Public Accounts Committee on June 1st, 2026

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you. That is the time.

Mr. Lemire, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

At my request and with the support of several colleagues from each political party, namely the Liberal Party, the Conservative Party and the New Democratic Party, I asked the Parliamentary Budget Officer to look into the situation regarding the International Federation of Association Football, or FIFA, World Cup.

Last week, the Parliamentary Budget Officer revealed that public investments in the order of $1 billion had been granted to FIFA, which amounts to approximately $82 million per match. For every minute played, FIFA wants $1 million from taxpayers; $473 million of that comes from the federal government, a bill that can only grow because security costs can't be accounted for at this stage.

In addition, if there are cost overruns or special requirements, the federal government will cover the expenses, to which tax exemptions must be added. As we saw in the Radio-Canada report, these types of contracts involve secret agreements. This is tantamount to handing over the keys to the country.

Could we know the details on the tax exemptions granted to FIFA?

Could you provide the committee with data on the revenue that will be lost by Treasury Board? Specifically, we're talking about tax exemptions on everything generated by FIFA over a 10-year period.

Is that correct?

[Francis Bilodeau]

Regarding challenges related to tax policy, the Department of Finance or the Canada Revenue Agency would be in a better position to answer your question. We don't have any information on that.

Our department's role is to support the host cities by providing funding to ensure the delivery of the games, in accordance with the government's decision to host FIFA. Once again, this falls under Mr. Brown's purview.

Mr. Brown, would you like to add anything?

[Andrew Brown]

What you just said regarding customs and duties is true.

FIFA was granted an exemption for goods that they would be importing into the country with respect to the FIFA World Cup tournament. This is the same approach that was used for the FIFA 2015 Women's World Cup, and it was specifically related to goods that would essentially be expected to be brought in, have a temporary use and leave the country again subsequently.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

As you rightly said, it's for temporary use. We're also talking about over $1 billion in investments, including $473 million in federal support.

Quebeckers rejected FIFA, which, let's face it, has an international reputation as a white-collar criminal on the international stage. That reputation stems in particular from its demands that no other events be held at the same time. We would have had to cancel the Grand Prix, whose date had already been changed, the Just for Laughs Festival, the Montreal International Jazz Festival and the Francos de Montréal. That was the kind of demand that was made.

Fortunately, Quebec and the City of Montreal did not agree. However, we still have to foot the bill. If we do the math, we arrive at over $100 million of Quebeckers' money that will be given to FIFA to host this event.

How did you assess the economic benefits for Quebeckers? How do you justify this expense for Quebec and Canadian taxpayers?

We recall that government subsidies to host soccer matches in Ontario and British Columbia will amount to nearly $1 million per minute of play.

[Andrew Brown]

As you mentioned, that amount includes not only the investment made by the federal government, but also the investment made by other levels of government.

First, the federal investment will be for the host cities so that they have what they need. Second, there is an investment to support security at matches in Toronto and Vancouver.

In the 2025 budget, there was also an announcement about ensuring the event leaves a legacy for Canadians across the country.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

In the budget, it was presented as an investment, when in fact it's a major and shameless accounting aberration.

The deficit should be much higher than that, because it's not an investment; it's a net expense. The money invested in security will not result in infrastructure and cannot be amortized over a number of years.

In addition, guarantees were supposed to be provided in the economic study. However, while ticket prices are around $1,370 for seats in the upper deck and $3,100 for a lower deck seat for matches like Canada versus Bosnia-Herzegovina, there has been no surge in hotel demand in either Toronto or Vancouver. According to Destination Vancouver, there has been a 20% decrease in hotel bookings compared to last year.

Will this event be a flop?

How long will we have to pay for these bad decisions, again without knowing the ins and outs of the contracts that were disclosed and without knowing why, or at what price, tax exemptions were granted?

We won't know.

Why was this decision made?

[Francis Bilodeau]

The FIFA event is clearly one of the biggest sporting events in the world. The government has decided to support hosting it. Our department's role has been to support the host cities so that they have the necessary capacity to ensure its success.

The economic benefits can't be measured yet. We can see them later.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

At what cost? The question remains.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you very much.

Beginning our second round is Mr. Kuruc, please, for five minutes.

[Ned Kuruc, Conservative, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Hello. Thank you, everybody, for being here today.

I'd like to start off by asking for a yes or no answer. The CBC gets around $1.4 billion, and that's the budget for 2025.

[Francis Bilodeau]

That's correct.

[Ned Kuruc, Conservative, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Do you folks know how much the TV show Northland Tales got out of that $1.4 billion?

[Francis Bilodeau]

We don't know offhand, but we can get that information.

[Ned Kuruc, Conservative, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

They received $2.5 million to $5 million.

My next question is going to be very direct. Do you think it's a misappropriation of funding that the Canadian taxpayer had to have their money taken—$2.5 million to $5 million? By the way, I could find this on ChatGPT in a second, so I find it concerning that you don't have these numbers in front of us. I anticipated that you'd be answering these questions.

This money was given to a TV show that dragged in RCMP veterans under a false premise, only to humiliate them. I consider this a misappropriation of funds. What does your department consider this to be?

[Francis Bilodeau]

There are maybe two parts to my answer. First, my understanding at this point is that the production has been halted by the CBC while they look into that. That's part one.

Part two to my answer is that the system is intentionally built so that my department or the government has no say on programming, specifically to prevent any concerns about government overreach into programming within the public broadcaster. That's the case in Canada. That's the case elsewhere.

[Ned Kuruc, Conservative, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Based on what happened, is there any talk of now having oversight in handing out taxpayer money and having a few more checks and balances in place before funding goes out? I understand that you oversee the CBC, and the CBC sent out that money. I understand that separation, but it's the heritage ministry that really oversees everything. You might not have had a direct hand in that—I agree—but based on what happened and based on the fact that the RCMP union is now....

This is really a stain on Canadian society, what happened there. Are there talks of having some oversight before that kind of money gets handed out?

[Francis Bilodeau]

I understand the point. I think there are competing tensions, in what you outlined there, between protecting the independence of a public broadcaster and making governance choices—which could be made but have been made nowhere in the world—to have the government play a more direct role in the determination of programming.

The CBC—

[Ned Kuruc, Conservative, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

I'm sorry to interrupt, but it's not about the determination of programming. I understand your answer there, but when something gets funded, I'm assuming it's not just a blank cheque. Is that correct? It means there have to be some checks and balances.

We understand that the show Northland Tales had very bad intentions. They fooled everybody. My question is, have they fooled the CBC? Have they fooled the heritage ministry? We can't let that happen again. I respect your answer, but there should be checks and balances. I mean, this is public accounts, so I'm keeping my line of questioning to the taxpayer dollar.

[Francis Bilodeau]

To that end, I just want to make sure we're clear on the lines of accountability. The CBC is independently appropriated. It has a board of directors and oversight by the CRTC. That is the regime in place and that is the regime that touches on the specifics of where you would be asking questions.

[Ned Kuruc, Conservative, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

That's fair enough.

In light of what's happened, the CBC hasn't apologized. You guys oversee the CBC. Has there been any inquiry or apology on your behalf? It's been about a week or two now. What have we seen there? There are Canadians out there who are looking for answers. We can't just pass the buck on this one. I'm not saying you are, but where are we now?

[Francis Bilodeau]

Taking a step back, this was a co-production between the CBC and the Indigenous Screen Office. On that, I can turn to Joëlle, who has more details.

Specifically, the CBC has informed us that they have halted their engagement—

[Ned Kuruc, Conservative, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

So no apologies have been given. There were people brought in under false pretenses. They were duped. These are RCMP officers. These are high-ranking members of Canadian society. They were brought in with fake emails, fake corporations—fake everything—to be duped, and the Canadian taxpayer paid for it. CBC hasn't apologized. Your office hasn't apologized.

There should be an investigation. Is there an apology coming, or is an investigation going to be launched?

[Joëlle Montminy, Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Cultural Affairs, Department of Canadian Heritage]

I can jump in here.

My understanding is that the CBC has provided statements in the media—

[Ned Kuruc, Conservative, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

There isn't an apology, so we'll leave that to them. They're not here. You're here. Your department is here. Your department oversees it.