PART II: MAKING THE MUSEUM MORE TAXPAYER FRIENDLY

Of all government projects, shouldn’t a “human rights” museum be transparent and up front with humans? Shouldn’t a “human rights” museum also not force taxpayers to donate to it?

In both cases, the answer should be a resounding “yes,” but unfortunately that hasn’t been the case with the Canadian Museum for Human Rights project. The museum project definitely needs to become more taxpayer friendly going forward. (Image Canadian Museum of Human Rights:Wikipedia/1ajs)

The latest example of the museum being coy with taxpayers happened back in December when officials disclosed that the cost of construction had increased again; from $310 million to $351 million. And don’t forget, $310 million was up from the initial $265 million price tag when the project began.

Yet, thanks to a diligent journalist, the total cost, including some expenses left out by the museum, was discovered to actually be $357.5 million; $6.5 million higher than reported. It seems the museum felt it didn’t need to disclose to taxpayers a couple construction bills; the cost of building a theatre and temporary gallery.

When asked for our opinion about the real cost overrun figure, the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, a non-profit taxpayers’ watchdog group, criticized the museum for dribbling out such details to the public. We noted that taxpayers deserved to know the total cost, not an incomplete figure.

Incredibly, the museum saw the comments in the media and responded with a terse letter. They complained about the criticism, claiming it was “irresponsible” and “unfounded” for the Canadian Taxpayers Federation to make such statements. Ironically, it was museum staff who knew what the true total was, but didn’t disclose it to the public.

Unfortunately, this wasn’t the first time the “human rights” museum pulled such a stunt. Consider that over two years ago the museum received a $5 million funding commitment from the Ontario government spread over ten years. To date, over $1 million has been transferred to the museum from their government, yet neither the museum, its fundraising arm nor the Ontario government have put out a news release to notify the media and public about the donation.

If that situation sounds familiar, recall what happened a few years ago when former Premier Gary Doer ‘encouraged’ Manitoba’s crown corporations to make a donation towards the project. Like obedient subordinates, the crowns obliged, donating a total of $4.5 million. The kicker was the fact the public only found because someone on the inside leaked the information.

As for the $160 million that the federal government, provincial government and city hall initially contributed towards the project, why couldn’t those dollars have been left in taxpayers’ pockets? Couldn’t taxpayers have decided for themselves if they wanted to donate to the project? Shouldn’t such a freedom be a human right? After all, we’re not talking about tax dollars for a necessary government service like policing.

Another ironic example would be the gold-plated, defined benefit pension plan enjoyed by museum staff. Yes, 75 per cent of private sector taxpayers have no pension plan whatsoever, but we’re forced to contribute annually, through our mandatory taxes – to the museum’s golden employee pension plan. The funds will come in part from $21.7 million in annual funding from the federal government.

Fortunately, there’s a solution to many of these problems. In next week’s column we’ll explore what to do to improve accountability at the museum.