moved:
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.
Mr. Speaker, before beginning, I would like to draw your attention to the fact that I will be sharing my time with my colleague from Témiscamingue. This will be the case with all Bloc Quebecois members throughout the day.
I must first say that I am delighted to be able to debate amateur sport in this House today, and I trust that our debate will have the attentive ear of the other side of the House.
The Bloc Quebecois is introducing the following motion on its opposition day:
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.
If hon. members find this motion long, I must point out that every word has a meaning and a reason to be there. I would even say that each problem I shall address today could easily have been a motion onto itself, for the problems to be addressed throughout this day by my colleagues are but the tip of the iceberg. In fact, my impression in researching this matter was that it was like opening Pandora's box. Members will, I am sure, get that same impression.
I would like hon. members to know before I go any further that I too was part of the wonderful world of amateur sport. Yes, I was a competitive figure skater. I loved the sport and dreamed of taking part in international competitions, but I had to make a choice. That choice was to give up skating because my parents and I could no longer afford the skates, the costumes and the coaching.
I focused on my studies and then went into politics. Some might say I am still skating, but around issues. On this one, I will say right out that I want nothing to do with the kind of society that does not encourage its athletes, that politicizes sport and prefers to subsidize professional sport to the detriment of amateur sport.
Do members know what is serious here? Nothing has changed in the past 15 years. Nothing. Since the Liberals were elected in 1993 transfer payments for amateur sport have dropped from $76 million to $57 million. We are far from an improvement. In fact, I would call it a backslide.
For a moment we could have believed that the Liberals wanted to redeem themselves when the matter of striking a subcommittee on amateur sport came up, but no.
In passing, I would like to congratulate my colleague, the member for Rimouski—Mitis, who worked very hard on this issue and is undoubtedly following the debate today.
Although the Bloc Quebecois participated in good faith on this subcommittee, we have always felt that it was just an excuse to support professional sport and ensure the visibility of the maple leaf. We are still wondering if it was not a way to include the member for Bourassa.
The facts would certainly seem to bear us out. It is now clear that the subcommittee's report accomplished nothing because the minister did not implement any of the recommendations that might have helped athletes.
Although we were promised that this report would be the answer to all the problems encountered by athletes, the government is giving professional sport the nod over amateur sport.
What a sad comment on society, at a time when life is not easy for these promising athletes. Every year they face the same financial constraints and must struggle to find the necessary resources. The government should do more for these athletes, who do us proud and who give us a window on the world. It should match the commitment of the private sector.
The assistance now provided by Sport Canada falls badly short. Additional funding for our athletes should be made available immediately. Athletes cannot wait for the 2001 symposium and the resultant visibility for the government and its flag. If professional sport is in urgent straits, amateur sport is even more so.
As recently as May 1, 1999 one of our very well known athletes, Jean-Luc Brassard, asked whether athletes would have to walk behind their sponsors' flags. This is not a good sign.
Despite all the remarkable achievements of our athletes, of whom we are proud and who deserve greater assistance, the Liberal government's record on sport is a disgrace and I denounce it.
Since the tabling of the Mills report I have had the opportunity to speak to our athletes. There are many financial problems and they must be dealt with immediately.
As I said before, the issue of funding is among the most serious issues. Ten minutes are not enough to list all the problems that exist in amateur sport, but I will try to give an overview of the situation.
Let us be very clear. I want everyone to clearly understand that the Bloc Quebecois is not opposed to professional sport. We just want to make sure that the interests of millionaires are not given priority over those of amateur sport.
I also want the government to clearly understand that before funding professional sport millionaires there are questions that need to be answered. We should first determine the exact costs involved, know the spinoffs for Quebecers and Canadians, and control skyrocketing salaries.
No independent study has yet shown the economic impact of a professional franchise, and no professional team has made a commitment to remain in its host city in exchange for taxpayers' support. There are still many unanswered questions regarding professional sport, and if I had more than 10 minutes I would mention many more.
Sport Canada only gives 8.3% of its financial resources to amateur athletes. Every study conclusively shows that athletes often live below the poverty line. Even the hon. member for Bourassa agrees with me on that issue. Coaches are not required to be bilingual and there is no training program to help them learn to speak French. Francophones are subject to serious discrimination. I could definitely use another 10 minutes.
There is a shift toward centres such as Calgary and Toronto. For example, the synchronized swimming federation transferred the team's training location to Toronto, in spite of the fact that the majority of its athletes are from Quebec.
Also, athletes cannot engage in politics; otherwise they could be expelled from the Canadian Olympic Association. They must, however, promote Canadian unity and prominently display the Canadian flag. If the athletes forget, the minister makes sure to take flags along with her and constantly reminds athletes that integration of Sport Canada with Canadian Heritage has focused attention on the contribution high level sport makes to Canadian pride and to national unity.
Amateur sport is so important to the minister that she rejects all measures that could really help athletes; such consistency, once again, from the minister.
Would hon. members like another example, just for the fun of it, since they are beyond counting? In her letter to the head of the committee, the minister wrote:
The committee has made a convincing demonstration of the necessity of solid assistance from the federal government to amateur sport.
Such a convincing demonstration that the minister is going to wait a while yet. She is not too sure. Stay tuned for further developments.
As I said, amateur sport is full of problems. Did hon. members know that there is no system to monitor the federations, and no assurance that taxpayers' money will be properly managed and our athletes respected?
I will give one example: the skaters Isabelle and Paul Duchesnay. They were forced to go to France to train and to compete for France, and now have had to go to Florida to teach figure skating because the Canadian skating federation refuses to allow them to coach here. And the government is doing nothing to resolve the situation.
When there are problems within a federation, athletes have to go elsewhere if they want to continue or have simply to give up. This simply makes no sense.
If I had more than 10 minutes I could also speak about another problem, that of francophone athletes who are often discouraged because they have to go elsewhere and learn English because national centres offer few services in French. As Sports Québec indicated to the Bélanger-Campeau Commission barely eight years ago:
Unilingual francophone athletes must overcome an additional obstacle in Canadian selections when they are unable to fully communicate in their own language with their trainers and those responsible for selection... They have less opportunity... because the majority of professionals and volunteers responsible for the selection and training of athletes are unilingual anglophones.
If I had more than 10 minutes I would also talk about the problems within the Canadian Olympic Association, but once again 10 minutes is not very long.
The third recommendation in the Mills report on the matter of funding for the drug program is another hot topic. Clearly, the minister's response to the Mills report is a vast disappointment.
What has to be understood is that there are problems in sports at the upper echelons, and the government was elected for everyone, not just for the millionaires contributing to election coffers.
The government must become a decisive player and correct things now. In this case, why not let Quebec have its own banner? Quebec could do sports as it understands them. We could manage our federations properly and really give priority to our athletes.
This is the sort of society I want. Who knows, perhaps Quebec might beat Canada at the Olympic Games.
