Senator Jerry Grafstein says he’s delighted the federal government is no longer continuing its selection process to find a home for the Portrait Gallery of Canada. To him, it means renewed hope that the gallery will return to Ottawa – where, he says, it belongs.
“Now we can start again and put [the gallery] back to where it was to begin with. Turn back the clock,” says Grafstein, who witnessed the birth of the idea of a portrait gallery back in 2001, when the Liberals were in power. Grafstein was one of the people to suggest the gallery be installed at the former U.S. embassy, across from the Parliament Buildings.
However, that vision dimmed as successive governments delayed the project. Although more than $11 million had already been spent on the initial project, Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s government introduced a new idea last year: a contest between nine cities across Canada to submit the best proposal for the gallery.
Earlier this month, newly appointed Heritage Minister James Moore announced the government had changed its mind again; there would not be a Portrait Gallery of Canada after all.
In a media release, Moore blamed global economic instability and said “the selection process failed to meet the best interests of both the portrait gallery and taxpayers.”
The estimated cost of the gallery had been $22 million but nearly doubled to $40 million when the Conservatives reviewed the plans in 2006. Now they claim it would have cost $100 million. Charles Drouin, spokesperson for the department of Canadian heritage, says the government is firm on its decision and simply cannot consider investing such a large amount of taxpayers’ dollars into the gallery for the time being.
But Grafstein disagrees. “It’s not a lot of money. It’s not the $100 million. We spend more money in Ottawa on potholes every year,” he points out.
However, Drouin says the government recognizes the importance of the portrait collection and will make it available to as many Canadians as possible by more economical and innovative means, such as travelling exhibitions and other public programs.
Paul Dewar, Ottawa Centre MP, says he doesn’t buy the argument that the gallery would be too costly since moving artwork through exhibitions is expensive and generates less revenue.
Grafstein, who introduced a private member’s bill in Senate earlier this year to make sure the portrait gallery remains in the national capital, says he plans to reintroduce the bill. He says there is no better home for the gallery other than on Wellington Street, since its prime location would attract the thousands of visitors at Parliament Hill every day.
“It’s empty. There’s nothing in there,” says Grafstein about the Wellington location. “It’s an empty building, and it has been for the last five, six years.”
Although Drouin would not reveal the government’s plans for the former U.S. embassy, he says its request for proposals last year signals that turning the building into a gallery is not an option.
Also part of the Liberals’ plan had been the establishment of high-definition screens in various galleries across Canada to allow the exhibition to be shared throughout the country.
Grafstein insists the portrait gallery means so much more than money. “There’s a treasure chest sitting across the river from Ottawa. [It’ll] never be seen. That, in my mind, is obscene,” says an exasperated Grafstein. “Every country has one. Why not Canada? This is bizarre that people would question why we should have a portrait gallery. The argument is why not?”
“Some of the artifacts are the envy of the world, and we have them stored away,” says Dewar. “It’s really about celebrating who we are and understanding who we are. It’s investing in a country’s identity and you can’t put a cost on that. If you don’t do it, you’d watch [your identity] slip away and that would be most unfortunate.”
Grafstein criticizes the government for the project’s setbacks. “Imagination, vision and leadership – that’s what we’re lacking right now,” he says.
Jerry Grey, a local artist and member of Friends of the Portrait Gallery, agrees. “[Blaming economic instability] is just an easy out. I don’t know that [the Conservatives] were that committed to it in the first place,” says Grey. “It was all there and they’ve thrown it all away.”
Grafstein says the portrait gallery is worth fighting for and he hopes others in the community, Parliament and Senate will join behind the bill. Dewar says he will back Grafstein as well as make his own proposal to cover areas from which the senator is limited.
Heritage, history, patriotism, cultural identity – those are just a few of the reasons Grafstein listed for a portrait gallery. “It’s an act of Canadianism at its highest level,” he says. “This is not just for Ottawa. This is for Canada.”