CHPC Committee Meeting

    Good morning everyone.

    We're going to call meeting number 6 of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage to order.

    This morning we have the Honourable Shelly Glover, the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages, with us to discuss the supplementary estimates.

    Minister, welcome to the committee. You have 10 minutes.

    Thank you very much, Chair. I am absolutely thrilled to be here.

    Good morning, committee members.

    With me today of course are two individuals who will be helpful, being that I am the new Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages.

    I'm pleased to be here to speak about 2013 supplementary estimates. Before I do, I'd like to take a few moments to give this committee some insight into my first several months as the new Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages.

    It was a tremendous honour to be asked to serve in this role by Prime Minister Stephen Harper, and since July I have been focused on reaching out to a wide range of stakeholders and arts organizations across the country. For example, during a tour of parts of Atlantic Canada, I met with the Atlantic Provinces Art Gallery Association and members of the PEI Museum and Heritage Foundation. In Toronto I met with Stephen Waddell from the Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists, and with many great artists and creators at the Toronto International Film Festival.

    In Alberta I held a round table related to arts and culture, and had the pleasure of meeting with folks at the North Mount Pleasant Arts Centre, as well as several other groups. I toured cSPACE, where artists affected by the flooding were able to salvage, clean, and repair their visual works of art. It was a touching collaboration of the arts community in Calgary.

    In Quebec, I met with a number of people from the art world, including Simon Brault, CEO of the National Theatre School of Canada and Vice-Chair of the Canada Council for the Arts.

    I attended the 35th Gala de l'ADISQ, where I sat with Angèle Dubeau and her husband, Mario Labbé. Having an opportunity to talk to two renowned Quebec figures was truly a wonderful surprise and an honour.

    I attended the 28th Gemini Awards. I was sitting close to the team of Unité 9, a television show I love.

    I also had an opportunity to visit the facilities and meet the representatives of a number of organizations that are part of the Canadian Heritage portfolio. Here, I am thinking of Library and Archives Canada, CBC, the National Film Board and the National Arts Centre, to name only a few.

    I participated in the FPT Ministerial Conference on the Canadian Francophonie, which was held back home, in Winnipeg.

    I also attended the federal, provincial, and territorial meeting of ministers responsible for culture in Iqaluit. We discussed our mutual investments in Canada's creative industries and shared ideas about increasing overall appreciation of our culture.

    Last month I had the pleasure of hosting my first movie night with Telefilm Canada, showing The Grand Seduction. For those of you who couldn't make it, I highly recommend this charming Quebec-Newfoundland co-production filled with top-notch Canadian talent like Gordon Pinsent and of course Mary Walsh.

    Today, I am appearing before you for the first time as a minister, and I want to highlight the important work you do on behalf of Canada's arts and culture. I hope to meet with you regularly.

    Thank you for your commitment and your consistent contribution to promoting, preserving and celebrating our country's arts, culture and heritage.

    So far as minister I have witnessed many parts of the dynamic cultural sector that generates close to $50 billion to Canada's GDP every year, and 630,000 jobs. I've seen how the Government of Canada's support is helping sustain this sector with initiatives right across the country.

    I bring a strong interest in arts and culture to my new job, and each day I learn and appreciate more about the amazing Canadians who work to keep our arts and culture alive. All Canadians should be very proud of the talent we produce right here at home.

    I was also happy that the government mentioned certain cultural priorities in last October's Speech from the Throne, such as our intention to unbundle television channels in Canada.

    We clearly put forward our intention to unbundle television channels in Canada. We believe Canadian families should be able to choose the combination of television channels they want. That's why we issued a request to the CRTC under section 15 of the Broadcasting Act to report to the government on television channel choice. We are requiring the CRTC to undertake a full examination of unbundling of television services, and to report back no later than April 30, 2014.

    The throne speech also mentioned the Canadian Museum of History. As you know, the relevant bill was passed by the House of Commons and is currently before the Senate.

    The Speech from the Throne also noted two important sporting events that will take place in Canada in 2015. I'm delighted that Canada will be hosting the FIFA Women's World Cup.

    I am also looking forward to welcoming the thousands of athletes and spectators who will come to Canada for the Pan American and Parapan American Games in 2015.

    Long after the excitement of the games is over, they will leave a legacy of world-class sports facilities to be used by current and future athletes.

    

    Of course, another passionate sporting event is just around the corner. I am talking about the 2014 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games in Sochi. Millions of Canadians will encourage our athletes, and I am really looking forward to doing the same. The throne speech also stressed the importance of encouraging young Canadians to be more active. I personally consider this to be vital to the health of Canadians.

    I was happy to be in Winnipeg to participate in the signing of a bilateral agreement on sports between the Government of Canada and the Government of Manitoba. That agreement will help encourage young people, disabled individuals and aboriginals to participate in sports. Our government is signing similar agreements with all the provinces and territories. Those agreements will have a positive effect on communities across the country for many years.

    The throne speech also noted a milestone we're all eagerly awaiting. That is, of course, the 150th anniversary of Canada's Confederation in 2017. Since 1867, we have grown as a country and Canadians have made their mark in all fields.

    I am thinking of Louis Riel, leader of the Metis people in the Prairies and founder of my province. I am thinking of Frederick Banting, Canadian Nobel Prize winner.

    Of course, who could forget Alice Munro, who made us all very proud this year when she received the Nobel Prize in Literature.

    I also think of Mary Two-Axe Earley, who worked hard on behalf of aboriginal women who had lost their Indian status under the law.

    Each and every one of us could come up with a list of our own examples. It's quite possible none of our lists would be the same. Our country has a diverse and remarkable heritage that is well worth celebrating.

    Canada's 150th anniversary belongs to all Canadians. We will hold consultations to see how Canadians would like to mark that anniversary.

    Through face-to-face meetings and social media tools like Facebook and Twitter, we'll reach out to Canadians from all walks of life to see how they would like to celebrate and commemorate our shared experiences, values, and pride. We want to work with Canadians to ensure that 2017 is a great success and a source of pride.

    Now on to the estimates. Mr. Chair, the committee has asked me here to speak about supplementary estimates (B). Let me run through the most significant items.

    We are reprofiling $1 million from 2012-13 to 2013-14 through the Canada cultural spaces program. That's for the completion of the Heritage Discovery Centre at Ermatinger-Clergue National Historic Site in Sault Ste. Marie.

    As you'll see in the estimates documents, changes also involve several transfers to and from the departments. For example, $730,000 will go to the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council for research related to sport participation. At the same time, the department will receive $310,000 from Indian Affairs and Northern Development to promote National Aboriginal Day.

    Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development will provide $300,000 to help build the National Holocaust Monument here in the National Capital Region. On October 24, Minister Baird and I announced the six finalists in the national design competition for the future monument.

    All totalled, estimates (B) this year will result in a net increase of $0.5 million to the Department of Canadian Heritage spending authority.

    In closing, I'd like to thank the committee for inviting me here today and for your ongoing work on behalf of this sector. I look forward to working with this committee and with all stakeholders to strengthen the arts, culture, and heritage of our country.

    With that said, I'm happy to take any questions you might have.

    Thank you very much, Minister.

    We're now going to move to a round of questioning. It will be for seven minutes. We begin with Mr. Young.

    Thank you, Chair.

    And thank you, Minister, for being here today.

    I'd like to start with arts and culture, which is a tremendous economic driver. I'm very proud that our government has never cut funding for arts and culture.

    Could you please tell this committee what our government has accomplished in supporting arts and culture and artists and creators in Canada, and about the momentum that's been created across Canada?

    What a wonderful question. Thank you.

    I want to thank you, Mr. Young. I know how much work you've done, not only in your own riding on this very important subject of arts and culture. Also you've been a very good advisor over these few months that I've been a minister so I do want to thank you for your input. I know you have a vast amount of experience in this area.

    Thank you.

    First and foremost, let me say that arts and culture in Canada really do contribute to how we feel about being Canadian. We are proud to be Canadian, because we have arts and culture that is very different from that of other countries in the world. It actually makes our country the absolute best country in the world.

    We have a variety of programs to assist in celebrating arts and culture. I know that many of you are familiar with some of them. But let me remind the committee of some of the ones I am particularly proud of.

     For example, we support festivals across the country. In fact, I'm sure many of you are familiar with the festivals in your own ridings. I look to Monsieur Nantel, who has the Marché de Noël & des Traditions de Longueuil, 2013, qui s'en vient. Festivals really do allow us, at the local level, to celebrate our local culture. They allow us to bring our local artists to the forefront and celebrate their talents.

     We also, of course, have a number of other programs in the way of grants. We provide almost 9,000 grants and contributions through the Department of Canadian Heritage, and we get probably 15,000 requests every year.

    The Canada Council for the Arts, as well, does a fantastic job as creators and as experts. They choose the artists who they sponsor and provide funding to. They, themselves, have been able to provide approximately 6,000 different grants through the $180 million that we provide them each and every year. I might add that this $180 million is the highest level of funding the Canada Council for the Arts has ever seen. So we're very proud that we have maintained that. Even through a very tough and fragile economic time, we are in fact the only G-7 country that was able to maintain direct funding, like the funding we provide through the Canada Council for the Arts, to artists.

    The literary awards were also held yesterday. I'm particularly proud of the 14 recipients. The Canada book fund, actually, provided funding to 10 of the 14 literary award winners yesterday.

    We are making a difference. We are able to contribute in a meaningful way to arts and culture so that we can celebrate this wonderful country. I hope to continue the work of Minister Moore, who did a very, very good job before I arrived. I'll need your help, so I appreciate that.

    Thank you.

    We know from Alice Munro's award, and from many other Canadian authors, that Canadian authors are as good as or better than anybody else in the world, as are Canadian musicians. They sell records all over the world. I'm thinking of groups like Nickelback, and singers like Céline Dion and others.

    For the record, could please talk about the economic impacts arts and culture have in Canada with regard to our cultural industries. How many jobs come from the arts? When somebody writes a book, it creates jobs through publishing and distributing. It's the same thing when somebody writes a song. It goes through the record business. You need promoters. People sell them in the stores. You need artists to design the covers. But there's a huge number of jobs created in the arts.

    Could you please talk a bit about that?

    This is one of the messages I've really tried to share as I go from place to place, at all of these round tables and in each of these arts and culture locations. There are in fact 630,000 jobs that really are directly linked to the arts and culture sector here in Canada. It's a huge economic driver, a huge job creator. It also brings almost $50 billion into the Canadian economy.

    The reason this is important for people to know is that there are people who don't believe that arts and culture are worthwhile. The Conservative government is here to tell them they're wrong. The Conservative government has a strong record of supporting the arts and culture sectors, and will continue to support them, because it is the right thing to do. It is about who we are. It is about our Canadian identity, and it is about job creation.

    I hope all committee members will support us in these efforts to continue to promote the arts and culture sector. And I'm sure I'll learn about those who may not.

    Am I out of time, Mr. Chair?

    You have a minute and 15.

    Thank you.

    We know that we export a lot of art. For example, Cirque du Soleil sells tickets all over the world. It's a wildly successful arts organization. I mentioned Nickelback before; it is the largest selling Canadian band in the world. We tell the world who we are. They like it and they want to share in it.

     I wonder if you could just comment on the value to the Canadian economy—we're talking about money today—when we export our art, our music, and our books.

    Thank you for mentioning Nickelback, of course. That's only one of many groups that the Canadian government has been helping. Might I remind you, when it comes to Nickelback, we help them with a very small amount of money, and they're hugely popular worldwide. We're so proud of them. And the same thing with Carly Rae Jepsen.

    We invest about $2 billion annually into arts and culture and, as I said, we get back $50 billion into the economy. When our artists are out in other venues across the world, it brings economic return to Canada.

    So as I said, we continue to invest in that way, and I'm very pleased to have your support in allowing us to do that.

    Thank you very much.

    Mr. Nantel, the floor is yours. You have seven minutes.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    I want to begin by thanking the hon. Minister of Canadian Heritage for joining us today. You are right in saying that the work we do here is important. It is a privilege to sit on this committee. I also want to congratulate you on all the meetings you have held since the beginning of your mandate. That's a good message to send to people from the cultural world.

    You answered the question of my colleague Mr. Young by saying that there was an economic side, but that identity and Canadian pride were also major considerations. This is something we cannot do without nowadays.

    You said earlier that this committee's work is very important. No witness could understand better than you that this committee must discuss certain topics. Speaking of committee work, I would like to use the first minute of my floor time to give notice of three motions. You will find that it would be very appropriate for the committee to consider them.

    The first notice of motion is the following:

    The second notice of motion reads as follows:

    The third notice of motion is the following:

    I am making this recommendation because I have met with some people from Montreal, and I thought their approach to consultations with various sectors was inspiring. The imagery of the identity and figurative aspects was very relevant and inspiring.

    Ms. Glover, you probably know that we have proposed motion M-445 on resale rights in visual arts. At a recent auction held by Waddington's Auction House in Toronto, the works of 18 Inuit artists were sold for a total of $84,700. Had there been any resale rights, the artists would have received $4,235 of that money. It is time to address that shortcoming by integrating resale rights for artistic works into the Copyright Act, as over 69 countries have done. Do you have any plans when it comes to this?

    Thank you.

    You brought up some topics your committee may want to study. I want to point out that, as a minister, I am very busy. I can assure you of one thing—it is up to you to decide what you want to do within your committee. I appreciate the fact that you gave notice of motions, but I won't meddle in that.

    Regarding your question on the motion moved in the House, Mr. Moore—who was the minister in charge at the time—talked about copyright. The legislation will be reviewed in five years, and what you just mentioned may be included in that review. We are taking due note of your suggestion for the review that will be held in five years.

    I invite you to learn about the auctions that have been held recently. One took place in Toronto, and another one will be held in Ottawa, next Wednesday, I think. You can see the reality of renowned artists who, at the end of their life, have an income that is not at all in line with their merit and the admiration Canadians have for them.

    I would like to come back to your response to the letter we sent you regarding the future of Library and Archives Canada, which you mentioned in the beginning. I understand that your mandate has just begun, but your answer doesn't mention the consultation held with people involved in the archival community. They had clearly expressed their desires and criteria for the selection of the next Deputy Head and Librarian and Archivist of Canada.

    Are there any developments in terms of candidates and the selection criteria?

    Thank you for the question.

    I would first like to point out that some Canadian artists—and they are numerous—receive money from funds set up by the Government of Canada, including the Canada Book Club. Without those funds, they could not have the income they currently have. They do some very good work, and we are proud of them. They are receiving compensation commensurate with their talent. Some of them are not as successful as others, but we will support them with the available funds.

    But about the Archives....

    You first talked about artists who don't make enough money. Some of them make a lot of money. The situation should be considered as a whole.

    As for the process of hiring a new head of Library and Archives Canada, we are being told that things are moving along and that a list of final candidates has been created. That is a well-established procedure that will continue. I hope to soon have the name of the person who has been selected.

    Thank you.

    Mr. Dion, you have the floor for seven minutes.

    Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

    Madam Minister, I did so in private, and it is also a pleasure to do so in public. I want to wish you the best of luck in the fulfilment of the very important responsibilities you now have. In your honour, I even put on a blue tie.

    Thank you.

    I would also like to....

    And I am wearing red.

    I also want to wish all the best to your new deputy minister, Ms. Swords.

    Mr. Hertzog, thank you for joining us.

    Madam Minister, it can be assumed that you and your closest collaborators have a general idea of the aspects of supplementary estimates that pertain to your department.

    One of those close collaborators is your director of policy. This is a very important position, given the potential influence on the department's directions in terms of supplementary estimates. So I would like to know whether you appointed Patrick Rogers to that position or whether his nomination came from the Prime Minister's cabinet or someone else.

    Wow!

    Mr. Dion, I'm ruling that out of order. It's outside the subject of today's meeting, which is the department and the supplementary estimates.

    Mr. Chair, yesterday your colleague, the chair of the Standing Committee on Natural Resources, Mr. Benoit, accepted this question. It's clearly linked to the influence that a close collaborator of the minister may have on the estimates, so I would say that for consistency, maybe you might revisit your view.

    I'm going to rule that out of order.

    So be it.

    Monsieur Dion, we did stop the clock for that, so carry on.

    I appreciate that. Although I disagree with your decision, I respect the fact that you are the chair and I will go ahead with another topic, Mr. Chair.

    Thank you.

    Ms. Glover, you announced that you wanted to unbundle television channels—home bundling, pick and choose, as the Americans say. The CRTC's mandate does not seem to include consultations. This is a very important policy, and we have to make sure it is properly thought out.

    Madam Minister, will you ask the CRTC to carry out very extensive consultations? Will you hold any consultations yourself?

    Thank you for the question.

    I am very proud of my team at the Department of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages. Our team is not made up of only political staff, but also of public servants. It is an honour to work with all the employees of this department.

    Are you inviting me to repeat the question I asked earlier, Mr. Glover?

    No.

    I'm talking about the question regarding your director of policy.

    I'm trying to move along. I will repeat it; I am proud of everything.

    That leads me to ask questions about your director of policy, Madam Minister. I think that the Chair will let me speak because the minister invited me to do so.

    Can I continue?

    Carry on.

    Thank you.

    Can I finish without being interrupted?

    I am really proud of them. They work very hard, and I will continue to do the work I have to do for Canadians.

    First, I want to assure you that I make my own decisions. Second, I will answer your question.

    The CRTC announced a long time ago that it was consulting Canadians regarding the future of television. Of course, we took the opportunity to ask the commission—as long as the consultations were being conducted pursuant to section 15 of the Broadcasting Act—to address this issue we think is key. Consumers must be given more options. That is what they want.

    The CRTC will carry out a comprehensive study during its consultations. They will submit a report to me by April. We will then consider the issues raised not only by consumers, but also by official language minority companies and communities. I take this matter seriously. We will unbundle television channels and use the CRTC's expertise to help us with that.

    You say that the CRTC has the mandate to consult all the organizations and groups you just talked about.

    As it was just mentioned, you will invite the CRTC. The commission is perfectly aware of its mandate, but under section 15, we have the right to ask it for a report. That's what we are doing.

    I know about the report, but I don't know whether any consultations are being held to find out what the consequences of such a decision are on the variety of channels, on the francophone minority offer and on Canadian content. Is the CRTC holding consultations on this? That's not part of the mandate you gave it.

    I will repeat what I said in order to be clear. Under section 15 of the Broadcasting Act, we have the right to ask the CRTC to submit reports and carry out investigations.

    And a consultation.

    We asked it to comply with section 15 by producing a report and conducting a study. That's our right, and that's what we did.

    I am deducing from your answer that no consultations are being held.

    As for the fund for music....

    On a point of order, Mr. Chair, while I understand and appreciate Mr. Dion's concern for unbundling and his wish to do some consultation, I would suggest that's a matter we could deal with at subcommittee. We would be happy to have a conversation about that. I'm not sure at all what it has to do with the supplementary estimates we're dealing with here this morning.

    Okay.

    Monsieur Dion, you have about 30 seconds left.

    Madam Minister, I will ask you a question about the Canada Music Fund. We were both at the Gala de l'ADISQ, where you were invited to renew the fund, which will expire in March 2014. Would you commit to renewing it?

    Thank you for the question, as this is another important issue for me. We are holding discussions on that. It was really nice to see you at the Gala de l'ADISQ. You were very welcoming, and I want to thank you for that.

    If that's okay with you, I would like to take this opportunity to talk about the roadmap. Once again, the roadmap includes certain initiatives. It is introducing a new initiative entitled Music Showcases for Artists from Official Language Minority Communities. More investments will be required to support Canadian music and artists. I hope that initiative will help bands from back home such as Chic Gamine and Les Surveillants. So I'm very proud of what our government has set up in the roadmap.

    As for the renewal of the Music Fund, discussions are ongoing, and we will soon find out what the decision is.

    Thank you very much, Minister.

    We're going to move to Mr. Richards for seven minutes.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    Minister, thanks for being here today. I listened to your opening remarks. It sounds as though you've been very busy since taking your new position as Minister of Canadian Heritage. Obviously, you've been doing some great things. Obviously, you have a department that is very important to helping Canadians shape our national identity and have pride in our country.

    Obviously, you know we've been undertaking a study of our preparation for the Olympics. We've had a number of organizations, including sports organizations, here and we've heard over and over how our athletes and our great efforts, which we have seen at recent Olympics, inspire Canadians, particularly young Canadians, to be involved in sport. Obviously there is work being undertaken as we approach our 150th anniversary and there are other large milestones coming very soon. There's a lot of work for you to do, but you can see the fruits of those efforts in the pride we create in Canadians about being Canadian.

    I think about some of the local organizations that your department has funded. In my riding specifically, the Airdrie Food Bank has a festival every year that raises money for those who go a little hungry, but it also promotes the arts while it's doing so with its Empty Bowls Arts Festival. I think about things like the Mountain View Music Fest and Airdrie's ARTember. I also think of course about the world-class Banff Centre in my riding with its arts and leadership training thanks to the funding that comes from the department for that.

    I know you're proud to be a part of all those things. I appreciate your being here today.

    But I would like to focus in on the subject matter at hand. Unlike some of the opposition members who have chosen to talk about future business in the committee or to bring forward notices of motion, I would really like to talk a little bit about some of the things in the supplementary estimates if I can. I'll just ask you a couple of questions in regard to that.

    I notice the transfer from Indian Affairs and Northern Development to Canadian Heritage to promote public awareness and community participation in National Aboriginal Day activities. I wonder if you can tell me a little bit about what that transfer has enabled the department to do and what kinds of activities and things surround that.

    Thank you very much for the question.

    I'm so glad you mentioned your Banff Centre, because it was amazing to visit that centre. They were very complimentary to this government for many years of support, and I know how hard you've worked to assist them. Aside from the Banff Centre, there's your mention of the food bank, God bless you, because they really do value how we feel about helping those who are vulnerable.

     Continue doing the work you're doing. It's very important in your riding, and they appreciate it very much.

    With regard to the estimates, that specific transfer is a huge and popular transfer, especially in my home province. Of course, I'm a Métis woman, so National Aboriginal Day on June 21 is something that we celebrate frequently.

     We have expertise in the Department of Canadian Heritage. We do the Canada Day grants as well. As I said before to Monsieur Dion, we're very proud of the work that is done there, and that is why Aboriginal Affairs transfers these funds: because we're already able to and capable of providing the expertise to manage those requests.

     Aboriginal Day is celebrated from coast to coast to coast by the first nations, by our Métis, and by our Inuit. It is a celebration that, again, honours their heritage and honours their culture, and I am just so very pleased that the Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs allows us to take part in helping those communities to celebrate a very, very important day. They are the first people. They are Canada's first people, and they're worth celebrating. Their history is worth celebrating.

     Thank you for asking the question. I appreciate it.

    Thank you.

    Another transfer that I see here, from Foreign Affairs to Heritage, is to support the building of the National Holocaust Monument. Obviously that's something that's very important, and I'm proud to see that our government is undertaking it.

    Who is responsible for building that? Is it Heritage responsible for building the monument? What is the transfer there facilitating?

    Well, we've recently brought into our fold, into our Heritage family, the National Capital Commission. By working together, we will be able to be more efficient in putting on events and making sure that monuments like this one, which is so very important, are done in a collaborative way.

    So yes, it is under Heritage Canada's purview, but I am working very, very closely with Minister Baird, who takes a very active interest in this monument. He had done an awful lot of work on it before the NCC was transferred to Heritage. I value his input and I continue to work with him and take his advice on this very important monument.

    Thank you.

    I also notice a transfer from Foreign Affairs to the National Arts Centre Corporation in order to support their orchestra in a fall tour of China. Obviously that relationship is one that is an important relationship for our country, I think, in terms of trade and in terms of tourism.

    Certainly, with Banff and Canmore in my riding, tourism is a key part of our economy. Since Prime Minister Harper was able to gain approved destination status for our country, we're seeing huge gains in that tourism volume from China, and it's only continuing to grow. I think it's important to do exchanges like the one that would be facilitated by that transfer.

    I wonder if you can tell me a little more about that tour. Do you want to expand a bit on that and on its importance and maybe on any other activities that Heritage would be undertaking to try to encourage those kinds of activities?

    You bet.

    This is an important aspect of the Conservative government's philosophy on trade. It's an important aspect because trade between our countries is essential. We are an exporting country and we must have trade relationships with other countries in order to survive, in order to increase the economic growth of our country.

     I was very pleased to be at the launch when the orchestra put on a wonderful event at the National Arts Centre before they left for China. They were very excited. In fact, they had students from China who actually participated in the event, so the exchanges have already been taking place between our arts performers and, of course, performers in China.

    China is a huge country that has literally billions and billions of dollars that we, as a trading nation, want to be able to access, and to access their consumers—

    Thank you, Minister.

    Are we done?

    We're going to have to cut you off.

    I could go on because it's a great question.

    We're going to move to Ms. Mathyssen for five minutes.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    Thank you, Madam Minister. I think you'll find that on this side of the House we're very intent on protecting and supporting Canadian arts and heritage.

    I have a couple of questions.

    The first is in relation to CBC. Canada's hockey night TV landscape changed quite significantly this week, with Rogers Communications’ getting control of the NHL multimedia rights, a 12-year $5.2 billion agreement that preserves Hockey Night in Canada but limits CBC's role in the broadcast.

    According to the Friends of CBC, this will cost the national network about $200 million in advertising revenue each year. Because that advertising money goes a long way in supporting cultural and important identity broadcasting, how will you ensure the health of our national broadcaster and ensure that you support that other programming?

    Thank you, Ms. Mathyssen. It's a pleasure to see you here in committee.

    First and foremost, I have to address the question because there is no such group called the Friends of CBC. In fact, when I met with Hubert Lacroix, he was very clear that there is a group out there but they are not called the Friends of CBC and are not the friends of CBC. In fact, Hubert Lacroix was quite insistent that they have, in fact, damaged the CBC's reputation and damaged their ability to move forward on the mandate they have, which takes them to 2015, so—

    Thank you, Minister, but I'd like to know how we're going to support the other programming with this $200-million loss.

    That too is fictitious because no one has said that.

    I don't know if you saw an article that is out today, in which the CBC's administration, the executive, including Hubert Lacroix the president and CEO, made statements about this deal, saying it is a good deal for Canadians.

    Here is what Hubert Lacroix actually said, and I'm going to quote him—

    Thank you, Minister.

    I have seen the articles, and I am concerned about the lost revenues, but rather than quote from articles, perhaps we could go on and talk about the museums assistance program.

    One thing I've taken note of is that the program is intended to enhance Canadians’ knowledge, understanding, and appreciation of events. This applies to the 2,600 museums, artist-run centres, aquaria, science centres, etc.

    My concern, Minister, is that according to your website, the list of projects that will get MAP funding is very limited. It doesn't reflect that we have a wide variety of interests and communities across the country. My question is how will these very diverse museums be able to access MAP funding when it seems to be restricted to commemorative battles, conservative prime ministers, the Stanley Cup—a very small range of things when you look at the diversity of this country?

    Thank you.

    I hope you're going to let me answer when you ask me a question. I would like to say that I find it unfair. It is my first time and perhaps we're getting off on the wrong foot, Ms. Mathyssen, but in all fairness, when you make a statement that is simply not true, I think it's imperative, as Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages, that I correct the record.

    Well, thank you very much.

    Please allow me to correct the record first and foremost because you did ask a question that was not true. You also cited an organization that does not exist. Hubert Lacroix said the following: it is “the right outcome for Canadian hockey fans”. That's what he said about this deal. The executive of CBC has said there is no $200 million, a number being quoted by people who choose to invent numbers. I just wanted to say that.

    Now onto museums. I'm very proud that this government was one of the only governments that did not touch museums during a very difficult global recession. So thank you for asking the question because we are very proud of our museums. They are about our Canadian history and our identity. We have in fact invested $142 million more since 2006 into our national museums. We value the stories they tell. We value the collections they house. We have also created two new national museums, including one in my home province, in my home city in fact across the river from my riding, the Human Rights Museum, and of course, we also have in Halifax Pier 21, the museum that will talk about immigration and celebrate the very important immigration aspects.

    It was Canadian Museums Day just the other day. I met with a number of people in the field of museums. They're very pleased with some of the changes this government has put forward, including the investments we've made. In particular, they were very happy that we changed the travelling exhibitions program. There was a time under other governments where if a museum wanted to share exhibits, if they wanted to bring other exhibits into their museum, it could only be done if the exhibits went out of province. We have changed that recently—

    Thank you, Minister.

    —so that we can actually share them within province.

    Thank you, Minister.

    We're going to move to our last questioner.

    Mr. Dykstra for five minutes.

    Thank you, Chair.

    Thank you, Minister, for appearing this morning. I noticed that when Ms. Swords opened her purse there was a hint of green. I know we're both Brock alumni but I do have to congratulate you. Of course, I sit on the Hamilton Tiger-Cats side and we know that you're a big Saskatchewan Roughriders fan. So congratulations, begrudgingly, for the big win on Sunday.

    Minister, I wanted to take the same tack as Mr. Richards and return specifically to the estimates. There's a lot of what I think is astounding and great work coming out of the transfers that are happening. I look at the following, for example:

     I know you spoke a little bit about some of the investments that we've made in music. Perhaps you could speak to some of the investments we're making here and what this investment will actually do for the province of Quebec.

    Thank you very much for the question.

    You started off with green and I have to jump in. I don't know if you know this, Mr. Dykstra, but I was born in Saskatoon.

    Okay.

    And so, Riders, I'm very proud that they were able to pull it off.

    So I guess on the record then you're saying that the Riders are your favourite team.

    I have my two feet planted squarely in two provinces, so if the Bombers are playing, I'm with the Bombers, and if the Riders are playing, I'm with the Riders. And at the Banjo Bowl I keep my mouth shut.

    Back to the estimates. In fact, Zones Théâtrales is a very important program. I come from St. Boniface where we as a Conservative government have contributed to creating a new theatre. Cercle Molière is a new theatre that the Conservative government helped to build in my riding and that theatre takes advantage of participating in Zones Théâtrales.

    I know how important it is not only to my community but also to the Fransaskois, to the Franco-Albertans, to all of our francophones and francophiles across the country, because through theatre of course we get to express ourselves in a way that it's hard to do in other settings.

    Of course, expressing ourselves in arts and culture is done through theatre, music, books, film, television, but Zones Théâtrales allows theatre groups to get together and do this expression and share in the expression and learn from one another.

    Quebec is well represented. They have some of the most amazing artists in theatre. I look forward to seeing some of the plays that will take place and of course I also made the announcement at Zones Théâtrales of some more funding agreements with this government. I'll leave it there but it's a great program. Thanks for asking about it.

    One of the other transfers to the other organizations was from Canadian Heritage to the Council for the Arts, to support cooperation projects for French-language theatre as well as to ensure Canada's participation in meetings of the Commission internationale du théâtre francophone. I appreciate your response on that, because it is obvious we're focused there.

    One of the other transfers that we've made—and it speaks a little bit to the original point we were talking about in terms of football, Mr. Chair—is the amount that Canadian Heritage transferred to the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council for research funding to inform policy development related to sport participation. We're doing a study looking at the upcoming Sochi Olympics and our involvement and investment there.

    I wonder if you could, perhaps, comment on how this originated and what the purpose of this transfer will mean to those who are researching our participation in sport?

    I'm so pleased you mentioned your study, because I've heard wonderful things. I've heard about the testimony by Elizabeth Manley and some of these world-class Canadian athletes. I look forward to seeing the rest of the testimony.

    This government has been steadfast in its support of sport. Along with sport, research must be done. Research is imperative to ensuring the safety and the wellness of the athletes who participate. It's important because we need to be able to train them in an effective manner—not only the athletes but also the coaches who participate. We are presently getting ready for the Sochi Olympics, which will, again, be an opportunity for us to showcase the best of Canadian athletes. We invest heavily in our athletes because we are proud of them and the recognition they bring to Canada.

    This is a fund that we support very much. It will allow us to do essential research. Things like concussions are, of course, in the news continually. The ability to actually do some research there is important and I'm glad that Health Canada is also embarking...to ensure that we have what we need to protect our athletes.

    Thank you for asking about it.

    Thank you very much, Minister. I'd like to thank you for coming today.

    We're going to have to move on to the votes.

    Mr. Chair, I want to raise a point of privilege.

    Okay, Mr. Lapointe, be quick.

    It doesn't take that much time to vote.

    I have a minute question. We don't have the honourable minister very often. It's very specific, and I just need 30 seconds.

    I'm sorry we have to move on Mr. Lapointe.

    Thank you very much, Minister.

    We will break briefly.

    If members could come to the table please, we only have a few moments to go through the actual votes.

    Members, I'm going to commence the voting on the supplementary estimates.

    Could everyone return to the table, please?

    (Votes 1b, 5b, 10b, 50b, 65b and 70b agreed to on division)

    The Chair: Shall I report the supplementary estimates to the House?

    Some hon. members: Agreed.

    An hon. member: On division....

    The Chair: Thank you very much.

    We will suspend briefly to bring in our next panel.

    Thank you very much.

    We will reconvene this meeting number six of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage.

    Concerning our study on the 2014 Sochi Olympic and Paralympic winter games, we are going to hear from the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages, Graham Fraser, the commissioner, and Carsten Quell, the director of policy and research from the policy and communications branch.

    From the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport we have Doug MacQuarrie, the chief operating officer, and Jeremy Luke, director of the Canadian anti-doping program and business operations.

    Also, from the Canadian Tire Corporation, we have Duncan Fulton.

    We will hear from each of our representatives for eight minutes.

    We will start with Mr. Fraser.

    Mr. Chair, members of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage, good morning, bonjour.

    I appreciate this opportunity to address the committee on a topic of great interest to all Canadians. Like you, I have certain concerns regarding the upcoming Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games in Sochi.

    The Olympic Games are always an extraordinary opportunity for Canadians to join together and feel an immense sense of pride in our athletes.

    Sporting success on the world stage is never a random occurrence. Rather, success is the result of sacrifices and preparation made over many years by our athletes and their families, our coaches and our sport associations—with the support of federal institutions like Canadian Heritage, as well as the private sector.

    For our winter athletes to excel, as they did in Vancouver with 14 gold medals—the most of any country at the 2010 Olympic Winter Games, and the most ever for Canada—their focus must be rigid, their training intensive and their performance second to none.

    Canadians have always been, and continue to be, inspired by our athletes' Olympic success. As Commissioner of Official Languages, I can take that one step further: I have also been singularly impressed at how bilingual our athletes are. It is amazing to hear an athlete, still panting after winning a medal, give interviews in both official languages.

    Our official languages were a key element in the planning and delivery of the Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games almost four years ago here on Canadian soil. My office's collaborative work with federal institutions and the organizing committee of the Vancouver Games led to a very successful event presented in both official languages, with the unfortunate exception of the cultural component of the opening ceremonies.

    The invaluable lessons learned from this experience resulted in the production of a practical guide to promoting official languages for any organization hosting a major sporting event in Canada. We have copies here. This past summer, Canada Games organizers in Sherbrooke used the guide and were clearly successful in promoting both official languages during this national event— proof that we have made great strides.

    As far as the Sochi Olympics are concerned, the challenges are quite different. In 2010, it was not until the eve of the games that a decisions was made, making it possible for Canadians across the country to watch television coverage in French on CPAC. We are in a much better position this time around.

    I was pleased to hear last year that CBC/Radio-Canada had won the contract to cover the games, ensuring that Canadians will have access to coverage in both official languages. I personally congratulated Hubert Lacroix for this accomplishment.

    As you know, English and French are the official languages of the International Olympic Committee. Earlier this year, the Francophonie named historian and Russia specialist Hélène Carrère d'Encausse as Grand Témoin de la Francophonie for the Olympic and Paralympic Games in Sochi. It will be her job to observe, both before and during the games, how successful Russia has been in fulfilling the requirements of the International Olympic Committee. I wish Russia the very best in meeting the challenges of hosting a successful event.

    Of course, commenting on the country's ability to provide services in English and French is well beyond my mandate. The one area of concern for Canada will be to ensure that our athletes can obtain the services they require in both official languages from their sport associations and from the Canadian Olympic Committee. My expectation is that this will be the case.

    When our athletes are many miles from home and challenging themselves in highly competitive, suspense-filled environments, perhaps the most challenging moments of their lives, we must ensure that they have the information they need, the support they require, and the last-minute coaching advice they can count on.

    Although some of our sport associations have had language challenges in the past, challenges that were documented in a study by my predecessor, Dyane Adam, I've had no indication that there are particular issues for any of our athletes set to compete in Sochi.

    I think that the Olympic and Paralympic Games are a remarkable opportunity for all Canadians, no matter what language we speak, to celebrate not only our athletic achievements but also the linguistic duality that enriches our country in so many ways. I look forward to watching the performance of our tremendous athletes as they make Canada proud in Sochi.

    In closing, Mr. Chair, I thank you and your colleagues for the opportunity to appear before the committee this morning.

    I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.

    Thank you very much, Mr. Fraser.

    We'll now move to Mr. MacQuarrie.

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    Members and associate members of the standing committee, ladies and gentlemen, bonjour, good morning.

    My name is Doug MacQuarrie. I am the Chief Operating Officer of the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport.

    With me is my colleague, Mr. Jeremy Luke, director of the Canadian anti-doping program and business development. Jeremy also served for four years as director of anti-doping for the Vancouver Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games.

    On behalf of the centre, I'd like to thank you for the opportunity to describe our efforts to support the Canadian Olympic and Paralympic teams as they prepare for the Sochi games.

    The CCES works to protect the integrity of sport. We collaborate with others to activate a values-based and principle-driven sport system throughout Canada, and we advocate for sport in Canada that is fair, safe, and open to everyone.

    I know you would agree that clean sport is an objective we all share. None of us wants to see a Canadian athlete receive a medal on a Friday, only to see it taken away on Saturday. We lived that once. We do not want to live it again.

    We believe most elite Canadian athletes train and compete clean, but they, as well as most Canadians, look to the government and the sport community to maintain a level playing field, to stay abreast of doping tactics, and to stop the cheaters.

    In the time available, we'd like to cover five key areas: one, recent events that are shaping our anti-doping work; two, contemporary approaches to tackling the doping problem with Canada's high-performance athletes; three, specific CCES actions related to this committee's interest in the Sochi games; four, some doping risks facing Canadian Olympians and Paralympians; and five, opportunities for enhanced federal government involvement.

    Concerning recent events shaping our work, since the fall of 2012, the Lance Armstrong scandal has exposed the truth about the most sophisticated doping conspiracy ever seen in sport. Its tentacles and further revelations by other professional cyclists continue to unfold. Several Canadians have been implicated, such as Michael Barry and Ryder Hesjedal.

    Meanwhile, the Australian Crime Commission carried out a 12-month investigation and produced a detailed report titled Organized Crime and Drug Use in Sport. The report reveals widespread doping, match-fixing, and the growing involvement of organized crime throughout many levels of sport in Australia.

    Closer to home, Canada Border Services Agency data reveal that steroids are the second most-often confiscated drug at our borders. At the Quebec border, steroids are the number one most confiscated drug. Our own research with Canadian elite athletes suggests that 16% have personal knowledge of doping. These facts prompted us to reach out to the Minister of State for Sport, the Canadian Olympic Committee and the Canadian Paralympic Committee for additional financial support to help bolster our national anti-doping efforts. On November 5 , the Government of Canada, and for the first time ever, the Canadian Olympic Committee, and the Canadian Paralympic Committee came together and agreed to provide an additional $800,000 to be invested in the Canadian anti-doping program. The amount represents a one-time increment of $400,000 from the Government of Canada, and another $400,000 spread over the next three years from the COC, and a one-time contribution of $10,000 from the CPC.

    As for our contemporary anti-doping efforts, the additional funding will enable us to increase our work in a number of key areas. We will increase our anti-doping education efforts to ensure all athletes fully understand their rights and responsibilities under the World Anti-Doping Code.

    We will expand our intelligence-gathering initiatives and conduct more investigations into the supply and distribution side of doping in Canada. We will include more athletes in our whereabouts program, a system that allows us to locate athletes throughout the year and around the clock for unannounced testing.

    We will increase our athlete biological passport program, a system that develops a unique blood profile for each athlete, enabling the monitoring of blood for deviations that signal doping. We will be carrying out more testing in urine and blood—not more random testing, but more tests guided by the intelligence we gather.

    We gather information from many different sources and we are already seeing results from a newly launched anonymous report-doping hotlline. This tool allows athletes, coaches, training personnel and others to share sensitive information they may have about doping.

    With the above approach we can test the right athlete, at the right place, at the right time, for the right substance.

    On our specific actions related to the Sochi games, the CCES continues to play an important role in assisting the Canadian teams to prepare for Sochi. We maintain close contact with and provide regular briefs to the chief medical officer and others with the COC and CPC with respect to Olympic and Paralympic anti-doping programs.

    Our e-learning platform is available to all athletes and support personnel with specific information regarding the IOC and IPC anti-doping rules. Our on-line drug reference database is available to help athletes know what is permitted and what is not. Our athlete services team is available to assist athletes who require a therapeutic use exemption, or have other anti-doping-related questions.

    We have exchanged information with the COC and are confident that their tangible efforts to keep Canadian athletes safe and secure while in Russia are on target. We will ensure each Olympic and Paralympic athlete is tested at least once in the four months immediately preceding both games.

    Finally, during both games, CCES staff will be available remotely to help the COC and the CPC staff to navigate the anti-doping rules and procedures.

    It should also be noted that the CCES has provided ongoing consulting to the Sochi organizing committee over the past two years, based on our experiences in Vancouver. As such, we have influenced the very nature of the Sochi anti-doping program. With these new and expanded initiatives in place, we can be more confident that athletes representing us are clean.

     Regardless of these important preparations, there will continue to be doping risks to our athletes due to ongoing concerns, such as supplement contamination, which continues to be a very significant risk. Athletes who consume supplements—and our research suggests a majority do—face a real risk of inadvertent doping due to limited federal regulation and lax industry standards. Regrettably, we experience a dearth of cooperation from Canadian law enforcement. This is largely due to an overly restrictive regulatory environment and scarce resources. For example, none of the intelligence gathered at our borders related to the confiscation of steroids is being shared with our organization.

    Finally, for a small window of time, NHL hockey players don a Canadian jersey and compete for the country. When they do, they leave their relatively lax and insular environment insofar as anti-doping regulations are concerned, and enter a much more restrictive and highly regulated anti-doping environment, both during the pre-games and the games period.

    Can we guarantee that a Canadian athlete won't get caught doping at a major international competition in the future? No, we can't, but if it should happen, we know we're doing everything we can to prevent it, notwithstanding the risks.

    While we are focused on preparing the athletes for the Sochi games, let's not forget that once the flame is extinguished and our athletes come home, our work in anti-doping continues and our athletes' desire for clean sport remains. World championships and other major games occur in most sports on an annual basis, therefore, our investment in clean sport must be sustainable.

    Canada has demonstrated a commitment to eradicate doping in sport. In 2005, the federal government became the second signatory to the UNESCO International Convention against Doping in Sport. This convention entered into force in 2007. The need to back our commitment with continued, and even increased, action has never been greater. We are highly regarded globally in the fight against doping, and Canada has a tremendous opportunity to lead other nations toward more rigorous anti-doping programs.

    Mr. MacQuarrie, I'm going to have to cut you off there, but you will have an opportunity to expand on this in the questioning.

    Thank you.

    We're going to move now to Mr. Fulton for up to eight minutes.

    Thanks very much.

    I thought I'd use my time this morning to give you a few views on why the private sector, Canadian Tire in particular, has an interest in Sochi and Canada's performance on the world stage.

    Private sector companies align themselves with sports, in this case the Olympics, generally for two reasons. One is brand for commercial reasons, to elevate your brand, because you're tying yourself to a great symbol like the Olympics and some of our greatest athletes. The other reason is out of a sense of greater social responsibility, to give back to communities and invest in sports, because it's core to your DNA.

    Certainly in our case, for 90 years we've been investing in communities in sport. We today spend more than $40 million a year in communities in sport. For us, associating ourselves with the Olympics and the Paralympics and the Special Olympics, which is a relationship we're forming now, is just a natural thing for us to do.

    Our view on the ability for Canada to succeed in Sochi or at any world venue is not necessarily the year or the months before the competition; it's the journey from the playground to the podium. It's about getting kids involved at a very early age in sport, getting them excited and inspired about the power of sport, and helping them understand the importance of living healthy and active lives.

    At a playground level, we are big supporters of Hockey Canada, Soccer Canada, Skate Canada, Alpine Canada, and thousands of community sport programs. We just announced last week, with 60 partners, a national movement to compel our provinces to inject an hour a day of activity into schools, recognizing that 88% of Canadian parents are extremely concerned that their kids are not active today or nowhere near as active as any of us were as kids. In fact, we have a fairly exciting announcement next week in one of the provinces that will be among the first in the country to commit to getting kids in their province active for an hour a day at school.

    We obviously use athletes to help inspire kids to live healthy and active lives. We have relationships with Sidney Crosby, Jonathan Toews, Charles Hamelin, Christine Sinclair, Mark McMorris in snowboard, and Rosie MacLennan. She actually works for us at Canadian Tire two days a week, and is gaining some real-life job experience.

    Mark's Work Wearhouse, which is one of our business divisions, is getting heavily involved in community coaching. Sport Chek, another one of our divisions, is increasingly getting involved at the high school and university levels.

    At an elite level, we support major organizations that are critical to things like Sochi for their success: the Canada Games, B2ten. We fund the Olympic committee, the Paralympic committee. We direct money to Own the Podium.

    I will say, just as an editorial comment, that we need to do a better job as a country of celebrating our athletes and celebrating the success of the investments that the government makes. The government's putting hundreds of millions of dollars against athletes and their performance—in the journey to Sochi, in this case.

    Canadian athletes have won more than 50 medals on the world stage this year, but we don't hear about it at all, right?

    These are world events where, because of the funding of the Government of Canada, through Own the Podium and others, our athletes are succeeding. But we don't put a big enough spotlight on their success, so Canadians only care, once every two or four years, how many medals we get.

    I recognize that it's tough for the government to spend money marketing the success of those sport figures. It's tough for Own the Podium to take money away from athletes to market that success, which is why I think the private sector has a role in doing that for others. Certainly our objective for the next eight years as a partner of the Canadian Olympic Committee is to elevate and make heroes out of the athletes that you and many others are funding.

    In Sochi in particular, we've invested against approximately 10 athletes. They're going to be featured in all of our advertising. In fact for Sport Chek, every single ad we do for Sport Chek for the next eight years will feature amateur athletes just to elevate them and make heroes out of them to help inspire other people.

    For the friends and families of athletes in Sochi, we helped fund Canada Olympic House in Sochi to make sure they have a place to come to celebrate the athletes and their lives.

    In terms of promoting patriotism in stores, we have a number of merchandise lines that are out there right now. We have a new Adidas line of high-performance gear at Sport Chek and a number of Olympic-branded things at Canadian Tire. Certainly the royalties all go to the Canadian Olympic Committee.

    I would suggest that, as we look to the contributing factors to success on the podium, we bear in mind that it is not so much what happened last year or this year. As a country, if we want to be successful on the world stage, we need to start investing in kids and start inspiring them to live healthy and active lives. This is a major issue compared with where we were 10 or 20 years ago. We view our role as contributing everything from the playground to the podium.

    Those are my comments, Mr. Chair. I'd be happy to take questions.

    Thank you very much, Mr. Fulton.

    Mr. Hillyer.

    Thank you, everyone, for coming today.

    I'd like to start talking with Mr. Fulton. We've already met with a lot of organizations for this study. Many of the organizations are government funded, but most of them can't survive on government funding alone. So I'm happy that you've come. One of the questions I've been asking is, besides government funding, what can government do to promote sport in general? What can government do to help the elite athletes in the country? How can we help to get people ready for the Olympics and to have more success once they get there?

    At a provincial level, the role of government is to inject more activity through the entire school system—to encourage kids all the way from K to 12 to be active. The average right now is about 20 minutes three times a week, which means we're not teaching kids good habits for healthy and lifelong living.

    At a federal level, from a private-sector point of view, it seems that the way the sport community treats elite athletes doesn't make sense. There are so many tiny little organizations that are self-run, self-organized. I understand how it got there. There's not a lot of overarching coordination inside the sport community.

    From a government perspective, you start with a huge amount of money, hundreds of millions of dollars. Then it gets dispersed—a million here, and a million there. By the time it's dispersed in 120 places, it would be surprising if the sum of the parts was as powerful as the total amount of money put against it.

    As a relative newcomer to the elite part of sport, it's hard to get your head around all the different organizations. You can sponsor the Olympic committee, but you have no right to deal with any of the sports. You can sponsor the sports associations, but you're not allowed to feature any athletes. You can sponsor the athletes, but you're restricted by deals they have with various brands like Nike, Adidas, Under Armour, and others. In order to do anything meaningful, you end up having to go all the way up and down and side to side.

    There's no doubt there's need for investment. I have no doubt that more investment will make us more successful on the world stage. But I don't know how you get around what I politely say is the disorganization of the sports community in Canada.

    Thank you.

    What can we do, and what can Canadian Tire do? There are some private corporations that invest in sports for the two reasons you mentioned, but probably not as many as should or could. What can we do to encourage other private corporations to get involved? Do you think that Canadian Tire can inspire and lead other corporations to get involved as well?

    In the private sector, there has to be a ROI for your investment. Again, you're either spending the money because you think it's the right thing to do, it's what your customers expect you to do, and it's what you have a moral authority to do, or you're investing the money to get an economic payback, that by tying yourself closer to a sport, it's going to elevate your brand and give you more resonance with your customers. Each organization has to identify the cause it aligns with. There are lots of organizations that align with causes other than sport, and I think that's fine, because they make their business decision to do so.

    There's no doubt; I know organizations that would love to get more involved in sport. It does get complex. If you have a million dollars to invest, you're going to be extremely limited in what you can do with that, given all the different structures and layers inside the organization and the rights you have to buy in order to activate anything. So unless you have a lot of money, or unless you're extremely focused on a single sport and a single individual, then it's hard to invest in sports, which I think more people should be doing.

    Thank you.

    Mr. MacQuarrie, I'm not sure if you're aware that the New York Times a couple of days ago had an article that the Sochi games doping lab was being threatened with suspension. Are you aware of that?

    I'm aware of the issue but not the article, yes.

    Can you talk about that issue, how big a deal it is, and how worried we should be about it?

    I'd actually ask my colleague, Jeremy Luke, with the chair's permission, to respond. He has more intimate and direct knowledge about that relationship.

    Thank you.

    Thank you very much, and good morning everyone.

    The issue is of concern. To provide some context for the members here, the World Anti-Doping Agency has the responsibility of certifying laboratories that analyze samples for anti-doping purposes. There are roughly 35 laboratories around the world that the World Anti-Doping Agency certifies.

    So the issue in Sochi is certainly a concern from the perspective of the laboratory perhaps not operating at the level that it should, but I think we should be comforted by the World Anti-Doping Agency doing the work it ought to be doing in regulation, certification, and monitoring of those laboratories, and take comfort that if the issue is serious, the World Anti-Doping Agency will revoke the certification of the laboratory and it will move to a different laboratory in a different country.

    Thank you.

    We'll move to M. Dubé pour sept minutes.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    My thanks to the witnesses for joining us today.

    My questions mostly go to the witness from the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport. He brought up some quite interesting points.

    If steroids are among the drugs most commonly seized on the Quebec border, I cannot believe that $800,000 is enough to solve the problem. Is that enough? It is really the number one problem on the Quebec border. That is what you told us. It seems to me that the amount is not enough, given the scope of the problem.

    Clearly, additional resources or additional incentives for others to invest would be beneficial.

    The data are Canada Border Services Agency data, not ours, and the reports are monitored fairly closely. Additional resources of $800,000 present a good start. We believe that if this funding were sustainable, as opposed to one-time incremental, we would be able to enhance our activities on intelligence, on investigation, and on the strategies to stem the tide.

    Those are the types of approaches that other leading nations in anti-doping are taking, through collaboration with law enforcement, through collaboration with their border services agencies, and through the sharing of information that allows for a much more effective use of the scarce resources in an agency such as ours. So without access to any of the information that exists, we're left to use these resources as best we can.

    It is interesting that you used the word “collaboration” more than once. Would it not be desirable for the Minister of State for Sport to have better collaboration with his colleagues in other departments, such as the Department of Public Safety or the Department of Health? The idea would be to find solutions and use the resources at their disposal to bring about improvements that are necessary, in your opinion.

    The minister and his colleagues I believe do collaborate to the extent possible. I think resources are only one part of the issue.

    Another limitation in this area of work is the regulatory and legislative environment that prevents the sharing of information even between law enforcement organizations within the country. So CBSA is not able to share information as freely as it might with the RCMP, and the RCMP with Justice, and others. It's not only a resource issue. We believe that we need to look at the legislation and the regulations that would enable the amalgamation of the available data and for the agencies that are involved in the battle to benefit from all of that information, as opposed to only the information within their own agency.

    It is mostly a matter of information.

    Earlier, you ran out of time when you were discussing solutions that would improve the situation. Apart from information and resources, are there other solutions that we as lawmakers could look at to improve the situation?

    We believe there are these opportunities to better coordinate and collaborate between the criminal and civil systems. We believe that enhanced regulations and quality assurance in problematic sectors would be beneficial. So in the area of supplements, for example, they operate within the natural health products area of Canadian regulation, and it's very permissive. So supplements present a huge issue for our elite athletes.

    Workplace health and safety regulations in pro leagues would be very beneficial. That would ensure compliance with health and safety issues, of which we believe anti-doping is a very clear health issue.

    Obviously we've mentioned enhanced and sustained financial support.

    Then finally, with reference to our friend from Canadian Tire, we've issued a challenge on the world stage to the corporate sector at the recent international conference on anti-doping to get involved in supporting anti-doping efforts. We believe the corporate sector throughout the world has benefited from elite and high-performance athletes, but they have, to date, not invested in keeping those athletes clean. So the resulting UCI scandal and Lance Armstrong scenario are apparent and corporations have actually left a lot of the funding.

    Mr. MacQuarrie, I'm going to have to interrupt you because my time is winding down.

     There's just one other topic I wanted to mention. I know you're here to talk in particular about doping, but I know your organization does work to put forward the values of sports as being open and such. You talked about briefings with athletes and everything. I was just wondering if your organization had any thoughts on some of the concerns about athlete safety in Russia, given the anti-gay laws that have obviously been a great cause for concern for a lot of folks here in Canada. Do you have any quick thoughts on that before we wrap up?

    Well, we are an agency that is committed to these upstream values and principles in sport. The issue you raised we have discussed with the Canadian Olympic Committee, and they are actively involved with respect to the experience that Canadian athletes will have at the Sochi games. They've assured us, and they're assuring their athletes, that their safety, their involvement in the games, and so on will be unaffected and that they will be well served by the preparatory work that COC has done.

    Thank you very much.

    Mr. Dion, you have seven minutes.

    Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

    Thank you, gentlemen, for being with us today.

    My first question is just about the Olympic Winter Games in Sochi, which will take place in a few weeks.

    Would you like our report to contain any particular recommendation to the government on something that you see as vital for final preparation? Or would you say that you are ready and that there is nothing specific to ask the government for?

    Perhaps we could start with Mr. Fraser.

    I would like a recommendation to the effect that athletes be guaranteed the services they need on site in the official language of their choice, whether it is for training or for other needs.

    I would like to give you an example. When the Royal 22^nd Regiment was in Afghanistan, there were never any complaints because the entire infrastructure from Valcartier had been moved to Kandahar in support of the soldiers. I hope that there will be support and all the infrastructure necessary for the athletes and their families and coaches in the official language of their choice when they are in a foreign country that is hosting the Olympic Games.

    So you would like the bilingual infrastructure that we have here to be moved to Russia, to the extent possible.

    To the extent possible, yes, please. That is what I would like.

    Okay.

    Mr. MacQuarrie, for Sochi in a couple of weeks from now, is there something, an ultimate request, that you would address to the government through us?

    Well, the activities we're involved in are going to play out the way they're currently engaged. I would suggest that it would be of great value to have a commitment in your report to investigate and explore this complex legislative environment that prevents the access and sharing of information. The commitment won't affect Sochi, for sure, but it would definitely affect the Pan Am Games coming up, the Rio Olympics, and the world championships in other events that were mentioned earlier.

    Can you be more explicit about the legislative problems you just mentioned?

    We have learned from other countries that their legislatures have enacted regulations and changed laws to enable the sharing of information. They have empowered their anti-doping agencies with certain powers and authority, in Australia, for example, to compel individuals to come and testify and provide information. This is a monumental move in the world of anti-doping, which exists in civil law under contract as opposed to the legislative environment that would be affected through federal regulation.

    You would like to see Canada update its legislative framework?

    We have encouraged Sport Canada to work with its counterpart agencies to create the legislative environment whereby this information would help the efforts we undertake with respect to clean sport.

    Is there something you might feed to the committee about this specific problem that we may study?

    Yes, certainly. We would be happy to provide additional information.

    Thank you very much.

    Mr. Fulton, for Sochi, do you have any recommendations that you would like us to carry to the government?

     I think directly for Sochi, Mr. Dion, probably not. For future Olympics, I think that if you have an objective to unlock more private sector funding to support athletes in the sport community, then you need to make it more compelling for the private sector to do that.

     You'll make it more compelling if the athletes are celebrated more and have bigger brands. If the brands of the athletes ride, it's easier for a lot of companies that otherwise wouldn't think of it to align themselves with those athletes and invest money against the athletes in those sports.

    The Government of Canada is spending hundreds of millions of dollars investing against athletes and, respectfully, is not telling the story of the success of those athletes in between Olympic Games. There's almost no marketing effort at all on the dozens and dozens and dozens of successes of these athletes all the way through. I think that if some small reasonable investments were made to do that, to raise the profile of those athletes, the profile of those athletes in those sports would attract a lot more private sector attention, and you would unlock a lot more private sector funding.

    Right now, there are hundreds of millions of dollars going to good use, and Canadians don't know it's going to good use, and the private sector doesn't often see it.

    So there's a lack of communication about that?

    I think there's a lack of marketing of the success of the athletes. Personally, if I spent a few hundred million dollars to invest in athletes and they did a great job and no one knew about it other than every two or four years at an Olympics, I don't think I'd be maximizing my investment by not telling the success stories our athletes have. Fifty medals on a world stage this year is an exceptional accomplishment, and no one knows about it. The private sector doesn't know. I don't think Canadians know.

    It's too late for Sochi, but unlocking private sector funding towards future events is going to be tied to celebrating the successes that, frankly, your funding is generating.

    Do you have inspiration that we may find from other countries that are more successful at advertising the success of their athletes? I would say the United States.

    Yes, the U.S. probably does a bit better job of telling those stories. Canada's pretty good at hockey. There's a great hockey culture here. But, you know, there are incredible things happening across two dozen different sports that people don't even know about. You could unlock a lot of value creation for the entire sport industry in Canada if you just made it easier for the private sector to see the successes you already have in front of you.

    Okay. Thank you both very much.

    We're going to move to Mr. Boughen, for seven minutes.

    Thank you, Chair.

    Let me add my voice of welcome to the panel. Thank you for sharing your day with us. We appreciate your involvement and your expertise.

    I have a couple of questions.

    First of all, Doug, let me run this by you. If Canada were to legalize marijuana and one of the Olympians tested positive for marijuana, would the other countries disqualify him or her from competition, given whatever the current situation is on marijuana?

    The anti-doping rules are governed by the World Anti-Doping Code. It's a uniform and global set of requirements. Currently, cannabis is a prohibited substance in competition. It has a specific threshold associated with the tests we conduct. An athlete in competition found to have cannabis present in their system above that threshold would be subject to an anti-doping rule violation regardless of the legal and civil environment of whatever country they come from.

    Okay, thank you.

    Jeremy, you've been working on this for a long time. Maybe you can share with us how athletes get started on doping. We're talking playground to podium. Now, little kids don't get doped. Maybe they get a popsicle at the end of the day for a reward, but they're not into doping. But somewhere between that playground and that podium they get hooked on something or other. Can you tell us how that happens?

    If I look back on my own time in athletics, which was fairly extensive, it would never have entered my mind, or the minds of any of the people I competed with, to get into the doping bag. That was totally not doable, not viable. You would be looked at as kind of a nut case if you even smoked. What's happened? How has this happened?

    If we don't know how it happens, we'll never change it. Putting together—I don't know—35 labs does not change that landscape. It just tells you there are 35 labs busy checking folks who are hooked on dope.

    Thanks for your question. It's a complex problem to understand.

    The experience we've had, in speaking with athletes who have chosen to go down the road of doping, is that it has been for differing reasons. If you think about cycling as an example and some of the experiences we've had in that, there are athletes who shared the same view you have as far as never thinking they would do it until they encountered a culture within that sport at the professional level and made the decision at that point in time to go down that route.

    Certainly the work we do in anti-doping on the protection of side of things and the enforcement side of things is important and it's effective to a certain degree. But I think the key message is it comes down to values and the values within our sport system in order to create an environment so the young athletes at the playground level, as they move up, can withstand the pressures that may exist to dope, based on the proper values they've experienced in sport before getting to that level.

    Thank you.

    Graham, the Canada Games in Sherbrooke last summer had some hiccups. In your opinion was the Official Languages Act enforced in Sherbrooke? Was it evident that athletes had a choice? Can you talk to us about that a little bit?

    I was extremely impressed with the performance of the Canada Games in Sherbrooke. I attended the opening ceremonies. I visited a number of the sites, and one of the things that I felt was that it was a reflection of the amount of planning that had gone into the language component of the organization of the Games.

    There was somebody on the executive with that responsibility who told me that he had constantly referred to the manual that we had developed. There's a little tear out, a quick reference page in the middle, and he told me that it was pinned to the bulletin board in his office and that he worked carefully through establishing agreements, creating a structure, designing an effective plan and tracking progress, assembling the team, communicating with the public in both official languages, cultural activities, quality control, and all of those elements. From what I saw personally and from what we heard from the team who was there on the ground throughout the Games, reports were all very positive. I saw it as a real success.

    Thank you.

    I guess, Duncan, Canadian Tire has taken a very positive step in sponsorship and acknowledging athletes and their success. How do you think you might encourage other corporations to become involved in that sponsorship program when in fact it's not a sponsorship competition, it's a sponsorship program?

    Do you have any ideas about how you could go to other corporations and ask them to jump on board, tell them that there's something there for them at the end of the day? I mean, that something is people being more aware of what the athletes have done. As you've said, people aren't aware of which athletes have competed, or where they've competed in the past year, and their success.

    There's certainly a group of companies now, and you see them. It involves Bell, Air Canada, RBC, and BMW. There are a number that are supportive through the sport system.

    For companies that don't currently invest in sport, it's likely because there's not a natural link to their own brand or company, so it's not a natural place to invest. It would be hard to compel someone to invest if it didn't make any rational sense.

    That being said, there are lots of companies that have nothing to do with sport that invest in it and use it to tie to their brand. It's the same point as I made to Mr. Dion. The more that we can raise the profile of the different sports and the success of the athletes, and the more Canadians and private-sector companies' customers recognize those athletes and those sports, the more private sector money will flow to those sports and those athletes.

    Thank you very much.

    We're going to move to Monsieur Lapointe

    You have five minutes.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    Mr. Fraser, it is always very useful for us to have you here. Thank you for joining us.

    In the previous round of questions, you said that you “hoped”—and I am troubled by the verb “to hope”—that the infrastructure would be moved. I understand you to mean that, in a sense, you want French-language logistic and linguistic capabilities to be moved from Canada to Sochi, much like the support for francophones that was set up in Afghanistan for the Royal 22^nd Regiment.

    That was the metaphor I used.

    It was an analogy.

    I used it a little loosely.

    The verb “to hope” troubles me. Now that we are only a few weeks away from the Olympic Games, should Quebec and French-speaking athletes not be expecting rather than hoping? Should they not have guarantees and assurances that our francophone expertise will be available to them in Sochi?

    Let me be clear. I have no indication that such will not be the case. We have received no complaints. My predecessor Dyane Adam wrote quite a harsh report about some sport associations. Since that report, I feel that there has been a lot of improvement. In the past, there were some disputes about the lack of coaches capable of serving francophone athletes, but I heard nothing about that in Vancouver, for example, and I assume that it will be the case again in Sochi.

    But, in reply to Mr. Dion, I said that I thought that a recommendation to make sure that it is the case would be a good idea. Sometimes, with changes of leadership and direction in a sport association, the situation can change.

    If I understand you correctly, Mr. Fraser, it is something we should keep an eye on.

    I think so.

    It would also be interesting to look at the level of bilingualism among francophone athletes who just gave up, unless the services have improved so much that a francophone who speaks little English now receives adequate services. In my opinion, that is a relevant question.

    Exactly. As I said in my statement, I have always been impressed with the number of athletes, anglophone and francophone alike, who seem to be bilingual.

    They tend to be bilingual.

    Mr. MacQuarrie, let's talk about the investigation process that your service has set up. Suppose an athlete is suspected of doping through the Report Doping program; what processes are put in place when you get that information? What mechanisms are there to protect an athlete who is caught in a possible conflict by reporting abuse, doping or a poor dope-testing policy? How sure can we be that anonymity will be guaranteed and the athlete will be protected?

    We have created and maintain an investigation system. A manager of intelligence is available. We receive information on a confidential and anonymous basis with respect to any matters pertaining to doping, whether it's the use, distribution, or sale and trafficking of prohibited substances.

    Under the rules of the World Anti-Doping Code, there are eight types of anti-doping rule violations. One of them is what we call “presence”. That is when we get a human sample and we detect through an analytical process a substance in that sample, blood or urine. There are seven other types of anti-doping rule violation that deal with possession, trafficking, tampering, administration, evading, and so on.

    That's all very interesting, but could you be more specific? What happens when an athlete has to tell your services that he or she thinks there has been doping on their team? How does it work?

    Thank you for the clarification.

    We would receive the information and evaluate the nature of the tip. We would determine whether there are similar tips that we've received, or other sources of information, and we would check with respect to the data sets that we try to maintain around the testing, the actual work that we're doing in the area where the individual reports suspicion of doping.

    From there, we may change our testing behaviours. We may allocate more resources. We may try to collect additional information to substantiate the nature of the tip. In these non-analytical forms, ultimately in order to prove an anti-doping rule violation, we have to assert and advance a case. It's very similar to the criminal system, but it's done before an arbitrator. We collect and maintain the evidence chain and then advance a case to prove a violation.

    Thank you.

    We're going to move on to Mr. Richards, for five minutes.

    Thanks, Mr. Chair.

    I'll start with Mr. MacQuarrie, or the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport, whichever one of you would like to answer.

    I'd like to get an idea about how Canada's anti-doping program compares with similar programs in the rest of the world. It sounds as though we have a very stringent set of criteria and all the athletes are being closely monitored. Obviously, you want to see your athletes compete on a level playing field and I'm sure there are varying levels of anti-doping programs in different countries. I'm wanting to see where we sit. Is our bar up at the top, or are we somewhere in the middle of the pack? And what are we doing to encourage other countries to follow our example? What about those that are maybe not up to the same standard?

    In Canada, we certainly see ourselves as a world leader in the fight against doping in sport. We have a long history in this, dating back to the situation involving Ben Johnson and the Dubin inquiry. We recently celebrated our 20th anniversary. Many other countries are newer to this issue and have established their agencies over the past 10 years or so. We have a long history, which gives us a lot of experience.

    We've made significant attempts to try to help other countries build their anti-doping organizations, to ensure a level playing field throughout the world. In areas such as the Caribbean, Africa, and even Sochi, we've done consulting work, and we'll continue to do so. With respect to our anti-doping work being cutting-edge, one of our concerns has to do with the way we share information with law-enforcement. Organizations such as the U.K. Anti-Doping Agency and the Australian Anti-Doping Agency have much more sophisticated methods, which makes their programs more effective. This is of concern to us.

    My last point is in response to your question on what we're doing in the global fight against doping in sport. We work very actively with the World Anti-Doping Agency and have strongly encouraged them in their regulatory regime to ensure that other countries have sophisticated programs as well.

    Obviously, all Canadians are proud to know that our athletes are clean. We're trying to compete honestly and fairly, and we're still able to be very successful. That's something we all take pride in here in Canada.

    When our athletes go to Sochi, are they competing on a level playing field? Are there other nations that you feel aren't meeting that bar? I know that's a tough question to answer. Maybe it's not even a fair question, but I wanted your opinion on it.

    I think it's an appropriate question for sure. We attended the World Conference on Doping in Sport in South Africa earlier this month, which brought together all countries and international sport federations to talk about the issue of doping and what different countries are doing. We had an opportunity to make an intervention at that conference. One of the key points of that intervention was that we want to see the World Anti-Doping Agency exercise its authority to ensure that all countries are implementing the World Anti-Doping Code and have credible anti-doping programs. That's because of concerns in other countries where it's thought that those programs are perhaps not as appropriate as they need to be.

    Thank you very much. On behalf of the committee, I'd like to thank our witnesses for their contributions to our study.

    The meeting is adjourned.