Thank you, Mr. Chair.
First of all, thank you, doctors, for being here in our extreme sport arena—better known as Canadian politics.
I think I understand. And to my mind, everyone around the table understands as well. In any case, I would have been pretty surprised to see the Canadian Medical Association giving us its official okay on
the MMA sport. I would have been in shock, actually, if you had.
But this is where we might differ a bit.
In your presentation, Dr. Reid, you made it clear that you weren't a lawyer. But what the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights is trying to determine is whether it is still appropriate for the Criminal Code to qualify the practice of a certain sport as a crime when, in reality, it is not treated as such. The criminal aspect has been completely overlooked for some time now. UFC specials have been around for a number of years. I see them on several TV channels almost every day. Spike TV airs one or two matches with no problem.
We may be dealing with some hypocrisy here. And I'm not referring to your position but to the fact that the practice is criminalized in the Criminal Code. In your opening remarks, you made a statement that also appears in the notes you provided:
For parliamentarians, and for society, the question of whether to legalize MMA under the Criminal Code therefore comes down to a choice: A choice between money and health.
That comment bothered me a bit, for the simple reason that the issue has nothing to do with that in my opinion. Nor is it a matter of legalizing something. You talk about legalizing MMA, but we're actually talking about decriminalizing an activity, not legalizing it. The provinces and territories can put certain rules in place, but that doesn't mean the passage of Bill S-209 would legalize the practice. All it would do is decriminalize an activity that, in actual fact, has not been treated as a crime for quite some time.
That is the reality of Bill S-209. As my colleague Mr. Seeback pointed out, your opposition is based on the intent of the sport. In other words, the foot and elbow strikes dealt directly to a participant's head during mixed martial arts, or MMA, matches make this activity different from other sports. My understanding, then, is whether it happens in boxing or MMA, you're against it as a matter of policy, as doctors.
However, when two hockey players decide to fight during a game, taking off their helmets and gloves so they can punch each other freely in the face, it is clear to me there's an intent there as well. Therefore, I imagine you would like to go as far as to ban fighting in hockey, adding it to your policy on boxing and MMA.
Unless I am mistaken, you're position applies to all cases where an individual uses a body part to strike another person's head on purpose. The head is the main issue for you, is it not?