Proceedings of the Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs
Issue 1 - Evidence
OTTAWA, Wednesday, December 11, 2002
The Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs of the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence met this day at 12:05 p.m. to examine the proposal of the Valiants Group for the erection of statues in downtown Ottawa to salute the heroic wartime sacrifice of certain valiant men and women who fought victoriously for the independence of Canada during the 17th, 18th, 19th and 20th centuries, and helped mightily to establish Canada's nationhood; and to consider a draft report.
Senator Michael A. Meighen (Chairman) in the Chair.
[English]
The Chairman: This meeting is pursuant to our authorization by the Senate to examine the proposal of the Valiants Group, who are represented here today by Mr. Hamilton Southam, LGen. Belzile and Dr. Sydney Wise.
Thank you very much for joining us today, Mr. Southam and colleagues. I understand you have an opening presentation. I must remind all of us, presenters and questioners, that we are a little constrained by time and that we must bring this phase of our hearing to a close by 1 p.m.
I will turn the floor over to you, Mr. Southam.
Mr. Hamilton Southam, Chair, The Valiants Group: Mr. Chairman and honourable senators, we are delighted to have the opportunity to explain the Valiants project to you. It is a veterans' history project of national significance, conceived two years ago in the afterglow of that unforgettably moving ceremony when the Unknown Soldier was laid to rest before the War Memorial.
Our group consists largely of veterans and military historians, with advisors in sculpture and urban planning. Our names are listed in the pamphlet that has been given to you, with two notable additions, Jean Pigott and David Bercuson. Mr. Bercuson, a well-known Calgary historian joined us recently, and Mrs. Pigott is now our co-chair.
Reflecting as we then did on the meaning of the Unknown Soldier, it came to us that Canadians, however peace loving we may be, should be reminded that war has played a crucial role in our history during the five centuries that saw Canada grow from a small French colony to a great North American nation.
We decided that the best reminder would be the statues of certain valiant men and women who fought victoriously in our colonial wars of independence during the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries, and again when we grew to nationhood in the world wars of the 20th century. We thought the best place for them would be near the War Memorial, standing as ``a cloud of witnesses'' at the Unknown Soldier's tomb.
We asked our historians to choose the ``Valiants'' to be honoured. Their list grew to 16 as they reviewed our wars of independence during the French regime, the Seven Years' War, the American Revolution, the War of 1812 and the world wars that determined our nationhood and the role of women in war. The pamphlet that you have names the 16 they chose, honourable senators.
We contacted the various agencies concerned, Canadian Heritage, Veterans Affairs, National Defence, Public Works and Government Services and the NCC. Last year, Veterans Affairs had Ipsos-Reid survey public opinion. Eighty per cent of respondents said commemorating Canadian war heroes was important and 64 per cent favoured their statues being placed at the War Memorial.
Early this year, Canadian Heritage set up an interdepartmental working group to examine our project. Our report to deputy ministers on August 19 recommended that the statues be raised on both sides of Elgin Street between Queen and Albert. This site was proposed by the NCC, and we all thought it to be an excellent one. Elgin Street serves as the primary visual axis and processional route to the War Memorial. Placing the statues there would strengthen the ceremonial function of the street and both complement and extend the nationally important themes embodied in the memorial.
We also recommended that a Web site be created by Canadian Heritage and be hosted by the Legion, to educate the public on the project and to poll Canadians on the choice of Valiants. That Web site went on-line some weeks ago in both languages. Eighty per cent of the respondents among 1,200 viewers so far favour the proposal. Only one or two have suggested other Valiants.
Deputy ministers examined our report on the Valiants project on October 25. On October 31, Mrs. Larocque of Canadian Heritage told us it was to be dropped.
We heard later that the NCC and Public Works and Government Services had been supportive of the project, while Veterans Affairs and National Defence were against. We found this strange because both the ministers of Veterans Affairs and National Defence had promised us their support.
Three reasons were given for this decision: First, 16 statues were too many; it was incorrect to have so many officers vis-à-vis other ranks; and the cost was too high. A fourth reason expressed in Ms. Copps's letter of December 3 to your chairman was that military statues are out of place in the heart of the capital of a peace-loving nation like Canada. To that opinion, we would reply that the Valiants are not simply military figures; they are larger-than-life historical figures whose actions still resonate today in the memory of all Canadians who know their history well.
Remembrance Day supervened, and the Valiants Group met again on November 19. We then decided to seek federal and municipal political help to get our project back on track. We firmly believe the Valiants project is a matter about which Parliament and the City of Ottawa should have much to say.
The Mayor of Ottawa has just written a second time to Ms. Copps to support us strongly. We now turn to you.
We remain strongly convinced that 16 statues tell the Valiants' story best, though it could be told with 12 or even 10. The costs come down with fewer statues, and we are now ready to contribute 20 per cent rather than the 15 per cent we first suggested.
Honourable senators, we have circulated a paper this morning showing what our project would look like and what it would cost with 16 statues, 12 and 10.
If you like the Valiants project, we hope you will go for the complete version. Incidentally, you will see a slight adjustment there between World War II officers and men. In any case, please tell the Minister of Canadian Heritage you want to see the project re-examined and realized.
There is no time to lose. The Valiants should be unveiled on the sixtieth anniversary of the end of World War II, August 15, 2005. Could a better way be found to mark that occasion?
To conclude, all Americans are familiar with the name of the hero of their War of Independence, and the Washington Monument stands proudly at the heart of their capital. How many Canadians know that we have fought three wars of independence? How many can name our heroes, from Frontenac as he faced Phipps in 1690, through the American Revolution, to Brock and Salaberry in the War of 1812? Their statues and the others we propose surely deserve a place of honour in Ottawa.
Honourable senators, we have spoken to you on behalf of all the veterans' groups in Canada and, we believe, a large portion of the general public as well. We would be glad to answer any questions you may have.
The Chairman: Thank you very much, Mr. Southam. I am sure there will be questions.
Senator Atkins: Were there any other locations considered?
Mr. Southam: Yes, sir. First, we proposed the empty plinths that already stand on the Plaza Bridge over the Rideau Canal. You may have noticed that there are four empty ones on either side that seem to call for statues. The NCC said no, and it has remained rigorously negative on that proposal ever since. They proposed that our statues go down by the new Canadian War Museum. The Canadian War Museum was not at all interested. They have a story to tell, and they want to tell it their way. They did not want their building distracted by some other group telling what may be the same story in a different way.
We were shown various places where the statues could go, and the one that was recommended to us was down by the riverbank, where they would be out of sight by anybody at the level of the Canadian War Museum. It would have been invisible.
Senator Atkins: I would have thought that that would have been a natural consideration.
Mr. Southam: That is what the NCC thought. However, the Canadian War Museum did not and we did not. We feel that the story we have to tell should be told in the centre of the city, as it is in most capital cities.
Senator Atkins: Is Barney Danson involved in your group?
Mr. Southam: No, he is not, nor do I think I discussed it with him. I think he is familiar with it.
Senator Atkins: He is such a driving force on the new museum.
Mr. Southam: Yes, he has done great work there.
The NCC was against the Plaza Bridge, and we were against the Canadian War Museum because it was off-centre.
The working group continued to work, and the NCC came up with the proposal of Elgin Street. After we thought about it for a moment, we agreed.
Now I can say that every one has agreed that if the statues are to go they will go on Elgin Street. We think it is a good site. It is the approach to the War Memorial. They do not invade the memorial, nor are they around it. The War Memorial is left alone, as it should be, on Confederation Square, but as you approach it, we think it very suitable that these statues should be on either hand.
Senator Atkins: Did Canadian Heritage use the fact that it would cost them a significant amount of money as an argument?
Mr. Southam: Yes, they said it was too much. We said we would contribute 15 per cent, but we are now prepared to go to 20 per cent. That means that we are now prepared to pay $680,000, which would leave only $2.72 million for Canadian Heritage to pay.
Senator Atkins: I must say that I am on your side.
Mr. Southam: Thank you, senator.
Senator Day: Gentlemen, thank you very much for being here and giving us the background on this worthwhile and exciting proposal.
Just for a little bit of clarification, you said you were later told, Mr. Southam, that NCC and Public Works had been in favour but that Veterans Affairs and the Department of Defence both had reservations. Were you told that in writing, or was this just anecdotal?
Mr. Southam: It was part of the gossip that follows that kind of event.
Senator Day: We do not know whether that is factual or not.
Mr. Southam: No.
Senator Day: Who had the lead on this project from a government department or agency point of view?
Mr. Southam: Canadian Heritage; the funds would come from their budget.
Senator Day: No funds would come from Defence or Veterans Affairs for this?
Mr. Southam: They have been careful to say not, although if I were at Canadian Heritage and I had decided this would go forward I would consider it perfectly normal to ask them to contribute. Veterans Affairs have funds for remembrance, and National Defence could do this or that, little things that they would normally contribute. However, I cannot speak for them.
Senator Day: Do you know whether there was any discussion within the various government departments that would be interested in this project as to a sharing of costing, or was it just all put on Canadian Heritage's shoulders?
Mr. Southam: It never got to that stage, senator, to my knowledge.
Senator Day: You also indicate that you believe — not express, but believe — that there was a feeling among certain people that military statues are out of place in the heart of the capital. On what do you base that belief?
Mr. Southam: Things said during the working group meetings by representatives of Canadian Heritage, and we find them confirmed by the letter that Ms Copps has just sent you. She stated it straight out.
Senator Day: Are you referring to the letter dated December 3?
Mr. Southam: Yes, sir.
Senator Day: Has there been any discussion between your group and Ms. Copps, or any other government agency, with respect to your new proposal to reduce the overall cost to the government by either reducing the number of statues or, alternatively, an increase or a combination and increase from your group to 20 per cent from 15 per cent?
Mr. Southam: No, senator. We went to this fatal meeting on October 25 prepared to discuss these things. We had been warned beforehand that these questions would arise, and we were prepared to discuss a lesser number of statues, but we were not asked. At that meeting, we were simply told that the project was dead. We were in a state of some consternation. I suppose if I had thought of it I could have said, ``Wait a minute, can we discuss this?'' However, I did not have the presence of mind to raise it.
The proposal is there. You have our suggestion of how you could do it with 12 and 10. I do not know whether this has gone to Canadian Heritage. I believe not.
Senator Day: To clarify, at that point, there is no future meeting planned or set up for you with anybody at Canadian Heritage or any other government agency at this time?
Mr. Southam: No. The tone was so decisive at the October 25 meeting that we felt we would have to retreat and regroup. We have done that, and now we are advancing again on a different level. If you send the message we hope you do to Ms. Copps, we hope she might arrange for us to be called in and start the discussions again.
Senator Kenny: Welcome, gentlemen. I am pleased to see you here today.
Is this an expandable project? If you started with 10, 12 or 16, could you see more being added as you went on?
Mr. Southam: Yes, although it might be difficult, because if we start with 16, the way we see them laid out, the way our urban consultants have recommended they be laid out, they would start down Elgin Street with the originals and move up so that the World War II veterans would be facing the War Memorial. If there were later additions, it would be difficult to fit them into that.
Senator Kenny: How tough would it be to reverse the order? One presumes these are not the last people to be commemorated.
Mr. Southam: This is really an artistic decision, and we would yield to artistic advice. We have received the message that people do not want the story to stop there.
Senator Kenny: North-south, south-north, it seems to me to be as wide as it is long.
Mr. Southam: I would ask Dr. Wise to explain why we stopped at World War II.
Dr. Sydney Wise, Senior Historian, The Valiants Group: Senator, I was just reflecting on your previous question. The problem is, in part, an aesthetic problem, but in part a historical problem. How do you tell the story? Do you start with the originals down around Laurier Street and work up to the Plaza Bridge, or do you reverse that? I find it difficult to answer.
The reason that we stopped at World War II rests on the historical rationale for our selection of 12 or 16 statues. We wished to illustrate, first, the enunciation of a separate destiny in the north of North America in colonial times, replicated in the American Revolution and the War of 1812, and then the growth of our country through the 20th century wars into a mature polity, a mature society, acting by itself among a concert of nations. It seemed to us that that was an historical epic that could be illustrated in that fashion. There could be additional, obviously. The future is hidden from us and historians are not very good about futures. However, there could be other matters we might wish to illustrate.
However, here we have something with a beginning and a climax.
Senator Kenny: The reason I raise the question is that I find the minister's comment in the third paragraph difficult, where she says: ``The addition of up to 16 statues with war as their theme would threaten the balance of commemorations in the heart of Canada's capital, a country which prides itself on being a nation that excels in peace as well as war.''
Did the minister or the department share with you their plans for other commemorations? What I do not understand is why are they so negative about your proposal, which seems to make good sense? If they are concerned about the balance, why do they not have 16 statues of Canadian poets, artists, hockey players and whoever else you want to commemorate to keep the balance?
Dr. Wise: We never raised that issue.
Senator Kenny: Where does the minister have the right to say this is the right balance? Has there been a debate in this country that I have missed about the appropriate balance for statues in downtown Ottawa? Do we have too many?
Dr. Wise: We have all too few. I have been a guest of the Commonwealth of Australia on a number of occasions, and I have done work in Canberra. At the heart of Canberra there is a memorial to the Anzacs of World War I, and the Australian forces of the World War II. Nearly three million Australians a year visit the memorial. It is viewed as highly appropriate for Australians. I see no reason why it should not be highly appropriate for Canadians.
Senator Kenny: One of the criticisms that appears in the letter is that you do not have enough listed personnel. Would that be beyond the capacity of your committee to find another three or four statues that had enlisted people?
Dr. Wise: A general officer should be answering that question. Let me begin by saying that when you take the colonial wars into account, it is difficult historically to penetrate beyond the officer level to men in the ranks. It is only later, especially in the 20th century wars, when other ranks emerge as significant actors in World War I and World War II.
Senator Kenny: If I may, how many enlisted personnel won VCs in World War I and World War II?
Dr. Wise: Quite a few. When I checked, I was surprised to find a great imbalance between other ranks and officers. Then I realized that it was because many of the ranks that had won the VCs were commissioned. The same holds true for World War I.
Senator Kenny: Lieutenant-General, do you wish to make a comment about finding appropriate enlisted men to commemorate?
Lieutenant-General (Ret'd) Charles Belzile, Grand President, Royal Canadian Legion: Honourable senators, I do not think there is a problem finding them in the 20th century. However, I echo what Mr. Wise has said. It may be unfortunate that leaders such as General Currie in World War I have come out as an icon in our participation of the war. He is recognized not only by Canadians, but also by the British and our allies as being a leader that really comes out. General Currie did not receive a Victoria Cross, of course.
There is no problem finding these people. Even among the military today, we find that many of them do know our past leaders, unless they have learned about them through research. The message seems to be that if you are not well known or have progressed after your own career, then you are unknown.
Senator Kenny: He was promoted, but he did not know it.
LGen. (Ret'd) Belzile: That is correct.
Those are the things that historians sort out better than us.
We fully recognize the Victoria Cross. However, the Victoria Cross is not the only qualifying system that we have had in selecting people. There were people who were very well known for their notable activities during the wars that our storyline was trying to tell, from colonial to evolution to a mature nation.
Senator Kenny: LGen. Belzile, Mr. Southam represented you to us as being a representative of the legion and veterans groups. Are veterans groups offended at the thought of an imbalance of officers? Are veterans groups upset that you have more officers than enlisted personnel in your group?
LGen. (Ret'd) Belzile: It is impossible for us to see. The hits on our Web site where these comments appear do not tell us who they are or whether they veterans or not. They are anonymous.
Officially, the veterans' organizations represented in the group that was put together by Mr. Southam, that we call the Valiants Group, supported the 16 outright. There is no question there.
Senator Kenny: Where does the Department of Heritage get off by saying that there is an imbalance? What is that based upon? You should not be defending them, but did they give you a rationale for their comments?
LGen. (Ret'd) Belzile: I do not know. I suspect that the imbalance they are talking about is not between officers and other ranks.
Senator Kenny: They refer to that.
LGen. (Ret'd) Belzile: The imbalance they are talking about is probably other Canadian icons other than military.
Senator Kenny: Did they suggest at all that they had other plans to commemorate other groups?
LGen. (Ret'd) Belzile: No, not that I am aware of.
Senator Kenny: The message is, you people slow down and back off, but we do not have an alternative; is that correct?
Mr. Wise: They never mentioned one to us.
Dr. Southam: If I could say this about our 16, from the beginning down to World War I, they are all really historical figures. They are all well-known, historical figures and, thus, should be better known.
When we came to World War II, we had a slightly different optic. We wanted to represent, army, navy, air force and the merchant marine.
We asked the merchant marine to name someone, and they mentioned Captain Thomas, who commanded the Empress of Scotland throughout the war.
Then we came down to the army, navy and air force. All they asked was that they should be VCs. It was really in consultation with the associations of officers and NCOs that we consulted, and we came up with the names that we did.
We had a difficulty with the navy. I do not know whether you have heard of Chief Petty Officer Bernays, who behaved very gallantly in an action in the North Atlantic. He was recommended for the VC but did not get it. He was awarded something good, but not the VC. The navy was divided between Chief Petty Officer Bernays and Lieutenant Gray, who did get the VC. Dr. Douglas, the naval historian in our group, sounded out the naval area and decided that Gray should be the man.
They also, by the way, represent the four areas of hostilities. Gray represents the war in the Pacific, where he died. His behaviour on that occasion was something of a revenge for Hong Kong, I think. Captain Thomas of the merchant marine represents the battle of the Atlantic. He crossed it a number of times and in fact got his CBE in a little struggle off the coast of Ireland.
Mynarski represents Northwest Europe. He died there. Triquet represents the war in Italy. These four, as well as the four armed services, represent all our four major theatres.
Senator Kenny: You mentioned that you were generously increasing your support from 15 to 20 per cent. Where is that coming from?
Mr. Southam: When we first started discussing this with Canadian Heritage, they said, ``Of course, you will contribute something.'' We said, ``Of course.'' We set out the figure of 15 per cent, because that was the amount the Passing the Torch campaign was raising for the Canadian War Museum, 15 per cent. We said we would raise 15 per cent.
I made some phone calls and discovered that I could raise about $250,000 very quickly. I could not go any further, because the government did not say they were going to do this. However, I told Canadian Heritage that I thought we could raise 15 per cent.
Twenty per cent is more of a challenge, but we are ready to take it on, which means we will do our best.
Senator Kenny: What you are telling honourable senators is that this is a fundraising effort that you are undertaking personally. This is not corporate sponsorship or anything like that?
Mr. Southam: No. We have set up the Valiants Foundation. It is ready to begin, and it has its charitable number ready. It has never been enacted because the government has not decided to go ahead with this.
As soon as it begins operating, I will put myself in a money-raising mode and the struggle will continue. We can do it.
Senator Atkins: As a supplementary, would raising funds for this project be seen as being in competition to the attempt to raise funds for the Canadian War Museum?
Mr. Southam: I do not think so. The amount we will raise is minimal. I believe the target for the Passing the Torch Campaign is $15 million.
Senator Atkins: How are they doing?
LGen. (Ret'd) Belzile: They are at about $12.5 right now. They are very confident that that target will be met within months, if not weeks. I do not have any concerns for them.
Some of them, as I am sure you realize, were dependent on something like Mr. Southam is now quoting. We are dependent on the government committing themselves to a certain amount of money, and then the fundraising opens up to a certain extent. They are very confident that it will be met.
Someone mentioned to me that he probably could do it before the end of this year. I believe their $15 million is pretty well in the bag.
Senator Atkins: Out of an $80 million project?
LGen. (Ret'd) Belzile: It is more than that, senator. The figure has risen with the change of the site. It is closer to $100 million, perhaps $105 million.
Senator Atkins: Does the legion contribute in any way? Is there a way in which the legion could help in raising the funds?
Mr. Southam: The legion said: ``Look, we are a poor and struggling organization. Every dollar we have goes to servicemen, to help them in our various programs. This helps the servicemen.'' They said, ``No. Thank you very much. We like this project, however, we cannot contribute to it.'' Is that right?
LGen. (Ret'd) Belzile: That is correct. However, the legion is not in a fundraising mode in any way, shape or form, except for its specific benefits to service, to ex-service people and their families, families in need and that sort of thing.
However, the legion is also a bottom-up organization. There is nothing to prevent a legion branch in Nova Scotia or Alberta from donating to our cause. However, the legion will not undertake it as a national thing. It is not within their mandate to do that.
Senator Atkins: The legion is project-oriented, in a way.
If you had these funds and you went to these different authorities, do you think you would get approval for this project?
Mr. Southam: If we had the funds what we say we can get?
Senator Atkins: No. If you were to say to all these different departments that you have the money to do this project, would you get acceptance of it?
Mr. Southam: I do not know, senator. I do not think it would be right to raise the money on spec.
Senator Atkins: I understand that. This is a hypothetical question.
Mr. Southam: I never asked them that question. I have never said, ``If we came to you with $600,000, would you do it?'' It never occurred to me to say that.
Senator Atkins: What if you went with $3 million?
Mr. Southam: If we raised $3 million? That thought never occurred to us, I must say. We considered this project to be a federal responsibility. These statues should be commissioned and set up by the federal government. We would be glad to help. It never occurred to me to set out to raise $3.4 million. I thought 15 per cent was a fair offer, based on what was happening at the Canadian War Museum.
Senator Atkins: I am trying to determine where the problem lies.
The Chairman: Whether it is money or something else.
Senator Atkins: That is correct.
Mr. Southam: The fact is that two successive deputy ministers of Canadian Heritage, Mr. Himelfarb, who was there when we started, and Mrs. Laroque, who is there currently, both told me that money was not a problem.
The Chairman: That is as close to an answer as I believe we will get.
Senator Forrestall: I have a two-part question. I believe that the debate is not about your proposal. The Valiants proposal seems to be widely accepted, worthwhile and meritorious in its own way. Rather, however, it is the location that is the difficulty. You have gone to the government.
The people of Canada can best totally participate when public money is involved. A sense of partnership is manifested in that way.
However, this is not a question of money, I do not believe. I believe this is a question of location. I believe I read Minister Copps' objections; they are moot, debatable and not of great consequence.
Against that, in light of your responses to Senator Atkins in the matter of your proposal, did you consider the Metcalfe Street location and the long-range proposal that is part of the National Capital Commission, the City of Ottawa and the Government of Canada, that is, the opening up of Metcalfe right down to the old museum and turning that into another kind of mall or park, if you will?
Mr. Southam: No, senator. We relied on the NCC to come up with proposals. They came up with the LeBreton Flats proposal that we did not like. Finally, they suggested Elgin Street. We liked that. They seemed to have made the suggestion that resolved the location problem. They did not mention Metcalfe Street.
The Metcalfe Street location could not be realized for 10 or more years. A group of veterans are speaking to you, and we are of a certain age. We would like to see this realized in our lifetime. We would particularly like to see it realized on the60thanniversary of World War II, in 2005. Metcalfe Street would still be in the planning stage in that year.
Senator Forrestall: As a senior on this side of the table, let me reassure all of you that not only will you probably still be here, whether we are or not, but also you will be long remembered for this piece of work. It will happen. How and when is another question.
I welcome your contribution. What the committee will recommend remains to be seen.
I share Senator Atkins' view. I wholeheartedly support the Valiants project. Second, I have no objections nor am I uncertain about the views of the Unknown Soldier. I am sure that he would welcome such illustrious company.
Mr. Southam: Nicely said, senator, thank you.
Senator Forrestall: I see nothing wrong with that at all. I see it as enhancing as opposed to detracting. Of course, it is a sacred spot, as are the memories of those who helped to form our country.
You are absolutely correct. I am not an historian at all, but our principal centres were founded originally as military establishments.
I wish you well. I am sure Canadians will look very fondly on your work.
The 60th anniversary is a very appropriate time to celebrate and get on with this. Victory is much more important than the date of the victory. Good luck with it.
The Chairman: To clarify the exchange with Senator Forrestall, as I understand it, there is no further controversy with respect to location. The NCC is the group that is responsible for location, not Canadian Heritage, Veterans Affairs, National Defence or the City of Ottawa. That has been decided, and you agree with it. That is one area that is no longer a matter of controversy, is that correct?
Mr. Southam: That is correct, senator.
Senator Day: My question flows from this discussion. The NCC made the recommendation, with which you agreed. It is a good one. Your brochures show that. It fits in nicely with the restoration of the Unknown Soldier and the National War Memorial. It fits in nicely with all of that.
The NCC was on side. You thought Veterans Affairs and National Defence were on side. They are the lead departments in this kind of thing, I would think. If it is not money, how did Canadian Heritage get to play such a major role in all of this?
Mr. Southam: Canadian Heritage seems to be the lead department on projects of this kind. The NCC said that they liked the idea but that we needed to talk to Canadian Heritage about it. It is in their field.
The Chairman: Is it their money?
Mr. Southam: It is their money.
Senator Day: The National Capital Commission is an independent commission and can make its own decisions. If it is money, then the money must come from somewhere else. The primary thrust of your proposal, then, was to look for funds by approaching Canadian Heritage. Canadian Heritage took the lead for that reason.
Mr. Southam: That is correct.
Senator Day: Notwithstanding the support from Veterans Affairs and National Defence?
Mr. Southam: That is correct.
Senator Day: That clarification will be helpful to assist us in reviving this matter or moving it along.
The other matter was with respect to Senator Kenny's issue of how they come up with recognizing leaders as opposed to other participants in the military. We recognize that many participants and soldiers live vicariously through their leaders and are very closely associated with their leaders. On Parliament Hill, where you are now, there are many examples of recognizing leaders. Not all of the members of Parliament who have participated over the past many years, but the many leaders —
Senator Kenny: Not many backbenchers.
Senator Day: Not many have their photos or paintings on the wall.
Senator Forrestall: What about Robert Hall from Hantsport, Nova Scotia, the only black and the first Commonwealth recipient of the Victoria Cross.
Mr. Southam: I did not get the question.
Senator Day: He wants to increase the number from 16 to 17.
Senator Forrestall: I am looking for a way to get one more general out of the way and another Victoria Cross winner in there.
Senator Day: Who do you want to remove, Wolfe or Montcalm?.
The Chairman: I am sure that we can consider that as being tabled, and the witnesses will consider that suggestion.
As I understand, you had an independent group reviewing the names.
Senator Forrestall: I want to make sure that you had considered that name in all seriousness.
Mr. Southam: We are leaving the choice to military historians. We think that they are the ones to consult on this. They are the experts, and they will come up with the 16 names. We rest our case on what they have told us.
The Chairman: We are almost out of time. If I may be permitted one question, I wanted to get your response to an issue that the minister of Canadian Heritage, Ms. Copps, raised in her letter of December 3, 2002. That letter said, in part: ``The government is committed to the cause of remembrance and believes that the story of the military's contribution to Canada's development as a nation is important. The Valiants Group, therefore, has been invited to meet with government officials to explore other more comprehensive and wide-reaching means of telling this story to Canadians everywhere in Canada. Government officials have encouraged the Valiants Group to consider possibilities such as film, books, the use of the World Wide Web and the creation and distribution of teaching materials. Each of these endeavours would represent a significant commitment and tribute and yet would be far more flexible and effective for conveying such an important story. I would hope that you would encourage the Valiants Group to pursue these other options.''
May I have your comment on that?
Mr. Southam: Yes, they made those suggestions to us. We regard them all as very useful, provided they are anchored on the statues we are proposing. We build the statues. They are there. Through the Web and kits for school children, we spread the story. Of course we would do that.
However, visible evidence that Canada cares for the men and women who did what they did to see us here today is needed.
The Chairman: I join with my colleagues in wishing you well. We are very supportive of what you are endeavouring to do. I find the choice of Valiants intriguing. You have managed to combine people who were not only involved in military operations but who were also nation builders. In some ways, their roles as nation builders were almost more important than their military roles. They are people about whom many Canadians school children have heard, although perhaps not as much as they should have. A statue to them would only improve on that.
As we move forward in time, you are perhaps including more military heroes, but in my opinion you are not so much trying to achieve the glorification of war as the glorification of values that we all hold dear, be they selflessness, valour or the will to put others before oneself. This is what people like Mynarski and Tirquet exemplify. Mynarski gave his life trying to save someone else's. It happened to be in a military conflict, but is saving the life of another who is in danger not something that we would encourage in civilian life?
I must say that I find it difficult to follow the logic of the Minister of Canadian Heritage in that regard.
It being 1 p.m., as interesting as this discussion is, I have no alternative but to bring this meeting to a close.
I wish to thank each one of you for your presentation.
Senators, we have a few administrative details to deal with. First, is it agreed that the material provided by the Valiants Group be filed as an exhibit?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Second, is it agreed that the letters from the ministers of Canadian Heritage, National Defence, Public Works and Veterans Affairs and from the Chair of the NCC be filed as exhibits?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: We have heard the presentation by the Valiants Group. I think it fair to say that there is a consensus among us. Would senators be agreeable to recommending that the Government of Canada reconsider the Valiants project, taking into account the proposals of the sponsors to reduce the number of statues, alter the choice of Valiants and lower the costs?
Senator Day: I so move, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman: There being no further discussion, I declare the motion adopted. It will be sent to our parent committee, the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence, chaired by Senator Kenny.
Senator Day: I believe it is good to say ``Government of Canada'' rather than ``Heritage Canada'' because I think we should not assume that the lead should be taken by Heritage Canada. We should give our position on this to all the various departments.
I have had an opportunity to discuss this briefly with the Minister of Veterans Affairs and I think he would be pleased to hear what we have said here today.
The committee adjourned.