A Message from the Executive Director

Massimo Bergamini

Ukraine needs our help — are we up to the task?

Those of us in Canada’s museums sector work every day to help enhance the value of museums to society, including to preserving, expanding and interpreting society’s cultural heritage. Of course, some days are more difficult than others, as in all occupations, but because we care deeply about our institutions and their vital work, most days are deeply rewarding.

Massimo Bergamini. Photo — Jean-Marc Carisse

However, I suspect that, even in our most difficult moments, amid our daily frustrations, none of us ever experienced anything like the nightmare that is engulfing Ukraine and our colleagues there. Amidst the upheaval and terror of an unprovoked and unjustified war, our colleagues are attempting to save their nation’s cultural heritage and national identity while trying to protect themselves and their loved ones.

We can all admire those who are living our shared principles just as they face the pounding of air raids, missile attacks, and tanks. They are doing it as I write this, and perhaps they will still be doing it when you read it.

It is not enough for us to applaud our Ukrainian colleagues’ efforts, as extraordinary as they may be — they need our help.

Speaking about the situation in Ukraine, Lazare Eloundou, UNESCO’s World Heritage Director, said “city centres are seriously damaged, some of which have sites and monuments that date back to the 11th century. Today, museums are damaged, some with collections inside. It is a whole cultural life that risks disappearing.”

Russia has shown it will not hesitate to attack civilians, including hospitals and schools. Why stop at cultural treasures, particularly those seen as emblems of Ukrainian nationhood? In fact, destroying these treasures is a deliberate effort to support Putin’s claim that Ukraine is not a “real” country and has no claim to nationhood.

It will only get worse if the war continues. Should the fighting stop, how long will it be before vulnerable works, collections and sites can be restored to the conditions needed to preserve them?

If we want to see the cultural cleansing stopped, we should—we must—support those who are helping to preserve Ukrainian history, art and culture in the face of Russia’s attempts to erase them, and their nation.

Ukraine is home to seven UNESCO World Heritage sites, including St. Sophia Cathedral and monastic buildings in Kyiv. Other sites on the U.N. list are in the western city of Lviv, the Black Sea port of Odessa, and the second largest city, Kharkiv. All four cities have been shelled and bombed by Russian forces.

UNESCO’s director general, Audrey Azoulay, said in a statement that the agency is coordinating with Ukrainian authorities to mark key historic monuments and sites across Ukraine with an internationally recognized sign for the protection of cultural heritage. UNESCO plans to meet with Ukraine’s museum directors to help them safeguard museum collections and cultural property.

At the time of writing, I have invited some 70 leaders from our community to come together to identify concrete steps that we can take to support our Ukrainian colleagues. I will also be reaching out to our colleagues with ICOM Canada and ICOMOS Canada to bring them under CMA’s tent.

Our goal will be to propose ways we can support Ukraine’s museum and cultural community and advance the cause of peace. Three pathways come to mind: humanitarian and technical/financial assistance, cultural support and promotion, and, if necessary, sanctions.

We cannot look away. We must take action—effective action. Ukraine needs our help—our expertise, our skills, and our compassion.

This crisis is a test of our sector’s ability to mobilize and become a catalyst for social justice, human development and peace. It is a test of CMA’s leadership and its convener role, of our shared commitment to the value of culture everywhere, and lastly of our common humanity in the face of brutal atrocity.

I am confident we are up to the task.

Parallels with 1972 point the way forward for CMA’s National Museum Policy Advocacy

When reflecting on what a new national museum policy might look like, it is instructive for us to consider the factors that contributed to the creation of the 1972 National Museum Policy.

As we do that, it is equally important to strive for a common understanding of our sector’s place and role in society — today and in the future — because that is the role that a new museums policy would be expected to support and leverage.

Announced 50 years ago on the heels of the report of the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism by Secretary of State Gerard Pelletier, the National Museum Policy was one of several cultural initiatives of the Trudeau government in response to the cultural and political tensions of the day.

Among other things, the policy aimed to encourage a shift in museum programming from preservation to public engagement. Framed under the policy rubric “democratization,” the government’s goal was to leverage museums and their collections to unite Canadians and help heal the stresses and fractures that, at the time, characterized Canadian society.

The stress and trauma of the last two years have laid bare fissures in our society that are deeper and more complex than those prevalent in Canada 50 years ago. This has brought historical inequities and grievances in sharp relief, and has exacerbated divisions within our civil society.

Museums are safe spaces for reflection about civility and civil society; about personal and social responsibility; and about diversity and real inclusion. They are safe spaces for dialogue and healing at a time when a cacophony of seemingly irreconcilable perspectives on the world dominates our daily lives.

As some of the most trusted and respected public institutions in the country, museums can provide Canadians with solid ground on which to pause and reflect on a way forward out of the uncertainty of today.

Yet here is the problem: Canada’s Museums Policy is an artefact of a bygone era. It simply does not reflect modern Canada or our sector today - what they look like, the stresses and strains they face, or their potential for tomorrow.

Simply put, Canada’s National Museum Policy was designed for a Canada and a museums and heritage sector that no longer exist.

The political and cultural parallels with 1972 are legion, and they suggest that just as 50 years ago, museums were viewed by the federal government as having a role in uniting our country, so too museums today can play a similar role in healing and bringing Canadians closer together.

Conversations with officials at Canadian Heritage tell us that they share this perspective and that they and Minister Rodriguez are committed to renewing Canada’s museum policy.

That’s great news. This policy will set the terms and conditions for the relations and the kinds of partnerships that might be possible with the Government of Canada for at least a generation — meaning that together, we have to get it right.

Beginning in April, we will begin pan-Canadian consultations and listening sessions with CMA members as well as representatives of the larger heritage community, with the goal of bringing a consensus proposal to the Minister of Canadian Heritage in the fall.

These consultations will include in-person meetings, virtual roundtables, as well as an online questionnaire. In addition to informing the CMA’s formal submission to the Government of Canada, each stream will feed into a “what we heard” report that will support the submission. This report will be publicly available.

Look for updates and information on how you can participate in our CMA News. M