:
Thank you, Madam Chair and members of the committee.
It's a great pleasure to appear in front of the committee once again. On behalf of the dominion president of the Royal Canadian Legion, Comrade Patricia Varga, we offer our support to your continuing advocacy on behalf of all the veterans of all ages and their families.
[Translation]
You have a copy of our presentation in French and English. We will answer your questions in either language.
[English]
At this point in time the Legion is not in a position to support Bill , or Bill for that matter. However, the Legion does recognize and support the need and particularly the desire to retain historically and culturally significant military orders, decorations, and medals within Canada. This is a noble but perhaps unachievable objective.
The two main reasons for not supporting the bill are as follows. First, it will not be effective. In order for legislation such as this to work, the barn door has to be fully closed. There are too many loopholes that can be opened up and too many medals can slip out. How do you account for them all? This bill leaves it partially open, so significant orders, decorations, and medals will be able to leave Canada. If enacted, Bill would likely drive the sale of significant medals underground and all visibility of transactions would be lost. These medals are bought and sold every day in large quantities and in international markets. All you have to do to really verify it is check on eBay, where basically the run-of-the mill medals, and not the high-end items, can be found at any point in time.
Enacting Bill would infringe on the rights of Canadians to own and dispose of their own private property as they see fit. This is a right that should not be trampled upon lightly. This right is already restricted to a degree by the Cultural Property Export and Import Act. If it is not sufficient to retain historically and culturally significant medals within Canada, then that specific act needs to be amended. We do not feel that additional overlapping legislation such as this is required.
There are a number of other problems with Bill that have been identified previously but have somehow not been addressed in the present version of this private member's bill. Some of these, in no particular order of importance, are as follows.
One is terminology. In common parlance, only orders have insignia. Decorations such as the Victoria Cross and medals are simply referred to as medals. We should be discussing orders, decorations, and medals, ODM.
Another problem is responsiveness to the feedback. In December 2009 we received confirmation that amendments would be made to the bill in response to the comments that we in the Legion made and forwarded. This included the definition of “near relatives”, the transfer of medals outside of Canada, the expansion of the list of museums and organizations that these medals could be offered to, and the addition of a maximum amount of any penalty imposed. It does not appear that any of these recommendations have been followed up on in the present bill.
We're also concerned about acceptable museums. Only the Canadian War Museum, the Canadian Museum of Civilization, and the Department of Canadian Heritage are deemed acceptable recipients for these types of medals. This overlooks a large number of provincial, regional, and local museums, as well as military museums and commands and branches of the Royal Canadian Legion. Other museums or veterans organizations that might have museums, such as ANAVETS, might be interested in acquiring these types of medals, by purchase or otherwise.
Funding is another issue. Most, if not all, museums have very limited acquisition budgets. To be effective, this bill would need to ensure that there is a well-funded national acquisition budget policy. Otherwise, these medals offered for sale might well leave Canada because there are no funds to purchase them.
And then there's the obligation to acquire. Most, if not all, museums have limited storage and display space. Just because an offered medal may be historically or culturally significant, a museum should not be obligated to purchase it if it does not fit into its collection mandate.
Finally, there's the market for the current orders, decorations, and medals. There is a perception that modern medals do not have much value and therefore perhaps would not be affected by legislation such as this. This is incorrect. Should they come onto the open market, modern medal groups, especially those with gallantry awards from Afghanistan, would command high prices.
Examples of the new British Conspicuous Gallantry Cross, which was introduced in 1993, have been sold at auction with a suggested value of £6,000 to £8,000, or $9,500 or $12,700 Canadian funds. Similar Canadian medal groups containing new gallantry awards could be expected to command very similar prices. Modern groups should be included in any legislation.
There was an observation in the ACVA minutes of June 17 that the Cultural Property Export and Import Act only applied to items that were over 50 years old, and therefore would not be included in this legislation. If this is correct, then the act should be amended to include them as well.
In summary, at this juncture, unless the above issues can be resolved, the Royal Canadian Legion cannot support or offer its support to Bill . We recommend instead that the Cultural Property Export and Import Act be amended to achieve these objectives in the proposed legislation in a less confusing and restrictive manner.
For your information as well, we have gone out to other veterans organizations. I would offer that the views expressed above by the Royal Canadian Legion are also shared by the Army, Navy and Air Force Veterans in Canada Association; the Canadian Naval Air Group; the Royal Canadian Naval Association; the Naval Officers' Association of Canada; the Hong Kong Veterans Commemorative Association; the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Veterans' Association; the National Aboriginal Veterans Association; the Canadian Association of Veterans in United Nations Peacekeeping; and finally, the Gulf War Veterans Association.
That concludes our presentation today. We would be more than glad to accept your questions.
:
I'd like to add something to that.
If you look at the bill as it stands, basically at paragraph 5(a) it reads that the Governor in Council may make regulations “identifying insignia of cultural significance and the criteria to be applied”. In other words, you're approving a bill but you haven't quite defined what you mean by “culturally significant” or what the criteria would be.
We think that's open-ended, especially in the context of looking at the number of orders, decorations, and medals that are out there in the world. You may not be aware, but there are 325,000 defence medals going back to World War II, 650,000 Canadian volunteer service medals, and 700,000 more medals that were issued. Most of those medals were issued without a name on the circumference of the medal, and they're only significant if they're linked to the documentation that accompanied those medals.
This is what you're dealing with in the context of this legislation, so we're suggesting it's unenforceable.
:
I will answer in English so I can express myself better, if that's okay with you.
[English]
The process that we have to determine positions such as this is a national one, our convention every two years. Obviously, it's at that convention where we create and discuss policy for the Royal Canadian Legion. The Legion, as a bottom-up organization, listens to what is being said at its branches and discusses those issues on the floor of the convention, and that basically sets our policy and positioning for the next term or cycle, as we call it, for two years.
Issues such as this, when they're out of that cycle and not a normal part of the cycle, are discussed through our dominion executive council, which is our governing body outside of the convention. So we will take issues like this to our dominion executive council, and we have taken this particular position to our council and they have debated it. They are representatives from all of our provincial commands across Canada. So we have the ten provincial presidents who are there, we have our senior elected officers of the Royal Canadian Legion who are there, and they discuss these issues and the presentations that we make. And it is that body that gives us those directions in-between conventions.
That is basically our policy process for discussing issues such as this.
:
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Gentlemen, thank you very much for coming, and please give our best to Pat Varga and to Vice-Admiral Larry Murray as well. I think he is a great replacement for Charlie Belzile as honorary president. I thought that was a fine choice you all made.
On the bill itself, my support began for it when I spoke to the member proposing the bill. What he's attempting is to respect the significance of certain medals and so on and stop them from leaving the country. There's one thing I slightly disagree with, and I know that I've had this discussion with the Royal Canadian Legion before. When medals are presented to members of our armed forces or policing services for the various acts they've done--their CDs, combat medals, Victoria Cross, whatever.... I got this from Smokey Smith before he passed away. He was proud of his Victoria Cross, but he was just as proud of all the other medals he received. Yet it would be the Victoria Cross, if it came up for auction, that everyone focused on. Yet he himself appreciated all the medals he received.
One thing I've said repeatedly, literally forever, is that this is not currency the government gives you. It's not hundred-dollar bills hanging from your chest. These medals are significant for the fact of service, honour, valour, duty, and everything else. Most importantly, a lot of you wear them because 118,000 men and women never got a chance to wear theirs, because they passed on, many in the act of service.
My own , which I think is easier to understand, basically would restrict these medals from ever being sold or turned into currency. It's very similar to what the Government of Canada has with the Order of Canada. You talk about the property rights aspect of it. But if you receive the Order of Canada, when you die, by law, that Order of Canada has to go back to the Governor General or back to the government. You cannot sell it. Now, many of them don't go back. They're hidden, and kids keep them, and nobody really goes and looks for them.
If the Order of Canada can be restricted, then why can't certain other medals or decorations be restricted?
I sympathize with the private property aspect of it, but if you're currently serving and you receive medals, you cannot sell them while you're currently serving. You can only do with them what you want once you leave the service. If you're serving right now, and you have six or seven medals, you cannot sell them. You cannot do with them whatever you want. You have to be out of the service before you can do that. As you said, you choose to do what you like with your medals.
My belief, and I'm not sure if the author of the bill supports it 100%, and I'd like your clarification on this, is that I have a problem with medals given to our heroes in our country eventually turning into cash. To me, that demeans the medal. It demeans the act of what that person has done.
I'll give you an example in closing. There was a recent gentleman in Quebec, one of Quebec's most decorated soldiers, and he died. His son Charles received the medals, and he was going to sell them. He was asked what he was going to do with the money, and he said, “Maybe buy a car”. His family was opposed to his selling these medals, but he had the right to do with them what he wanted. So this man's valour, everything he did for his country, his province, and his people, is now worth a car. I was just so shocked by that. Really, in the end, if you sell these medals, that money can do whatever.
I'd just like your comments on that.
If you could, have you made recommendations regarding the Cultural Property Export and Import Act in regard to helping the honourable member and the rest of us achieve some of the things he would like to achieve and I'd like to achieve, and at the end, getting the Legion's support on that?
Thank you.
:
My understanding of the act is simplistic, but I understand that the act basically restricts the export of a medal for 90 days to ensure that those organizations that may want to obtain it or retain it have that ability.
I don't think the act says specifically what is a medal of significance. I think that's the question that you have to ask here. What is a medal of significance? I think we go back to that as well.
To answer your first question, on whose right it is, medals are awarded to individuals for recognition of acts of service. I know, because I come from a third-generation military family. We have that sort of ethos within my family that tells us how we handle ourselves with our medals and what we do with our medals. I understand fully that there are people out there who don't have that same sort of background or historical significance, impact, or understanding of what it means to be awarded a medal, such as a medal of bravery or a medal of honour.
So how do you educate people is really the question. How do you educate people to understand what the significance of a medal is? Do you educate people by legislating it to them? Or do you do it some other way? I think in our day and age when people talk about government interference in our lives we have too many people who say it's the government's issue. Well, now you're making it a government issue. Everybody complains that every time something goes wrong the government has to sort it out and they are not taking responsibility for their own actions. So do we have to legislate everything? This is my question back to you.
People need to understand, they need to be educated, and they need to be responsible, and they can only be responsible if they've been educated. That would be my response.
:
I might want to add a couple of things to that.
I think part of the challenge with Bill was that the last clause basically said:
Every person who contravenes subsection (1) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
So here we are. We have private rights and we have the burden of potentially suffering an offence punishable on summary conviction. I think that's a bit of the challenge.
I think the solution resides in what my colleague was saying. We have to not pass legislation. We have to encourage veterans, their heirs and successors to understand that orders, decorations, and medals are valuable items of their family history. I think we have to encourage the donation of ODMs to museums or other institutions, and we even have to encourage a partnership with collectors in order to help preserve the memories of veterans through their ODM.
I think the Legion is ready to do its part in that education process, but we urge you not to pass this legislation.
I talked about the potential cost to the museums. When we addressed the sale of the Shankland's Victoria Cross group that was purchased by the Canadian War Museum, the purchase cost was approximately $244,000. Actually, that equated to $288,000 because there was a buyer's premium factored in. This was within the pre-auction estimate of $220,000 to $330,000 Canadian.
These medals will indeed remain in Canada; however, this particular issue has identified what the potential cost of passing such a bill would be to even museums that have strong financial backing.
Thank you, gentlemen, for joining us today. We appreciate your being here.
There are a couple of things I'd like to raise, because there is a conflict in your presentation between having the rights and being concerned about whether the bill goes far enough. I want to clear that up, because that's an issue of principle that I think is worth discussing.
There is one thing that concerns us. I don't think everybody has the values you have, as both service and Legion people, in terms of recognizing the importance of keeping these medals within the Canadian context. Obviously, many people do that in a private collection and do that within family circumstances, but many don't. We don't think simply letting it go, which has gone on for some years, is a resolution. I'm glad to hear you're prepared to cooperate with us, and I know you are in the education. I think education is a good second step, after this legislation, but I do want to follow that further. Gary brings forward, I think, the intent, and we all talked about it and all agreed in principle. It's a very positive thing for somebody to step up as a private member and raise this and say, “Listen, there's a problem out there. There's a difficulty. It ain't perfect, but here's a suggested course of action.”
I'm far more comfortable, obviously, than you are in supporting the intent of the bill. I don't see it as a big negative out there. When we're Victoria Crosses and that, those are covered. Those aren't going anywhere, and we know that. But as a general principle, you're not going to have a law that's going to protect every single medal. You're always going to have some underground economy. I think the intent of those medals from the past is covered, unless you're saying the culture and import act is totally wrong and should be done away with as well, which is a whole different discussion.
I don't think this is trying to fill in all the gaps so much as it is taking a step forward with the public, with Canadians, to say, “Listen, there is a gap in what happens in the Canadian culture today”. Part of it is education, and I understand and appreciate that, and I agree totally--but what I'd ask first, then, is whether the principle of ownership and private protection and non-interference is the larger concern here.
:
I know he's very touchy, but it is a fact that they actually do a lot to preserve the medals. A lot of these collectors--probably the majority of them--are actually former military people who take a really keen interest.
I'll give you a good example of what happens with medals, decorations, and orders. We received at our national headquarters a collection of World War I and World War II hat badges. It was probably the most complete hat badge collection we've ever seen. It was squirrelled away in the downstairs of a Legion branch that went out of business and asked Dominion Command to take over the hat badge collection.
It's such a significant collection that we've actually given it to the War Museum because they had never seen that many hat badges of that era. So we are in the process of cleaning it all up, and then we're going to go through the process of displaying it properly. It actually sat in an old back shed somewhere. For years and years nobody could see it. That's where these collections are.
The same thing is going to happen with a lot of these medals. A lot of these medals are going to end up squirrelled away in drawers somewhere, whether in a family drawer, in a collector's drawer, or, through mass of numbers, in a slide-out drawer at a museum because they just don't have room to display all of these.
So, yes, it's a huge problem. And I think even just discussing this bill brings the education aspect forward. It helps to educate Canadians on the magnitude of the issue. Do we need legislation? Does my right to be able to determine where my medals go need to be legislated? I would prefer that it not be.
:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Good afternoon, Messrs. Allard and White. I have been listening carefully to your points of view. I also understand Mr. Schellenberger's take on things.
First, here's an off-the-cuff idea for you. If the government really wants to hold on to certain medals, isn't there some way to index them and identify which medals the government would like to keep in Canada? Second, would the government be prepared to pay the market price if someone wanted to sell one of their medals that was listed as important?
In addition, let's assume we were to remove one of the bill's clauses under which people would be prosecuted for selling their medals, and by doing so we were to allow people to do what they like with the less important medals that are not indexed. Would that be closer to what you are asking for? We have to see what we can do.
I will give you an example. A museum could very well not be interested in buying your medal, Mr. Allard, if it already has one like it. In that case, you would be stuck with yours. You could not sell it, and even your children or your grandchildren, wanting to part with the medal, could not sell it to the museum, which already has one.
The government should settle on a price for important medals, determine the market value of each type of medal—because the government's price shouldn't deviate from the market one. The government should specify that it is prepared to pay that amount to people who wish to part with their medals. As for the other medals, the government should allow people to dispose of them as they see fit, to sell them as they wish.
What do you think about this idea?
:
I don't know. I don't run the museums, nor do I have the answer to that.
I'll give you another example. In my community there's a guy named--maybe you know him--Dave Thomson, who repatriates medals to their original families when he finds and bids for them on eBay. In fact, he solicits money from individuals around the community. Many of us have participated in supplying him the money he needs to get a medal that's being bid on eBay. He has literally repatriated hundreds of medals off eBay to their original families, usually the descendants of the veteran who owned the medals. He does the historical research to find out who they belonged to. When he cannot find out who they are attributable to, he will donate them to a military museum--
A voice: Or a legion.
Mr. Phil McColeman: --so they are preserved without getting back into the open market of buy and sell, as they are when he finds them.
I guess, in a sense, that one of the reasons why many of us have given him money to do that and have encouraged him, and when it gets down to the final strokes to give him more money so he can acquire these things, is the fact that we know they are not going to be sold again. They are not going to be out there as an item for trade on the open market.
I suppose my question was more driving at the fact that as these are bought and sold in that environment.... I understand collectors and I understand they have great motive and they want to make sure they preserve these to their original.... I suppose all the attributes that Mr. Stoffer articulated that medals are really all about is the reason why. But in the other situation I'm familiar with, where they are trying to be repatriated and not be bought and sold, do you think this is something we should be dealing with here, or should we let it happen as it is today?
I don't want to belabour the point, but to build on what Mr. Storseth said, in certain provinces there are foreign ownership restrictions on agricultural land. In a way, that's to protect some foreign ownership of agricultural land. And I can understand or assume your position on that one.
But the point is that even in a real estate transaction, there are so many days to close the deal, and it could be for a number of reasons. Is it that unreasonable to the family of a veteran or to the veteran himself that he or she allows a Canadian 120 days to match an offer? Is it that unreasonable to a veteran, if he has had the medals in his family for 25 years, that they wait another 120 days?
I understand the idea that they are your rights, they are your medals, whoever's medals they were, but is it that unreasonable, from the Legion's position, that it is just so unsavoury that there are 120 days to at least make an opportunity? To me, when you're looking at all sorts of things about rights and freedoms or whatever, it doesn't seem that big of an onerous task.
:
Just a quick point of order.
Mr. White brought up the collector thing and how I'm not a fan of that. What was on the Internet was simply incorrect. What I've said is that I don't have a problem with people who collect medals. If you want to give your medals to a collector, that's great. If you sell the medals to a collector, there I have a problem. And if the collector then turns around and sells them, there I have a problem.
On Mr. McColeman's comment regarding estate sales, in many cases people are selling medals that have no connection whatsoever. They bought them at an estate sale. They're on flea market tables and at garage sales. Give me twenty bucks, and off they go. He's right.
I don't have a problem with people who collect medals. I have a problem with trade in cash transactions for medals.That's my problem.
Thank you. I just thought I'd let you know that.
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
:
I have just one short comment to make, before we wrap up. Basically, it seems to me that we have an ethical dilemma on our hands, a conflict of values, if you will. I would like to hear what you think about that.
We have a government that awards medals to soldiers who participated in missions and performed exceptionally well. Therefore, worthy soldiers are rewarded with medals.
On the one hand, you're saying that the medal belongs to you and that you can dispose of it as you see fit, since you took part in a military mission and risked your life. To reward you for your efforts, the government awarded you a medal. On the other hand, the government is saying that the medal awarded to you is heritage property. It's memorabilia. It's cultural property that's part of history.
I have only one question. You have received several medals. When you received them, did you feel that they were awarded to you without any restrictions whatsoever, or rather that the medals given to you were a symbol of the country and, in a way, belonged to it? How do soldiers feel when they receive a medal? Do you understand what I mean? That is the dilemma we are facing.
Let's forget about the medals for a moment. If I'm given something, that something belongs to me. It's mine. The argument here seems to be that, when it comes to medals, things are different, since they are part of history and heritage. You're saying that things are not necessarily different, since the medals belong to you.
So, I would like to know how you felt when you received those medals.
:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
In listening to you, the last bit of discussion seemed to focus on one area, and I think it's important to remember that you brought forth a number of concerns.
With medals, I understand the struggle. It's about protecting history, cultural heritage, memory of a life of service. But it's also about recognizing our veterans, respecting them, and giving them choice.
Medals are deeply personal, they're personal to families, and they're awarded in good faith. I think that's the word--awarded. They are given to you, and they are your property.
I will make one other comment about cultural significance.
As Mr. Allard pointed out, context is everything. It's who and what the medal was for. It's like context in archeology. Without that context, I believe those medals will be lost to a museum drawer.