Winnipeg | Canadian Museum for Human Rights - Page 58

esquire · #**1141** Posted **Aug 22, 2016, 12:17 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tacheguy

So this museum is a living thing that is basically a platform for discussion, debate and education. If there were no controversies about its programming or exhibits I would be one of the first to call for its termination.

I agree with jmt, I'm not sure that "controversial" is really a word that I'd apply to the CMHR's content. The only real controversy that I can recall was generated mostly by one man who was upset that his ethnic group's history wouldn't be receiving the exact same square footage of dedicated display space as the Holocaust.

The CMHR would have probably benefitted from turning up the controversy dial a bit by taking a bolder stand on some issues.

Tacheguy · #**1142** Posted **Aug 22, 2016, 1:02 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jets4Life

Well said.

Speaking of the Hip. Gord Downie had made reference to the conditions of the north (arctic I assume),during the encore, after he acknowledged Justin Trudeau in the audience. I thought that was interesting.

I was so happy when he did that. The demographic that grew up with Hip will do a better job of addressing those issues than we boomers did (hopefully).

buzzg · #**1143** Posted **Aug 22, 2016, 6:26 AM**

It's a museum and museums evolve over time. The exhibits will evolve and update, they'll get a better grasp of what works and what doesn't, etc. Also, it was pretty public that the Harper government tried to put its stamp on the content, so it'll be interesting to see if any changes come from them (presumably) having more free reign now.

TimeFadesAway · #**1144** Posted **Aug 22, 2016, 1:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jets4Life

However, nobody can rationally justify spending nearly $500 million in public funding on a Museum that has been more divisive, rather than to unite people.

The museum cost $351 million to build, $180 million of that was public money (including donations from Crown corps). That's a fair bit less than $500 million.

blueandgoldguy · #**1145** Posted **Aug 22, 2016, 9:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jets4Life

You and I, and the rest of Winnipeg's population. The City and Government of Manitoba are paying for most of it. In other words, we're paying for it. That's not vision, that's corporate welfare.

The Asper's could have paid for it mainly by private funding, and everyone would be happy. Even the majority of "private" funding that the CMHR did get was from Unions and Crown Corporations. It's all good now, as it still has that "Shiny New Toy" image.

How will history judge the CMHR? Only time will tell...

How do you feel about the "corporate welfare" given to all those national museums in Ottawa? Better yet, how do you feel about all the annual $13 million in subsidies given to the TNSE?

blueandgoldguy · #**1146** Posted **Aug 22, 2016, 9:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by TimeFadesAway

The museum cost $351 million to build, $180 million of that was public money (including donations from Crown corps). That's a fair bit less than $500 million.

I think he is referring to the $25 million annual subsidy. I'm not sure how long that is guaranteed for...

Still it is puzzling that he refers to it as corporate welfare when it is essentially operated by the federal government. It certainly is not some privately run enterprise.

Authentic_City · #**1147** Posted **Aug 22, 2016, 9:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by blueandgoldguy

I think he is referring to the $25 million annual subsidy. I'm not sure how long that is guaranteed for...

Still it is puzzling that he refers to it as corporate welfare when it is essentially operated by the federal government. It certainly is not some privately run enterprise.

I'm not sure it's fair to characterize operating funds for a public museum as subsidies. All national museums receive a share of annual operating costs from the government. These are not subsidies of a private or corporate enterprise.

Jets4Life · #**1148** Posted **Aug 23, 2016, 4:10 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by blueandgoldguy

How do you feel about the "corporate welfare" given to all those national museums in Ottawa? Better yet, how do you feel about all the annual $13 million in subsidies given to the TNSE?

Museums in Ottawa? Not great, but expected, considering it's Ottawa

Subsidies for True North?

AWESOME. True North should just take over the city. They deserve every penny.

blueandgoldguy · #**1149** Posted **Aug 23, 2016, 10:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jets4Life

Museums in Ottawa? Not great, but expected, considering it's Ottawa

Subsidies for True North?

AWESOME. True North should just take over the city. They deserve every penny.

Why do you not feel good about those subsidies to museums? They are an important part of heritage and culture. Hard to put a price on that...and there isn't some rich individual behind these institutions who will become wealthier due to these subsidies.

Please don't play stupid. You damn well know True North receives subsidies to the tune of $13 million per year plus various tax exemptions.

The effects on the entire downtown from True North have been pretty minimal. It's limited to a very small portion of downtown south of Portage between Edmonton and Donald. Other projects - both big and small - that have resulted or will result in people living downtown plays a much bigger role in revitalizing downtown than events in an enclosed facility that last 3 hours...and the impetus behind those projects (with the notable exception of True North's Glasshouse) have nothing to do with the return of the Jets to downtown.

Jets4Life · #**1150** Posted **Aug 23, 2016, 10:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by blueandgoldguy

Why do you not feel good about those subsidies to museums? They are an important part of heritage and culture. Hard to put a price on that...and there isn't some rich individual behind these institutions who will become wealthier due to these subsidies.

It should be the CANADIAN Museum of Human Rights. When Gail Asper and "Friends of the Museum" were running things, they asked Canadians what should the Museum be composed of, assuming the #1 answer would be the Holocaust. Turns out it was #6. The treatment of our First Nations people was, far and way, the #1 answer to that question. However, they then suppressed the results of the survey, and public opinion for that matter. Like most others in Canada, I want the museum to reflect on CANADIAN values, not the values of a rich billionaire, who wants to create a watered-down Holocaust Museum, seemingly at all cost. However, there is still hope. The museum is still young, and could be used in future to reflect what is important to Canada, and not what happened in Poland in the 40s.

Quote:

Please don't play stupid. You damn well know True North receives subsidies to the tune of $13 million per year plus various tax exemptions.

And I support True North 100%.

The difference between True North and the CMHR is too broad to mention, but for starters, even before the NHL returned to Winnipeg, if I came across a Winnipeg out of province, especially if male, one of the most common salutes would be "GO JETS GO." A "GO JETS GO" chant broke out in North Dakota, of all places, during the 2005 World Junior Championships, when the Jets did not even exist. I think the Jets are more important to this province in terms of identity, than the Riders are to Saskatchewan.

Additionally, everything True North touches seems to turn into gold. The Jets are profitable, and don't demand to be insanely subsidized by Government, unlike most places in North America (see Arizona). One of the reasons David Thomson bought the Jets was to buy up cheap real estate in Winnipeg, and build. Look at how Downtown Winnipeg is being rejuvenated since the Jets return. $13 million is chump change, in relation to not only the economic benefits of the new construction in Winnipeg, but civic pride, and putting the city back on the map.

jmt18325 · #**1151** Posted **Aug 23, 2016, 11:08 PM**

It's arguable that the CMHR has been part of that rejuvenation, bringing people downtown that otherwise wouldn't be there.

Not everyone wants to watch hockey.

rrskylar · #**1152** Posted **Aug 25, 2016, 6:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmt18325

It's arguable that the CMHR has been part of that rejuvenation, bringing people downtown that otherwise wouldn't be there.

Not everyone wants to watch hockey.

Wow! Good one!

Jets4Life · #**1153** Posted **Aug 29, 2016, 2:29 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmt18325

It's arguable that the CMHR has been part of that rejuvenation, bringing people downtown that otherwise wouldn't be there.

For comparisons sakes, I've heard Jim's Fish and Chips brings people downtown too.......

jmt18325 · #**1154** Posted **Aug 29, 2016, 2:33 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jets4Life

For comparisons sakes, I've heard Jim's Fish and Chips brings people downtown too.......

That's not a very intelligent statement.

robertocarlos · #**1155** Posted **Aug 29, 2016, 4:05 PM**

I really like the tall prairie grass. There are many crickets in the grass and a few on the sidewalk. I try not to step on them.

How about parcel 4 as the site of a new MTSC?

esquire · #**1156** Posted **Aug 29, 2016, 4:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by robertocarlos

How about parcel 4 as the site of a new MTSC?

What's wrong with the old MTSC?

robertocarlos · #**1157** Posted **Aug 29, 2016, 4:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by esquire

What's wrong with the old MTSC?

Nothing really. It's a perfect AHL arena. One day they are going to build a new arena downtown. That looks like one of only a few available spots. Or they could build next to IGF.

esquire · #**1158** Posted **Aug 29, 2016, 4:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by robertocarlos

Nothing really. It's a perfect AHL arena. One day they are going to build a new arena downtown. That looks like one of only a few available spots. Or they could build next to IGF.

Considering MTSC is not even 12 years old and by all indications still quite a profitable venue, I doubt anyone is going to be ponying up the cash to pay for a new one anytime soon.

I can't imagine that FNP would consider sitting on Parcel 4 for another 30 years and keep it available for TNSE in the event that it wants to build a new rink there some day. I daresay that it's not in keeping with their mandate to sell it to TNSE now so that the latter can run a parking lot there for decades until they're ready to build.

robertocarlos · #**1159** Posted **Aug 29, 2016, 4:21 PM**

Who earns the money now from it being a parking lot?

Authentic_City · #**1160** Posted **Aug 29, 2016, 5:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jets4Life

For comparisons sakes, I've heard Jim's Fish and Chips brings people downtown too.......

Jim's Fish and Chips was quite good its in heyday, but I believe the restaurant was located in St. James, near the Viscount Gort Hotel. Also, they closed decades ago and their building demolished. Not sure how they could draw folks downtown. I am positive that the CMHR draws more downtown visitors than Jim's Fish and Chips.