Thank you, Mr. Chair.
To begin, I'd like to express my solidarity with the people back home affected by the wildfires, particularly those in Normétal and Saint-Lambert. I also stand with the people affected on the north shore, in northern Quebec, in Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean and in northeastern Ontario. This situation affects me personally. I obviously intend to return to my region as of tomorrow, because I want to be there.
Before, though, I thought it was very important to be here in person.
When I heard the testimony of Ms. Da Silva Rondeau and Ms. McCormack, for example, I was particularly shocked to learn just how far organizations go to protect themselves.
I was pleased to receive an invitation from Laurel Collins, a member of the NDP, to attend a meeting with My Voice, My Choice, to discuss the process related to non-disclosure agreements and their adverse effects. That's where I met Ms. Favro and Ms. Gaertner.
As I told you before, I was particularly shocked by your testimony. I was impressed by your strength and prominence.
Thank you for being here today. I absolutely wanted to see you contribute to our study, given your expertise and your sensitivity.
I would like to address one particular point. It seems that the people involved in the complaint process are often lawyers. However, there are certain skills required when dealing with someone who has been a victim of a crime of this nature, and that element is missing.
You explained the importance of having an investigator or adjudicator who takes victims' trauma into account. Are their practices being properly monitored? Does it have enough oversight?
For example, the committee would have liked to hear Mr. Bard's testimony last week, but he did not appear. That said, can the sport community govern itself?
How are staff from the Office of the Sport Integrity Commissioner or the Sport Dispute Resolution Centre of Canada involved in this work?
How can lawyers be at the head of national sports organizations?
Finally, can you tell us about the dangers of contamination of evidence and conflicts of interest?