CHPC Committee Meeting

     Good morning everyone. We're going to call this meeting number 24 of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage to order.

    Today, we have the pleasure of hosting the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages, the Honourable Shelly Glover, to our committee.

    Welcome, Minister. We're going to have you speak for 10 minutes and then for the rest of the hour we will have questions for you. Following that, we will have a half-hour with the officials from the Department of Canadian Heritage. After that half-hour, we will go in camera to work on our study.

    Minister, welcome. You have the floor for 10 minutes.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    To begin with, I would like to talk about hockey and say that last night's game was fantastic. Go, Habs, go! We are all proud today. I also want to say hello to my husband. It is my anniversary today. So, hi Bruce.

    Mr. Chair, I am delighted to be with you today as Minister responsible for Canadian Heritage. With me today are Colleen Swords, the Deputy Minister of Canadian Heritage, Robert Hertzog, the Department's Chief Financial Officer.

    l will begin with a heartfelt thanks to the committee members for your ongoing work to help strengthen the arts, culture and heritage in Canada. You have been hard at it since I was here last fall, with your studies on the 2014 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games in Sochi and on Canada's music industry. I know my departmental officials briefed you as part of their study on the music industry.

    The committee has asked me here to speak about the 2014-15 Main Estimates for the Department of Canadian Heritage and Portfolio organizations, so l will briefly go over the key elements with you.

    The total resources for the Department of Canadian Heritage for 2014-15 are $1.39 billion—$178.3 million in operating expenditures, $1.19 billion in grants and contributions, and $24.0 million in Statutory.

    This year's departmental estimates have increased by $72.8 million over 2013-14.The overall $1.39 billion figure for the department includes the transfer of $14.2 million from the National Capital Commission to the Department for the Capital Experience Program. With the transfer of the Capital Experience Program, Canadian Heritage has taken responsibility for activities including Christmas Lights Across Canada and Winterlude. I was pleased to participate in both events, and they were a huge success.

    This year, portfolio organizations are receiving $1.8 billion in appropriations as well as the $803.7 million they generate as revenues, making total resources of $2.6 billion available to them in 2014-15. In particular, the National Battlefields Commission is receiving an additional $5.6 million in funding in 2014-15—an increase of 64.8%—so that Gilmour Hill can remain open 12 months of the year. Overall, the government is providing $8.2 million from 2013-14 to 2015-16 for this project.

    All in all, the funds allocated through this year's main estimates will allow the department and the portfolio organizations to continue serving Canadians by promoting our official languages, supporting our arts, culture and heritage sectors, and fostering sport participation in this country.

    As you know, the government also tabled the 2014 Economic Action Plan, the EAP, in February, and several items reflect our strong support for arts, culture, heritage and sport. We recognize the contribution these sectors make to strengthening communities and generating economic activity. According to the most recent figures, arts, culture and heritage in this country generate close to $50 billion and 630,000 jobs each year.

    Through the economic action plan we have put in place permanent funding to programs that were due to sunset on March 31, 2015, which brings total permanent funding to $24.6 million per year for the Canada Music Fund and $39.1 million for the Canada Book Fund. We also made $79.9 million in funding permanent for arts programs, bringing total funding for core arts programs of Canadian Heritage to $120.6 million on an ongoing basis.

    The economic action plan also confirmed the permanent renewal of $25 million for the Canada Council for the Arts resulting in total ongoing funding of over $180 million annually.

    Now the combination of our artists, talent, and creativity and the support they received from Canadians has resulted in a remarkable year for the sector. At home the Governor General's awards in visual and media arts recognized eight Canadian artists in different fields such as visual arts, architecture, video, independent film, and new media.

     I was also so pleased to host the screening of Louise Archambault's Gabrielle at February's movie night. This gem of a film won a Canadian screen award for best picture and best actress for Gabrielle Marion-Rivard's incredible performance. Gabrielle also won five Jutra awards and Antoine Bertrand won a Jutra for best actor for Louis Cyr: L'homme le plus fort du monde.

    My hometown of Winnipeg put on an outstanding show for Canada in hosting this year's Juno award ceremony as well. It was a great opportunity to recognize a host of Canadian music professionals for their work: singers, songwriters, composers, musicians, and entrepreneurs. Arcade Fire's Reflektor won a Juno for album of the year and it was also certified triple platinum in March 2014. Winnipeg's own Bachman-Turner Overdrive was inducted into the Canadian Music Hall of Fame.

    The talents of Louis-Jean Cormier and Marie-Mai were recognized at the awards ceremony gala of l'ADISQ. Internationally our artists and films are being nominated at the biggest international festivals and winning many, many awards. For example, Xavier Dolan Tom à la ferme won the International Federation of Film Critics best film prize at the 2013 Venice Film Festival. Canadians Michael Bublé and Jennifer Gasoi won Grammy awards. Dany Laferrière became the first Quebecker to be elected at the prestigious the Académie française and Alice Munro won the Nobel Prize in Literature 2013, which is a first for a Canadian woman author.

    In addition to the emphasis that we place on promoting Canadian arts and culture, our government continues to celebrate and honour our history.

     The EAP noted several milestones on the road to Canada's 150^th birthday in 2017. Historic events this year include the 150^th anniversaries of the Charlottetown and Québec Conferences. To date, our Commemorate Canada program has invested approximately $7.4 million in celebrations related to these historic nation-building milestones.

     As well, our government is asking Canadians how they would like to celebrate our 150^th birthday. Individuals can have their say through an online forum at the Canada150 website, and I hope all of you will encourage your constituents to submit their ideas on how to mark this important anniversary.

    I have participated in several roundtables, and I was particularly impressed by the forward-looking views I heard from youth representatives. And similar meetings are taking place throughout the country with a range of participants representing aboriginal and linguistic minority communities, as well as business, arts, heritage and cultural sectors.

    In 2017, communities of all sizes from coast to coast to coast will join in the celebrations of our diverse, bilingual, pluralist and unique Canadian heritage.

    Our government has also reconfirmed it's commitment to sport participation and sport excellence in this country. Canada's athletes are an enormous source of pride. Witness Sochi, where we placed third in the gold medal count at both the Olympic games and the Paralympic games winning 10 gold medals at the Olympic games and seven gold medals at the Paralympic games.

    We will build on the momentum generated in Sochi by continuing to invest significantly in sport. There will be ongoing funding of nearly $23 million yearly made permanent in budget 2014 towards sport excellence, bringing total ongoing funding for sport support to $146 million.

    This includes $11 for Own the Podium, $6 million for summer team sports, $5 million for the Canadian Paralympic Committee, and $1 million a year for Special Olympics Canada.

    We will provide Special Olympics Canada with an additional $10.8 million over the next four years to help provide sport training and competition opportunities for Canadian athletes with intellectual disabilities.

    Increasing sport and physical activity among Canadians, particularly children and youth, is another priority for our government. We are providing Le Grand défi Pierre Lavoie with $1 million over two years to promote healthy living and physical activity among school children living in Quebec and in French language minority communities.

    I see John Weston over there just grinning ear to ear. I want to thank you for all of your fitness concerns and helping us all to stay active and healthy through fitness. Thank you, John.

    The 2014 economic action plan reconfirms $500 million over six years for the 2015 Pan American and Parapan American Games in Toronto. This includes $193.9 million for the Games in 2014-15, which is an increase of $71.6 million from 2013-14.

    As one of the largest multi-sport events ever held in Canada, the Games will create economic, cultural and community development opportunities for the Greater Golden Horseshoe area and beyond. They will highlight our country's sport excellence and create a sport legacy for all Canadians.

    In brief, these are the key elements of the main estimates for 2014-15 and the 2014 economic action plan. Both clearly show that our government continues to be committed to supporting arts, culture, and heritage in Canada.

    I'd now like to turn it over to your chair and answer any questions you might have.

    All right. Thank you very much, Minister.

    We're now going to go to the questions and we're going to start with Mr. Boughen for seven minutes.

    Thank you, Chair.

    Let me say welcome to the minister and to your colleagues with you. I appreciate the fact that you're giving time to sit with us and hear our issues and concerns and that we can hear from you.

    Looking ahead to the 150th anniversary of Canada, the government has some important milestones that will define our history and shape our identity. Our government takes holding these events very seriously and is working hard to ensure that the celebrations will showcase all the best of Canada. You've pointed that out, Minister. We're certainly with you on that.

    You and your department have been undertaking national consultations with a large number of Canadians to see how they would like to celebrate Canada's 150th. Could you perhaps give us an update on how these consultations are going and what are you hearing from Canadians from coast to coast to coast?

    First of all, let me thank you for that wonderful question. This is going to be a celebration of the greatest country in the world. The 150th anniversary of Confederation for Canada will be an event from coast to coast to coast that is celebrated in every locale.

    We are presently doing these consultations, as you mentioned. Here I'd like to share just one little bit of a proposal put forward by a youth from the north. As you know, we've already got a number of celebrations planned, and in this regard I think of things like the 50th anniversary of the national flag and the 100th anniversary of women's suffrage. Of course, we're in the 100th anniversary of the start of World War I and the 75th anniversary of the start World War II. Presently we're commemorating those events.

    We've got a number of events on the road to 2017 that we're already acknowledging, but there is this one young person who said to me at a youth round table that his grandmother makes quilts. He's an aboriginal boy from the Northwest Territories, and quilting is part of their tradition. He suggested that for our 150th we should get all of our youth across the country to participate in making a square that would tell people what they think of 150 years in our country, and then we should put all of those squares together from coast to coast to coast and make a beautiful quilt that would then hang in one of our national museums.

    And 50 years later the kids are going to be around still, he said, so we should get together again and have the next generation do the same with another quilt, and for years and generations to come people will be able to see how Canada has evolved and how proud we are of everything we have.

    These are the types of things I'm hearing from Canadians. And this young boy, I'll tell you, he had an impact everyone in the room.

    Aside from that, we're hearing from seniors who want to remember the sacrifices of many of our men and women in uniform, some of whom obviously gave the ultimate sacrifice so that we could have the freedoms, democracy, and liberties that we presently enjoy.

    I'm hearing from official language minority communities across the country that they want to make sure that we have both official languages, that they form part of this fabric of our Canadian identity and continue to thrive everywhere, that they're acknowledged.

    So I just hope that all of you here will endeavour to do a round table, do a consultation in your own communities, refer people to the website that's now in place and give us your ideas. We want to make this a celebration that Canadians themselves organize and tell us what they want to do. We don't want it to be a celebration where the Government of Canada is telling others how to celebrate. This is an opportunity for all Canadians to have input.

    Well, it's interesting that you mentioned quilting, because that's definitely a Canadian throwback from years and years ago that,s coming back into its own. It's interesting to hear that the young people look at it as a kind of preservative, if you will, of culture and history. Very good.

    How much time do I have, Chair?

    You have two and a half minutes, Mr. Boughen.

    Good.

    Minister, you mentioned the Juno awards, which were a resounding success. Every year they simply seem to get better and bigger and more excellent. In your opinion, why is Canadian music so important and how does it help foster and develop a strong and stable music industry in Canada?

    Thank you for mentioning music. I know you're heavily invested in a study on music at this point, and I wish you all the best in your study. I'm anxious to receive your report when it's done.

    First of all, let me tell you that Canadian music is part of our identity. When we enjoy the music that our artists put out, it reflects who we are as Canadians. Our Canadian music is essential in ensuring that we are different from our neighbours across the border. So when I think of some of the artists at the Junos, and I think of Serena Ryder and how she hosted with tremendous enthusiasm, and I think, of course, about Brett Kissel, who is phenomenal and an inspiration to so many young people.

    This is why it's important that through Canadian Heritage we provide some funding, so these artists can continue to provide Canadians with music that portrays who we are. Through budget 2014, we actually made permanent a number of measures, including permanency in the Canada Music Fund. We also continue to provide to FACTOR and Musicaction, so they can decide how to bring new musicians into this wonderful industry

     It does create huge economic benefits for Canada, huge benefits. In fact, when I think about all of the money that is put through the industry, I know there are jobs that go with that money. So for Canadians, it's not only about feeling good or feeling sad through the music that's produced, feeling proud of who we are through the Canadian content and celebrating those musicians, but it's also an economic driver and source of employment for them. So I'm proud to be able to say it's now a permanent feature of our government's plan.

    Thanks, Minister.

    You have 10 seconds.

    Only 10 seconds.

    In 10 seconds, may I simply say that the Junos in Winnipeg were awesome. Thank you to all of you who were there. I know some of you were there.

    Thank you very much.

    Mr. Nantel.

    Mr. Nantel, you have the floor for seven minutes.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    Thanks to the three of you for being with us here this morning.

    Minister, we all have very busy schedules, and I imagine yours must be much busier than mine.

     You began your remarks by thanking the committee people for conducting in-depth studies and for devoting time to them. I do not entirely share your view in that your predecessors have done very little with those studies to date. Some of our recommendations on the 150^th anniversary, for example, have clearly been overlooked on several occasions.

    The urgency in my remarks is obviously related to Radio-Canada. We will be discussing that all day. I would like to ask you some very specific questions that have been prepared on the topic.

    Did you meet with the President and CEO of CBC/Radio-Canada before he announced the last round of cuts? How often do you speak with Mr. Lacroix and members of the board?

    I want to thank the member for his question.

     I definitely meet with Mr. Lacroix from time to time. At the start of my appointment as Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages, Mr. Lacroix and some of his colleagues attended one of those meetings, and I was there with my assistants. The meeting was supposed to take an hour and a half, but it lasted three hours.

    I understand.

    I want to know everything that goes on in my department, and I pay attention when it comes to CBC/Radio-Canada. I am very proud that our government has acknowledged the importance of the role that the CBC plays in our society. That is why we grant significant funding to the agency every year.

    I am pleased to hear you say that. Thank you.

    Are there any guidelines on the mandate and role of that crown corporation's board of directors? If there are, could you send them to our committee?

    What do you mean by "guidelines"?

    Are there any eligibility criteria for becoming a member of the board at the CBC?

    I will be pleased to send you the eligibility criteria. The appointment process is quite rigorous, and we make sure all the criteria are met.

    You mentioned that some 150^th anniversary events are overlooked. If that is the case, I was not informed of the situation. I have a whole list of those items.

     I want to make sure I re-email you the report we submitted to you. We spent several months studying the celebrations for the 150^th anniversary. One of my complaints is that the activities for the 150^th have been overlooked.

    My essential point is that our committee spent a lot of time studying the music industry in the digital age.

    I hope you will have a chance to read our report, which I also hope will be unanimous. If there is a dissenting opinion, however, I hope you will take the time to read it. We have invested a great deal of time, energy and money in that study. A lot of witnesses appeared before the committee, and it will be very much appreciated if our report is considered.

    In the House, you mentioned the decline in the CBC's ratings. However, Mr. Lacroix told us exactly the contrary, that the problem with the CBC is not attributable to ratings.

    Can you give us the source for your comment on ratings? Could you also submit a copy of the document you used as a basis for saying it?

     As I mentioned, the plan for the 150^th anniversary has not yet been established. Consequently, we have overlooked nothing yet. I encourage you to send us ideas. I know you have drafted a report, but everything is still at the planning stage.

    That in a way is the problem, minister.

    Like many Canadians, I honestly wonder how it is that we have made so little progress with barely three years to go before the event. Canada's centennial celebrations in 1967 were planned virtually a decade in advance.

    Furthermore, as far as I know, a community in my electoral district has submitted its consultation report to you. Will we ultimately be coming up with something?

     To wrap up this discussion, which I consider less urgent than the one concerning the CBC, I simply want to remind you that recommendation  15 in the report called for the creation of an independent agency. That would be an independent, non-partisan agency that would travel the country to conduct the consultations rather than the Minister of Canadian Heritage.

    You are not unaware that I appreciate your short answers, since I also have to talk about the CBC.

    On April 9, we asked you some questions about the mandate of our public broadcaster and its obligations toward the official language minority communities. You immediately answered that it was up to CBC/Radio-Canada to provide the programming that Canadians want to see.

    As you can understand, your answer is somewhat insulting to Canadians living in the communities, like the one you come from. Was your message that regional programming is of no interest?

    I would like to answer all your questions.

    To be clear, the decision to cut jobs at Radio-Canada was not made by the government, but rather by Radio-Canada management. I even have quotations of remarks the union made before the cuts were announced, including one by Alex Levasseur, President of the Syndicat des communications de Radio-Canada. He said this:

    France Bélisle, Director of Communications and Public Relations at CBC/Radio-Canada, said the following:

    It was Hubert, his team and the unions that really provided the evidence.

    Pardon me for interrupting you, but my next question is too urgent.

    Ms. Glover, Hubert Lacroix specifically condemned the situation in a radio interview not so long ago. On this point, I want to hand the floor over to my colleague, Kennedy Stewart, who would like to ask you a question.

     I can quote Mr. Lacroix's remarks if you wish.

    Allow me to hand the floor over to my colleague.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    We're all enjoying watching the playoffs on CBC, and I'm wondering why you killed Hockey Night in Canada.

    Wow. You know very well—

    You've cut funding for CBC, and now they can't—

    You know very well that the government does not operate CBC. They make their own decisions. This was obviously—

    But you have cut the funding for CBC.

    I did not cut the funding for Hockey Night in Canada. In fact, Hockey Night in Canada was in the situation where entities bid on the rights to host the program, and as Hubert Lacroix said himself, “...it is the right outcome for Canadian hockey fans...”. That's a direct quote of him.

    If CBC had more money, we could be watching hockey on CBC—

    However, here's what Hubert Lacroix also said about the cuts at CBC, which was a decision made as a result of the following:

    That is why he defines himself—

    But it's also from cuts by the government—

    Thank you, Minister.

    We're going to move to Monsieur Dion for seven minutes.

    Mr. Chair, I want to thank the minister and her two associates for being here with us today. I know how essential the relationship with a deputy minister is for a minister.

    Minister, I am going to read you a quotation:

    It was your predecessor, Mr. Moore, who said that in 2011.

    The main estimates for 2014-2015 state, on page 34, that the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation's appropriation will be reduced by $115 million. Consequently, an additional $45.5 million still has to be cut in order to hit the 2012 target.

    When I asked you in the House about the impact of these cuts, you answered that there would be none and that it was the CBC that was making those decisions. You know very well that makes no sense. If its parliamentary appropriations are cut by $115 million, that will necessarily force the CBC to take draconian measures. That is also contrary to the commitments made by your predecessor, Mr. Moore.

    What has changed since Mr. Moore's statement? In 2011, when the recession had already been under way since 2008, he made a commitment to increase or maintain the CBC's budget. However, you have cut that budget. What has happened? I say "you", but that also includes Mr. Moore, since the cuts started in 2012.

    Thank you for your question, Mr. Dion.

    As I previously said, you are referring to cuts that were made in 2012, during the global recession. Since then, Mr. Lacroix has clearly said he has enough resources to carry out his mandate. As he said, the corporation lost the hockey broadcasts, for which there was a key audience, and that resulted in a decline in its advertising revenues and viewership.

    The current cuts are not attributable to a government decision. As I previously said, we allocate very significant funding because we acknowledge the importance of CBC/Radio-Canada's role.

    You cut $115 million in addition to the $7 million you withdrew from the Canada Media Fund.

    That was in 2012.

    There was also the CRTC decision to cut the budget by $47 million.

    We have not cut funding to the Canada Media Fund. We allocate $134.1 million to that fund. That is based on a partnership with other businesses—

    All those cuts amount, in constant 2014 dollars, to a $227-million reduction in CBC/Radio-Canada's parliamentary appropriations relative to 2006, when the Conservatives came to power. That represents a cut of 18%, nearly one-fifth of its budget.

    You are telling members and Canadians that it is not the government that is making these cuts and that, if CBC/Radio-Canada takes draconian measures such as cutting some 600 full-time positions, that has nothing to do with you and that you, as a minister, need not be concerned about it. Is that really what you claim?

    That is not what I said, Mr. Dion.

    Then what are you saying?

    If you will allow me to finish, I would like to say what I have to say.

    You acknowledge that you have some responsibility for the current decisions.

    I would like to answer your questions, but you interrupt me every time you ask me one.

    My question is this: do you have any responsibility for the current decisions?

    Thank you.

    A recovery occurred after the global recession. Ten per cent cuts were made to all government departments. Ours was the only G7 government that did not make cuts to official languages or direct funding to artists. The other G7 countries made direct cuts to funding for artists, but not our government. We also did not reduce funding for museums or sports programs.

    That was done in 2012. Mr. Lacroix informed us that he had enough money to carry out his mandate. He has more than $1 billion. That is a significant amount. CBC/Radio-Canada has suffered declining advertising revenues as a result of the loss of the hockey broadcasts. Its viewership has also fallen. That was obviously not a government decision. It is ridiculous to think any such thing.

    We acknowledge the importance of CBC/Radio-Canada. That is why we grant it significant funding. That organization will produce programming in English and in French in the regions and elsewhere.

    The fact remains that the minister's promise has not been kept. You are forcing cuts on the CBC after promising that you would not. You even talked about increasing funding. We do not know why the government changed its mind.

    I never cut the CBC's budget.

    Yes, you did. We are talking about $115 million.

    No, I did not.

    Yes, you did. That goes back to the minister's statement in 2011. This is a $115 million cut. It is on page 36 of the 2013-2014 main estimates. No one can deny it.

    And since when have I been minister?

    If you wash your hands of what your government did before you, I think that is major news that we should broadcast.

    No, I am sorry, but you say that "I" cut the budget. That is what I am responding to.

    You are connected by ministerial responsibility, minister.

    So?

    Your government cut that budget by $115 million.

    Cuts were made across government in 2012. We were the first to do so during the economic recovery. We have created more than a million jobs in the economy. That is the priority for Canadians right now.

    How much time do I have left, Mr. Chair?

     You have one minute and 15 seconds.

    Minister, how do you explain that—

    Around the world, people view Canada as a country that succeeded following the recovery.

    Yes, thank you, but I have only a minute left.

     How do you explain that 87% of the Canadian Museum of History's programming for the 150^th anniversary of Confederation, 26 out of 30 events, is based on military themes? Only four events have a non-military theme. We were afraid your government might have an ideological influence on that museum, and those fears are being confirmed.

    The military aspect should be celebrated, but do you not think that 26 out of 30 events is completely unbalanced, given the richness of Canada's history?

    As you know, Mr. Dion, the museums are responsible for their own decisions.

    I want to raise a point. When the Liberals were in power, they cut more than $400 million from CBC/Radio-Canada's budget. The goal was to reduce the budget by cutting costs. Pardon me, but you have to take action during a global recession. You have to protect Canadians' jobs. We reacted well. We were first around the world—

    I would simply like to recall that we reinvested money once we were out of the recession, minister.

    But we are talking about $400 million here.

    The CBC's budgets were on the rise when the Liberals were in power. You, on the other hand, promised not to reduce its budget. You cut it by $115 million despite what you had promised.

    Thank you.

    We'll now move to Mr. Weston for seven minutes.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    Thank you for being with us today, minister.

    I noticed that approximately one-third of your comments concerned sports. You mentioned the support provided to the Sochi Olympic Games, the Grand défi Pierre Lavoie and the Pan American Games. Before, during and after the 2010 Games, which were held in large part in the electoral district I represent, we wondered what heritage those games would leave behind.

    First, I would like to ask you how you view the connection between sports and heritage.

    By the way, I was with Laureen Harper last week. She is

the honorary patron of the Trans Canada Trail,

which is a non-governmental organization, but in the private sector.

    I would like to know what agreements there are between the government and private businesses for the purpose of developing heritage through sports.

     Lastly, if you have the time, I would like you to tell me what role sports will play as a factor in unifying Canadians during Canada's 150^th anniversary.

    That is a lot of questions. Tell me if I forget any and I will go back to them.

    Sports are really very important in Canada. As I previously said, they keep us in good health. They also unite us and are fun. It is important for our government to support communities wishing to take part in sports and hold celebrations for our athletes. That is why we invest in the Olympic Games, the Pan American Games and so on.

    As I said in my presentation, events will be conducted by Special Olympics Canada, an organization with which we cooperate and which is working very hard across the country. There is also the Grand défi Pierre Lavoie. We work with those people to organize events designed to encourage Canadians to keep fit.

    We have to support great sports champions and people who are part of our heritage like Pierre Lavoie.

    Yes.

    The Olympics were an opportunity for us to be proud of our athletes and to introduce them to the entire world. I am thinking of all the medals we won. I am thinking of Jennifer Jones and her curling team. That was both an athletic and a unifying experience. The event brought all our communities together. Canadians were very proud.

    Our deputy minister will tell you about the funding available for sport. I will hand the floor over to him.

    Just to add a little bit on the Pan Am Games and the legacy, obviously, a large part of the $500 million that the Canadian government has promised will be going to the infrastructure, so that infrastructure will live on. We're also providing $65 million for a legacy fund, which will allow the operating costs of some of those buildings to continue for a number of years. In relation to cultural strategy, you're absolutely right that culture and sport often go together, and there's an additional $3 million that we'll be providing for a federal cultural strategy to allow the Pan Am Games to be experienced throughout the country through sort of a torch facility and some cultural activities connected with Pan Am.

    Some of us believe Canada should be the fittest nation on earth, and maybe you've heard that before. Do you see some collateral benefits from what you're doing in encouraging sport, not only at the high-performance level but also for all Canadians?

    I don't know if you know this, but I played soccer for a very long time before becoming a parliamentarian. I spent 14 years coaching soccer in my community, and I'm a referee of soccer as well. It's really encouraging to see the impacts that the funding has in our communities. I think about a high-level soccer program that's actually running out of Glenlawn Collegiate in my own riding that the Government of Canada has been happy to participate in.

    There's a huge link between sport and well-being and health. There's a huge link in the way we feel about ourselves and how we feel about our communities. That's why sport is so important. It really is a part of our Canadian identity that unifies us and will be celebrated for many, many generations to come.

    Minister, I would say there are perhaps even economic benefits—

    Oh, yes.

    —in terms of the cost savings for mental and physical health problems. Would you care to comment on that?

    Absolutely. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. This really applies when we're talking about sports, because to be active and healthy means that you reduce the risks that are associated with things like heart disease and other forms of disease that impact the health care system.

    Of course, there are also jobs involved in the sporting industry. When I think about our coaches and our physiotherapists and so on and so forth, I mean, sport is a huge economic driver, along with protecting us against these ills in the health care field and of course, as I said, unifying the country.

    I know you're a champion of sport and I want to thank you again for that. Keep doing what you're doing, because we should be the healthiest country in the world, and with your help maybe we'll get there.

    And Pierre Lavoie encourages how many people? I heard it's a huge number of volunteers and others. So the small amount of money invested has a huge impact.

    It is huge.

    So, long may you run.

    Thank you very much.

    Thank you very much, Mr. Weston.

    We're now going to move to Ms. Mathyssen for five minutes.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    I want to share my time with Monsieur Nantel.

    Minister, I'm going to ask you two questions in two key areas, and if you would, a written response would be appreciated.

    The first area has to do with APTN. As a minister from Winnipeg, a Métis woman from the Red River Settlement, you of course know that APTN is the world's first truly national aboriginal television broadcaster. They're experiencing some real difficulties. Last year the Canada Media Fund cut APTN's English envelope by 55% and the French envelope by 42%. This was a huge financial hit, so the answers I would like in writing from you are: what are you doing to ensure that APTN receives sufficient revenues from the Canada Media Fund so they can meet the conditions of their licence in the programming genres as well as language and the other requirements?

    Would the government consider increasing the aboriginal language funding to help offset the losses experienced? Would you, Minister, consider the aboriginal language fund be reserved exclusively for APTN?

    My second area of concern has to do with Library and Archives. I have heard from Canadians across the country, and they have expressed concern about Canadian government library closures. Would you be willing to consult with the archivists, CLA, and provide a more thorough description of the process taken to review collections and have a more transparent process for the management of these valuable, publicly owned collections? We're not sure where these collections are going. Will they be properly preserved? It is very important.

    I thank you for those responses, Minister, and I'll turn it over to Monsieur Nantel.

    That is good. We are asking you for answers in writing.

    I won't remember if we—

    Those questions will go on the record.

    In any case, I can see the extent to which Ms. Glover—

    Those are two very long and very important questions. With respect to APTN, I know that people want to know a number of things.

    If you ask me six questions that I never get an opportunity to answer,

    We won't do it justice.

    We can put them to the officials again after you have left.

    Okay, APTN is great. All right.

    Mr. Dion asked you a question a little earlier, and I understood that you were partly detaching yourself—there is a kind of ministerial solidarity—from the decisions that were made. From the very start, I thought you were the right person in this government to handle heritage issues because of your nature, your concern for those issues, your delicate approach and the fact that you come from a francophone minority community in Manitoba.

    Having said that, I dare hope the decisions that were made can be corrected, changed or altered thanks to a person like you, who brings her own judgment to certain issues.

    For example, a little earlier I was talking to you about cuts to the CBC, which are a major concern for us. You seemed surprised by what I said about the reports this committee has tabled. For example, we worked I do not know how many weeks on the music industry report, but it was definitely three months in total.

    Could you assure us that you are committed to maintaining the funding currently allocated to the Canada Music Fund?

    People mentioned how happy they were with it and said it was working well, particularly the funding allocated to FACTOR and to similar organizations such as MUSICACTION. Can you commit to maintaining that funding and to properly considering the report we will be preparing after so many weeks of study?

    I was not surprised at all, but I was surprised that you said we had overlooked the report, which is false. We take all your reports very seriously. They inspire us and give us ideas. I simply wanted to be clear; I was not surprised at all. In fact, we did not overlook the 150^th anniversary; we are simply asking for some patience since it will be a celebration for all Canadians.

    Allow me to cite another example.

    We conducted an in-depth study on Digital Canada 150, which ended in February 2011. All the industry's evidence and recommendations came to nothing, except for certain things on the NFB and a little on the archives.

    I hand the floor back to you.

    Let us start with Library and Archives Canada.

     I'll switch to English for Ms. Mathyssen.

    Guy Berthiaume has just been put in place as the head of LAC. He begins in June, and I would encourage you to speak with this very talented and qualified new appointee. LAC, of course, determines their own programs, etc., so that is where I would refer you with regard to the first question. We all know how important Library of Archives is to Canada.

    Going back to APTN—

    Okay, thank you, minister.

    We're going to move to Mr. Falk now for five minutes. Maybe he'll want to continue with that.

    Thank you, Chair. No, I don't want to continue that.

    Thank you, Minister, for coming here this morning.

    I do want to ask you a few questions, but first I want to respond a little bit to what I've been hearing about the CBC. Here I do understand what you're saying. I understand that CBC needs to present a business model that is attractive to maintaining its listenership and to maintaining advertising, and they haven't been able to do that.

    With over a billion dollars of subsidy on an annual basis, I don't understand why they're not competitive in the marketplace to keep Hockey Night in Canada. I don't understand that, because other networks are and the other networks seem to be making a copious amount of money. I don't know why their business model isn't working, but I think it's a management issue that needs to be addressed by CBC. I think we provide very generous funding.

    But they are a crown corporation, so to be very clear, we believe that the CBC plays a very important role, of course, in Canadian society, and that is why we provide them with that over a billion dollars worth of funding. I compare it to some of the communities that really do see the importance of the CBC. They're dependent on it, right? The official language minority communities, and some of our remote communities and aboriginal communities, they depend on the CBC. So this is why they are important. They're a public broadcaster.

    Here I have to say that the Olympics were amazing, simply amazing. The CBC did a phenomenal job. In fact, other countries were tuning in at a time when their own television broadcasts were not being viewed.

    As I say, they've had some challenges, but we do provide them with significant funds and they have enough money to provide under their mandate under the Broadcasting Act.

    Good, thank you. And I certainly do appreciate the programming that CBC provides.

    Along that line of thinking, I would like to talk a little bit about a commitment that our government made in the Speech from the Throne. I'll repeat it:

    I live close to your riding. I live in a rural riding in southeastern Manitoba. And simply to qualify my comments, I don't have a cable subscription. I have a TV subscription that is commonly referred to as “farmer vision”, which is the free to air stuff. Shaw was kind enough to send me a satellite dish and provide me with the four essential channels for my area, which I get.

    Now that I've been privileged by my constituents to serve in this capacity here in the Government of Canada, I stay in a hotel and I actually have access to cable network TV and I'm amazed how much I have to surf through the channels, when I do actually have time to look at the TV, to find a channel with good programming. The frustration of many Canadians has been that they have to pay for all these channels that they really don't like. A lot of times they are channels they don't want in their homes and, unfortunately, more and more Canadian parents are allowing the television to be the babysitter. I think that's sad because there's stuff coming in that they don't want in their homes and they don't always have the parental control that they need.

    Can you give this committee an update on where our government is in fulfilling this commitment?

    Sure.

    Thank you very much for the question. We obviously look forward to living up to that promise made in the Speech from the Throne. We know that Canadians want choice and we're intending to unbundle channels.

    The first thing we did, of course, was to ask the CRTC to look at this issue and to give us some advice basically on how we might provide choice in television while maintaining Canadian jobs, among other things. So the CRTC has come back with a clear road map for us that will allow us to provide greater choice to Canadians across the country.

    I might just touch on a couple of those things that were in the CRTC's report. They touch on four things that they believe ought to be considered. The first is that the basic television service that has been provided has grown substantially. They believe we should return to the basics and provide what they call a “skinny” basic service in television.

    They also talk about pick-and-pay, which is somewhat like à la carte. That, of course, is where viewers get to choose the channels they want to subscribe to. They also talk about making our own bundles.

    I live in Gatineau while I'm here working in Ottawa, and Vidéotron already allows me, in Gatineau, to pick some of the channels that I want to watch, which is much appreciated.

    Then, of course, CRTC also touched on the pre-made bundles that are the ones that exist right now.

    They saw that these four elements really ought to be considered. But they are continuing their discussions and we will look forward to further instruction and advice from the CRTC. This is a tremendous move forward for our consumers. This is something they've been asking of all of us for some time, and I'm pleased to be part of a government that intends to provide them with that choice.

    Thank you, Minister.

    All right, thank you very much.

    Mr. Nantel, you have five minutes.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    I cannot help but feel that the question from my colleague opposite is very relevant.

    As a result of signal variations, CBC/Radio-Canada is sometimes unavailable on a new generation digital television set. That causes major problems even in my colleague's region, the Gaspé Peninsula. The Radio-Canada people clearly have to make some tough choices.

     I would like to encourage everyone and all those here who are interested in Radio-Canada—whether to help it or harm it—to listen to the interview that Mr. Lacroix gave to Jacques Beauchamp on the program Pas de midi sans info. Since CBC/Radio-Canada has always been a proud user of Internet and web platforms, it is very easy to find a rebroadcast of that program.

    In that interview, Mr. Lacroix explained that his mandate is not to demand more money from the front pages of newspapers so that he can better carry out his mandate. And I do mean "better carry out his mandate". He told the program's listeners that it is parliamentarians' role to squabble over how much Canadians will pay.

    I understand your position, of course. However, it is not true that Mr. Lacroix said he had enough money to carry out his mandate. He said he could do much better. In the circumstances, one might simply scratch one's head and say it would be better if he got a little more.

    I understand why you quoted Mr. Lacroix, but a person can always be quoted out of context. If you listen to that interview, in which neither you nor I were there to question him, you will see that he clearly said what I just mentioned about all the Canadians who listened to the program. I encourage you to listen to it.

    Now I will hand the floor over to my colleague Irene Mathyssen.

    May I answer that question?

    Of course.

    I would like to add something on that subject.

    It is definitely true that no government department, organization or agency would say that it does not want any more money. They will all say they would like to have more.

    We allocate significant funding to the CBC, which is enough for it to carry out its mandate under the Broadcasting Act.

    Mr. Pierre Nantel: That is what you say.

    Hon. Shelly Glover: Mr. Lacroix himself said he had enough money to carry out his mandate. That is what I am saying. I am not claiming that the CBC or any other agency or organization would not like to have more money. However, we have to take taxpayers into consideration. The priority for them is the economy, jobs and the economic recovery.

    I cannot help myself, Ms. Glover; I have to tell you that those taxpayers are also citizens.

    May I finish?

    They are attached to the CBC, madam.

    Yes.

    Do you know that the significant funding I am talking about, $1.1 billion, represents the same amount as is available to my department for all the Canada Day festivals and celebrations? It is virtually the same as the amount my entire department has to distribute to all the communities across Canada to cover what they need for those celebrations.

    It is a significant amount. We recognize the CBC's important role, but it receives enough money.

    You are the one saying it.

     I believe that Canada ranks 15^th among 18 countries. I have seen the list on the subject. Public funding per capita in Canada is $29. I do not really know what country comes after Canada, but then there is the United States, where the figure is $3.

    Ms. Mathyssen, I hand the floor over to you.

    Thank you very much.

    I want to come back to the issue of access to television channels. I'm mystified, because in London, Ontario, there's no free air-to-air reception anymore. Everyone has to pay, and this caused a great deal of consternation. So I'm not convinced that people have access.

     Second, I'm wondering if you would be willing to talk about other aspects of heritage—for example, the grants in regard to official languages. It's come to our attention that there's been a significant delay in terms of those grants, and our official languages are a profound and important part of the heritage of this country.

    So, in terms of our access to television, and in terms of the delays to organizations in need of those official grants, I wonder, can you respond to that, Minister?

    Sure. Thank you for the opportunity to respond to your questions.

    Just to be very clear, I was answering a question by Mr. Falk about unbundling. When I said unbundling is something that consumers and Canadians have been requesting for some time, that is in fact also what the CRTC was seeing when it did its review. So our intention, through the Speech from the Throne, is to provide them with that choice, and that's the question I answered.

    With regard to the official languages, as you know, I went through French immersion in school. I am so proud to be someone who can speak both official languages, our national languages here in Canada, and I actually learned how to pronounce French words properly by listening to Radio-Canada, which is why I know the importance of Radio-Canada.

    This is a $1.1 billion commitment. This Roadmap for Canada's Official Languages is a historic document that provides funding through a number of ministries so that Canadians can have the opportunities to have both official languages prominent in the things they do. We divided this road map into pillars: education, immigration, and communities. Many of them have envelopes of money through different ministries. In my own ministry, I also have funds through my direct ministerial programs that flow to our communities to enable them to provide the important programs that they do.

    There is a process, though, to get the money out the door, meaning that we have to make sure that those proposals actually meet criteria, etc. It's actually through our deputy minister and her hard-working team at Heritage that they make sure those criteria are satisfied, and then the money flows. We have to ensure value for the dollar; we have to ensure that the money meets the envelope criteria; and so we are moving as quickly as possible, and the money is flowing. In fact, just the other day I signed 200 different program proposals to flow the money out to the communities. I can only work as quickly as I can, and I know how hard the Heritage public servants work. We'll continue to provide this historic funding because it's important. It's essential.

    All right, thank you very much, Minister. On behalf of the committee I'd like to thank you for joining us today. We will briefly suspend while you pack up.

    All right, I'll call the meeting back to order, so that we can continue our questioning with the deputy minister, Colleen Swords, and Robert Hertzog, director general.

    We're going to go now to Mr. Weston for five minutes.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    Minister, I am pleased to put questions to you and to those who are here with you.

    I am interested in your government's emphasis on the Pan American Games. The budget provides for an increase in funding to Canadian Heritage, which includes $71 million for those games. How will that funding be spent?

    I do not know whether you can answer the next question, but I will ask it all the same. In addition to the Pan American Games as such, will that be good for the health of Canadians?

    Thanks very much for the question. Obviously, any time we host a major sporting event, there are benefits for our young people, who see these wonderful athletes and are inspired by them. So I think it always has that spill-over effect for our young athletes.

    Overall, the government is providing $500 million, spread over a number of years, so there are variations from year to year in what we're funding. I'm going to ask our chief financial officer to explain the details of exactly where that $500 million is going and how much of that relates to this year.

    Thank you.

    As noted earlier, a total of $500 million is being provided by the Government of Canada for the Pan Am Games. Of that $500 million, $377.1 million is for sport infrastructure, so when you see an increase in the budget of $71.6 million, essentially the amount being provided for infrastructure is increasing in 2014–15, and the amount in 2014–15 will be $189.8 million for infrastructure. So in our total main estimates, in our vote 5, $189.8 million is for infrastructure for the Pan Am Games.

    In addition, $65 million is included in the total $500 million Government of Canada contribution for legacy funding to help support the installations once the games have taken place. The facilities can then be used on an ongoing basis afterwards to support athletes, and to support community use of those facilities as well. The Government of Canada, in its $500 million, is also providing $48.9 million for essential support services that will be provided during the games themselves.

    Following the Vancouver Olympic Games, we learned that it was very important to have funding to maintain infrastructure after the event.

    What percentage of all the funding invested in the games will be spent by the Department of Canadian Heritage?

    If you mean which amount is for our department, Patrimoine canadien, it's $500 million out of our department for the full period. The games themselves, of course, cost more. Funding is being provided by the provincial government, for example, and the City of Toronto, and that doesn't include security costs, I believe. That might be additional.

    All right, thank you.

     I am thinking of the future and of our 150^th anniversary. The minister said she thought the emphasis would be on sport and heritage and that would be reflected in this celebration. Can you elaborate on that subject?

    Can you give us any information on the subject and tell us how it will all take place? What is the connection between our investments and this anniversary?

    The detailed planning for all that we might do on the road to 2017 is not finalized yet. There are certain events in the road up to 2017 that we know of, and we're still gathering ideas, of which there are very many, for how best one could celebrate.

    In the road to 2017, though, there are a number of important sports events that Canadians will have an opportunity to experience and watch. Some events are taking place in their own communities. For example, the under-20 women's soccer world cup is going on in parts of Canada. I believe it's this year. That's one example of a major sporting event that will showcase Canada for the world and for a lot of young people.

    As with any major celebration, we will want to identify ways in which communities can express their pride and their sense of Canada's history and Canada's future. Clearly, after we've seen in the Olympics, and I hope as we'll see in the Pan Am Games, that pride will be on display once again, and there will be opportunities for communities to identify projects that tie in with 2017, but that are also related to sport. One of them would be the Trans Canada Trail. That's very important, I think, for people's sense of how you can keep fit, but at the same time enjoy Canada.

    Thank you very much.

    I hand the floor over to Mr. Nantel for five minutes.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    Good afternoon, madam, sir. Thank you once again for being with us.

    I have tried to get some answers on the subject of the absence of the CRTC board member from Quebec. Perhaps no announcement has been made yet, but maybe there has been some been progress on the matter.

    This has dragged on for 10 months, nearly a year. Has any progress been made in the search for a candidate to represent Quebec? Television clearly plays a crucial role in Quebec. We hear that in every debate, about Radio-Canada or any other cultural issue.

    How can we do without that viewpoint for such a long time? Has any progress been made?

    Mr. Nantel, some progress has been made, but perhaps not enough for everyone here.

    We have made progress. Selecting somebody for boards is not something that's done in a week. There is a selection process. Interviews did take place late last year. Then reference checks have to be identified. In some cases—I'm not saying in this one, but in some cases—you discover that there's a potential conflict, so you have to decide whether you're going to start the process over again or see if there are ways to resolve conflicts. I'm not saying that's the case here; I'm just talking in general terms.

    We are very much aware of the need to ensure that the CRTC has its board well-staffed, and we are working hard to make sure that happens.

    Thank you.

    The appointment to Library and Archives Canada is very good news. It was a long time coming, but it has pleased people in the archival community.

    As for the CRTC, can we hope for an outcome soon since this is a major concern for television people, particularly in Quebec? Can we expect a development soon?

    All I can say is that we're working hard and we're doing everything we can to get the necessary decision. It is a Governor in Council appointment, so it's something that involves not just the public service, but also the government.

    We and the government are working hard, and we hope that there will be a decision in due course.

    Thank you.

    I hand the floor over to my colleague Mr. Stewart.

    Thank you.

    Welcome today, through the chair.

    I have some more questions about CBC. We talk about current funding, and then past funding, but it's a bit confusing sometimes because it's not adjusted for inflation. What I'm interested in is long-term funding for the CBC. What percentage over the long term is provided by the government and what has been brought in as revenue?

    Say since the 1970s, the proportion of money that the CBC has received, have they received a larger or smaller of their overall operating budget from the government?

    If you can't provide that today, it should be a fairly simple thing to compile. If you can submit that to us, that would be great.

    Thanks for the question.

    I have the figures for 2014-15, the amount received from the government and the amount normally received from their own-source revenues. I don't have the figures going back.

    I'm interested in proportions, though, because it gets really confusing when you don't adjust for inflation. This government frequently does that.

    For 2014-15, though, the appropriation from the federal government is over $1 billion, and the revenue expected in 2014-2015 is $670 million. So the CBC obtains a fair proportion of own-source revenues.

    But you wouldn't have the exact proportion?

    That's the proportion for 2014-15.

    Right, those are the figures, but the percentage that's provided by the government.

    I'm not great at math, but $1 billion out of $1.6 billion is provided by the government.

    Okay.

    Going back a decade, would you say that's a larger or smaller proportion?

    That we would have to get back to you on, because I don't have the figures here.

    With respect to inflation, though, I would say that there was money provided to a number of the crown corporations for inflation related to salary in years past. We'll get you those figures as well. There was some adjustments for inflation.

    Sure.

    But would it be fair to say that the government provided the lion's share of revenue for CBC in the early years, and now it's relying more on private sector funding in current years?

    I don't have those figures in front of me, so we'll have to get back to you with them.

    But no guess...?

    No.

    No guess, Mr. Hertzog...? No?

    No.

    No guess...?

    No guess....

    Okay.

    You have 20 seconds, Mr. Stewart.

    Okay.

    How long is Hockey Night in Canada going to be on CBC?

     In addition to the fact that the rights have now been sold, it is important to remember that CBC has arranged a four-year contract, so they will be continuing to provide Hockey Night in Canada coverage for at least the next four years. They don't have the rights but they will be providing the coverage.

    Thank you very much.

    The other question I have is how long do we have the Habs in the Stanley Cup playoffs—

    Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

    Ms. Colleen Swords:—because CBC will definitely be providing that. So if they go to the Stanley Cup final, we'll have them even longer.

    Thank you.

    We'll move to Mr. Falk for five minutes.

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    Thank you, witnesses, for coming here today.

    My question revolves around veterans and war. This past Friday we had a national day of honour when we celebrated the conclusion of our mission in Afghanistan, and this year will also mark the 100th anniversary of the First World War, which lasted more than four years, and the 75th anniversary of the beginning of the Second World War.

    In its report on plans and priorities, the Department of Canadian Heritage stated that "Using existing resources, the Department will fund activities that give Canadians opportunities to participate in the commemoration of the two World Wars...”.

    Can you tell us a little about what those existing resources are, and how the department will mark the anniversary of these historic events?

    The department does have various programs that can assist us in commemorating these important events. They include the commemorate Canada program, so there will be some funding there that will be used to commemorate the world wars. Building communities through arts and heritage is a program that allows individual communities to put on events that are related to matters of importance to Canada.

    The museums assistance program has provided some funding to help museums include more information on the wars. The Canada cultural spaces fund is available for cultural buildings for the infrastructure they may need help in renovating, and some of the funding from there is being used to help in these commemorations. Then there's the Canada history fund, where we have various competitions, essays, and so forth, and where we're trying to focus on some of the world wars.

    That's some of the funding our department has. Of course, Veterans Affairs and DND are also involved in commemorating these wars. They would have additional funds for that.

    Can you tell us a little about the amount of funding, the total budget your department has, for these events?

    Do you have the total budget, Bob?

    The funding comes from a series of programs, as Ms. Swords mentioned, so it would be a part of the funding from the different programs.

    For example, we mentioned commemorate Canada. It has a budget of about $3.25 million and some portion of that will be provided for the commemoration of World War I and World War II projects. Similarly, our building communities through arts and heritage program has a set budget and some portion of that funding would be provided for World War I and World War II commemorations.

    Each of those departments has included a portion of it in their detailed budgets?

    Yes, it would be included in their budgets.

    Does our Canadian War Museum just down the street fall under your portfolio?

    Yes, it does. They're part of the Canadian Museum of History, organizationally.

    I had the opportunity to tour that museum last year, and it's very well done. It's very impactful, and we're hoping that in Winnipeg we'll get the same traction from our Canadian Museum for Human Rights.

    It opens in September.

    That's right.

    Do you have an update on how things are going there?

    Yes, I visited there about a month or so ago, and it's a spectacular building. They're starting to put in some of the exhibits. I think it will be a very special and informative venue for all Canadians.

    You mentioned the War Museum. The minister has just announced, I think this week, the Holocaust monument, which will be situated right across from the War Museum, so that part of Ottawa will be a true memorial to important events in our history.

    I would imagine that our War Museum will also be involved in some of these celebrations, both the 100th and the 75th anniversary.

    Yes, indeed. The full budget for the Museum of History is in the estimates, and part of that would be for the War Museum.

    Okay.

    Mr. Chairman, how's my time?

    You have about 45 seconds, Mr. Falk.

    That's very good.

    Tell me a little more about the 150th anniversary celebration in 2017. Apparently you're starting to get some feedback. Can you give us a little idea of the flavour of the feedback you're getting? What are Canadians asking to see?

    You could almost imagine what they would be saying just by asking people around this room. Canadians are asking for things that involve youth so that the same sense of excitement that was created in 1967 can be created again, and when those youth are our age, then they too will have that memory.

    They're asking for events and activities that strengthen our pride, that strengthen our recognition of what we've gone through in 150 years, but which foreshadow what might be coming next. There is a lot of interest in the new digital world. How best can you take advantage of that? How do we connect Canadians? How do we unify Canada?

    And there's a lot of interest in the north. There's a real sense that the north is a very special part of Canada, and maybe there are opportunities here to identify ways in which we can help celebrate. People are always anxious to have a big celebration—on the Hill, and all across Canada—a very special celebration.

    Thank you. We'll go to Monsieur Nantel.

    You have the floor for five minutes.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    I would like to ask a question about these celebrations.

    As you know, I am one of those people who think we have done a lot of talking in committee. A lot of information has been passed on, but I feel that little has been used. I really am outraged by the situation because I think these committees use parliamentarians and consider them as their best resources. We try to do the job while remaining as objective as possible. We try to do what is best for Canadians. We have spent a lot of time consulting a lot of people.

     A few minutes ago, you mentioned 1967, the 100^th anniversary of Confederation, saying that there had been fantastic moments that everyone still remembered. Today we are somewhat concerned. I would like to ask you a two-part question.

    First, do we already have a complete schedule for the organizations and municipalities that want to submit projects? If so, have there been any serious discussions with the Société des célébrations du 375^e anniversaire de Montréal? Apart from the $3.5-million figure mentioned for the Cité Mémoire project, are any other contributions expected?

    I will add the following comment while you look for the figures. Exhaustive thematic research is being conducted for Montreal's 375^th anniversary. I think that is enviable, particularly as regards the metaphors and the exciting side of those celebrations.

    Where do the discussions stand on the subject? Is there a timetable indicating when the municipalities and various provinces may be consulted and submit projects?

    First off, Monsieur Nantel, I did want to assure you that the report of the committee of September 2012 has been read carefully. The government did provide a response. It was tabled back in January 2013, and every time the government tables a response it means that people have read it, people have developed a response. It's gone, it's been approved by cabinet. The committee shouldn't feel that it was ignored, by any means. It is something that we have looked at.

    So, if I may, Mrs. Swords, wasn't there clearly a recommendation in this report that a neutral agency or committee be formed to help the government in planning this? Wasn't that in the report?

    It was in the report. The government has tabled its response. We're still completing consultations with Canadians. There have been a number of organizations that have had ideas. This will be one idea that is set in. We have not reached any final conclusions yet on how we will be moving forward. That will be something for cabinet to be deciding.

    On Montreal 375, we have had discussions with them. There have been a couple of meetings with the organizers, and we will continue those discussions which I hope will be very fruitful.

    I understand that all the people here are doing their jobs. However, Canadians are not just taxpayers. As I told the minister earlier, they are first and foremost citizens of this country. They pay taxes, and they want to get something for their money from the work that we do, that you do and that everyone does. They also want to have that feeling of pride that you referred to.

    I honestly feel like it is almost midnight. If we want to have a legacy or something that people will remember, particularly the constructions, it will have to be done quickly. Do you not think that is the case?

    I think part of what would be worth stressing is that we're not just looking at 2017 as one year, where at midnight the switch goes on and suddenly we start. We're looking at how we ramp up and how we identify the important events now that build up to 2017.

    This year is the anniversary of the Charlottetown and Quebec conferences, which basically led to 1867. We wouldn't have had that without them and there's a tremendous amount of activity going on in P.E.I. to celebrate this year. They're doing a number of events with Quebec. The tall ships will be sailing from P.E.I. up to Quebec.

    As the minister mentioned, our department has allocated over $7 million for those activities and events. Other departments have also contributed, as has the provincial government.

    I think it's not quite correct to say that nothing is happening. There is a lot going on in the build up, and we're still finalizing all the planning for 2017 itself.

    Thank you very much, and thank you to our officials for joining us today. Thank you for answering the questions of our committee members.

    We will briefly suspend.

    I call the meeting back to order to vote on the main estimates.

    (Votes 1 and 5 agreed to on division)

    (Vote 1 agreed to on division)

    (Votes 1, 5 and 10 agreed to on division)

    (Vote 1 agreed to on division)

    (Vote 1 agreed to on division)

    (Vote 1 agreed to on division)

    (Vote 1 agreed to on division)

    (Vote 1 agreed to on division)

    (Vote 1 agreed to on division)

    (Vote 1 agreed to on division)

    (Vote 1 agreed to on division)

    (Vote 1 agreed to on division)

    (Votes 1 and 5 agreed to on division)

    (Vote 1 agreed to on division)

    (Vote 1 agreed to on division)

    The Chair: Shall I report the main estimates to the House?

    Some hon. members: Agreed.

    Some hon. members: On division

    The Chair: Thank you very much.

    [Proceedings continue in camera]