Debates of Oct. 24th, 2024

Canadian Heritage

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

Madam Speaker, I am feeling a bit defensive. I do not think that the situation is quite as my Bloc Québécois colleague explains it. We all know that the Bloc Québécois had the opportunity to amend the motion, but did not.

I would add that, as parliamentarians, we do not need to wait for a private, internal investigation. The drone spying scandal at the Olympic games in Paris affected our country. Canada's reputation hurt our athletes. I believe that as parliamentarians we should all feel a sense of obligation to find an accountability mechanism to ensure that we put an end to this culture that clearly seems to exist.

I wonder why the Bloc Québécois joined the Liberals to block the implementation of an accountability mechanism. This is something that needs to be done right away to ensure the integrity of sports and soccer in the country.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, the member did a fantastic job, not just on the file but in her intervention, outlining the ways in which ethical breaches in governance can go from organizations cutting corners to perhaps trying to find a competitive advantage, to cheating. We have discovered some of the most violent and pernicious aspects, the underbelly, of the dark side of sport.

Can the hon. member please expand upon why having a clear, strong and accountable ethical framework for sports in Canada will be essential to ensuring that we do not repeat some of these disgusting acts of violence against our athletes?

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague. I know, as an ethics critic, he spends a lot of time working on issues of ethics and is also tasked with the Herculean task of getting the Liberals to see the importance of ethics in their conduct.

The safe sport study made it clear there is no sense of accountability when it comes to our sports organizations. There is not proper oversight from these organizations. There is not proper oversight from the federal government. Sport policy in our country is not just something that is adjacent to the federal government. It is our responsibility. It is our responsibility to oversee the development of safe sport in our country. The Liberals have dropped the ball and they are continuously dropping the ball. I brought up the most recent example around the soccer drone scandal.

Canadian athletes deserve better. Canadians deserve better. We need to see ethics in sport. We need to bring back the core values of integrity and fair play.

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

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for the strong convictions on human rights that she has displayed so remarkably today. I thank her for her commitment.

I have a question for her. We know that she referred to the alleged facts of 2018: the gang rape in London. Today, we know that criminal charges have been laid against five of the players. She mentioned that in her speech.

I moved the motion in Parliament to call in the heads of Hockey Canada on this issue. Parliament ordered documents, including the Henein Hutchinson investigation. In response, we got excuses. If parliamentarians had not worked collaboratively, does the member think these charges would have been laid?

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

Madam Speaker, I want to acknowledge my colleague's work, particularly with regard to Hockey Canada. Clearly, it was thanks to his work and that of the committee—I mentioned my colleague, the member for New Westminster—Burnaby—that we were able to hold Hockey Canada to account. The committee looked closely at how Hockey Canada tried to protect those who committed the abuse while silencing the victim.

This study is historic work. It illustrates what still needs to be done. It also shows how concerned Canadians are about abuse in sport. They want to see a culture where integrity and accountability are an integral part of youth sport going forward. I hope we can do the work that needs to be done. It starts with a national public inquiry. We will not give up on that very important point.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise to speak on this very important issue. There is no doubt that the standing committee did a fabulous job of gathering information. I would especially like to give a shout-out to those individuals who shared their personal stories. I am sure that if we were to canvass members who listened to those personal stories, we would find that members in all political parties would express a great deal of gratitude to the witnesses for having the courage to share their stories. By going to the standing committee, they shared their stories with all Canadians. In my book, that would have taken a great deal of courage. For this reason, I would like to acknowledge those presenters who went before the committee.

I want to emphasize that this has been a very important priority for this government. When we think of sports and the abuse that has taken place, this is not new, unfortunately. It has been there for many years. I can assure people that the government's priority has been the safety of kids. We take this very seriously. It is one of the reasons why we were very pleased to see the standing committee deal with this important issue. Even the presentations we have had thus far have been really encouraging, at least in some ways, not as encouraging in others.

I will be sharing my time, Madam Speaker, with one of my colleagues from the Bloc.

Let us look at a number of the comments that were put on the record today.

I thought the parliamentary secretary, the member for Milton, did a fabulous job explaining, to anyone following the debate, the types of actions the government has taken. He also shared with us his personal experience. He is someone who can relate, at least in good part, with individuals who are most affected. He has a depth of knowledge that very few people in the chamber would have, and I would encourage others look at what he had to say.

I was disappointed in the member for Saskatoon—Grasswood's thoughts in regard to the issue. We are trying to come up with some ideas with respect to how we can improve the system, and he summarized the Conservative Party's position by saying that we should get rid of Sport Canada. That is the far-right attitude we often see from the Conservative Party. Cutting something does not make things better. I had the opportunity to ask another Conservative member if he supported that and he did not deny it. I am led to believe that is what a Conservative government would do.

We have a contrast between the Liberals and the Conservatives in the way we would approach public policy. It is one that is based on marginalized government, where it cuts where it can, versus a government that cares about people and the role that government can play to support Canadians. We see that when we get speeches like the ones we heard earlier and in the questions on those speeches. Here is what the member for Saskatoon—Grasswood said in his response to a question from the Bloc member, “disband it altogether.”

In the background, I can hear some members from the Conservative lobby saying, “Hear, hear.” Canadians can hear them. When the election comes, we will ensure that Canadians know how sharp the knife is in the Conservative Party, that the leader of the Conservative Party yields two machetes, like a samurai, cutting everything he can see so he can fix the budget.

We just heard another statement about something they are going to fix, but at what cost? As a government, our primary concern is the safety of kids. What is the alternative? What is the Conservative Party going to do to deal with this issue? First and foremost, I would like to think the Conservatives recognize the seriousness of the issue.

Instead of just talking about cuts, what are they going to do to deal with the issue? I understand that Stephen Harper did nothing, and the leader of the Conservative Party was one of his minions back then. However, at the end of the day, the issue does not disappear.

Through organizations, we are able to build upon it, whether it is through regulations or codes of ethics. The government has done that to ensure our athletes, both today and into the future, are in fact being protected.

The report deals with the issue of how we can best provide support to our children. We can answer that by reading what the the minister has provided to the House, responding to the issues listed in the report that we are debating. The minister gave about an 12-13 page response. I would highly recommend that members read the response.

I want to pick up on another point. As the House deals with concurrence reports, it does give us a break from the Conservative game and why the leader of the Conservative Party does not want to get the security clearance, unlike every other leader in the House of Commons, because he does not have an interest in foreign interference and its impact within the Conservative Party. I believe there is a reason, and it might have something to do with Conservative leader's past. We are getting a break from talking about that issue, whether it is concurrence reports or the hours and hours of debate by the Conservatives on a bogus issue, which is their motion that ultimately asks for the issue to go to procedures and House affairs committee. The Conservatives do not want to allow it to go to committee. The Conservatives are actually talking out their own motion.

With the sort of behaviour we have witnessed over the last few weeks, they are denying the government the opportunity to bring forward its legislative agenda that deals with things such as the inappropriate use of the Internet, and I am talking about the harms to children, to reforms of our military court system being transferred to the civil side to changes to our Citizenship Act.

My plea to the Conservative Party is to start thinking about Canadians first as opposed to the Conservative Party. Hopefully this report will pass.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Madam Speaker, in the heritage committee, we heard from a senior government official, Michel Ruest, that he became aware of sexual assault allegations by Hockey Canada on June 26, 2018. He did nothing about those allegations for four years. This individual, Michel Ruest, is still a senior government official at Sport Canada.

Would the member agree that it is entirely unacceptable that a senior government official who knew of allegations of sexual assault at Hockey Canada did nothing for four years?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, I will tell the member what is unacceptable. Are there individuals who could have done a whole lot better? Yes. Am I disappointed that actions with respect to this were not taken as quickly as they might have been? Absolutely. However, what I disagree with wholeheartedly is that when the Conservative Party has an opportunity to say that it supports Sport Canada, it declines to do so.

We have had more Conservatives stand in their place and ultimately defend what the member for Saskatoon—Grasswood has said, which is that they will disband Sport Canada. However, we do not have to get rid of Sport Canada because we do not like the actions of a few people. This institution does have a role to play. The Conservatives should be ashamed of themselves for not recognizing that fact.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I would remind members that they have had an opportunity to ask a question. If they have anything else to contribute, they can do so through a different round. I would also remind members who I have not recognized to not yell out. If they want to contribute, they should wait until the appropriate time.

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Abitibi—Témiscamingue.

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

Madam Speaker, the parliamentary secretary referenced the government's response several times today. I would like to read an excerpt from the second paragraph on page 3 of the English version. Obviously, it is an opinion.

“The Commission is better suited than a public inquiry for what we are trying to achieve,” the government's objectives, that is, “as it allows for a broader scope and can be adjusted as needed”, and I will stop there.

This is precisely the problem. The minister's voluntary commission is going to cater to the government's needs, in other words, perpetuate the cover-up and keep buying certain people's silence. Strangely, the reaction to this report's publication has been subdued. Why? It is because people know that the office is making the rounds of organizations, such as Own the Podium and the Canadian Olympic Committee, that appeared in committee and said they supported an independent public inquiry. The former minister of sport said that she was in favour of an independent public inquiry. Why is there one? It is because of pressure by the public, the media, and Parliament. Why is it that stalling for time makes things settle back down? I do not accept that.

I would like to hear what the parliamentary secretary has to say about that.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, with all due respect, if the member opposite were to read the first couple pages of the letter that was provided by the minister, the answer to his question will be found. It states:

...the Future of Sport in Canada Commission. Canadians deserve a sport framework that upholds our national values of equality, fairness, and inclusivity. I am committed to a system grounded in human rights, where sport participants have access to safe, welcoming, inclusive and accountable sport environments that are free from all forms of maltreatment and serve all participants responsibly.

The minister even makes reference to how this committee could have a positive impact on the future potential of a public inquiry. I see that as a positive thing. It is a good, detailed letter.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, one of the critiques of this entire process was that survivors did not really have a meaningful voice. Understanding how this happened, how can the Liberals ensure that whistle-blowers, vulnerable athletes, should this ever happen again, have a direct seat at the table and that perpetrators of violence against them are finally held accountable?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, the Future of Sport in Canada Commission should provide a great deal of assurance, as should the amount of advocacy that has taken place. People want a really good understanding of how the government is approaching this issue. All one needs to do is to read what the member for Milton said earlier about his first-hand experience. At the end of the day, I believe we have made significant progress on this file.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Madam Speaker, I want to begin by reminding everyone in the House that people are watching us at home right now. I would remind them that victims and survivors are listening to this debate. I want to recognize Kim Shore, from Gymnasts for Change, who is calling on us to rise to the occasion and to take action for victims and survivors. I also want to recognize her entire team.

I am rising today to take part in the debate on the Minister of Sport's response to the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage's report on safety in sport. This issue was first examined by the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage, but the Standing Committee on the Status of Women also examined it at my suggestion. This is an issue that the Bloc Québécois has worked on as a team, and I commend my sport critic colleague for bringing this issue before the heritage committee. We then also looked at it at the status of women committee. I had to invoke Standing Order 106(4) for an emergency study to be conducted on the growing number of cases in the media. Yes, the media had to talk about situations of violence, abuse and bullying, particularly the terrible sexual assault scandal at Hockey Canada, before the minister finally took action.

We need to get to the bottom of this matter and provide better protection for young people. As we know, high-level athletes are not just 50-year-olds, but also young people between the ages of 16 and 25. We have a duty to protect them. The Minister of Sport had the opportunity to do something following the committee's report, but she did nothing. Given the letter from the 1,000 gymnasts sent in March 2022, given the Hockey Canada issue, given the many scandals in sports, 16 different disciplines want and deserve action. The committee even heard that this could be just the tip of the iceberg and that further investigation is needed. Accusations were made, but the minister did nothing. Other examples include the Olympic Games and all the stories of coaches abusing athletes.

The Bloc Québécois wants an independent public inquiry because aggression in sport is systemic. The sports policy expired over a year ago. There is still no clear direction for action, and the minister is not giving any direction. If there is no clear leadership on this issue, sports businesses are not going to follow through and nothing will change. The minister has a duty of due diligence and verification. If the minister does not ensure athlete safety, who will? The revolving door for the position of Minister of Sport over the past few years certainly has not helped either.

Today, I am going to approach the issue from three angles. First, I want to go over a bit of background, which I have already started doing. Then, I will come back to our crucial recommendation, which we see as a priority. Finally, I want to talk about other ideas related to today's debate.

To begin, I would remind the House that, following the allegations in the media, the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage held an emergency meeting in the summer of 2022. Then, seeing that there was still a great deal to learn about the allegations, the Standing Committee on the Status of Women launched a study, during which we heard from victims, sports organizations, in short, a long series of witnesses who came to explain why this issue could not be swept under the rug and why there absolutely needed to be an independent public inquiry. Let us not forget that the previous minister of sport froze funding to Hockey Canada but reinstated it far too quickly and without the systemic changes demanded by victims and survivors.

Second, let us come back to our work in committee. To take meaningful action to eradicate maltreatment in sports, a rethink of the sports governance system in Canada is needed. Witnesses identified systemic changes that could be made to the sports system. These changes include: an oversight of sports organizations' funding use and ways they process maltreatment allegations; the creation of a publicly accessible national coaches registry aiming to prevent coaches subject to sanctions for maltreatment from being able to coach in another sport or to coach in a different province or territory; the improvement and expansion of safe sport education and training for athletes, parents, and any other individuals involved in the sports system; and efforts to increase women's and girls' participation as well as gender equality and inclusion in sport.

In order for all of those changes to occur, most witnesses called on the government to establish an independent national public inquiry into maltreatment in sports. This inquiry could shed light on how the sports system has allowed maltreatment to occur and go unpunished. First of all, the slate needs to be wiped clean and truly everything needs to be put on the table through this inquiry. In the report that was tabled, despite the 24 recommendations in total to prevent the maltreatment of athletes, the recommendation on the independent public inquiry was crucial and a priority. It was the one that stood out.

Third, I will talk about other important issues related to this file, including the non-disclosure agreements that sought to cover the whole thing up and protect the institutions. We heard that victims were forced into silence through these non-disclosure agreements. We also need to look at that, if we really want to make a change.

There is also the matter of grooming, where an adult sexually propositions a 15-year-old minor or a person representing themselves as such using electronic or other means of communication. We also heard about that in committee. We heard about adults using their position of authority as coaches to manipulate underage athletes, while the parents of those athletes thought that they were safe.

We also talked about the CCES, the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport, and the OSIC, or Office of the Sport Integrity Commissioner. The OSIC is a mechanism that is available to only a small proportion of athletes. Witnesses who appeared before the committee expressed concern that OSIC's complaint mechanism set up by the previous minister of sport was not independent from the sports system. As a result, athletes may not report maltreatment, fearing retribution.

Here is another subject that is very close to my heart. I raised this issue at the Standing Committee on the Status of Women, where we are currently doing a study on coercive and controlling behaviour. I will give a definition of coercive and controlling behaviour. It includes physical, sexual or psychological abuse, financial control and implicit or explicit threats of harm to a victim. Coercive and controlling behaviour is not limited to a single incident, but rather involves repeated behaviours. It is important to understand that certain actions taken in isolation could be considered normal, but in some cases, it is the recurrence and repetition of those actions that make it coercive and controlling violence.

These definitions were given at the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, but they reminded me of what we heard during testimony at the Standing Committee on the Status of Women. Coaches and other organizations exert this kind of control repeatedly over victims, witnesses and survivors.

These authority figures can also restrict a person's movement and even control what they eat and what they do. I myself have a bit of personal experience to share, unfortunately. I was with my sister through her journey as a gymnast, and I saw how much pressure she was under. They tried to control everything, including what she could and could not eat. It is unbelievable that young kids are being put through this. It can put them at serious risk.

Coercive control is insidious and repetitive. We have heard about physical violence, but it is not necessarily physical. It ends up eroding athletes' self-awareness and self-confidence. That is what we heard from witnesses in committee. The victims stop making decisions based on what is best for them and what really motivates them. Their decisions are based on fear of what the coach might do to them or what other people might do to them. They even end up making bad decisions.

Abusers use these intimidating, degrading and dehumanizing tactics to instill fear in their victims. The goal of abusive behaviours is to provoke fear and gain power and control, even over the victim's thoughts and actions. Such behaviours start to control all of the victim's thoughts. That is pretty terrible, and that is where we are at. We have to do something about that. Coaches use physical and psychological isolation. They do everything to control their victims.

Many victims who appeared before the committee told us, in their courageous accounts, about how they were living in fear and about how this is systemic and far more widespread than we think. We really need to keep the issue of coercive control in mind when it comes to all sports.

In closing, once again, the government thinks it will be better off if we do not get to the bottom of this. With a voluntary commission, the victims are the ones who have the most to lose. This is not the way to restore confidence in the system or to encourage young people and parents to participate in sports.

Maltreatment in sport is truly an ongoing problem that has been reported by survivors for decades. The report by the Standing Committee on the Status of Women was our way of shedding light on the various measures available to protect women and girls from maltreatment in sport, but that requires an independent public inquiry, not a voluntary commission. There are two problems. First, as far as the commission goes, the minister is not required to report on what she does. Who will she appoint to the commission? She might even try to protect people. Secondly, the word “voluntary” means what it says. It means that no one is under any obligation. That is a real concern.

I would like to say one final thing because I am also a sports fan and I want to draw attention to two pieces of good news. On October 12, I was lucky enough to have a hand in dropping the puck for the Granby CEGEP's new women's hockey team, Indigo. This team is a positive model and a worthy inspiration for many women's hockey players. Last week, the Bloc Québécois, together with my colleague for Abitibi—Témiscamingue, received—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I have to interrupt the hon. member as her time has expired. However, she will be able to add to her remarks during questions and comments.

The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Development.

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Development]

Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague and I were on the status of women committee and the women in sport study; we heard horrifying stories of what was happening to children, to young girls, to the survivors. I want to thank her for talking about our committee recommendations. Our government is already acting on many of them, including creating a commission, the Future of Sport in Canada Commission, and the sport integrity framework.

How does my hon. colleague think we can work together more, with all parties, to make sure that the voices of these courageous survivors of all the abuse in sport are heard?

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I just want to remind members not to run into the chamber here and make comments. If they wish to participate in debate, then they should be sitting in their seat and waiting for the appropriate time to contribute.

The hon. member for Shefford.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from the Standing Committee on the Status of Women for her question. I will simply say that we should be listening to what victims and survivors are asking for.

Victims and survivors were pretty unanimous in their calls before the Standing Committee on the Status of Women, but that is not what the ministers put in place. It is not working. For example, the Office of the Sport Integrity Commissioner has proven that it is ineffective.

What they want is clear and straightforward. We must listen to them. We need an independent public inquiry to truly create the culture change they are asking for.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, I know the hon. member from the Bloc Québécois to be very strong in her feminist convictions. Since she has taken part in this process, I think she would also have some compelling information about how the process of ethics and governance, the failure of the leaders of these organizations, starts with such things as cutting corners and cheating. It then evolves into what we are seeing: some of the most pernicious, violent and predatory practices.

Could the hon. member please expand upon the need for very clear ethical guidelines, within the governance of these organizations, that include accountability, thereby centring the voice of survivors and victims?

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Madam Speaker, my colleague's question is an important one. We talked about the impact on victims at the Standing Committee on the Status of Women, but I know that, at the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage, my colleague from Abitibi—Témiscamingue was mainly concerned about the issue of governance.

Our committee also heard about governance and accountability for the people running these sport organizations. People told us that, in the end, more time was spent letting these organizations protect each other and sweep things under the rug instead of really shining a light and uncovering problems, not only the problems victims are facing, but also the governance problems plaguing the sport community.

Sport should be healthy. That is what I said at the end of my speech. There should be nothing but good news stories in the sports community, stories like that of the Granby Loutres, who are currently in Bahrain. I salute the Granby coach and his team. Sport should be a healthy activity for everyone.

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

Madam Speaker, I thank my incredible colleague for the depth of her convictions on this issue. I would like to encourage her to elaborate on the answer she just gave about governance.

Often, when there is a problem, the government will pass the buck and ask an independent third party to conduct an investigation. What is the point of that? It is to cover up what is happening, to buy time. The government seems to be using that same approach in this case by proposing a voluntary commission.

I would like my colleague to tell us how such an approach is used to buy the silence of victims and how it serves to revictimize them rather than helping them seek justice.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Madam Speaker, the whole issue of revictimization is absolutely terrible for victims. We heard a bit about that in committee.

Who are these people the minister has appointed to the commission? What do their pasts look like? Do they truly want to shed light on what is happening in the sports world and work for the victims, or would they rather participate in a system that allows people to help friends out in order to hide a chequered past, either theirs or that of someone else?

How is it that coaches were able to participate in Olympic games despite what they had done in the past? That is unacceptable. The only way to put an end to this system is to conduct an independent public inquiry, as called for.

As far as the current commission is concerned, there are doubts about whether the members are truly able to be independent and neutral in order to shed light on this affair and bring about systemic change, as the victims are demanding. We want to get to the bottom of this so that we can make the necessary changes.

[Jamil Jivani, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Saskatoon—Grasswood.

I would like to start off by highlighting why the matter of safety and trust in the world of sports is so important and why the concerns raised by the athletes who came to committee, who highlighted their experiences, is something we need to take seriously.

For a lot of young people across our country, especially young people lacking in opportunity or facing a series of adversities and barriers to success, sports are often where they find themselves. It is where they access mentorship, guidance, personal growth and development, and learn about hard work and discipline. It is a place where they often find the first adults who ever care about them and are invested in their success.

When I think about the positive things in the world of sports in our country, I think of some of the people who are doing excellent, incredible work at the grassroots level. I think about people like Michael “Pinball” Clemons, the general manager of the Toronto Argonauts, who has been able to work with youth in some of the most challenging circumstances across our country and do what he describes as bringing young people from the margins of society into the mainstream and building a bridge for young people who grow up in circumstances where they feel like they are looking at life from the outside, unsure of where they fit in in school or where they fit in in our economy. It is by building confidence and self-esteem through sports that they are able to perform well in school, pursue their dreams and live up to their potential.

Mr. Clemons has done a phenomenal job through his foundation of building grassroots programs and supporting them across our country, but particularly in the Toronto area. One of the organizations he supports, which has operated in the Jane and Finch community for a long time, is the Youth Association for Academics, Athletics, and Character Education, run by a schoolteacher named Devon Jones.

Mr. Jones has been in the Jane and Finn community for a long time. He works in classrooms by day and is operating incredible sports programs and tutoring programs by night. He has shown many young people who did not believe in themselves what they are capable of by first engaging them through sports and then opening up an entire world of possibilities for them.

Locally in my community of Durham, Scott Dickinson, a basketball coach, has run local basketball programs for young people in partnership with Big Brothers Big Sisters all across Clarington and Oshawa, showing young people all the incredible things they can do.

The reason these programs are so successful is that they prioritize safety and trust. Parents who know their kids need more opportunities and access to ways that allow them to live up to their potential and learn all the skills and abilities they have inside of them given by God know they can trust these programs and trust these people. They can hand their kids over to them and it will be an incredible experience that will elevate their lives.

Unfortunately, what we have learned through the process of understanding what has happened with safe sports in Canada is that there are far too many young people, student athletes and parents whose trust has been broken. They believed that organized sports were going to be the positive experience they are for some, but they instead found that they were not getting the support they deserved. In fact, there has been poor conduct and people have not lived up to a reasonable standard, or even a decent standard, of how to treat other people.

The impact of sports hinges on safety and trust so that young women and men can engage in sports organizations and receive the mentorship, guidance, personal growth and development they need. The report on safe sports in Canada highlights where Sport Canada and national sports organizations have failed to create a safe and trusted environment for athletes.

I stand in the House today in full support of the Conservative Party's dissenting report on safe sports in Canada, which outlines changes that would help us provide a positive experience to more Canadian youth. I would like to focus on the lack of accountability highlighted in the testimony provided by witnesses before the heritage committee. In particular, the testimony highlighted a lack of accountability resulting from failures of the Office of the Sport Integrity Commissioner, which, as many people across our country have highlighted, needs to do a better job of investigating complaints in a timely and impartial fashion and needs to enforce consequences for non-compliance.

The issue of a lack of accountability is a theme that comes up very often when discussing the current government, but some very reasonable, logical, actionable recommendations have been provided on how the OSIC can better do its job of protecting athletes and enforcing accountability in sports across our country. I would like to highlight three of those recommendations.

First, the OSIC is not trusted by many Canadians to take their concerns seriously, act in an impartial, investigative manner and enforce compliance. These are the reasonable expectations of any commissioner who receives a complaint, a red flag or a concern about what an athlete, a young person, might be going through. Time, impartiality, seriousness and enforcement are the basic foundational elements of any ability to evaluate a complaint and make sure not only that victims are heard, but that what they share, which is often a very uncomfortable and difficult experience to begin with, is acted upon. That is the first recommendation to the OSIC.

The second recommendation is that the OSIC work with provincial and territorial governments to ensure greater transparency and accountability on provincial and university teams. We heard from witnesses that red flags, concerns and complaints can be raised at the national sports level, but they are not necessarily enforced locally when it comes to provincial and university teams. This is a jurisdictional problem that should not exist, but it is the result of a bureaucracy that is not working with local partners to make sure that if violations are found or complaints are raised, those who have been found guilty or proven to be violating a code of conduct are followed.

Young athletes, young men or women, naturally work with and are members of teams in sports at various levels. The idea that we have a commissioner who cannot work with universities and provincial and territorial governments is absurd. It is a very reasonable recommendation that deserves action immediately.

The third recommendation, which is also common sense, is to establish a searchable and accessible public registry of coaches who have violated the Universal Code of Conduct to Prevent and Address Maltreatment in Sport. This makes complete sense. Coaches are trusted authorities in the lives of young people. When a mother or father sends their kid to practice or to perform as part of a team, they are trusting that their coach is going to use their authority within the law, with respect, care and love. When that does not happen and there is violence and, as one of my colleagues adequately put it, pernicious behaviour on the part of an authority figure in the world of sports, that needs to be known to parents. That needs to be known to athletes. Putting coaches in an accessible and searchable registry makes sense. This is how we protect people and hold people accountable for their actions.

I call upon the Liberal government to take action on these items. The report that we received identifies many items that could be acted upon now. Actions could be taken now, with the best interests of families, students and athletes in mind, to restore what should be a trusted and safe environment for all young people to be involved in.

As I mentioned at the top of my comments, many people, and I count myself among this group, find their best mentors and sources of support, the people who believe in them the most, through the world of sports. It makes such a difference in the lives of young people, especially young people who are struggling and overcoming adversity.

I believe this needs to be a top priority, as another one of my colleagues mentioned, to ensure that the bad behaviour of certain actors in the world of sports does not taint or poison how sports broadly are perceived. We hope that the Liberal government will take action to hold those who give sports a bad name accountable.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change and to the Minister of Sport and Physical Activity]

Madam Speaker, I am grateful for the contributions that my hon. colleague from Durham has made to this debate. It is a very important issue, and as I have said repeatedly, I do not think the safe sport issue and abuse in Canada ought to be partisan issues. We should all be working together for a better and safer system and for better resources for the institutions that support and protect athletes.

I am very glad to let the member know, if he is unaware, that the registry he recommended and called for was established last March so that athlete organizations, athletes themselves and potential employers can look up any of those considerations. I would ask if he is aware of the $2.8 million that our government invested in athlete mental health or of our support of the Canadian Olympic Committee's establishment of the game plan program, which has provided many of the resources that my hon. colleague has recommended we put in place.

[Jamil Jivani, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Madam Speaker, there were three recommendations brought forward concerning the commissioner. One was about the registry, and I am glad to see the government has taken action on that. There are two additional recommendations, though. One is regarding the time and impartiality of investigations and complaints, and the second one is about whether the OSIC is working in collaboration with other jurisdictions, including provincial and territorial governments.

A lot of reforms are needed, and I would encourage the Liberal government to address all of the recommendations on how the OSIC can become more effective. I am glad to hear that investments are being made in mental health for student athletes, but until these reforms are made, I do not think the Liberals should be patting themselves on the back.