HERI Committee Meeting

STANDING COMMITTEE ON CANADIAN HERITAGE

COMITÉ PERMANENT DU PATRIMOINE CANADIEN

EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Thursday, May 17, 2001

• 1002

[English]

The Chair (Mr. Clifford Lincoln (Lac-Saint-Louis, Lib.): We'll resume the meeting of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage. Today's meeting is in connection with the order of reference from the House of Commons dated Tuesday, February 27, 2001, on the main estimates, vote 1.

We're very pleased to welcome the Minister of Canadian Heritage, Ms. Sheila Copps, and the Deputy Minister, Mr. Alex Himelfarb.

Ms. Copps, since we have only one hour, you have agreed to make your remarks reasonably short so that we can have a lot of time for questions. Thanks very much.

Hon. Sheila Copps (Minister of Canadian Heritage): Absolutely. It's wonderful to be in this room, because I've spent many years in many committees here. I remember talking about global warming when David MacDonald was the committee chair, and many other good experiences. Unfortunately, when you're in the cabinet, you don't get as much chance to participate in committees. So I appreciate the opportunity to be here, and especially to have the pleasure of introducing my deputy, Alex Himelfarb, and a number of other officials who have worked very hard on these files.

I want to spend a few moments on the government's vision of culture in Canada and how the various initiatives of the department and the portfolio are trying to mesh together. In that context, I'd like to review some of the recent announcements in the cultural field, and I'd like to speak on some other initiatives that I believe will contribute to building a diverse, inclusive, and vibrant country.

Over the last few years, the government has been working very closely with your committee to define our role in culture and to modernize our approach. Your comprehensive report in June 1999, A Sense of Place, A Sense of Being, was a road map for the establishment of a comprehensive framework for cultural expression. Your report on the state of the book industry has also given us great insight into some of the challenges being faced in an industry that is faced with increasing global competition. As you've seen in the response, we intend to follow your blueprint and find the appropriate means of addressing your recommendations.

In the work that you will undertake on broadcasting and on the issue of diversity, whether diversity is really reflected in the broadcasting system, you will no doubt provide the government, and especially Canadians, with a chance to get some public, transparent input into the policy implications of many recent developments such as media mergers and new media technologies, and I look very much forward to not only the hearings you will be holding but especially your recommendations. I believe your committee has put culture at the top of the government's agenda.

[Translation]

I would like to thank you, because when the Prime Minister spoke about the place of culture in Canada in the speech he gave two weeks ago, I think that it was because of the work that you have accomplished, that you are continuing, and that will be one of your priorities while this government is in office.

The Speech from the Throne in January set out a new, clear vision, urging us to create new opportunities, to celebrate our shared citizenship and cultural diversity, and to carve out a distinctly Canadian space in North America. It places culture right at the heart of government priorities. This vision of culture is based on a solid foundation, namely our shared values. It is also based on the importance of cultural diversity and linguistic duality. Recognizing this fact is as important, if not more important, today than when we enshrined it in the Constitution.

• 1005

We advocate cultural diversity, both domestically and internationally. I would like to talk about this a little, because we have an international strategy to promote cultural diversity and Canada's linguistic duality.

In our country, Canadians share certain fundamental values with regard to diversity, respect, mutual responsibility and peaceful conflict resolution. I believe that these values are at the heart of our Canadian identity. They are reflected throughout our history. This year we are celebrating the Great Peace of Montreal, when the first Europeans signed an agreement with 39 Aboriginal peoples, declaring that they wished to work in peace rather than wage war. This value is a cornerstone of our history and the guarantee of our future success.

As I have done over the past few years, I would like to take the lead for Canada in discussions aimed at reaching a consensus on cultural diversity in the context of globalization.

[English]

We started the process of an international network of culture ministers here in this place as a result of your work in 1998, and in three short years, over 50 countries have become members. We have a new policy initiative, which will be launched in Switzerland in September, where a number of signatory countries will seek to ensure that culture is treated as a separate instrument outside of the WTO. We're expecting that we will have a number of signatory countries at that initiative in September in Switzerland.

[Translation]

In a similar manner, the upcoming Games...

The Chair: Ms. Gagnon, what are you saying?

Ms. Christiane Gagnon (Quebec, BQ): Madam Minister, you are speaking too fast. The interpreter cannot keep up with you.

The Chair: The interpreter cannot keep up.

Ms. Sheila Copps: I thought that by going quickly, I would be able to give you more time for questions. I will try to speak more slowly.

[English]

I'm trying to rush through it because there's a lot of material, and I want to give you an opportunity to answer questions.

[Translation]

Do you have the flu? You should try homeopathy.

Ms. Christiane Gagnon: That's what I intend to do tonight.

Ms. Sheila Copps: As far as linguistic duality is concerned, I am on a Cabinet committee chaired by my colleague, Stéphane Dion, that is working to ensure we meet all our commitments to minority communities, and to apply sections 41 and 42, which are the cornerstone of Canada's official languages policy.

[English]

So we actually have a cabinet committee, including the Minister of Justice, the President of the Treasury Board, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, and me, because we are very concerned about the fact that in the process of modernizing our relationships with provincial governments and in engaging in changes in human resources and other areas, we want to make sure that we don't forget that one of our overriding governance principles is respect for two official languages.

That's one of the reasons we're fighting so hard to see the case of the Montfort Hospital resolved in a positive way for the people of Ontario.

[Translation]

We will also be overseeing the upcoming Games of La Francophonie, working to ensure that they offer great opportunities to celebrate. The Games of La Francophonie, which will be held in July in the Ottawa-Hull area, will be a fine opportunity to celebrate the diversity of the francophone communities of Canada and the whole world, and to bring people closer together.

[English]

I hope all of you will take the time to come to the games. They open on July 14 here in the national capital region. There will be an opportunity to meet people from more than 50 countries around the globe. We will have athletes from all of the francophonie countries represented. What a wonderful chance to celebrate a shared heritage and a shared future, and also to make the linkages that help build the world. Globalization isn't just about trade, it's also about shared experiences.

• 1010

Arts and culture are central to giving a voice to our diversity, contributing to our quality of life, being successful in the new economy. They're job creators. The single most important job growth area for young people in Nova Scotia is in arts and culture. So when we make an investment, it should be considered an investment in the same way as we make investments in other sectors that yield long-term fruits in the economy.

The announcement from the Prime Minister on May 2 of a major new investment is an acknowledgement of the importance of culture and the expression of our diversity, and a strengthening of the values that bind us together. It also represents an investment in qualify of life. It makes sense from an economic perspective, because it will generate significant and real returns.

[Translation]

Beyond the economic benefits, these initiatives allow our country to make linkages, feel respected and gain a better understanding of the importance of respecting cultural diversity, of respecting different cultures and languages.

[English]

I believe they offer the expression of a deeper belief in shared values.

The investment is comprehensive. It will promote excellence, it will promote access, it will promote diversity, and it will promote sustainability. There's no point creating bricks and mortar when you don't have operational budgets, and that's one of the challenges we've been facing.

We also believe in a results-oriented approach, and I think in the last five years in this portfolio I've tried to ensure that our investments are measured by real results. We need to bring our cultural industries into the new digital economy. We need to support excellence and creativity among our artists, notably our young people. We need to help not-for-profit and heritage arts organizations to become more sustainable, and we need to help renew our cultural and heritage infrastructure across Canada.

If you look at the results of the world's first virtual museum, which links right now over 600 museums across the country—and at the end of next year we'll link every museum in Canada—in the first six weeks we had 13 million visits from over 100 countries around the world, and that was an investment of under $20 million that permits you to get on the web today and take a visit to the Yukon without leaving your desk. Hopefully, you'll leave your desk in the future too, but it's a good entrée, entrance point.

[Translation]

The government is currently investing $288 million in the arts and heritage sector, focussing on creators and artists, who are the ones that create content. The government also provides tools to help communities build and maintain arts and heritage organizations, and it is determined to ensure that all Canadians have access to better Canadian-made cultural products.

As far as visibility is concerned, some of the money we are investing will be used to increase the funds that are allocated to the Canada Council to promote excellence and diversity. The Canada Council will receive $75 million in new funding. An additional $13 million will be allocated to the National Arts Training Contribution Program to help young artists prepare for a career in the arts. An amount of $80 million will be earmarked for improvements to cultural infrastructure in communities throughout Canada, and $63 million will be set aside for a national strategy aimed at modernizing the management of arts and heritage organizations and strengthening their financial stability.

[English]

We're going to be rolling out specific details in the next weeks.

[Translation]

We also intend to support the revitalization of the Canada Broadcasting Corporation. We want to enhance the visibility, relevance and impact of the CBC by reinvesting in Canadian content in both official languages, thereby creating unique opportunities for the Canadian creators who affect the lives of Canadians daily. On May 2, the government announced an additional grant of $60 million for one year to the CBC.

• 1015

Of course, this money will not solve all of the Crown corporation's financial difficulties. The issues of long-term policy and structures will be examined as the current CBC restructuring exercise develops and its future plans and objectives crystallize.

The government continues to co-operate with the CBC so that it can fulfil its unique mandate as the public radio and television broadcaster, by offering high-quality programming that reflects our country's cultural diversity.

[English]

I want to give a special thank you to the Mark Starowicz production, which, contrary to all the naysayers, was an incredible success in meeting Canadians' thirst to know about their own history. It's also being utilized as an opportunity to teach and continue the story of our history in our schools, etc.

As for the book industry—and I'll try and do this as quickly as I can—we need to replace an outmoded supply chain. We need to reduce book returns and risks. We need to increase the marketing and promotion of Canadian authors. We need to build on the very specific suggestions of the committee report. We have begun that work. In the last number of months, I've announced a number of initiatives, including a straight infusion of $28 million over three years. These measures will help to speed up their adoption of new technologies, provide better information on available titles, sales trends, and industry performance, and increase support for marketing and promotion of Canadian books and authors. We heard your message.

In sound recording we want to focus on diverse Canadian content. We want to increase opportunities for Canadian artists and cultural entrepreneurs, we want to enhance access by Canadians to Canadian musical works, and we want to ensure that the new Canada Music Fund will make these things possible. We have announced, again in the course of that larger announcement, $28 million over three years, which will focus in on the creation of a new Canada Music Fund, which will have

[Translation]

as its goal to achieve these objectives.

[English]

The Canadian Internet cultural content strategy I'm particularly proud of, because I think it's an area where three years ago everyone was chuckling and saying it couldn't be done. We were spending millions of dollars and creating this government museum monster. In fact, we've done exactly the opposite. What Virtual Museum Canada has done is permit us to be the first, and at this point the only, country in the world that has a strategy to link all museums under one roof. I think the attachment to this site has already been demonstrated. I think it was the single most successful site launched in the history of Canadian content, not just within the government, but in Canada in that short a period of time.

What we're finding is that there are a lot of revisits. If you haven't had a chance to go in on it yourself, I can explain. If you're planning, for example, on taking a trip with your family this summer, and you want to go to a community and get a feel for what you would like to do on that trip, you can actually get into the community in another part of the country. We'll use, for example, Loyola's community. Let's suppose you're going to St. John's.

Your actual home is where, Loyola?

Mr. Loyola Hearn (St. John's West, PC): Actually, it's a place called Renews, which is a little town south of St. John's.

Ms. Sheila Copps: I was thinking of Mount Pearl. We could say Mount Pearl. Let's say you're going to Mount Pearl, you call up Mount Pearl or St. John's. You get into the actual list of museums that are available. When you find a museum you want to get into, you can actually read the program, you can do your bookings, and you can actually plan your trip around the dates of a particular performance that might be coming.

The idea is not just to permit Canadians to see our museums, because one of the things we've done is use the National Research Council technology, which permits the taking of an object and examining it in 3-D. You can actually go up to Baffin Island and see an Inuit statue, and you can see it on all sides because of the technology that's available.

• 1020

What we're hoping is that not only will people visit on the Web, but also that this might give them

[Translation]

the idea of going to visit in person.

[English]

But today, maybe all you can afford is to get on the Internet.

Similarly, for Parks Canada, we want people to be able to explore our parks and historic sites virtually, with the hope that they will begin to develop an interest directly. We're going to be working in....

Virtual Museum Canada was a $19 million investment over three years, and the cultural strategy we announced two weeks ago includes an additional $108 million over the next three years that will be devoted to Internet cultural content.

We're very proud of the fact that we're the first country in the world to have wired all the schools, and now to start wiring the classrooms. But to have the hardware without the stories is only half a success story. We think this cultural content strategy will be able to help us to digitize material and also to develop tools to facilitate the creation of new content, with a particular focus on the work of young and emerging artists through the Internet.

In terms of expanding cultural exports, we have a mandate to showcase Canada to the world and to expand markets for artists and cultural industries. We have a mandate to showcase our artists and cultural products, and we have a vocation to lead the world in the new media. In an effort to make our cultural industries more self-sustaining, we will be investing $32 million over the next three years in order to increase the export of Canadian products and services and to explore new markets for our artists.

We hope these export service programs will enable Canadian cultural organizations to take advantage of the rapidly expanding international opportunities. We also hope revenue from export markets will help to make Canadian cultural entrepreneurs connect into the wired world.

Our artists and our creators are our most dynamic and effective ambassadors. No disrespect to the politicians and the ambassadors, but when you see Céline Dion, when you see Shania Twain, when you see Robert Lepage, or when you see

[Translation]

Notre-Dame de Paris in Paris, it tells you much more about Canada than you could learn from any speech by a minister or an ambassador.

[English]

On exports of cultural commodities, I think this has to be emphasized, because we continue to see culture as a straight subsidy. Some of the comments on the investments that we made a couple of weeks ago made that point.

Exports of cultural product amounted to nearly $2.35 billion in 2000, and cultural services are conservatively estimated at $2.2 billion. From 1996 to 2000, cultural exports in Canada increased by 38%. You will not find a success story stronger than that in most other sectors—I dare say of any other sector.

If you look at the area of job creation, again, culture jobs are increasing at a faster rate than almost any other sector of the population, and they tend to be jobs that are transportable out of the capital cities. You can go to Cape Breton to make a movie, and when you do make a movie, you're investing in the local economy by purchasing food. It's a very sort of upfront, liquid investment. It's not a megaproject investment that creates tremendous infrastructure investments with not a lot going out into the direct economy.

[Translation]

The Historic Places Initiative—

[English]

I'm sorry to go on so long, but we've been doing a lot of stuff. I don't get that much of a chance to come before the committee. So the government

[Translation]

is committed to preserving our heritage.

[English]

With an investment of $24 million over the next four years, we are going to develop a new policy on historic sites that will permit us to have a national register of historic sites for which there will be potential tax incentives that can be developed at the federal and provincial levels.

If we as a government expect to turn the tide on the fact that we have lost over 20% of our historic buildings in the last thirty years, we cannot do it alone and we cannot expect the taxpayers to foot the bill for that. But we certainly can create a playing field where it is as equally advantageous for an entrepreneur to invest in saving a heritage building as it is for them to build a new strip mall.

• 1025

If you look even to our neighbour, to the United States, in the policy that they brought in 1984, they changed their public works policy so that the government, when it occupies buildings, must occupy heritage buildings and must work in areas of core redevelopment. They were the catalyst for the redevelopment of a lot of crumbling downtown cores in the United States. There's an opportunity for the Government of Canada, in partnership with provincial and local governments, to do the same thing.

I'd point to the example of Winnipeg. They created a local tax credit in Winnipeg. They had the provincial government's authority to do so, since the enabling legislation must come from the province. Last year they had $70 million in building permits given out on historic buildings that would not have been carried out without the support of this tax incentive.

If you're looking at it from a business perspective, if you go in to restore an historic building, obviously there are a lot of surprises. There are surprises around the electrical, there are surprises around roofing, and there are also surprises around contamination. You ignore those if you go out on a strip mall, but if you keep building strip malls, the whole issue of what we're doing in our urban cores is not just a local problem, it's a national tragedy when you see what's happening in a lot of crumbling urban cores.

So this strategy for the national register is intended to work in concert with provincial and local governments in order to establish a registry of national sites that would be eligible for tax credits for private sector development, as long as the development is consistent with the historic integrity that will be part of this discussion and debate process. A lot of provinces also have some things that are happening and we want to be a partner in that.

[Translation]

The future of Canada's capital.

[English]

Most of that has been discussed in recent days, such as the relocation of the War Museum and the other announcements. As the national capital, we certainly want to ensure that when people come to the national capital region they are capable of experiencing the strength and power of museums that will make us proud.

I have to say that when the Museum of Civilization was first conceived.... As an opposition member, I think one of the first invitations I had was actually to the opening of the Musée des beaux-arts, Moshe Safdie's incredible architectural delight. When you go to places like that, and when you take your international visitors there, or when we have the NATO countries coming—I think 800 members of parliaments from the NATO countries are coming next October—these are institutions that you're proud to show them.

I mentioned this to my mother when she was here the other day. She asked why we aren't spending this money in our town. I said what's important is that we invest in the connections across the country, but it's also important that we invest in the capital region. People come to this place and see it as an example of a vibrant new country, not just a country of hewers of wood and drawers of water, although that is also very important.

Natural heritage is a source of pride for all Canadians. We have made a commitment to the creation of new parks, and we've also made a commitment to ecological integrity. We've just seen the passage of legislation for marine conservation areas. In the last seven years, we have cut the Parks Canada budget by 25%. At the same time, we've asked them to assume new responsibilities and add new parks. You can only stretch a rubber band or an elastic so far, so we do need and have made a commitment in the red book for new investments, but we need to see those new investments increased if we are to meet the test of ecological integrity.

Given that the government does have a commitment to double the research and development budget, one of the places that we need to be looking at real investment in research and development is in Parks Canada. The template that we received from your legislation and from the Jacques Gérin panel on ecological integrity was that we have to stop looking at parks as individual sorts of territorial areas. We have to start looking at them as part of a network of ecosystems. In order to do that, we need the science and ecological integrity template to be developed.

In terms of focusing on youth, we have actually worked very hard in the last five years to take the creation to the young people. If you look at the new investment we made in the Canada Council for the Millennium Fund, we specified that it had to go to new creations. Yes, it's important to sustain artists in the longer term, but it's also important that the new creators coming up have an opportunity.

• 1030

We have also created a new, single-window access point for exchanges across Canada. When I came before the committee maybe three or four years ago, one of the things we heard was that this country is so large, so diverse, and so diffuse in population that we don't know each other. We started to look at what we had by way of exchange programs, and we were rather shocked to discover that we already had 20,000 exchange programs that were operating in various forms across the country, but they were all here and there.

You probably know Rotary Clubs have a great exchange program. The 4-H Club has exchange programs. The Y has exchange programs. The Government of Canada runs the Terry Fox Centre. The Government of Canada has a number of other exchange programs. There was never a way of finding out what they were, though, so we actually created a one-stop portal called Exchanges Canada, which is supported by the government and the private sector.

The intention of Exchanges Canada is not to create, by itself, a whole bunch of new exchanges, but rather to put in the hands of all Canadians all the information that exists on exchanges in Canada. We will be increasing the number of exchanges that are being developed by 15,000 per year, with the ultimate goal of having 100,000 exchanges per year by 2005. That's our stated objective, and so far it has been working.

I must say the private sector is very interested in the initiative as well, because there are lots of people who want to invest in exchanges, but they don't know where to go or how to go. Exchanges Canada is providing a kind of one-stop-shopping for that.

Finally, in the wake of the national sports summit...actually, since I've been before you as minister, we have actually increased the sports budget, the total sport envelope, by 75%. The first new investment came in when we took the carding system for athletes and coaches and increased it by 50%—and that was in the first chapter of the second red book. Following this summit on sport, hosted by the Honourable Denis Coderre, we increased it by $10 million again, and we also created a new hosting policy.

When I became minister, we had this crazy idea that the only games we could host were multi-sport games, which basically meant we could host the Olympics or the Pan American Games, and that was it on an international level. The government would not support any single-sport hosting event, including athletics, which has literally dozens of participants. We've changed that policy and have brought in a realistic policy, because we also understand that it's important for young people to get a sense of excitement in nation-building. Investment in sport is therefore a good investment.

This new sport policy will put particular focus on youth, increased excellence, and building capacity, and we're up to almost $90 million in sport now. But certainly one of the things that came out loud and clear from the summit was that we also need to work a lot more collaboratively with all the partners around the table, because if you're running a local rec centre and the local school board has a gym that's closed at night and your rec centre is open at night but not in the day.... There are lots of resources out there that we're not utilizing in the best fashion possible.

I think one of the greatest outcomes of the sport summit—for which I have to give a lot of credit to Denis Coderre—is that it was the first time you actually had a process for all of the players around the table—not just at the governmental level, but also at the operational level, meaning the athletes themselves, the NSOs and the PSOs—working toward a coordinated strategy. That should help.

I know that was probably too long, Mr. Chair, but I will stop there and await your questions.

The Chair: Thank you, Minister.

Mrs. Gallant.

Ms. Cheryl Gallant (Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, Canadian Alliance): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have three questions that are unrelated to one another.

I'd first like to welcome the minister and her officials to the committee, and I particularly thank the minister for her comments during question period.

The Canadian Alliance supports and recognizes the contributions that veterans have made, though the delay in announcing the construction of the new Canadian War Museum means that an estimated 100,000 veterans will go to their greater reward while never seeing the museum. Therefore, there certainly is some urgency in making that announcement.

Veterans tell me the problem is that the Canadian War Museum operates under the control of the Canadian Museum of Civilization, and that unless the War Museum becomes autonomous and is operated with people with an actual, vested interest in its displays and heritage, it won't receive the attention the veterans deserve. So the first question is, why is the minister ignoring the requests of the veterans and refusing to transfer the control of the new museum to Veterans Affairs?

• 1035

Mr. Chairman, my next question refers to the Canadian Television Fund. I understand the Auditor General has some concerns with the elements of the way funds are allocated. I'd be interested in hearing what progress has been made to address those concerns. Specifically, concerns have been raised by independent film-makers across Canada that the distribution of funds from this fund is biased to Toronto and Montreal to the exclusion of the rest of Canada.

For example, you told the House in my response to the question that funding to Alberta from this program had gone from $50 million to $200 million when, in fact, for last year, the total for all of Canada was about $200 million, of which Alberta received $4.9 million. Some years P.E.I. received no funding. It's evident that this program is contributing to the disunity in our country. So the second question is, what are you going to do to correct that problem?

My final question relates to the 2001 interim operational guidelines for the law enforcement developed by Parks Canada to meet the Labour Code ruling of January 31 of this year. That ruling identified that park wardens were not being provided with the proper safety equipment to do their jobs properly. The fact that wardens are being trained in the use of firearms—in this case shotguns and rifles—is an admission on the part of Parks Canada that firearms are the only way to ensure the protection of park wardens.

The Canada Labour Relations Board safety inspector recognized that the proper equipment was not being provided. Yet park wardens and chief park wardens are being told that with the risk inherent in law enforcement activities, they are responsible to see to it that park wardens have the appropriate equipment.

Considering the fact that the presence of a firearm, in this case shotguns, which are being issued to about 300 wardens in law enforcement activities to comply with the Canada Labour Code direction, would heighten the potential for a violent confrontation, rather than resolving a volatile situation by talking to an individual with a sidearm that is holstered, which cannot be done with a long-barrel firearm. Why does the minister fail to issue sidearms, which has been recommended in study after study by Parks Canada? What happens if the labour board rules against you? And what happens after the final appeal?

Ms. Sheila Copps: I'll do them in reverse order.

The operations of Parks Canada and the parks legislation are the purview of the chief executive officer, so I would ask Tom Lee. You may want to bring him at some point to discuss these issues. He can certainly speak to the issues of the labour board ruling. I don't operate the parks.

The Chair: Mr. Lee spoke about it last week.

Ms. Sheila Copps: He's the right person to talk to because my mandate is to give a long-term vision for the parks. I don't operate the parks.

On the issue of the CTF, perhaps you misunderstood what I said in the House on the issue of television funding. What I said in the House is that as a result of a number of audiovisual policies of the government, including the licensing for A-Channel, including the CTF, the Alberta television industry had gone from $50 million in 1995 to $153 million in 2000. Unfortunately, during that time the Government of Alberta cancelled their tax credit. They are one of the few major areas in the country that do not offer a tax credit. Since that decision was made by their government to abolish their tax credit, they are seeing the exodus of some production that had existed.

So when I made my comments, it was not in specific relation to the CTF. It was basically saying that because of the policies of the government, there are many jobs being created in the television industry in Alberta.

The numbers will show that in 1996 there was $90 million in production. In 1999 it went to $148 million. It's at $153 million now and we believe it could probably top $200 million directly, if the provincial government would support a corollary tax credit. They have one in Ontario, in Newfoundland, and in Nova Scotia. They definitely have one in Quebec and also in British Columbia. They're developing one in New Brunswick.

• 1040

So there's certainly an opportunity there, if she would like to speak to her colleagues in the provincial House.

On the issue of how the fund works, one of the things we wanted to do was to try to ensure...and I guess I'm looking at it as a parent, frankly. It's had the by-product of being an incredible catalyst in the television industry at a time when we were moving to the multichannel universe. Because when we launched the first 17 specialty channels, everybody said that the American channels were going to be the ones that people watched, not the Canadian channels. In fact, it's been the opposite. Right now in the audiovisual industry, the $100 million we invested in the CTF across the country resulted last year in 8,000 hours of new television programming.

We decided that instead of setting it up so that the government sits and decides who gets assistance, we would set up a system where in order to be considered for any money from the Canadian Television Fund you have to have a licence to be aired on prime time in the following two years in the three categories that we consider to be under-represented—namely, children's, documentary, and drama.

There's an innate discipline in the system, which means that the actual cost of operating the Canadian Television Fund in terms of the operational cost is under 5%. I think it's actually about 3.5%. If you contrast with most other funds, most other funds on average cost 15% to 20% to operate, and historically, if it's the government delivering the program, a lot of times the cost for delivery is much higher.

We decided not to split it, and we have a regional bonusing system that gives additional points for productions that occur outside of Metropolitan Montreal, Metropolitan Toronto, and Metropolitan Vancouver. We had found that those were the three areas where all the productions seemed to be getting drawn in. We created a bonusing system that encourages people to take their productions outside of those three major centres.

One of the reasons the production has been so successful is that instead of giving the money to a broadcaster, who only has then an interest in fulfilling through the CTF the requirements that they undertook in the licensing process of the CRTC, we forced the fund...or we created the mandate so that the fund only funds independent productions.

So you have this tremendous synergy, because the independent producers have to shop their stories to the networks. They have to get on prime time. But the network must also work with the independent producer.

In the past, when a lot of these kinds of things were made available, they would go into the network production costs and you might not see the results. We try to make it very program-driven. So you can actually look at the 8,000 hours of programming in one year. That creates a lot of jobs across the country.

Now, there will always be issues of regional distribution. I'm from Hamilton and I can tell you that if you look at the cultural dollars that are spent by our government in the province of Ontario, the vast majority tends to go to Toronto. But that's also a function of the industry, the entertainment and cultural industry, etc. So you always try to find a balance. But it doesn't make a lot of sense to say that you will only give out assistance based on regions.

What we are trying to do is to give out the investments based on production capacity, and I think you can test that fund against any other investment of the government and you will not be able to quantify such incredible results that are delivered to ordinary people who turn on their television in any other area of public investment.

So the issues on governance have already been addressed. They were addressed last year when the CTF changed its governance structure.

One of the challenges that I think the Auditor General has is that a number of these new organizations are being developed that are.... This organization is not totally arm's length, because we have three members that are on the board. But the reality is that we're trying to do more and we're trying to involve the private sector. We're trying to lever more dollars. To do that, it isn't always housed within a department of the government. So there are certain pluses and minuses. We're trying to deal with the regulatory and transparency issues that relate to that.

The Chair: Could you address the Canadian War Museum question?

• 1045

Ms. Sheila Copps: The Canadian War Museum, yes. The question is with regard to veterans asking that it go to Veterans Affairs....

That's your BlackBerry? There's a vibrate function on it, actually. It's hard to find. It's an option. It works. You can do a little LED light.

Sorry.

I know, because I've discussed it with the Minister of Veterans Affairs, that the department is not interested in taking over the War Museum. I don't where that information came from, because right now Veterans Affairs is challenged to deal with the health, safety, and well-being of the veterans. There was a proposal—and maybe this is what you're confusing it with—under the auspices of Marcel Massé to decouple the War Museum's management from the Canadian Museum of Civilization management, and that particular proposal is under active consideration.

I created an advisory board, which has actually been operating with the full authority of the agency, because we were very concerned that, at the time the original proposal was developed for the Holocaust gallery in the War Museum, there had not been sufficient consultation. So we actually created an advisory committee, chaired by Barney Danson. We brought in a number of veterans and representatives. He's recently been replaced by a former general in the armed forces, General Paul Manson. He has an advisory committee of veterans and others to help him with the rollout to the War Museum. And we're very interested in reaching a point where it can run as a stand-alone operation.

One of the things that we would love to see, and one of the reasons that we were glad to be able to move it to the new location, is that it's going to be 10% bigger. It's going to be much more visible to the public, and what we would like to do is follow on the work of Jack Granatstein and Joe Geurts and actually get a lot more work done with the Legions.

We've started funding interactive, school-ready materials through the Legions that we would like to see nurtured through the War Museum but available across the country, because we're hoping that the War Museum is a living museum, not just for people who come and visit Ottawa. It also might develop linkages. I'm sure that in every part of the country there are probably military service institutes and other museums that have a pretty good collection but have no way of linking them together. In the longer term, we envisage that the War Museum would play this role of a major museological arm for these museum organizations across the country.

The Chair: We have a real problem. We have to surrender this room at 11 o'clock, so we have only about 10 minutes left. I will have to share the time as fairly as possible and perhaps have brief questions and brief answers.

Madam Gagnon.

[Translation]

Ms. Christiane Gagnon: Thank you.

Madam Minister, you know that we cannot approve of Canadian Heritage strategy, that refers to a single culture, that refers to linguistic duality rather than to the Canadian culture and Quebec's culture. Because of the fairly high level of investment in the cultural sector, we are justified in asking questions and getting answers that are a little clearer.

I would like to bring up the strategy of Exchanges Canada. I know that Canadian Heritage provides $1.9 million for accompanying students in Canada. We are not opposed to Quebec students learning English, but there is no accountability to members of Parliament. Although we are asked to approve any programs in our ridings, there is no accountability for the money spent by Canadian Heritage. What is this money used for? We are told that it is used for the infrastructure used to host the students.

As for the 65% funding provided by Canadian Heritage for Canada Day, why is it that so much money goes to Quebec, although everyone knows that Canada is a large country and that very little money goes to the other provinces?

There is also the $4.8 million given to Option Canada right in the middle of the referendum campaign, which violated the Referendum Act. There is also the “clearly Canadian” criterion for investing in feature films. We have met with Quebec artists who feel that their access to credits is being blocked by this criterion, because whenever a film is not 100% Canadian, they lose the credit.

There was an announcement in the newspapers about $15 million being set aside for the Plains of Abraham. It appears that you approved an amount of $15 million for the Plains of Abraham, for propaganda purposes. That is a great deal of money.

• 1050

When you provide certain types of funding for artists, it is as though you were holding them hostage so that they will buy into Canadian culture.

I know that you do not have the time to answer all these questions, but it is the general principle of Canadian Heritage's support in the various sectors of cultural activity in Quebec that we denounce. Thank you.

[English]

Ms. Sheila Copps: I don't know if it's possible to get another...is there anybody in the other room?

The Chair: You mean if we can't get the other room?

Ms. Sheila Copps: Yes.

The Chair: No, unfortunately, they're carrying on there.

Ms. Sheila Copps: Okay.

[Translation]

With regard to exchanges, I am sorry, Ms. Gagnon, but it has been the same way for five years. With regard to Option Canada, as I explained to you five, four, three, two and one year ago, the amount was equal to the amount spent for the sovereignty option. I have nothing more to say on that, especially since I was not the minister at the time. It is difficult to explain something that happened when I was not the minister.

As far as exchanges are concerned, we are not dealing here with exchanges to learn English, Ms. Gagnon. For example, we have an exchange program with the Association des étudiants canadiens- français. One would not think that it is in order to learn English. I would like to point out that, last year, the members of Parliament for Charlesbourg, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, Chambly, Joliette, Jonquière, Laurentides, Longueuil, Repentigny, Sherbrooke, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, Saint-Jean and Trois- Rivières thought that this was a good program, because they took part in it.

You say that you are not bothered by the fact that people visit all parts of Canada, but you find the amount of $1.9 million exorbitant. I have projects in your ridings that add up to more than $1.9 million and that does not seem to be too high; $1.9 million is not very much to enable students to travel across the country.

As for the other questions, it is hard to make things work when you think that there is only one culture in Canada. I would invite you to go to Newfoundland. Go and visit Mr. Hearn's riding. You are perhaps not aware of it, but there is a dictionary of the Newfoundland language. I myself have learned some things from my husband.

[English]

Do you know what a “jeezler” is?

A voice: A jeezler. Oh, oh.

Ms. Sheila Copps: Okay. He knows what a jeezler is.

Mr. Rodger Cuzner (Bras d'Or—Cape Breton, Lib.): Loyola is one.

Ms. Sheila Copps: I'm just saying that

[Translation]

it is hard to think of two cultures. When you travel in my riding...

Ms. Christiane Gagnon: That is not what I said. I said that there was a Quebec culture.

Ms. Sheila Copps: You spoke of two cultures, as though there was a kind of amorphous Canadian culture and a vertical Quebec culture. This is not the case. The cultures of Canada are always developing. Take the example of a band from Saskatchewan, Wide Mouth Mason. I believe that in this band, there is one young man whose parents were born in Pakistan, another who is an Aboriginal person, and another of a different origin... In any event, they are from all kinds of backgrounds. Take the example of Celtic life, the renaissance of Celtic music goes back to our roots. My great- grandfather was Acadian. He learned Acadian dancing from the francophones, but he lived on Cape Breton Island.

When we talk about cultures, we have to realize that cultures are constantly developing. That is why I find your comment on languages somewhat contradictory. One of the foundations of our cultural policies is that we must support cultural development in both official languages. Does Antonine Maillet not have the right to be edited and published in French, because she lives in New Brunswick?

Ms. Christiane Gagnon: That is not what that means.

• 1055

Ms. Sheila Copps: That is why I spoke specifically of cultures. Of course, there is a deep-rooted Quebec culture, and Quebeckers have taken the time to keep their language and their culture alive, whereas this has not been the case in other parts of Canada. However, it is also true that there are currently one million francophones outside Quebec who are in the process of repatriating their language and their culture, and vice versa. We must help them. Our plans in the cultural sector must be based on respect for cultural diversity, which means that we must assist and contribute to a number of cultural expressions. That is what we are trying to do.

[English]

Is there any other room that we can get?

The Chair: There's a room across the hall, which is very small, room 208.

A voice: Does it accommodate this many members?

The Chair: A lot of people will have to stand. It's a small room. Okay?

Do people have other committee meetings?

Mr. Bonwick.

Mr. Paul Bonwick (Simcoe—Grey, Lib.): I think you will find that there are likely others who have committee meetings as well. I mean, I'll miss my next committee meeting.

The Chair: Well, you have to give a signal to the minister.

Mr. Paul Bonwick: No, that's fine. We don't get her very often, so most certainly it's okay.

The Chair: We'll go to the Liberal side, to Mr. Bonwick and Mr. Harvey.

Mr. Bonwick.

Mr. Paul Bonwick: Are we doing that here?

The Chair: Yes.

Mr. Paul Bonwick: Mr. Chair, I have to express my frustration before I address my two quick questions. It never ceases to amaze me that, when we have an opportunity to discuss with the Minister of Canadian Heritage the cultural situation, present and future, for the entire country, the Alliance Party spends an inordinate amount of time on this feverish desire to see people carry guns in parks. We need a little bit of a reality check here at the committee, certainly from the Alliance standpoint.

That said, I want to express my appreciation to the minister for acting as a champion of the committee and Canadian culture in cabinet with regard to the $500 million announcement the Prime Minister made. It was something that went beyond my wildest expectations two years ago, and I certainly offer my thanks to that.

But more specifically, Minister, in that $500 million announcement, I'm wondering what assurances regional areas and rural areas like the one I represent, and many members around this table.... What assurances can we offer so that regional areas will benefit from this announcement, so it's not just Montreal; it's not just Halifax; and it's not just Vancouver?

Secondly, what mechanisms will we use to deliver those dollars to make sure that we're able to back up our assurances to regions like Simcoe—Grey or regional areas across the country?

Ms. Sheila Copps: Do we have to move? Surrender!

Okay, I surrender.

The Chair: We're being asked to give the room to the health committee. Should we go to room 208 and carry on?

Ms. Sheila Copps: Sure.

Some hon. members: Agreed.

The Chair: We'll move over to that room.

• 1059

• 1108

The Chair: So we'll just carry on, Mr. Bonwick. Have you finished with your question?

Ms. Sheila Copps: Paul was asking about regional distribution. Being a person who's not from a capital city, I've tried very hard to develop policies that will interconnect, and it's a challenge. So a lot of this is actually based on building community capacity.

So, for example, with the money we're going to be spending on content connection, the intention is to be able to take all the small artistic organizations and museums across the country and actually assist them in interconnecting and digitizing their processes and their stories, etc. That's $100 million out of the $500 million.

In addition to that, we put $80 million aside for cultural infrastructure. We're rolling out the development in the next few weeks. If you take the country as a whole, $80 million is not a huge amount of money. We're hoping to use the $80 million to lever investment in pre-existing facilities with a focus on heritage.

So if you have a small building in your own area that you would like to convert into a particular vocation, and you have other partners.... The local and provincial partners on the infrastructure program also have to put museums and cultural organizations on their list.

I know you probably feel this is in your area, but in our area as well, a lot of times the local council will tell you this is their top priority, but they never put it on their list on other government programs. The department cannot be a stop-gap for other infrastructure, because the amount of money for infrastructure is just so small.

There will be $30 million of this money set aside for this registry. I believe it will be the single most important initiative that we can launch in the preservation of built heritage. It will mean that instead of having to get a designation and having a non-profit organization take over a facility...of the 900 historic places we have right now, about 100 of them are run by the government, and the balance are run by non-profit organizations. We know we have about 20,000 buildings of an historic nature across the country, and in order to grow that number, in order to develop those buildings, we need to engage the private sector.

They're only going to be engaged if you level the playing field, as I would call it, by creating a tax advantage for developing heritage buildings. That will be accessible in every part of the country.

We've had two examples in the U.K. and in the United States; you've had tremendous private sector interest. If you're looking at the development, for example, of bed and breakfasts, restaurants, small boutique-style stores—a lot of small towns in rural Ontario that I've travelled to over the years are suffering the strip mall syndrome we're facing in a lot of bigger urban areas as well. As people build out, the downtown core is emptied and there's nobody there to bring it back.

So the $30 million heritage tax credit is actually to put in place the system, to work with provincial and local governments, and to encourage corollary tax credits. As I mentioned, in Manitoba they already have a heritage tax credit because the Mayor of Winnipeg was very keen on that development. They actually have an application now to be designated as a world heritage site for the garment district, for the Prairie Theatre Exchange, which is incredible.

Lunenburg in Nova Scotia is a world heritage site. That small town decided themselves to pursue the designation, and we assisted with it. It became a world draw and as a result has tremendous tourism gain.

In terms of the other proponents, there is a $30 million envelope for stabilization, because we're trying to encourage local communities to work together.

One thing I'm going to be flushing out in about two weeks at a meeting of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities is a dream that I have, which took me five years to put together. I think it's going to be awesome. It's actually the creation of a recognition of the cultural capitals of Canada.

When I was first appointed minister I went to Europe. We were invited to a meeting in Thessaloniki, and Thessaloniki had been designated the cultural capital of Europe for that particular year. So all of the countries actually pursued activities in Thessaloniki for that year.

We devised a typically Canadian program, which will be delivered through the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, where every community in Ontario or Canada of a certain size will be asked to apply for a designation as Canada's cultural capital for that year.

In order to achieve that, you'll have to have all the arts organizations working together. So instead of having the art gallery fighting with the ballet, fighting with the museum for money, they come together, they create an application, and there will be a national recognition and a cash award. This program will be operated on an annualized basis, starting next year. That will be available to small towns, medium-sized towns, and large cities. That's how it's being developed.

It's another piece of that puzzle in recognition of the fact that frequently when you spend big investment dollars in the centres of cultural renaissance, which probably, most properly, would be Halifax, Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver, a lot of other communities would like to be a party to that. And we have to find ways of getting them in on it.

There is sound recording also. I think if you look at the East Coast Music Awards, the West Coast Music Awards, the Prairie Music Awards, and also the Aboriginal Achievement Awards, there's a lot of potential in the sound recording business for anybody to be a player. All it requires is a burning room, and not even that nowadays.

Mr. Paul Bonwick: Thanks to the minister for providing a response to that question, for giving us the extra time.

Minister, please continue to remind your department that rural Canada needs investment dollars and they have to stay the course for us to make sure that areas like mine, areas like those in Labrador, wherever the case might be, have that kind of help.

It's a sad day. I'm so angry that Mr. Day's Alliance Party equates our Canadian culture to guns and then they excuse themselves early from the meeting when the minister's here trying to discuss Canadian culture. That typifies the Canadian Alliance's approach to Canadian culture.

• 1110

Ms. Sheila Copps: Paul, one of our challenges as a department—and we do have an initial agreement—is to engage Canadians in the recognition that culture is actually a contributor to the economy. If you look at the investments that are made...and I know the human resources department took a little drubbing for certain investments they made in culture.

I know in our area there was a music festival that was supported in Fort Erie. I think the local human resources office was trying to respond to the fact that there are potential short- and long-term jobs that come out of summer festivals. They took a chance and they did invest it and they were crucified in the newspaper.

As soon as you talk about music or the arts, people say, this is a subsidy. The figures will show that the economy in cultural industries is growing at a faster rate than in any other area of the job sector. So we need to also integrate that thinking into the broader view of government.

In the rural strategy we developed, for example, we don't look at culture, and that's something we can look at through training.

I had a conference last Thursday and Friday night with the aboriginal cultural tourism organization and various representatives of the aboriginal community. Many of them are in rural and remote areas and they have access to programs, but not programs for culture, when what people really want to see when they visit them is culture. So somehow we have to continue to make the case that investment in culture is an economic investment also, and that the regional economic dollars that are spent on developing local communities should not necessarily exempt culture or cultural industries.

If you built a sound recording studio in Listowel, that's an investment. If you go to the usual sources, they'll say, that's culture, go over to the heritage department. We don't spend on major training and major infrastructure development, so it's a challenge.

The Chair: Mr. Harvey.

[Translation]

Mr. André Harvey (Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, Lib.): Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I want to begin by thanking the minister and, above all, by praising her for always being there for all the regions of Canada. I think she has always shown a quite incredible amount of receptiveness.

In his most recent book, Reflections of a Siamese Twin, Mr. Saul writes that the problem does not lie between the federal and provincial governments, but between the provincial governments and the resource regions. This is a statement that deserves a closer look. Mr. Saul is a fellow with a good knowledge of all regions of the country, and we should closely analyze his thoughts on this subject.

I believe, in resource regions, that the federal government has a huge potential to influence, and sometimes even alter, the important debates that are carried on from the major Canadian capitals. Madam Minister, the resource regions are experiencing very serious economic and cultural problems, and I believe that our government has come to understand them, particularly in the basic direction it has given to its research policy. In the research sector, we have managed to get our government, in the last few months, to take action on the aluminum processing file.

I would like to fill in the picture for you, and in the end I will come back to the cultural sector. Our region has lost 8,000 jobs in the aluminum industry because the plants are being modernized and people are laid off. That is why all of our young people leave. Many young people aged 15 to 30 in the Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean region leave for Montreal and Quebec City.

Our government is trying to turn the situation around. Canada is a major international aluminum producer. I am talking about an industry with which I am somewhat familiar. We produce two million tons of aluminum ingots, which are first-rate products. However, Canada imports 500,000 tons of finished aluminum products every year. This represents tens of thousands of jobs, Mr. Chairman, that are created in Europe and in the United States using our ingots, produced with cheap electricity.

Our government therefore decided to focus its efforts on research and development, and some interesting things are being done. There was further evidence of this a few weeks ago, with regard to boreal biodiversity. What used to be called the Saint- Félicien Zoo will in the future, Madam Minister, thanks to your assistance, be known as a conservation centre for boreal biodiversity. Our region will upgrade itself somewhat in the area of research and will be a member of international organizations.

• 1115

But we cannot stop at the purely economic and tourist sectors; there is a whole cultural component. I know that you are fully aware of the fact that, as far as culture is concerned—and I want this to be on the record—the regions are ignored. When I read that $500 million has been announced for the CBC or the Canada Council, I know very, very well that these agencies do not have much of an obligation to help the resource regions. In all the provinces, resource regions are ignored by the provincial governments.

I do not want the federal government to just transfer money to national organizations that are not even familiar with the resource regions. There are people living in these regions who constitute a cultural reservoir with unbelievable potential. We contribute to the cultural wealth of the Montreal region with our artists from Saguenay—Lac-St-Jean. Madam Minister, I do not need to give you any names, because you know them all personally. Therefore, I feel that the federal government should be careful in allocating funds. It must be careful when it deals with the provinces, because when the provinces receive federal money, this money does not get as far as the regions.

When it comes to culture...

The Chair: Mr. Harvey, please ask your question.

Mr. André Harvey: Yes, here now is my specific question. I suppose I should ask it.

Ms. Sheila Copps: It will make a good mailing to his riding.

Mr. André Harvey: Yes, it will make a good householder.

I am not going to talk about the Canada Council because I have already spoken enough about it. It says here: "Renewed Physical Infrastructure." If there is $80 million set aside for renewed physical infrastructure, then that means that halls will be modernized with this money. In areas where there are no halls...

Ms. Sheila Copps: Yes.

Mr. André Harvey: This refers to concert halls. I have a population of 300,000, but there are no concert halls. Why was this physical infrastructure component not broadened? Instead of simply referring to renewed infrastructure, it could also include new physical infrastructure for culture. This is my small concern. I have confidence, Madam Minister, in our national organizations, but not too much confidence. Thank you.

The Chair: Before the minister answers, I must tell you that the clerk informs me that we did not manage to get an interpreter. I thought that there was an interpreter. In fact, there must be an interpreter during committee meetings. If someone is having problems, please let me know—either a member of the committee or a member of the public.

[English]

If there's any problem with that—

[Translation]

Ms. Sheila Copps: Will there be minutes? If it is taped, then there will be minutes that will follow.

The Chair: It is being taped. If there is no problem, we shall continue.

Mr. André Harvey: Normally, this would be a serious problem, but since the circumstances are exceptional, I agree to continue, even if it means that I will have to repeat what I am saying now at another meeting.

The Chair: You will not have to repeat this, because it is being taped.

Mr. André Harvey: So, it is not a waste of time.

Ms. Sheila Copps: It is being taped and it will be done after the fact.

First, you have to look at the whole situation. You are completely right when you say that we need to balance the demands. The problem we are experiencing is partly attributable to the fact that we are living through a transition period between a manufacturing-based economy and primary products, and a service- based economy and cultural products. The consumption of cultural products in Canada increases by almost 10% every year, whereas in the steel industry, for example in my city, production is increasing but employment is dropping.

Currently, in Hamilton, they are producing more steel with one quarter the number of employees that they used a few years ago. How do we deal with this transition? Why is it that we do not accept that, for example, cultural training be included in our training policy? It makes no sense to say that it is only within the Department of Canadian Heritage that we will be making this type of investment.

I would like to congratulate the CBED which... For example, in tourism, there is a lot of potential, but we also need to see... The Quebec government has been harsh in its criticism of us, in which they say we are interfering in matters of provincial jurisdiction, whereas in 1979, when Mr. Clark was Prime Minister of Canada, the government signed an agreement with all of the provinces to give them the right to have their own lotteries. In this 1979 agreement, it stated that so-called national high culture, such as the Grands Ballets Canadiens, the Royal Winnipeg Ballet, the National Ballet of Canada, etc., be funded by the government of Canada, and that the provinces, which took in millions and millions of dollars in investment profits, would invest this money in culture and in sport.

• 1120

We said that if we wanted to streamline what we were doing, it was not necessary for both governments to make investments in all sectors in order to create the pool of artists, that the education system was under provincial jurisdiction, and that the federal government would be there to intervene when they became professionals. So that is basically it, the gap between the reality and the application.

We will make an annual investment of $135 million plus $25 million, for a total of $160 million in the Canada Council. However, this is for all of Canada. Obviously, the Canada Council must focus on professional groups.

Now that our society is aging, people have more free time and there are therefore more people getting involved in arts, crafts, theatre, etc. The demand is therefore greater, but we cannot replace the agreement which was signed with the provinces in 1979. Currently, Loto-Québec collects millions and millions of dollars which are not allocated to culture. Despite the fact that the province has signed an agreement, it spends this money elsewhere and then tells us to do our part, but the two must not do the same thing.

What we have done with museums, for example, a provincial government could not do. It cannot link all of Canada's museums and help more than 2,000 museums. We need to establish objectives to accomplish what the provinces cannot accomplish. Even if we are asked to fund, for example, the cultural or sporting group for my area and we do the same thing with the province, we know that there will not be enough money to do so. This is why we need to consider the larger context.

Second, when we...

[English]

The Chair: Minister, I think some members are leaving at 11:30. We have two opposition members still to go. So we could go on to Mrs. Lill now?

Ms. Sheila Copps: Sure, but what I was saying was that in 1979 an agreement was signed. And as to that agreement not being delivered on, that is not something we can do. We have to try to rationalize what it is we're doing with provincial governments, because everybody can't be everything to everybody. So we're trying, but it's a delicate balance.

We also want to make sure we're investing in excellence. That's why, when we created the television fund, we looked at children's programming, because everybody gets to see those shows, and hopefully some of them will be inspired to become actors, so it will create jobs.

But you can't say it's all under one department. If culture is one of the greatest areas of job growth for the government, then we need to be bringing a broader economic perspective to it, which we have not fully engaged in at this point. Some parts of the government say, if it's culture, everything goes to Canadian Heritage. But if you look at the investments, if we're going to be doing job creation, if we're trying to transform the economy, if culture is one of the new jobs in the transforming economy, we have to find a way of reflecting that in the decisions we make on regional investment and other things. That's been a struggle, and we're continuing to struggle with that, although we're getting some good results.

We'll come back later.

The Chair: Mrs. Lill.

Ms. Wendy Lill (Dartmouth, NDP): I'm very interested in hearing about the new policy initiatives you talk about in Switzerland to produce a separate instrument outside the WTO. The last time you were here we talked about the culture club, so it's obviously evolved. But I'm concerned about the GATS, I'm concerned about the FTAA, and I'm concerned about these agreements that have been said to be WTO plus. I need to know more about this initiative. It sounds like heaven on earth, but we all want to see these kinds of exemptions pulled out of—get rid of chapter XI, get a new culture clause that will just push it all away. Quite frankly, I'm not sure what kind of status it's going to have.

• 1125

The second question concerns our broadcasting study, and again, it's a moving target kind of question. We're very pleased to be doing this. We're very glad that you gave us recognition and support in the House the other day. But for us to do a credible job, I think the government must let all parties know that this is not the time to restructure all over the place to escape any possible government action. We have the Toronto Star asking for two TV licences. We have CanWest Global, Southam, Bell Globemedia, and CTV all waiting for seven-year licences from the CRTC. So will you give this committee real support for our study by telling the CRTC not to make any long-term commitments that change the broadcasting landscape while our study is taking place?

Ms. Sheila Copps: Yes. I think that's very important, and one of the reasons I wanted it to come to this committee is that if you are going to make major changes in broadcasting, they should be done by the front door, not by the back door. It's important that we have a transparent public process, and I think the best place for that process to be carried out is through a committee of the Parliament of Canada. That's why I said what I said last week about the strength and the importance of Parliament. It is extremely important that the current Broadcasting Act be respected until it is amended by an act of Parliament. I think the mandate we've asked you to undertake, coupled with the background work that's been tabled with the committee, the studies we've done on the whole issue of media concentration, should form the basis for any new policy, not other parties.

On the meeting in Switzerland, the standing committee actually had a subcommittee of foreign affairs and heritage that looked at the whole instrument, and as a result of the work of that committee, the cabinet adopted a policy that we need an instrument outside the WTO to treat culture. We don't want culture on the table at the WTO, and we will not trade it away at the WTO. As a result of that initiative, we have begun the work. There's an actual committee. If you're interested, we can certainly bring the representatives of that committee to this committee.

We've actually looked at getting a longer-term view of where this is going, because the WTO negotiations are being undertaken by my colleague Minister Pettigrew. I believe the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs has an invitation to Mr. Pettigrew to come and give us a further roll-out on that issue, and I have also been invited to attend the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs to look at where we're at with the separate instrument.

In September the Swiss will be the hosts of the fourth meeting of the International Network on Culture Policy, which now has more than 50 countries that have joined, and at that meeting we hope to have a group of founding members who take this as a policy position of their government. We have strong support from the French government and some other key partners in concerns for cultural diversity. The challenge is that there is certainly not an appetite at the international level to develop another organization, so there's been some discussion about where this organization might be situated. Through Canadian Heritage and through the work we did in the founding meeting and then the meeting in Oxaca, we have a small secretariat that works here coordinating the working group on the new instrument. There are 16 countries that have been participating in that work, including South Africa and Russia. It's quite an interesting group, and at a future date the DG of the department could come and give you some more details on that, if you want.

• 1130

Ms. Wendy Lill: But the idea would be that it would override the present—

Ms. Sheila Copps: The idea would be that all of these areas would be taken out of any WTO agreements. The French tend to look at audiovisual as culture, but in Canada we have issues in book publishing and investment issues in television, audiovisual, and sound recording. We've been pretty successful. We've developed a pretty good template. Even though we're currently non-signatory on services, you would actually create an instrument outside of the WTO where the culture ministers of the various countries would convene on a regular basis to develop a system for determining what constitutes legitimate protection and what is merely a trade barrier in disguise. That would be headed by ministers of culture.

One of the places we were looking at was OMPI. I know the French are very committed to the process through UNESCO. One of the challenges we have is making sure it's a political organization. When you sign WTO agreements, political commitments are made that potentially can have repercussions. In the current structure of UNESCO, it's primarily an NGO and a consultative body, and it doesn't have any kind of political mandate.

So that's really where the discussion is right now. But there certainly is an appetite to create this instrument for culture outside of the WTO.

Ms. Wendy Lill: Thank you.

The Chair: Mr. Hearn.

Mr. Loyola Hearn: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

First of all, let me express my appreciation to the minister and her staff not only for coming but also for taking the time and putting up with the inconvenience of moving here to hear our questions. We certainly appreciate it.

I have a couple of observations and a couple of short questions. First of all, I'd like to briefly mention the CBC. As it puts its new plan together, I'm not sure if what I see happening fulfils its mandate to provide service to all regions of the country. It seems as if the concerns about expenditures and keeping within budget and raising money itself, selling off transmitters, etc., may be weakening the service to the regions. I have some concerns about that.

The other observation is in relation to something you said about the use of dollars to foster culture and heritage. Certainly, I see it happening in our own province with HRDC and ACOA funding. Some of the best projects that are being done are in relation to the development of our cultural and heritage sites. These things are becoming major tourism attractions and are bringing new dollars into our province. I congratulate your department on that and suggest you keep it going.

In relation to that, one of my questions has to do with archaeology, which hasn't been mentioned this morning. In our own area the archaeological dig at the colony of Avalon is drawing worldwide attention. But there is at least one other find that predates that, which is of extreme interest. I'd like your comments on how we should look at pursuing major archaeological finds.

Working with other agencies, including HRDC and ACOA, which I mentioned, the coast guard's plan right now is to automate a lot of the heritage lighthouses, and that's a major concern. I think in losing the individuals involved there, we're losing a lot of our culture and heritage.

Finally, I have to come back to the Montreal Canadiens. I'm not a fan of the Canadiens, by the way. I'm a Leafs fan. I was going to ask the minister, how can you sell the Canadiens? Are they worth anything? But I'll refrain from doing that.

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

Mr. Loyola Hearn: The Montreal Canadiens are part of our culture, and it's a bit dangerous.

You mentioned that we have to start in the rinks, the stadiums, and whatever. I know that, too, but I would suggest that participation really comes through imitation. We started playing hockey because we saw the Montreal Canadiens and the Toronto Maple Leafs. We all have heroes. Unfortunately, mine turned out to be a Liberal senator, Mr. Mahovlich. Unless we have our professional teams, we are not going to have that participation at the lower level. I think sport, as is mentioned in your presentation this morning, is something we can't forget.

• 1135

Despite the summit, which is all well and good, I think we have to concentrate on what's happening, because our young people are drifting away from involvement. When they get away from good solid involvement, they get into trouble, and it's something we can't see happen. I'll just leave you with those.

Ms. Sheila Copps: Thank you, Loyola.

I'll take them in reverse order, starting with professional sports. There were a couple of proposals on the table that involved provincial governments assisting in small-market communities. I don't know that the Canadiens would qualify as a small-market community. But in order to get a solution, you have to have the provincial government at the table.

Going back to the issue of lotteries, we signed off on lotteries in 1979. At the moment there are provincial governments across this country that are making tremendous revenues off sports betting, none of which accrues to the parties that actually create the sport, and that's unusual. But that has to be dealt with at that level.

I know, Loyola, that you grew up watching the NHL. I grew up with the Hamilton Tiger Cats in football, which is the only all-Canadian sport at this point. Young kids are now watching the Raptors and getting role models. As the number of professional sports increases, we also have to make sure that as a government we're not there to—

Mr. Loyola Hearn: Subsidize millionaires.

Ms. Sheila Copps: —subsidize millionaires while kids can't get into hockey rinks. It's a delicate balance.

But I do think there was a case to be made, and we had some discussions with provincial governments about this. When the original lottery agreement was signed by Joe Clark, I don't think anybody realized how much would actually accrue from sports betting. My understanding is that somewhere in the neighbourhood of $260 million a year accrues to provincial coffers strictly from professional sports betting. If you took 10% of that and turned it back to small-market teams based on a betting schedule, you'd start to have some support for them, which is not coming from the taxpayers but from a direct benefit the government coffers are receiving because of the presence of sports. That's one of the things that was looked at. But that has to be done by provincial governments. We can't pick that up because, as I said, we signed over the rights in 1979.

You asked about the CBC. I think one of the things the CBC has tried to do over the last 60 years or so is to be unique. But they're also facing a lot of challenges.

When Sheila Finestone was the Liberal critic for communications, she came into our caucus meeting one day and she had a group of wires. She said, this is going to be the new technology. All of your communications will be on these little wires. We told her she was crazy. That was around 1986. I don't think, Clifford, you had been elected then. In 15 years we've had a revolution in that field, and a lot of times public policy can't necessarily keep up with that revolution.

The CBC has to continue to be on the cutting edge of that. I remember when they started making major investments on the net. I was one of those non-netters who said, if you can't pay for your other programming, why are you doing this? That's a decision that was made about five years ago that is probably going to yield tremendous results in the long term for getting young viewers and listeners. So you need to balance that off.

You can look at some of the challenges the CRTC is facing. We've given them a broadcasting framework. That framework needs to be reviewed and updated in a transparent way. But they're also dealing with a lot of things coming at them without having had a lot of prior experience. Who would have thought you would see this capacity to deliver messages into peoples' homes? At this point we're still up in the air as to what's going to happen with it. Will we actually make a go of e-commerce? Will it simply be another entertainment? What will happen to television? I'm one of those who believes a lot of people watch television because they just want to kind of kick back and not make any decisions. Maybe you're not going to go home and sit with your computer, but you're going to use it for a lot of other things. That's all part of the challenge the CRTC is facing.

• 1140

So when they're looking at these issues and looking at them in the legislative framework that we've given them, we have to recognize that we have to update that framework, but in the meantime they have to keep operating.

We can't go in on every transaction, but we can certainly say that we recognize this as a major issue. Diversity of voices is a big issue. When you look at television, do you see yourself reflected? Do we have aboriginal people? We have lots of aboriginal people in jails. Are they in positive roles on television? Do we, and are we, properly reflecting how this society has evolved? These are questions that you don't want left to the politicians, but at the same time, you need the framework, and that's why the work you're going to be doing is going to be very crucial to the future of broadcasting in Canada.

The Chair: Okay.

[Translation]

Mr. Harvey, do you have one last question?

Mr. André Harvey: No, thank you.

[English]

The Chair: We're very grateful that you have given us all this time and extended your time before us. We really appreciate your coming here today. Thank you very much.

Ms. Sheila Copps: Clifford, you may want to get in touch with the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade, because I know I have received an invitation from them to appear on the instrument issue, and they were going to have Mr. Pettigrew first. So you may want to have a chat with them as to what the role is, because last time this was done, it was actually done in a joint committee, but because the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage has been so busy with a million other things, I think he just wanted to keep rolling and get an update on what had happened with that joint committee.

The Chair: Yes, we'll find out. Thank you very much.

Thank you for coming. We appreciate it.

The meeting is adjourned.