Status of Women Committee on Feb. 2nd, 2023

[Lanni Marchant]

I actually didn't publicize that I would be testifying here today.

Ironically enough, trying to figure out what I was going to wear.... I remember being so nervous, the last time, because the blouse I wore had sheer sleeves. I thought I wasn't dressed. Because of my education and what I do in court, I felt it wasn't necessarily the most appropriate attire. However, I was at a training camp in Flagstaff when I got asked to come speak, so I brought what I had—that blouse. This is very sheer today, but it was a white one with sheer sleeves. I felt I was dressed inappropriately, wearing that. I still got trolled and ripped apart. How dare I dress the way I dress when I compete?

This year, I opted for sheer again, because I think it shows my personality a bit better: I really am going to wear what I want to wear and compete in what I want to compete in.

No, I hardly let anyone know that I would be testifying here today, outside of my family.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

That's great. Thanks.

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

That's great. Thank you for your honesty.

I know my time is up, Madam Chair.

You're beautiful, so don't change.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

Jenna Sudds, you're on for five minutes.

[Jenna Sudds, Liberal, Kanata—Carleton, ON]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I will share in my colleagues' thanks to you all for being here today and helping us understand and navigate, as we work to make sport better for Canadian athletes.

I'd like to direct my first questions to you, Ms. Marchant.

One thing you talked about earlier was wishing that you had a safe place. I think it's important, as we go through this work, to make sure that we give thought to how to better support the mental health of athletes. We've heard this a few times from other witnesses.

I wonder whether you could speak to what support you wish were in place, now or moving forward, for today's athletes, to ensure that their mental health is protected.

[Lanni Marchant]

I would like to say thank you to Leah for acknowledging that the athlete brain can be a battered brain, and these probably are synonymous, unfortunately.

I think trauma-informed practices are of vital importance. If an athlete is going to speak up, it might not necessarily be to the person they're supposed to speak up to. They're going to just turn and say, “I need help. Help me.” Everyone involved in the sporting world from the grassroots up needs to know what to do with that, and if you don't know what to do, go find someone who does; but don't leave the athlete standing there, because it takes courage for us to even admit that something might not be right and to say, “I don't think this is right”, or “This is making me feel a certain way”, or “This is so hard, I don't even want to compete anymore”. By the time you get to the point that you say it to someone, the fact that you're pushing the air out of your mouth and getting it out is the hardest step.

We need trauma-informed practices and, whether you're a coach or a bodywork specialist, it really doesn't matter. That first step of any athlete disclosing abuse needs to be to someone who understands just how heavy and how hard that moment is in that athlete's life.

[Jenna Sudds, Liberal, Kanata—Carleton, ON]

Thank you for that.

One of the other comments you made was about this system having teeth. You spoke to the fact that come this spring, it's mandatory for the NSOs to sign on with OSIC in order for their funding to be provided.

I wonder if you can speak to your thoughts on that and whether you think that will improve the situation.

[Lanni Marchant]

Yes, I think we did it backwards. I don't understand why we created a system and then did not make it mandatory. It should have been mandatory from the get-go. Sport, unfortunately, is tethered to funding, and NSOs don't exist without it, so why weren't they required to be part of this system?

Whether people want to buy in or believe that OSIC can work or not is a separate discussion. You have to make everybody part of it before you can even have any understanding of how well it will work. To have athletes believe in a system, they need to see that their NSO is on the hook to it and falls under that umbrella.

Athletes have fought so hard for something like the abuse-free sport program here in Canada. We fought really hard, and it might not be shaped exactly how we wanted it to be, but the frustration is that we at least got a little bit of the taste of something, and you're going to tell me that my abuses don't count because my NSO made the decision not to sign on? It absolutely should have been mandatory from day one.

[Jenna Sudds, Liberal, Kanata—Carleton, ON]

Thank you for that. I respect and appreciate those comments.

As we move forward and we see that NSOs are going to be required—and I open this up to anyone—or are required now to sign on, do think that will have an impact to improve the situation?

[Randall Gumbley]

I'd like to address that, Madam Chair.

I'd like to read something to you: "Please be assured that the Government conducts a thorough and rigorous screening process to ensure that all federally funded NSOs, including Hockey Canada, maintain a well-defined governance structure and code of conduct.” That was a letter from the Minister of Sport sent to me in 2016 and 2018. At that time, Hockey Canada definitely did not have a well-defined structure or code of conduct. As we know now, they failed that miserably. Nothing was done.

In our situation, the CHL does not fall under Hockey Canada. It does not fall under the NSO. It does not fall under this type of governance. They would have to sign on to that individually, because they are in limbo. They claim that they're amateur to get amateur breaks on insurance, but they're a professional league. They have players, 168 players who play in the league, who have salaries in excess of $300 million. How is that an amateur league?

Therefore, one of the areas that we have is that the NSOs need to be held accountable. The funding to Hockey Canada means nothing, but we think that the appointment of the NSO, which represents at the Olympic committee in order to qualify for world championship games, is the bigger carrot that the government could impose. If they don't fall within funding, we're going to find another organization and another board to represent those athletes, and that could be across the board.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

Thanks very much.

I'm now going to pass it over, for two and a half minutes, to Andréanne Larouche.

Andréanne.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Ms. Marchant and Ms. Neil, thank you for your testimony. I think it confirms that we really need an in-depth review of what is happening in all sports in Canada. It's not a matter of reviewing only one sport at a time, one element at a time and one scandal at a time. We really need an independent, broad-based inquiry to get to the bottom of this.

My next question is for Mr. Gumbley.

You mentioned the issues of the Competition Board of Canada. Can you explain in 30 seconds what you meant by that statement?

[Randall Gumbley]

The Competition Bureau fails to enforce the laws of Canada, and that resulted in the players going to the courts, which has caused now Hockey Canada's insurance to skyrocket. It's an $826 million class action. It's a lot of money.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Ms. Slater, you wanted to share your experience and the tactics used by sports organizations, which in your case are Hockey Canada and the Canadian Hockey League.

You have tried on a number of occasions to raise awareness of athletes' problems, or you've appeared before provincial parliamentarians to give your testimony. Do you think this is a good illustration of the power of sport and the power it's given itself?

[Sandra Slater]

Absolutely, yes. I went to the Quebec National Assembly to try to fight the changing of the law to get the kids removed from the labour law, ESA, and I was literally threatened the Friday before with a lawsuit for libel if I said anything. I was threatened with that.

Upon that, I was going to bring a player. He chose to come with me, and an agent was going to come with me. That agent chose not to for fear of reprisal, that he would lose and not be able to have any more young players come to him to be their agent.

He took it very seriously. He regretted not going. I didn't care because I did the right thing. I had to speak up for these players. No one else was going to do it.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Thank you very much, Ms. Slater.

At the outset, I mentioned that it would be important to conduct an independent public inquiry to shed light on all sports.

I would like someone to answer the following question: If you were to comment on the importance of such a survey, would you say that it could make a difference?

[Sandra Slater]

If we have the right people in place who actually listen, I do believe that change can happen. What did a principal say? I've been fighting things my whole life. I have children—

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

Sandra, our time is really short.

[Sandra Slater]

Okay, I have to say this. Unless you expose something and let the sun shine on it, it will not heal. It's the exposure of these things that is going to cause change and awareness—end of it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

Thanks very much.

We're now passing it over to Leah Gazan.

Leah, you have two and a half minutes.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Thank you so much, Chair.

This is horrifying because we know this is going on, and from the testimony it's clear there is not enough action. We're talking about the abuse of kids, and we are also talking about the harassment and fear of people coming forward.

You said something, Madam Marchant, about not telling anybody that you were coming here because of fear of reprisal. Are you afraid of people coming after you? Has that occurred?

[Lanni Marchant]

I just didn't want to deal with it until I have to. Obviously this is a public record and it will be streamed, and I have a thicker skin and a better system....my support animal is here with me. I've a better way of handling it this go-around than I did in 2016, but I just didn't want—how do I put this?—people who are already the naysayers and the people who aren't necessarily the biggest fans of me to tune in and just try to find another reason to troll me.

I'd rather that if people happen upon this and listen to my testimony—they don't have to agree with me—they are looking for it because they are interested in it. They are not looking for it to poke holes or to try to tear me down like they did in 2016.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Thank you very much.

Madam Neil, where do you work right now?

[Andrea Neil]

I work for the Coaching Compass, my own company, on leadership training.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Okay.

What does that employment contract look like? One of the things that...is this kind of practice of non-disclosure agreements—and I'm not saying this is true of your contract. Is your contract, even though it's...? Are you required to sign a non-disclosure agreement that prevents you from discussing matters in detail?