the riding, no one who lives near it knew what was going on there. The company's operating licence, however, clearly stated that it must keep the residents informed. It did not, and the government is okay with that.
That is why Conservatives have refused my request, on behalf of the community, to reopen the licence to give residents their lawful opportunity to participate in the process of public information.
Cultural communities and citizens of varied backgrounds came to us at the heritage committee. They talked about their stories and their concern about a dominant culture in which there is no space for them to talk about their issues and their history.
With its one-sided and triumphalist approach, the museum of history could run the risk of presenting a monolithic vision of Canadian history, unrepresentative of its diversity. This is particularly of concern to me. More than half of all residents of Toronto were not born in Canada. Their stories, their struggles, their triumphs, their hopes and their fears are the lifeblood that courses through the veins of Toronto. Immigrants' stories are heroic stories.
Recently I had the honour of being present at a ceremony marking 60 years of Portuguese immigration to Canada. The history of the Portuguese in Canada, particularly, in Toronto, is incredible. It is built on hard work, fidelity to family, love of home country, and a deep faith and commitment to Canada. It is a story of the collective achievements of a community, many members of which came to Canada with very little and contributed so much.
Will this story be told in Canada's museum of history? Will the great stories of Canada's multinational, multi-ethnic immigrant community have a place there? Will it be up to the whim of the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages and his buddies on the board?
There are many stories and many parts of our history that many Canadians have little trust the government would be interested in presenting at this history museum.
The fact that we are even discussing whether the Conservatives would be interested in them underlines the real problem of independence. We know already that the Conservatives have tried time and again to interfere with the independence of cultural agencies.
We have great stories. We have troubling stories too. We have stories of the history of feminism in Canada, for example. We have the tragic story of the Komagata Maru. We have the On to Ottawa Trek. We have the story of Norman Bethune, for example; the Riel rebellion; the story of co-operatives in Canada, which is a phenomenal story; and of course, the story of the first peoples of Canada.
There is concern, not just here on this side of the House but across the country, that the government has a very narrow vision of what is Canadian history and that the Conservatives want to prescribe in this new museum a vision of Canadian history that is not the full picture. That is the concern. There is very little the Conservatives have said during this debate to allay the fears of many.
Some people may think that some of these concerns about telling the stories of new Canadians and immigrants are misplaced. However, when we look at the Conservative record on immigration, for example, we have a lot to be concerned about. While the New Democrats want to reunite more families in Canada, the Conservatives' radical overhaul of Canada's immigration system is turning this country into a less welcoming place, making it even harder for families to reunite in Canada with overseas spouses, children, parents and grandparents.
Here is what the Conservatives are asking families to face: waits as long as nine years to reunite with loved ones; a misguided two-year freeze on reunification applications for parents and grandparents; and arbitrary rejection of visitors visas, with no chance for appeal, preventing many family members from attending weddings and even funerals. Meanwhile, instead of welcoming skilled immigrants to address Canada's long-term economic needs, the Conservatives are prioritizing temporary work visas to help big business pay lower wages.
This is no way to build our country or our communities. If we want to grow a 21st century economy, we will need to attract the best and the brightest from around the world. Making family reunification a central priority in our immigration system is one of the ways to go.
This is part of the context in which we are debating this bill. If we do not have a sense that the Conservative government will play a hands-off role in cultural agencies, and if we do not have a sense that it understands the importance of families and family reunification in our immigration system, how can we trust them to allow the full story of who we are as a country to come out in this new formulation of the Museum of Civilization?
The bill would closely follow the Conservative attempt to interfere with history as taught in classrooms, clearly interfering in provincial jurisdiction. We have heard these comments tonight about the apparent lack of attention to history in Canadian schools. Sometimes some of these members should perhaps consider running provincially, because that is a provincial jurisdiction.
This spring, Conservatives on the heritage committee attempted to study history in provincial classroom curricula, focusing on battles in military history.
We understand the need for a balanced rendering of history devoid of any political interference. Too often, though, we have seen the current government reach into cultural institutions and attempt to compromise their independence. In fact, the Conservative cabinet, if Bill C-60 passes, will attempt to dictate rates of pay for non-unionized workers and terms for collective agreements at many cultural agencies, including the CBC and the Museum of Civilization, or as it will soon be called, the museum of Canadian history.
For the Conservatives, it is always a race to the bottom, though, on the environment, on ethics, on transparency in government and, most importantly, on wages.
The government is ideologically committed to pushing wages down, breaking unions and privatizing key cultural institutions. This ideology fails the people of Canada and Toronto and urban workers in cities across the country. Almost 50% of all workers in Toronto cannot find full-time, stable employment. They work part time, freelance, on contract or are self-employed. They have no access to benefits, workplace pensions or job security.
Our cultural institutions are not only the repository, the incubator and the teller of our shared stories. They contribute enormously to our local and national economy, providing employment to hundreds of thousands of Canadians. In fact, the arts and culture sector contributes between $60 billion and $80 billion of GDP to the Canadian economy. However, when key employers, such as the CBC and the NFB, are cut to the bone, life gets much harder for workers in the cultural sector.
We need to frame this debate in the context of other cuts that have happened to cultural agencies. When the government talks about its interest in sharing Canadian history, a community of librarians and archivists right across the country scratch their heads.
Since coming to power, the Conservatives have incessantly targeted Library and Archives Canada, a federal institution and the keeper of our collective memory. They have imposed modifications and irreversible consequences on our knowledge and perception of Canadian history, firing half of Library and Archives Canada digitization staff, cutting staff in charge of document preservation and conservation and eliminating the interlibrary loan program, which provides access for all Canadians to their national library collections.
These are the kinds of cuts that underline the fact that the Conservative government has done the most to prevent access to Canadian history since the $450-million cut to the CBC by the Liberal Party in the nineties.
We need to focus on maintaining the independence of these agencies. We need to stop wasting taxpayers' money. We need to introduce much more transparency so that Canadians understand where the money is coming from and how it is spent and that their history is not going to be dictated by ministers of the Conservative government.
Lynne Yelich ConservativeMinister of State (Western Economic Diversification)
Mr. Speaker, in defence of the Minister of Canadian Heritage in asking where the taxpayer dollars are coming from, I will quote him from yesterday. He said, “How many more NDP MPs are not paying their taxes?” and he said “...the NDP will come clean on how many MPs are avoiding paying their taxes”.
The minister has been very transparent about how important this is, and he asked people yesterday to pay their taxes. That is how he is going to get it. It might be incremental, but he will be getting money for the museum.
Andrew Cash NDP Davenport, ON
Mr. Speaker, I am not sure if the member asked a question or answered one that no one was asking. The member's supposed question did not actually get to the point. The point is this: Where did this money come from? Where is the $3.1 billion? How can a government spend $50 million on gazeboes just to get a minister re-elected? That is what Canadians want to know.
Canadians want to know how the chief of staff to the Prime Minister can cut a personal cheque for $90,000 to a senator who is under a cloud of suspicion for inappropriate expenses to the taxpayer. That is the kind of issue that underlines the lack of trust Canadians have when the government starts reaching into cultural institutions and mucking about, which is what it is doing here.
Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC
Mr. Speaker, I understand the member for Davenport's cynicism about the museum of history. However, I am prepared to vote for this.
I would agree with the member about the record of the Conservative administration. One of the first moves it made in relation to museums was to cut the free truck service that delivered exhibits in climate controlled vehicles, taking exhibits from one part of the country to the other without cost to museums. We have reason for skepticism.
We all know that in history, history is written by the victors. As Winston Churchill once said, “History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it”. It is not the first time people have been worried about politicians writing history that is favourable to them.
I would like the hon. member to explain to me why he is concerned that there will be political interference when the legislation, as I read it, provides independence for the curators of the museum from political interference.
Andrew Cash NDP Davenport, ON
Mr. Speaker, the reason that I am skeptical is because it does not matter what is written in the legislation; the government is going to do whatever the heck it wants to do.
Pierre Nantel NDP Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, QC
Mr. Speaker, I greatly appreciated the allusion my colleague made in his speech to the fact that we can actually be surprised that this government claims to like history so much, when the Conservatives have recently dismissed close to 84% of archaeologists.
I would like to tell my colleague that on the Museum of Civilization's website, there is a description that says a lot about the museum's current mandate. It gives us the feeling that our country's history is already very well represented in the Canada Hall.
Does he not think that all this debate and all this discussion is pointless, because if they had simply agreed to roll out the red carpet for the current exhibition in the museum's Canada Hall from the beginning, we would all have agreed with this wonderful initiative?
The problem is that they want to completely redo the historical narrative that is already housed in the museum right now. He should go and see it.
Andrew Cash NDP Davenport, ON
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. colleague for the question and also for his fantastic work as vice-chair of the heritage committee.
It is important to underline that this museum is already a jewel in the crown of Canadian culture. As usual, the Conservatives are looking to fix a problem that does not exist. However, in this particular case, the problem is their problem. The problem is that they want to redefine the way we relate to our cultural institutions and redefine that relationship so that it flows their way, to them.
This is a government that is intent on muzzling scientists and librarians, for goodness' sake. It is, in fact, a government intent on muzzling Canadian voters as per scandal upon scandal in the last election.
Joy Smith Conservative Kildonan—St. Paul, MB
Mr. Speaker, as we approach the 150th anniversary of Canada, what a unique opportunity this is to showcase our great country and our great history.
I know from being a teacher for 23 years that, in many of our schools across the country, our history has not been taught. There have been so many other subjects that were very important. Some of the students cannot even name the prime ministers of Canada. This is an opportunity for small museums and people in different places to be able to get to see exhibits that they never had the opportunity to see before.
I cannot understand why, in the House, we hear all this rhetoric going back and forth off-topic about this wonderful museum. Can the member explain to me why he cannot support Canadians learning more about their history and enjoying this opportunity, approaching the 150th anniversary, to showcase Canada as the great country it is?
Andrew Cash NDP Davenport, ON
Mr. Speaker, great countries usually have great democratic traditions, to which they hold tight and which they fight to protect. That is what a great country does.
What we see here with this piece of legislation is that the democratic process was turned upside down. In fact, this was a decision made arbitrarily by the Minister of Canadian Heritage. That should concern the member and it should concern the member's constituents. If we do not stand up in the House, fighting for the democratic ideas and ideals that Canadians hold dear, then we have got a serious problem.
The Conservative government has a serious problem. It is not committed to democracy the way that Canadians believe our Parliament should be committed to it.
Ted Hsu Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
Mr. Speaker, I rise to ask a question because I am little concerned with the word my hon. colleague from the government side just used, “showcase”.
I do understand it is important to show the world, the people in the country, and our young people the great things about our country and our history. However, one of the valuable things about history is the ability to learn from our mistakes and to admit our mistakes. If we simply use the word “showcase”, we may be potentially not reaping the maximum benefit of remembering our history.
I was wondering what my hon. colleague thinks about that.
Andrew Cash NDP Davenport, ON
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for his question and his contribution to this debate and so many debates in this House where he comports himself with a great amount of decorum.
The issue here is that Canadian history is vast and deep. Some of it is controversial. Some of it means important things to some groups of Canadians and different things to others. The last thing we need here is to have politicians reaching into our cultural institutions. The last thing we need is to have these things become politicized and attached to the politics of the day.
I also want to just underline that there is nothing in this bill that suggests that this great sharing of Canadian history, which I would argue the government is not committed to, is actually going to happen.
They are all going to have to back to their ridings and explain the government's complete and utter failure to deliver on this, because it is going to cost a lot more than $25 million to share this history, especially given the fact that so many archives and museums across the country are short-staffed and do not have the capacity.
Joyce Bateman Conservative Winnipeg South Centre, MB
Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley.
It is my pleasure to speak today to Bill C-49, the Canadian Museum of History Act. Our government recognizes the vital role that museums play in our cultural landscape. We have supported them consistently even during the period of economic uncertainty the world has just been through. During that difficult period, some governments chose to make severe cuts in their support for culture, but we chose another path. Our government is one of the few in the world to have refused to withdraw its support for arts and culture during the global recession. Instead, we chose to maintain our support and even increase it, in some cases.
Since 2006, our government has invested an additional $142 million in our national museums. Additionally, the House should know that, since 2006, our government has made key investments in the museum sector. That includes the creation of two new national museums, the Canadian Human Rights Museum, which is very important for the people in my riding and for all Canadians, and the Canadian Museum of Immigration at Pier 21, as well as increased funding for summer work placements for students in small and medium-sized museums.
We are fortunate to have more than 2,500 museums of all sizes across the country that enable Canadians to discover our history. Our government is committed to ensuring that the federal, provincial, territorial and municipal governments continue to work together to enhance Canadians' appreciation for their history and heritage.
The transformation of the Canadian Museum of Civilization into the Canadian Museum of History will make it possible to encourage such linkages, reinforce existing partnerships and create new ones within the network of Canadian museums. in order to share our heritage.
Marie Lalonde, executive director of the Ontario Museum Association, said that co-operation with this new museum will make it possible for local museums to offer special exhibitions and initiatives to their visitors that they would not have been able to offer before.
Creation of the Canadian Museum of History and support for Canadian museums are the government's priorities. Surveys have shown that 91% of Canadians think that museums provide a precious learning experience and teach us about our shared heritage. Canadians are convinced that Canada's governments should help protect and preserve Canada's heritage. More than 83% of Canadians feel that museums are the most reliable source of historical information.
With regard to the national economy, members should be aware that Canadian museums welcome close to 30 million visitors a year. The 13 million Canadians who visit museums across the country every year make a significant contribution of $78 billion to Canada's tourism industry.
Canadians believe that museums provide an opportunity to learn, and they are interested in Canada's social and cultural history.
We are well aware that various museums across the country focus on specific aspects of Canadian history and that they are in the best position to do just that. However, at the national level, Canada does not have a museum that provides a detailed account of our history. For these reasons, the government is introducing a bill to change the name and mandate of the Canadian Museum of Civilization in order to establish the Canadian museum of history, a hallmark of Canadian history.
The Canadian museum of history seeks to improve the knowledge, understanding and appreciation that Canadians have for events, experiences, people and things that have shaped and that reflect the history and identity of Canada, as well as Canadians' knowledge of world history and culture.
The government will invest $25 million in existing funding to allow the Canadian Museum of Civilization to renovate nearly half of its permanent exhibition space by 2017. The new museum will also hold fundraising activities to solicit the support of the private sector.
Through existing resources and new partnerships with other Canadian museums, the new museum will also launch a series of large, travelling, temporary exhibits that focus on Canada's history.
The new Canadian museum of history opened a dialogue with Canadians on the country's history and the transformation process through a dedicated website and consultations in nine Canadian cities. Over 20,000 Canadians participated.
Clearly, the Canadian museum of history will be an excellent resource for promoting Canada's history and heritage. We are pleased that the House supports the amendments to the Museums Act so that we can offer another opportunity to celebrate Canada's heritage.
For us, the key element is this: while other countries have made cuts to culture, our government has protected funding for all of our museums; however, the opposition voted against those measures. That is a shame.
Alain Giguère NDP Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC
Mr. Speaker, first I would like to congratulate the hon. member on the quality of her French. It is always nice to see that language courses and the bilingual skills of our political staff are improving.
That was a very nice and pretty speech, but my problem is that it regrettably reflects too much of an agenda. It is part of a strategy to determine what the history of Canada should be.
The government does not want to give Canadians a picture of Canada's history, it wants to impose its own history. It wants to destroy the Canadian Postal Museum although the post office is a historic institution that was instrumental in building our country.
How can the hon. member reconcile the two?
Joyce Bateman Conservative Winnipeg South Centre, MB
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. However, I must correct his mistaken impression. What I said was that the House of Commons needs the truth.
For example, while many other countries made draconian cuts to their investments in culture, we made additional investments.
Canada's history is very important to Canadians, including the members of the House, our constituents and all future generations.
Jean-François Fortin Bloc Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt in my mind. The Conservatives' plan to rename and rebrand the Canadian Museum of Civilization is a clear indication of their desire to direct, hijack and control a message.
I agree that it is important to talk about history. However, recent history shows us that the Conservatives do not do anything without a partisan agenda. The Conservatives' celebration of the events in relation to the war of 1812-13 was riddled with anachronisms.
I can understand wanting to promote history. However, why do so by rebranding the Canadian Museum of Civilization and changing its important mandate? This museum is known across Canada and around the world. People came to Canada to visit this important museum. As a result of the new direction the government is taking with the museum, many things will be lost and the government will control the message.
I would like the hon. member to assure me that the new museum's message will not be controlled and that the museum will not become a Canadian museum of Conservative propaganda.
Joyce Bateman Conservative Winnipeg South Centre, MB
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member. Let me clarify the difference between my colleague and our government. We are proud of Canada. We are proud of every aspect of our history, including our country's founders and our two official languages.
Scott Armstrong Conservative Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to speak tonight on the bill about the museum of Canadian history. As a person who has been a professional educator for 18 years, I have taught every grade in the classroom, from fourth grade to graduate studies at the university level. I have served as a vice-principal and a principal of public schools as well. It is great to be here to support the bill.
It is a bill that supports the teaching and education of history to many thousands of Canadians, from one end of this country to another. When we think about the way history is being taught in Canada right now, some improvements are needed. I think it is disgraceful that we have only 3 out of 10 provinces which have the teaching of history as a required course for graduation. That means 7 out of 10 provinces from coast to coast to coast have history courses that are taught basically as an elective. I do not understand how we are going to reach the potential that is Canada, the potential that our nation can achieve, if we do not teach the next generation where we are from and who we are.
This needs to change. We all know that teaching and curriculum development is a provincial jurisdiction and mandate, but what can the federal government do to support the education of our young people and the teaching of history in Canada? I think the bill is one step forward to make sure the citizens of Canada, the next generation of Canadians, have a greater opportunity to take a look at Canada and understand who we are and where we come from. If they have a better understanding of that, they will increasingly have a better understanding of who we can be and who we will be and how we are going to reach the great potential that is Canada.
The bill is about who we are and who we can be. Whether our ancestors came to Canada across a land bridge from Asia, or they first set foot in North America to exploit our great cod stocks on the Grand Banks, or they established settlements in Annapolis Royal and survived scurvy and, of course, the harsh winters, or whether they built Acadian dikes and established agriculture on the east coast of our country, or they escaped religious intolerance in Europe for more freedom for their beliefs in this country, or they escaped slavery in the United States and escaped to Canada through the Underground Railroad led by great Canadians like Harriet Tubman, or they avoided the potato famine in Ireland and immigrated to Canada, or whether our ancestors, like some of my ancestors and the ancestors of the Minister of National Defence, sailed to Canada on the Hector with the Camerons, the MacNeils, the MacDonalds and the MacKays, or they immigrated to Canada from China to help develop the railway which united this country from coast to coast, or they fled Nazism and the Holocaust in Europe in the thirties and forties, or the totalitarianism and the Communism in the Cold War in Eastern Europe, or whether they simply sailed up to our shores as refugees from Vietnam, this museum will stand for all of them. I support this museum and I support this legislation.
This is our story. It is a Canadian story. Canada is the world's home. We have accepted Canadians from across this globe who are coming here to seek their fortune, prosperity, and to avoid persecution. They are coming for freedom, to be able to respect the religion and beliefs they want to respect. Canada respects all of these people who immigrated here. We are going to have a museum which reflects that respect, those beliefs, and the history that is Canada. As the second largest nation on the planet, with a relatively small population and vast natural resources, our future is bright.
Canada is a beacon of prosperity, and when we look across the world at the economic struggles that many of our neighbours are facing, we truly are a beacon of hope. We truly are a light at the end of the tunnel. Canada is experiencing a better recovery from the greatest depression since the Great Depression of the thirties than any other nation in the G8. Thanks to the leadership of our Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance, we are emerging from that recession in a stronger position than anyone else, positioning our country for greatness for generations to come. This ability to help people coming to Canada, to help people who have lived in Canada for generations, understand where our nation was founded, how we have grown and where we can go is what this museum is all about. That is why I support this museum.
People from across the country have to come to our national museums, whether it be Pier 21 in Halifax or whether it be in Ottawa, and see what is contained in their national museums. This museum will work by partnering with museums all across the country, from Terrace, British Columbia to Tatamagouche, Nova Scotia to Weyburn, Saskatchewan. Small museums will be able to have artifacts in storage from these large museums.
I understand 80% of the artifacts of some museums at any given time are kept in the attic or kept in the basement. We will free those artifacts from the attic. We will free them from the basement. We will move them across the country, so literally thousands and thousands of Canadians, who have never had the opportunity to see these artifacts, to see what the history of this nation truly is, those who would not have the finances to travel from one end of this nation to the other, will be able to experience this in their home town, in their home communities and their home museums will be able to exploit this to help build the resources they need to celebrate their individual culture and history as well.
It is a win-win situation for our small museums and for all Canadians across the country. That is why we are putting forward this legislation. That is why this plan will best serve Canadians from coast to coast to coast, whether they are rich or poor, they can see the true Canadian cultural experience right in their home town museums.
That is why we support this legislation. That is why Canada, small museums and small communities will prosper from this legislation.
What might be contained in some of these communities? What might be able to travel? Artifacts from Marconi's radio, Bell's telephone. We might have something from the Canadarm.
We could celebrate great Canadians like Harriet Tugman, as I mentioned before, and the underground railroad, like Adam Beach and Tecumseh, artifacts from the War of 1812, artifacts from the Battle of Vimy Ridge and the great military history we have in Canada. All these things can now in showcases across the country from coast to coast to coast so all Canadians can enjoy them.
Canada is a special place, a place that we can all be proud of and a place that we should continuously celebrate. As I said at the beginning of my remarks, if we do not know who we are, if we do not know where we are from, if we do not know how we came to be, how can we achieve the greatness that Canada can be? How can we achieve that potential that every member of Parliament is here to ensure we all achieve together?
I am very proud to support this legislation. I am very proud that we are putting this forward. I encourage all members from all parties across the House to get behind our national history museum.
Any of us who have travelled to the United States or travelled to the German Museum of History, have seen what kinds of artifacts would be contained in these great national museums. This will be our Smithsonian. This will be our national museum, a Canadian national museum, celebrating great Canadians like Terry Fox, like all the prime ministers who have come before the current Prime Minister, celebrating great Canadians like Banting and Best and all the people who have put forward the scientific achievement that is Canada.
I strongly support this legislation. I credit the minister for putting this forward. This will be a true, national treasure for all Canadians to enjoy from coast to coast to coast.
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for an entertaining address on Canadian history. I found it to be his version of Canadian history to be entrusting us. I suppose each one of us in this room would have our version of Canadian history, what we think is important and how it should be displayed.
He talked about small museums. I sat on the board of a small museum called the Northern Lights Museum in Fort Smith. It actually had a great collection, collected by the Oblate priests from all over the north, 10,000 items. It is all in the national registry now.
At the time, we got great displays from national museums in our museum. We actually had a museum assistance program. In the 1980s, we used to get $25,000 for our museum from the provincial government. That museum assistance program never got any bigger in size and eventually it was cut by the Conservatives.
Small museums across the country need some financial support. What will this do for my small museum in my community?
Scott Armstrong Conservative Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS
Mr. Speaker, in fact, that is the centrepiece of this. Not only are we going to build a great museum in Ottawa that people can travel to, both domestically and internationally to visit, there will be the ability for great treasures that are contained in that museum to move across the country so all Canadian can enjoy them.
I am very proud that we are one of the few nations in the G8 that, during this time of economic difficulty across the globe, has increased the funding for arts and culture. When all the other countries are cutting that money, we are increasing it. This is another step we are taking to support our small museums, in our rural communities in particular, giving them opportunities that they have not had before.
Ted Hsu Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
Mr. Speaker, from listening to the speeches from the government side, there seems to be a heavy emphasis on the civic and political side of history, history that really has a direct civic and political relevance. However, there are other important aspects to Canadian history which are important to emphasize. I am a little worried that this new renaming the museum and the emphasis put on this Canadian museum of history is going to miss some of this.
This goes back to my colleague, the member for Western Arctic, who mentioned a small museum and asked whether it would receive funding. There is a very important museum in my riding, the Canadian Museum of Health Care, which is the only museum of its type in the country. It is short of funds. It needs to find funding to preserve the history of health care in Canada. It has an enormous collection.
Will this emphasis on the civic and political side of history miss an important part of history? In this case it is health care, but it could also be science and technology. Could my colleague address this question?
Scott Armstrong Conservative Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS
Mr. Speaker, we have all kinds of museums across the country. We have the museums of science and technology across the country. Our government has done an amazing job of funding new museums, particularly our national museums. I think of Pier 21 in Halifax close to my riding, which celebrates immigration. I talked about it in my speech.
We have increased the funding for museums across the country. This program will allow artifacts from the national museum to travel across the country.
However, I do not think we have to take any lessons on history from the Liberal Party when it has a leader who said that all the best prime ministers came from Quebec. He said Mulroney, Trudeau and Chrétien, as if there were never a prime minister ever elected before 1968. That is the Liberal Party's legacy.
The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer
I think we have time for one more quick question and comment and given the effort the member for Crowfoot put in to getting back to his seat in time, I will give him the floor for the last round.
Kevin Sorenson Conservative Crowfoot, AB
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. At this hour any movement is an effort.
I listened to the member's speech. Obviously, he has been an educator, not only in Nova Scotia, but my understanding is, although I do not know him really well, he was out west as well and he has taught across the country.
I wonder if he would just expand a little. One of the things I have tried to understand from what they are trying to do is how students from schools might now be able to take a field trip to a local museum that up until now, especially in the west, has had very limited artifacts. It would have artifacts about the west, but now some key Canadian national types of artifacts could actually show up in rural Alberta and rural Saskatchewan. How will this help teachers?