Debates of June 7th, 1999

Supply

[Lyle Vanclief, Liberal, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with one of my colleagues.

It is a pleasure to take a few minutes this afternoon to talk about the importance of supporting our athletes in Canada, Canada's amateur athletes in particular.

I want to take a moment to brag about the Belleville Bulls who this year were the champions of the Ontario Hockey League. They had a tremendous showing in the Memorial Cup. I know, Mr. Speaker, that they took out the team from your city of Kingston very early.

[The Deputy Speaker]

The hon. member does not want to go out of order in his remarks.

[Lyle Vanclief, Liberal, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am just making a valid point. The Belleville Bulls had a very successful year.

We see the success that amateur athletes bring not only to their own team but to the economic activity and the spirit in their community. It takes nothing away from the pride the other amateur athletes in the riding of Prince Edward—Hastings and across Canada bring to us.

I want to congratulate the member for Broadview—Greenwood and his subcommittee for bringing to the attention of all Canadians the importance of sport right across our country.

I want to take a few minutes to talk about how the Government of Canada shows its strong support for amateur sport through a number of important programs, particularly through the direct funding provided to athletes under the athlete assistance program.

This program has provided outstanding benefits to Canadian athletes for many years. It clearly demonstrates that the Government of Canada has placed athletes at the centre of the support structure for amateur sport in Canada.

As a branch of the Government of Canada, Sport Canada supports the achievement of high performance excellence by Canadian athletes in international sport. By doing so it strengthens the contribution sport makes to Canadian pride, to Canadian identity and to our society in general.

One of the key components of this program is the provision of direct financial support to Canada's international calibre athletes. This support is provided through Sport Canada's athlete assistance program. The program was initiated in 1976 and since that time has provided a focal point for the government's support to amateur sport. The support contributes to the accomplishments of our athletes who in turn become heroes and role models for Canadian youth. It contributes to the strengthening of national pride and unity.

The program has evolved over the past 23 years to a point where now on an annual basis about 1,200 Canadian athletes, including those in such games as the Paralympics are financially supported through the program. These athletes represent Canada at international competitions on an ongoing basis in over 50 different sports.

In 1998-99 the government through the athlete assistance program provided over $7 million in direct financial support to these athletes to assist in their living and training costs. As well it provided over $1 million in tuition support to assist Canadian athletes in completing their post-secondary education.

The main goal of the program is to contribute to improved Canadian performances at major international sporting events such as the Olympic Games, the Commonwealth Games, the Pan American Games, the Paralympic Games and World Championships. To this end the assistance program identifies and supports athletes already at or having the potential to be in the top 16 in the world. Eligibility for program support is subject to the athletes' availability to represent Canada in these major international competitions and their participation in national team preparatory and annual training programs.

In addition to providing direct financial support to Canada's international calibre athletes, Sports Canada also provides financial support to Athletes Can. This is a program of services and leadership which benefits our current and retired national team athletes and works with others in the sporting community to ensure a fair, responsive support system for all athletes. Athletes Can was provided with a contribution of $200,000 in 1998-99. Similar funding will be provided in 1999-2000.

All of this support contributes toward the creation of role models and sports heroes for Canadian youth. Canadians can recognize and feel the sense of pride in the accomplishments of so many of our athletes. I could take the time to list a number of them but I know other speakers will refer to them, whether they be hockey players, track athletes, kayakers, paralympians, all of our athletes.

These are just a few examples of how we support and recognize the excellence of our amateur athletes in Canada. The government places the interests of amateur athletes at the heart of our concern.

[Caroline St-Hilaire, Bloc, Longueuil, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for taking part in this debate on our opposition motion. It is good to hear a minister talk about amateur and professional sport.

The minister talks a lot about the money the federal government gives athletes through Sport Canada, but I would like him to put that in perspective, considering the fact that the money given to athletes by Sport Canada accounts for 8.3% of its total budget.

First, is the minister aware of the fact that this is not enough? Second, our athletes—and I will not get into the technicalities, but they have to be among the top eight in the world—receive about $800 a month. Is he aware of the fact that athletes are the poorest of the poor in our country?

I would like to hear what he has to say on another point. His colleague, the member for Bourassa, made an announcement last Friday, saying that the government would do the same for amateur sport and mass sport and would transfer some of its lands and parks to the provinces and municipalities so they would become accessible to all those who want to engage in sporting activities. This followed on the rumour that the federal government wanted to give some land to the Montreal Expos. What does the minister think of all that? Does he agree, yes or no?

[Lyle Vanclief, Liberal, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for her comments but I think the hon. member needs to get her facts straight. I believe if she looks at the contribution from the budget she referred to, it is about twice what she referred to. Fifteen per cent of the budget is used to support amateur athletes and amateur sport along with a considerable amount of indirect support for our athletes in Canada.

All of us in the House would like to have more money to spend in a lot of places. What we need to do and what we try to do to the best of our endeavours is make the best investment we possibly can with the money. We are proud of our level of support to amateur sport and recognize the importance of it for our athletes.

[Dennis Mills, Liberal, Broadview—Greenwood, ON]

Mr. Speaker, quite frankly I wish I had a little more than 10 minutes. To spend a year of parliamentary life on an issue and to summarize it in 10 minutes will be a challenge. I will deal with a couple of issues I feel passionately about in terms of my commitment to their being implemented.

I have to say to the hon. member for Longueuil, I celebrate her initiative in putting this debate on the floor of the House of Commons. I salute again the hon. member for Rimouski—Mitis who I know is with us here in spirit. Her contribution throughout the whole year and a half as we listened to hundreds of witnesses and read hundreds of briefs will be around for a long time in this Parliament of Canada.

My passionate interest in amateur sport stems from an educational background during my formative years in high school. I had the privilege and pleasure of going to a Catholic private high school in Toronto, St. Michael's College School. The school was run by the Basilian Fathers, an order of priests who believed that the whole person could not be developed unless sport was an integral part of their development. They believed that the key to a young person developing academically, spiritually and obviously physically was to make sure that sport was an integral part of their program.

I had the privilege of knowing men like Father Henry Carr, CSB, Father Mat Sheedy, CSB, Father Art Holmes, CSB, Father Brian Higgins, CSB, Father Tom Mohan, CSB, Father Jim Enright, CSB, Father Cecil Zinger, CSB, Father Norman Fitzpatrick, CSB, and lay teachers Jack Fenn, Dan Prendergast and Mike Lavelle, men who believed that coaching and working with young people was a vocation. These men believed that there was a theology of sport. In other words we were not there just to develop the body but it was part of developing and maturing the soul as well. That is something that has slipped today.

We heard witnesses. The Coaching Association of Canada told us that hundreds of schools across Canada no longer had coaching staff to look after their representative teams. It is almost unbelievable in a country like Canada that there are high schools without coaches.

We need to get back to pressing the nerve of Canadians that developing the fabric of this community and country must have a sport component attached to it.

A few years ago Cardinal George Flahiff, CSB wrote a paper on the theology of sports. He gave a lecture in 1955 to a group of coach educators. I only want to read two paragraphs from it but it is very important:

The immediate or proximate end of sports, as well as of gymnastics, physical education and similar activities, is not hard to define; it is the training, development and strengthening of the human body from both the static and dynamic points of view (i.e., from the point of view of its physiological development and from the point of view of its use in action). But there are higher ends, too, towards which all sports must tend if they are not to fall short of the function they are meant to fulfil as truly human activities. The body is not an end in itself; along with the soul, which animates it, it makes up the unity that is a human person. The soul has the higher function; it directs the body and, so to speak, uses it for the purposes of the human person as a whole. As a result, sports and all physical education can serve higher and more remote ends than the one mentioned; for, the more developed and better trained the body is, the more readily and effectively can it be used to further the development, interior as well as exterior, of the whole man. This is to suggest that sports have a very real role to play in the perfecting of a human person and, common with all human activities, they must have as their ultimate aim to bring man closer to God.

That was a quote from Cardinal George Flahiff, CSB, from this paper in 1955.

I believe this is a part of the report that we are not focusing on. When people ask me which recommendation in the report I am most committed to, I tell them that it is the recommendation that deals with the 1,300,000 young people under 16 who are living in poverty and do not have access to organized sports. That is the essence of the report.

We talk in the House about fiscal priorities. We have been obsessed with the fiscal priorities here over the last eight to ten years. We heard witnesses, doctors with qualifications, who came to us from the section of Health Canada that deals with physical fitness. Those doctors told us that if we could mobilize, motivate and energize another 10% of Canadians to spend half an hour a day on physical fitness, the treasury of Canada could save approximately $5 billion a year just in health care.

Here we are scratching our head over $60 million to look after young kids who do not have access, when we have been told by the best in the Government of Canada that if we mobilize Canadians to become more physically fit we will save billions.

The report is not about professional athletes. It is not about sucking up to millionaire hockey players. The essence of the report, the 68 out of 69 recommendations, as we said when we tabled it, are like a seamless piece of fabric.

The professional system in the country depends entirely on the amateur development system. We cannot have a good professional system if the amateur system is not sound. I am saying something on top of that point. Forget their commitment. Only one in 250,000 young kids becomes a professional athlete. What we need is a society where people have the dignity and the confidence to feel that their potential has been fully developed.

I go back to my Basilian mentors: the Father David Bauers, the Father Ted McLeans, the Henry Carrs, the Tom Mohans and the Cardinal Flahiffs who have convinced me that one cannot develop a whole person academically and spiritually unless sport is an integral part of their life.

I want to say to all members in the House that I salute my colleague, the Minister of Canadian Heritage, who after 90 days tabled 53 of the 69 recommendations in a positive way.

I know the spirit of the Liberal Party and especially the vision and spirit of the Prime Minister. I believe in the not too distant future that every single recommendation in the report will be implemented in some way, shape or form. I thank all members who worked on the committee for their co-operation. We will continue to move forward.

[Caroline St-Hilaire, Bloc, Longueuil, QC]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I wish to thank my colleague from Broadview—Greenwood. I also wish to acknowledge the work he has done throughout the entire subcommittee process. I feel that he has shown his interest in, and his passion for, amateur sport and he deserves praise for this. I share some of his points of view.

He has a lot to say about the recommendation on professional sport. I would like to point out to him that this recommendation, which the government has adopted, is going to cost more than $500 million, contrary to the measures on amateur sport, for which there is nothing.

There are some good recommendations on amateur sport, although there could be plenty more, but there is nothing new on the concrete measures to be undertaken shortly to help our athletes involved in amateur sport in Quebec and in Canada.

I have done a fair amount of research recently and have had many contacts with athletes and federations. I would like him to tell us a bit about how we as parliamentarians can help these sports federations and associations. There are a number of problems of discrimination, as well as those relating to language, to French, and to internal administration.

Sports Canada does not have control over these associations, yet there is a lot of money at Sports Canada. How can parliamentarians give a bit of help to these associations and these athletes?

[Dennis Mills, Liberal, Broadview—Greenwood, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have to humbly say that we never advocated $500 million to the professional sports realm. That was never part of the deal.

Our commitment to the developmental part of the amateur sport fabric in the country, including the physical fitness component, was somewhere in the neighbourhood of $60 million a year for the next five years, which was $300 million.

We also put on the table some areas where we thought moneys could be generated. Currently, all the lottery moneys in the country, which the then Prime Minister Joe Clark gave away to the provinces in 1979 in exchange for support for his leadership, or a payoff for his leadership, are going directly to the provinces.

I believe there is an opportunity for getting together with the premiers and saying that a portion of those moneys should come back into the amateur sport fabric, especially those gaming systems where they use the professional sports' logos. I see great hope for that in the future. The Minister of Industry for Canada has currently set up a system where all those things are being explored.

As far as interfering with the operations of the amateur federations on a day to day basis, I really do not think as parliamentarians we should interfere with the way they operate other than the fact that I think we should make sure that all of the facilities and all the opportunities across the country are there in both official languages.

[Myron Thompson, Reform, Wild Rose, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend the member for his work on this committee and for this report that he has put out.

I am also a very strong advocate for and supporter of amateur sports. In fact, I have spent a good majority of my life promoting it and coaching at different levels in high schools throughout both the United States and Canada.

There is one thing I need to be refreshed on, because the report was rather lengthy. I cannot recall whether there were any recommendations regarding the funding or the promoting of what I used to refer to as good sport, in other words, getting good qualified people who are going to run these various programs and work with young people to make them understand that there is more to this whole episode than just the sporting activity itself, that it goes far beyond that. What recommendations are we addressing regarding the qualifications of the providers?

[Dennis Mills, Liberal, Broadview—Greenwood, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we have a coaching crisis in the country today. The Coaching Association of Canada appeared in front of our committee and went into fine detail about the lack of support for coaching and the need for more certified coaches.

We have appealed to the Minister of Human Resources Development Canada. One of our recommendations was to have the whole area of coaching put into human resources development in the same way we classify information technology people, the construction industry or any other sector of the economy.

I believe that if the private sector through industry and government work together to top up some support for properly qualified coaches, we could quickly re-invigorate the coaching system in Canada. It seems to me that the teaching realm no longer has the same type of commitment to coaching that it had 25 and 30 years ago.

[The Deputy Speaker]

It is my duty, pursuant to Standing Order 38, to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Halifax West, Public Service Pension Plan; the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre, Health.

[Stéphan Tremblay, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have the great pleasure of rising today to speak to the motion put forward by our colleague, the member for Longueuil.

To talk about sports is to take a look at society. At the moment, I think that our societies are going through difficult times and facing great change and I believe that sports are also undergoing considerable upheaval.

Sport can at times reflect our society; therefore analyzing sports is somewhat like trying to understand where our society is headed.

Like events of today, sports sometimes take us to extremes, which makes me think it is difficult to understand the tangents and directions intended with certain decisions.

The debate today concerns the difference between amateur and professional sports. We have to look at the values held by the public and society in general in order to give priority to sports or set it aside. Naturally, there is a difference to be made between the two types of sport.

Earlier I heard my colleague opposite speaking of the benefits of amateur sport, and I think the remarks were excellent. Throughout my youth I was involved in sports and competitions. Sport becomes a passion and it is good for both physical and mental well-being. It promotes a team spirit, a taste for challenge, enjoyment of competition and the feeling of belonging, sometimes to a region. When we represent our region, it is interesting to do and very praiseworthy, but it is also interesting for the people of an area, of a region or of a country to identify with a sports team.

I sincerely believe that sport has many virtues on a human level, but direction is important. I was speaking earlier about identification with teams. We need only look at professional sport, hockey teams such as the Montreal Canadiens, for example, which is part of the Quebec culture, and I would even say Canadian culture, because the Canadiens hockey team has made a name for itself throughout North America.

As I said earlier, changes and disruptions in our society lead to certain inconsistencies. It is currently the case with sport, and this in many respects. I am very interested in anything that has to do with the growing gap between the rich and the poor. Earlier I said that hockey could be an interesting reflection of today's society, and I think it is absolutely true.

The report of the Subcommittee on the Study of Sport in Canada includes some very fine suggestions for amateur sport, but the government will take taxpayers' money to invest it in professional sport. I will not necessarily criticize this decision today, because I did not sit on the committee. However, I am convinced that my comments reflect the views of a large segment of the public, which finds it regrettable that we would now be making such decisions in our society. We are not alone. In the United States they invest billions of dollars in sport stadiums, while cutting funds for education and health care. I happen to believe that education is absolutely critical for future generations.

These are aberrations in a society that claims it has to tighten its belt. We are investing in sport teams that pay incredible salaries to their employees. I will not mention any figures, since everyone here is aware of the huge salaries paid to professional athletes. I think everybody is familiar with this issue.

Such a societal issue cannot be resolved in 10 minutes. Still, I am concerned and I wonder where it will stop. If this trend continues, and it is clear that it will, players' salaries will keep going up. I cannot see a cap being put on players' salaries because they are currently determined by the market. When the market is totally left to its own devices, this can lead to some aberrations. I think that professional sport is a prime example of that.

Today, in spite of all the kind words of the member opposite regarding amateur sport, we are still faced with a government initiative in support of professional sport. Obviously, I did not review all the direct consequences of promoting or not promoting professional sport. From an economic standpoint, we know that professional sport creates jobs, but when we take a look outside the stadium and see that our society is getting poorer and we are having to pay already ridiculous salaries, I must admit that I am in a quandary.

Earlier I mentioned education, as did the member opposite. I think there can be a very direct link between sports and education because very often we learn a sport at school. This has benefits for the body and the mind. It is good for our young people to be able to take part in sports at school, and they should be encouraged to try to beat their own records.

Earlier in the debate some members mentioned that it was a disgrace that a country such as ours lacked sports trainers. This is also a worrisome phenomenon. I could mention other worrisome phenomena, such as the invasion of Nintendo games. As a young boy—and that was not so long ago, no more than 10 years—it was normal for me to be outside playing hockey. Today, many young people routinely stay cooped up indoors playing Nintendo.

To sum up, we could study all facets of amateur sport and their benefits today, but I think that the initial debate is more about the government's decision to invest less in amateur sport and more in professional sports. There is food for thought here, more than I can cover in 10 minutes. However, I am pleased to have taken part in the debate.

[Dennis Mills, Liberal, Broadview—Greenwood, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I cannot let the assertion by the member that the government has made a commitment to professional sport and not to amateur sport stand. There are ongoing discussions with the smaller market teams in Canada which are struggling, but no decision has been taken. If the member would read the sport pact section of the report he would see that it is all quid pro quo. In other words, not 10 cents would be spent on the professional side of things unless there was an equal or proportionate amount for the amateur sport fabric in Canada.

When I say the amateur sport fabric I am not just talking about hockey. We have over 550,000 registered soccer participants, boys and girls, in this country. Even though hockey is our national sport and even though we are going to work very hard to figure out a way to keep the smaller market teams in Canada, make no mistake about it, nothing will be done unless the amateur fabric is also on the table.

[Stéphan Tremblay, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, if the government took good measures today, if it were in line with the Mills report and if money went fairly and justly to amateur sport, I would be delighted.

If this opposition day—which I do not like to call an opposition day, but rather a debate day—influences the government opposite so that it puts greater emphasis on amateur sport priorities, I would be delighted and I would not feel that I have wasted my time today.

[Gerald Keddy, Progressive Conservative, South Shore, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I have a quick comment drawn from the hon. member of the government benches who just spoke. He stated the quid pro quo, that there would be equal funding for professional and amateur sport. Although I am not an expert on this issue, I know a bit about sports. It seems there is a bunch of sportsmen on the government benches, but I think they are mostly jugglers. They are trying to juggle truth and fiction.

Surely Canadians and parliamentarians would not spend a penny to support professional athletes in this country. They already have all of the tax deductions. They have all of the potential to make a profit that any other business in Canada has. They already have all of those breaks. Surely we would not spend one penny, not one penny, to support professional sports in this country.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to put a question to the member who has just spoken in order to find out how he reconciles his party's position with what he wrote in the report we are debating today, in part, the Mills report, as the dissenting report, and I quote:

We recommend and encourage greater study of the issues of subsidies to professional sport franchises with a mind to ensuring their presence in Canada is balanced with the best economic interests of all Canadians.

The report was signed by the House leader of his party and critic, a member of the subcommittee.

How does he reconcile his remarks with those of the dissenting report prepared by his party?

[Michel Bellehumeur, Bloc, Berthier—Montcalm, QC]

I rise on a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I think that the member for Ottawa—Vanier is a bit confused. He has just put a question concerning a comment addressed to the member for Lac-Saint-Jean.

The member for Lac-Saint-Jean had time left to complete his remarks and to finish his response. Subsequently, if the member has intelligent questions to ask, he may do so. However, I invite him to follow the debate, because he is not even following it.

[The Deputy Speaker]

This is the questions and comments period. The member for South Shore asked a question that was directed really toward the government, I believe, and not to the member for Lac-Saint-Jean, who made his speech.

[Some hon. members]

It was not up to him to answer.

[The Deputy Speaker]

Afterward, the hon. member for Lac-Saint-Jean did not rise, so I recognized the hon. parliamentary secretary.

It is now the turn of the hon. member for Lac-Saint-Jean. If he wishes to respond, he has 30 seconds to do so during the period for questions and comments.

[Stéphan Tremblay, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am unable to answer the question from the member opposite because it was directed at the member behind me, who is from a different party. It is directed at him, and I have nothing to say.

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to take part in today's debate, and to congratulate my colleague, the member for Longueuil, on her initiative for this opposition day.

I also congratulate the member for Rimouski—Mitis for her work on the subcommittee, where she contributed a number of rather interesting clarifications on the study of sport in Canada.

My colleague's motion reads as follows:

That, since the government ignored most of the recommendations by the Sub-Committee on the Study of Sport in Canada, a Sub-Committee of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage, the House demand that the government place amateur athletes at the heart of its concerns and make a commitment to placing their interests before the interests of professional sport.

I think that the most pressing problem of this government's present policy on sport is the priorities and the mandate adopted by the Department of Canadian Heritage with respect to sport. The priority is to promote national unity, which is a propaganda mandate. We are strongly opposed to using sport to promote national unity.

The sole objective of amateur sport in Canada should be to promote excellence, and not to use athletes to serve a political ideology.

While the Minister of Industry will be following up on the mandate given him by the Prime Minister to save professional hockey in Canada, and calling a meeting in mid-June at which the provinces and the municipalities concerned will have to help fund sports millionaires, this same Liberal government is dismissing out of hand any additional funding for amateur sport.

I would like to point out that a few weeks ago I tabled a petition in the House signed by over 1,000 people in my riding deploring the fact that this government wants to subsidize sports millionaires.

It is clear once again that the federal government is choosing the rich over the poor. The federal government is in urgent need of re-examining its priorities.

In November 1998 the Subcommittee on the Study of Sport in Canada submitted its report to the government. Most of the report's recommendations dealt with the increased support that ought to be given to amateur sport, but recommendation No. 36 proposed that the government invest millions of dollars in professional sport.

This is what all members of the public are opposed to. When asked, everyone in Canada, and everyone in Quebec calls for no more investing millions of dollars in professional sport, for no more support to be given to what are termed the millionaires of sport.

If this government had any gumption it would understand that if there is any money to invest it could go into amateur sport, to the athletes who are often from poor backgrounds, whose parents have had to do without things that would have contributed to their well-being in order to support their children and encourage their top performance.

On April 28, 1999, while the Minister of Canadian Heritage was out of the country, her parliamentary secretary tabled the government response on her behalf. This government said no to any additional funding for amateur sport; yes to activities that will enhance the visibility of the federal government, such as the holding of a symposium on sport to be chaired by the Prime Minister; and probably yes to professional sport.

The Bloc Quebecois has always said that the subcommittee on sport was nothing but an excuse to support professional sports. Once again, the facts seem to bear this out.

There is considerable consternation in the world of amateur sport at this time. To quote Lane MacAdam, President of the Canada Games Council, as reported in the Globe and Mail of April 29, 1999:

This is a black day for amateur sport. It would appear that the government has chosen hockey millionaires over the 1.3 million poor children who have no access to sports. Amateur sport has been cheated.

The head of Athletics Canada, John Thresher, said this in the Globe and Mail the same day:

Compared to other G-7 countries, our athletes are second class citizens.

Here is what Jean-Luc Brassard had to say, as reported by Pierre Bourgault in the May 1, 1999 issue of the Journal de Montréal :

Will we have to parade behind our sponsors' flags in the future?

Since they took office in 1993, Liberals have done everything except support the development of Canadian amateur sport. They have made it a political issue more than ever before. Members will certainly remember that the heritage minister asked the Canadian Olympic Association to delay the announcement that Quebec City had lost its bid to host the 2010 Winter Games.

They have reduced their financial support for amateur sport by more than 35%. The envelope went from $76 million to $57 million, including the recent addition of $50 million over 5 years announced by the heritage minister in 1998. The predictable result is that, since 1993, 22 national sports associations no longer receive funding from Heritage Canada.

I hope all those watching understood what I just said. Since 1993, 22 national sports associations have stopped receiving any funding from Heritage Canada.

Finally, the Liberals rejected the recommendations made in the report of the Sub-committee on the Study of Sport in Canada, accepting only those that will not cost anything, that will ensure government visibility, or that will allow the funding of professional sport.

I would have a lot more to say about such an important issue, but I will conclude by responding to the member for Bourassa, who does not seem to understand the concrete proposals made by the Bloc Quebecois to support our athletes.

Our recommendations are: to provide adequate funding for the INRS-Santé laboratory in Pointe-Claire, which remains without a contract for the current year and which may not even get all the money pledged for 1998-99; to fund the upgrading of its facilities, at a cost of some $500,000; to fund all sport associations; to review the criteria used to deliver certificates to amateur athletes to promote excellence in Quebec and Canada; and, finally, to exclude politics from sport.

[Michel Bellehumeur, Bloc, Berthier—Montcalm, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the more I read on the issue, the more I am surprised by the silence of some Liberal Party members. They may well crow and say they invest a lot of money and work for amateur sport, but when we examine the figures, we see quite the opposite.

I ask the member if she finds it normal that since Liberals were elected in 1993, that is six years ago, money invested in amateur sport has dropped from $76 million to $57 million. Moreover, our dollar is worth less today than in 1993 and there is a huge difference in the amounts invested, almost $20 million between 1993 and 1999.

The Minister of Canadian Heritage may well want to spend $10 million a year of what she says is new money for five years, but we will still be under the amount spent in 1993. Everyone in this House claims that amateur sport is important and says we have to invest in that area.

In fact, the opposite is happening. These budgets were slashed. I know that some Liberal members agree with me, namely the chairman of the subcommittee which studied the issue and tabled a report. I know very well that the chairman who tabled this report shares my opinion, but in actual fact nothing is being done.

The member for Bourassa boasts about working a lot for amateur sport. I believe he is actually working much more for professional sport. Does the member find it normal that between words and reality there is a discrepancy of more than $20 million?

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my hon. colleague from Berthier—Montcalm for his question.

No, it is not normal. The cuts to amateur sport mean that the 22 national organizations I mentioned earlier are subject to a new funding framework. They are doomed to oblivion because their funding was abolished.

This is why we maintain that the federal government has once again chosen to help the rich instead of the poor. This is also why the government must rethink its priorities where amateur sport is concerned. It should encourage and support our amateur athletes.

I want to give another example. When the issue of propaganda was addressed earlier, it was said that out of the $1.3 million allocated to arenas, $900,000 was handed to the Corel Centre and the Molson Centre to ensure high visibility for the maple leaf. This is very upsetting to us.

We have athletes living in poverty and getting very low wages, while the government chooses to subsidize sports millionaires. These people earn $3 million to $4 million every year, while our athletes, who truly need to be supported and from whom we expect excellence, only get between $189 and $800 a month.

This is unacceptable and we are firmly opposed to sport being used to promote Canadian unity, national unity. The only goal of amateur sport in Canada should be to promote excellence and not to display flags to promote national unity.

[George Proud, Liberal, Hillsborough, PE]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Dufferin—Peel—Wellington—Grey.

It is a pleasure for me to rise today to speak to this motion. I want to congratulate the mover of the motion. Allow me to inform the House of the hard work that the Subcommittee on the Study of Sport in Canada has done and to say that I was honoured to be a member of that committee. I also want to talk about the government's continued commitment to sport in Canada.

This afternoon I would like to emphasize the value of sport in Canadian society and to look at the government's role in sport, all that we must do as we approach the 21st century and all that we have done.

The Subcommittee on the Study of Sport in Canada put the interests of Canadian culture and health on the discussion table. It was interesting to deal with policy that affects both health and culture. I do not think there is any other issue that connects health issues with cultural issues.

Sport is culture and sport promotes healthy lives. Sport is the point at which the game and fitness merge. It is where health, through increased fitness, meets tradition. We as Canadians have a long tradition of sport.

That is why I consider this subcommittee and its mandate to be so important. We investigated the potential scope of and rationale for federal involvement in the promotion of amateur sport in Canada and we determined that we must give amateur sport a push.

I have a true appreciation for amateur sport. I think that is a result of being from a maritime province. In my home province of Prince Edward Island sporting events provide a place where we can get together socially, catch up on the latest news, tell stories and see friends.

For example, the first thing many families do when they relocate is to seek out a sports club. They join these clubs because they already know and like the activity and want to socialize with others who share common values. Sport encourages social interaction. It also increases a healthy society, both mentally and physically.

Sport involvement is vital in improving the chances of youth at risk. These young people are not only at risk because of a passive health risk posed by an inactive lifestyle, but the lifestyle also drives them toward actively destructive or self-destructive activities such as substance abuse, anxiety, depression and violence.

Sport and physical activity offer an inherent sense of direction as well as a safe and constructive outlet for youth energy. In addition, the regular physical activity which sport provides naturally makes young people physically, mentally and emotionally healthier. Ask a friend whose son or daughter is involved in amateur sport and more often than not they will tell us that their child does not smoke, does well in school, is motivated, is energetic and is going to or has already enrolled in some form of post-secondary education.

It is interesting how physical activity is less prevalent today than it was 30 or 40 years ago. It is obvious that as our society becomes more technological we as a nation are becoming more inactive. I have often wondered where our inactivity comes from. One possible explanation is that when Canada was formed as a nation people had to be active in order to function in their daily lives.

Up until the post-war period people relied much more on manual labour to make a living. Technology has now made it possible for us to choose to lead less active lives. Street hockey has been replaced by video games. The Internet is making us more insular. Television is becoming a leisure activity, taking a huge chunk out of our recreation time, from 17 to 19 hours a week for children between the ages of 2 and 17. Ironically, much of it is spent watching sports events.

As we approach the 21st century and information technology, the Internet and computers become more common, the tendency of people to be inactive will increase. We will be able to shop from home, talk to our friends and play recreational games over phone lines. It all points to a more insular and less active society. Frankly, this scares me.

This sort of inactivity is deadly. Inactivity is a primary factor for cardiac disease, affecting one in five Canadians. Often an inactive adult was an inactive child and that is why we as a committee recognized the need for continued support for amateur sport and for children.

Obesity is also a result of inactivity, which in turn increases the likelihood of stroke, hypertension and diabetes.

These diseases cost the Canadian health system millions of dollars each year. It has also been proven that girls who participate in physical activity will be less susceptible to osteoporosis as adults. According to the Canadian Olympic Association, Canadian children are 40% less active than their parents were at the same age. A survey of grade two students found that one in four children cannot touch their toes.

As I mentioned earlier, sport is one avenue of achieving a physically and mentally healthy population. Promoting physical activity is an investment that increases the well-being of Canadians while reducing health care costs. As the chairman of the committee just said a few minutes ago, according to the committee's report reducing the number of inactive Canadians by just 10% would result in an additional saving of $5 billion in health care costs. There are very clear benefits to increasing the number of Canadians actively involved in physical activities.

How do we increase the number of active Canadians? We must guarantee that sport and fitness are accessible to all Canadians. I have spoken on my occasions in my constituency on the value of sport and fitness and what it means to be active. I often refer to Canada as having a system of amateur sport that is truly accessible, a system where anyone can play as long as he or she has the interest and the talent.

Increasingly this is not the case. Our system looks more like it did when class distinction determined if one was involved in sports. Some families have children registered in sports organizations. Some families do not. Some teams have sponsorship. Some teams do not. The government understands the benefit of increased participation.

Accessibility is key to increasing the participation of Canadians in physical activities. Our committee recognized this and recommended that an incentive for individuals to donate to not for profit sports organizations was needed. We suggested that eligibility for charitable tax deductions be given to provincial sports organizations. Imagine if we could give a donation to a sport club and receive a tax receipt. This would make it an awful lot easier to donate money. The donator would be happy. The government would be happy. Most important, the sport club would be happy.

Special tax treatment allowing provincial non-profit organizations to issue tax receipts is a clever idea. The government has decided that this proposal will be put into existing government efforts through a joint government-voluntary sector round table process.

When the committee looked at all the issues facing Canada as a whole we found that certain segments of society were underrepresented and we recommended that something be done. In January 1998 the Minister of Canadian Heritage announced a program called the new funding for sport. This program would inject $10 million per year for three different initiatives.

One initiative set targets to ensure that underrepresented groups have fair access to opportunities to participate in sport. A system of accountability has been developed that will track funding to ensure that opportunities for underrepresented groups are increased. These groups include aboriginals, women and athletes with disabilities.

The government has responded so that the playing field will be level, so that the values which result from involvement in sport are offered to everyone, not just the financially secure, and so that all teams young and old have a chance to thrive.

Another part of guaranteeing this is making sure that coaches and volunteers are looked after, that sponsors are given incentives so they can fund local amateur sports, and that we formally acknowledge the importance of amateur sport as a positive influence in the community and the country.

The Government of Canada will continue its policy and funding support of sport in Canada. For example, Sport Canada has been awarded an additional $10 million per year for new funding for sport programs as outlined in a red book commitment.

Our commitment to sport is demonstrated through our annual contributions through Sport Canada. It has been said many times today that over $57.8 million in total are allocated for Sport Canada contribution programs, $26 million of which are contributed to national amateur sports organizations.

As we suggested in our committee work, national coaching institutes are very much a part of Sports Canada's ongoing interest. A portion of the $2 million in annual support to the Coaching Association of Canada goes toward national coaching institutes across Canada. This is not enough but it is what is there today and much more is needed. In 1999-2000 the government will spend an additional $3.5 million specifically targeted for coaching support as part of the new funding for sport initiatives.

In the area of coaching support our objective is to provide increased support to high performances coaching and to create new full time positions for high performance coaches in order to enhance international athlete development and improve athlete development programs.

Like coaching, the government is also committed to creating competitive venues for amateur athletes. Canada's amateur sport is celebrated when the Canada Games convene. The Canada Games with its motto “Unity Through Sport” has been a mainstay of the Canadian amateur sport system since its inception in Quebec City in 1967.

Since that time successive federal, provincial and municipal governments working together with the corporate sector have supported the Canada Games. The government is a partner in this undertaking and currently provides approximately $4 million annually in contributions for team travel and for each host city for capital development and operations.

I represent an Atlantic constituency that has a great deal of amateur sports clubs and events within it. My home province of Prince Edward Island has its own culture and its own values. A lot of what we as Islanders do socially has to do with sport, amateur sport. Whether it is junior hockey, sailing, golf, whatever it is, sport in P.E.I. is a form of social interaction.

I understand the value of sport—