Evidence of meeting #104 for Canadian Heritage in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was athletes.
A video is available from Parliament.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
12:45 p.m.
An hon. member
That was like a minute and a half.
12:45 p.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
I'm sorry. I had eight minutes and 36 seconds here. The clerk is saying that he hadn't changed it.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
December 12th, 2023 / 12:45 p.m.
Liberal
Taleeb Noormohamed Liberal Vancouver Granville, BC
Okay. That's fine.
Look, when I think back to 30-something years ago, I was one of very few brown kids who played hockey. There were things that were normalized then that today we would not even contemplate as being acceptable, yet those things still happen. They happen in a way that perhaps is less overt, but it's still there.
How do we make sure through this process you've articulated, or that we're going to articulate and that will come to life, that those voices who are afraid to be heard in this iteration would be not just comfortable but able to do this in a way that doesn't retraumatize them and, more importantly, doesn't cause them consequences when they go back to sport? It's one thing to say that we don't want to retraumatize people, which is a terrible and awful thing. It's another thing when you're retraumatizing people and then they have to go back to compete. They have to deal with the stigma of having participated in a process like this.
For the current athletes and others who are currently in the system, for the coaches and others who want to take a stand and do the right thing, how does this process allow them to do that? Would this process allow them to do that in a way that respects their ability to feel safe, not just through the process but after?
12:50 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Canadian Heritage
That's an excellent question. The terms of reference are clear that issues like homophobia, transphobia and all these other issues are going to come up. That's why for the minister it was so important that the terms of reference be inclusive. There are many forms of abuse in sport. It takes many different aspects.
To your question on how to make sure they are not retraumatized when they come back, the commission will have the opportunity to do in camera interviews. If people would prefer to have this discussion in camera, the commission will be able to do that so that they can be heard but maybe not feel that, for some reason, there will be public retaliation for their testimony. That's definitely one thing that will be available.
I think the other fundamental question you're asking is whether organizations should allow these kinds of discussions. In the minister's testimony, she mentioned the code of conduct that has been imposed on organizations. One of the requirements of the code is to have board representation that is way more diverse. It has to be no more than 60% representation of one gender, etc. They have to develop a plan to show diversity, because that's where it starts. If the governance does not value diversity, does not promote diversity and does not represent diversity, there won't be the change of culture that you're talking about.
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
We're done now. Thanks.
I will now go to Mr. Lemire.
Sébastien, you have six minutes.
12:50 p.m.
Bloc
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you for being with us today, Ms. Mondou.
Sport Canada has been widely criticized over the years. Have you done any kind of internal review of the failures and shortcomings when it comes to the watchdog role that was expected of Sport Canada?
12:50 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Canadian Heritage
That's a very good question.
The way the people at Sport Canada view their role has changed over the years. It evolved over time. Canadians' expectations of Sport Canada have changed, as well.
At first, Sport Canada's role was to fund various organizations and ensure the best possible management of public funds. Some horror stories came to light over the years, and people demanded that sports associations be held responsible for their conduct. As the minister mentioned, this happens through funding.
In terms of soul searching, I'd say that, when we testified before this committee about a year ago I believe, the issue of audits came up. When we did our audits, we didn't have a separate team capable of really adding that extra layer of oversight. There's some money in the 2023 budget to create such a team whose purpose will be to ensure compliance, like in many other departments. We didn't have that ability before. That's one thing that happened.
We'd also started working on a report card of sorts, but we lacked the capacity to strictly enforce the results.
I apologize for the long answer.
12:50 p.m.
Bloc
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
You made some very relevant points, which is why I allowed you to continue.
We had a legal expert before the committee. What we learned is that the main difference between an independent public commission of inquiry and the kind of voluntary commission announced yesterday lies in the power to order the production of documents. Clearly, an independent public commission of inquiry could have looked into what Sport Canada did and did not do.
Now that you've chosen a voluntary mechanism, will you voluntarily appear before the commission to publicly state your conclusions and share the information you just talked about?
Will you take your responsibility for ensuring athlete safety?
12:55 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Canadian Heritage
Madam Chair, I pledge before the committee my full co-operation in the investigation, as well as Sport Canada's. That means producing documents, offering testimony and giving the commission everything it needs. I would also add that, when Justice Cromwell was preparing his report, we co-operated fully with his investigation.
12:55 p.m.
Bloc
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Justice Cromwell's report is very valuable. However, we're still waiting on the results to find out what happened. We're also still waiting for criminal charges to be brought in relation to the events that occurred in London.
The minister's two main arguments were money and delays. Minister St-Onge made a commitment on May 11. We lost six months, which might explain the delays. If we could have had a public inquiry, then the delays would be a non-issue right now.
With regard to money, I think it's odd that we're investing $12 million internationally in the FACE program while the commission to deal with the consequences of abuse in sports is budgeted at $18 million to $20 million.
Isn't there a disconnect between the amounts invested in prevention and those invested to make a diagnosis? Wouldn't you agree that there's something embarrassing about that?
12:55 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Canadian Heritage
I didn't hear Minister Qualtrough talk about money being a reason. I believe she mentioned yesterday that the exercise will have a $10-million to $15-million price tag, which is the going rate for a commission of inquiry. Money is not an issue here.
12:55 p.m.
Bloc
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
I'm happy to hear that.
On May 11, Minister St-Onge committed to making a number of changes and recommendations.
Which of these are still valid? Which publicly-made commitments still apply?
12:55 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Canadian Heritage
We're working on all of the commitments that Minister St-Onge made back in May. I mentioned the governance code earlier as well as the fact that it was one of the commitments.
Last week, if I'm not mistaken, the teams got together with all of the sports organizations to talk about the implementation of the governance code and request that they draw up an action plan by April 1, 2024. Although that deadline isn't set in stone, the code will need to be implemented across the board by April 1, 2025. This is one more example showing the progress being made on all of the measures taken by the minister.
We would be happy to send the committee a progress report, if you wish.
12:55 p.m.
Bloc
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
I'd appreciate that.
In February 2023, I believe, Minister St-Onge committed to releasing a Canadian sport policy 2022-32. It's been almost a year. Does this initiative seeking to set the ground rules for sports organizations still exist?
12:55 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Canadian Heritage
We're working hard on that.
I spoke to my colleagues in the provinces about that, and we're aiming for an approval process by 2023. On that subject, I'd like to mention the fact that people wanted to consult Indigenous communities, who've made certain comments. The consultations are nearly done. Ministerial approval should happen in 2024.
12:55 p.m.
Bloc
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Let's talk about the athlete committee. Why give it an eight-year mandate and why exclude athletes who were abused or mistreated over the past 20 years? I'm thinking in particular of the founders of AthletesCAN, who won't be eligible.
What is the basis for this eight-year discrimination? Was an agreement reached with the IOC or another body? Why eight years?
12:55 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Canadian Heritage
That criteria was set by the athletes themselves, but it can be revisited. We see the same kind of thing with boards of directors; the athletes want people who are still active and involved. That said, the minister could reexamine that if the athletes change their mind.
12:55 p.m.
Liberal