CCA BULLETIN / BULLETIN DE LA CCA
“ BUILT HERITAGE IS THREATENED .... ARCHIVAL HERITAGE IS AT RISK”
Ottawa , February 12, 2004 - Overlooked in all the shock and awe that followed the release of the Auditor General's report this week, is the fact that Chapter 6 of the report is an examination into the “Protection of Cultural Heritage in the Federal Government”. The audit focussed on the areas that presented the most risk to the protection of cultural heritage, but excluded the four national museums of Canada and their af filiates.
In general, the report deplored the condition of Canada's built, archival and published heritage and cautioned that a lack of immediate action would result in not only the deterioration of many artifacts, but in some cases their total loss. Media reports have circulated in the past, describing such deplorable situations as damaged artifacts in the National Library due to burst pipes, but this is the first such comprehensive study.
The report made several statements regarding the importance of Canada 's heritage in all its forms; the following is a small sample from the Introduction:
“Built, archival, and published heritage under the auspices of the federal government is exposed to serious risks of losses. This is because of deficiencies in various protection regimes, weaknesses in management procedures, and the combined effect of a decrease in protection expenditures and continues growth in heritage.
“... cultural heritage has suffered from the budget cuts of the last decade. Statistics Canada data show that the 2000-01 expenditures of $508 million on cultural heritage were slightly below those of 1990-91, following a significant drop in the middle of the last decade. These expenditures, when expressed in 1990-91 constant dollars, show a decline of 17 percent.”
A number of recommendations are included in the report, usually followed by responses from the appropriate department or agency (Canadian Heritage, Treasury Board, Parks Canada, National Library, etc). One important recommendation is:
Recommendation 6.104
The Department of Canadian Heritage, the Parks Canada Agency, the National Archives of Canada, and the National Library of Canada should define clearly the results they wish to achieve in the protection of heritage and collect the information necessary to evaluate how well these results have been achieved. They should inform Parliament of the condition of heritage protection, the measures considered for improving this condition, and the resources needed to carry out the measures.
The Department of Canadian Heritage agreed with the recommendation, stating:
“Through a Heritage Policy Framework, the Department will define its desired overall outcomes for the protection of cultural heritage and develop appropriate tools and mechanisms to achieve the desired data collection, planning, and reporting.”
The report went on to recommend that the framework should be completed as soon as possible, a recommendation that DCH agreed with.
The notion of a heritage policy is not a new one. In October 2001, the Department of Canadian Heritage issued a discussion paper on Canadian heritage, proposing the development of a heritage framework. The Canadian Museums Association ( CMA ) responded in February 2002 with its brief, “Canadians' Heritage: Stewardship, Synergy and Sustainability”, which applauded the Department's commitment to developing such a framework and pledged its willingness to work towards its implementation. Perhaps the Auditor General's Report will provide the required impetus to push this initiative forward at a faster pace, although one slight wrinkle might be the recent move by the new federal government to place the Parks Canada Agency in the Department of the Environment rather than keep it in Canadian Heritage.
Auditor General's report - http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/domino/reports.nsf/html/03menu_e.html
WARNING TO CANA DIAN CITIES: DON'T FOLLOW OTTAWA 'S EXAMPLE!
Only last week, the new federal government presented its Speech from the Throne, touting a “new deal for communities”, which Governor General Adrienne Clarkson described as:
“A new deal that targets the infrastructure needed to support quality of life and sustainable growth. A new deal that helps our communities become more dynamic, more culturally rich, more cohesive, and partners in strengthening Canada 's social foundations.... Another defining characteristic of our communities and of our reputation around the world is the vitality and excellence of our cultural life. Canada's artists and cultural enterprises are among our best ambassadors, as well as being an increasingly dynamic element of the knowledge economy. Their work holds a mirror on our society and builds a legacy for future generations.”
In an unfortunate juxtaposition to this utopian vision of Canada 's municipalities, the City of Ottawa unveiled a dr af t “no tax increase” budget this week, and culture has been virtually eviscerated. While culture was not the only area to hit the chopping block, it received the most damaging cuts - cuts which would result in per capita funding falling from an already dismal $3.89 in 2003 to a ridiculous 57 cents in 2004. (As a comparison, a 2002 study undertaken by the Halifax Regional Municipality provided the following per capita figures for funding of arts and heritage: Halifax $1.14; Montreal $11.32; Toronto $5.26; Winnipeg $4.28; Calgary $6.56; Vancouver $11.64.)
An example of these draconian proposals includes the total elimination of funding to heritage programmes; all major festivals, fairs and special events; and community associations and recreation boards. In addition, 80% of the funding to individual artists and arts organizations of every discipline would be cut. (This is particularly disconcerting given that the City of Ottawa recently underwent a major consultation process which resulted in a report entitled “Ottawa 20/20 – Arts & Heritage Plan”, adopted by City Council in April 2003; the current budget proposals directly contravene the recommendations in this plan.)
Mela Constantinidi, Director of the Ottawa Art Gallery , feels that the cuts will have a devastating multiplier effect on arts organizations. The Gallery stands to lose three-quarters of its funding from the city, as a result of which programming will have to be greatly reduced. In addition, the cut backs will prevent it from attracting funds from the Canada Council, the Ontario Arts Council, and the private sector. “The arts are so underfunded by the city that it's laughable” said Constantinidi.
These sort of stringent measures will knock the City of Ottawa right back into the Dark Ages. The CCA sincerely hopes this dr af t budget is a trial balloon, more hot air than substance, and that more enlightened views will prevail before the budget is finalised. (However, some arts groups report having just received cheques for the next fiscal year which reflect the 80% cut back.) We also hope that other municipalities around the country will not be following Ottawa 's example.
http://www.ottawa.ca/inside_govt/budget/budget_2004/draft_highlights_en.pdf
For more information:
Kevin Desjardins
Communications and Public Relations Manager
(613) 238 3561 ext.11
Fax (613) 238 4849
10/04
Please post and/or distribute. When reprinting CCA Bulletins, please give appropriate credit.