As documented elsewhere on this web site (see “NCC Renewal“), in 2006 the federal government conducted a review of the NCC’s mandate. The Poets’ Pathway Committee made a submission to the Panel headed by Prof. Gilles Paquet.

Here are some highlights, expressed in oral presentation:

* For this project to be realized further, the cooperation of the NCC is indispensable. The Pinecrest and Southern Corridors as well as the shores of the Rideau River are under its control.

* Most critically, the focal point of the Pathway, the meadow west of McCarthy Woods, and a connecting corridor further west, are on its surplus list and candidate for development. These lands are part of the Southern Corridor. We envisage this meadow and the adjacent Woods as a future Canadian Poets’ Park.

* We have twice formally approached the NCC’s Board of Directors and have had several meetings with staff before and after these presentations.

* On both occasions the reception was less than helpful. Mr. Beaudry, in his reply of 2005, while supportive of a commemoration of Canada’s national poets, suggested that the pathway should be in the core area. Doing so would not be in accord with the fundamental concept of the Pathway as a commemorative walk through natural landscapes.

* What’s more, this reply reveals the limited perspective of the Commission on its tourism mandate. Tourists are interested in more than visiting Parliament Hill and the Museums.

* The NCC to date has not seized the opportunity we are offering to create something that is uniquely Canadian and fully meets its mandate to explain Canada to Canadians.

* Note that page 13 of the paper that was submitted states: The NCC takes the lead in working with sponsor groups to identify sites for permanent monuments of national significance in Canada’s Capital … and it supports the development and design process for particular projects.
An implication here, which is confirmed when one looks at the Commission’s Commemoration Policy, is that commemoration is thought of as taking the form of monuments.

* We are not even asking for the NCC to take the lead, all we are asking for is an agreement in principle and technical assistance and advice, e.g. on appropriate standards and cost of explanatory plaques. With such an agreement in hand, we are quite prepared to take the lead in detailing the specifics of the route and do the fundraising.

* In conclusion, while we realize that your recommendations to the Minister will likely be at a high level and not include specific directions, we hope that our proposal can serve as background and example of how the NCC can do better in fulfilling its mandate of presenting Canada to Canadians while at the same time preserving important greenspace in the Capital.