LANG Committee Meeting

STANDING JOINT COMMITTEE ON OFFICIAL LANGUAGES

COMITÉ MIXTE PERMANENT DES LANGUES OFFICIELLES

EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Tuesday, March 17, 1998

• 1536

[Translation]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone (Mount Royal, Lib.)): The Standing Joint Committee on Official Languages will now begin its deliberations.

[English]

As our witness today, we have Mr. William Warren, president of the Canadian Olympic Association.

Prior to calling on Mr. Warren, I want to clarify the questioning period. It will be as agreed to at our first organizing committee. Seven minutes will be allocated for the first round to the Reform Party, followed by the Bloc Québécois, the Liberal Party, the Progressive Conservative Party, the New Democratic Party, and the Liberal Party. I will monitor the clock, and time will be called at seven minutes sharp.

The second round will consist of five minutes, and time will be allocated alternately between an opposition party and the government, starting with the official opposition.

[Translation]

So you understand our procedure? All right then.

Mr. Louis Plamondon (Richelieu, BQ): Point of order, Madam Chair.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Yes, Mr. Plamondon.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: I do not think this is the procedure we initially agreed upon. The second round starts off with the Reform Party, then goes to the Bloc Québécois—

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): No, Mr. Plamondon. On the second round, an opposition party gets five minutes, then the Liberal Party gets five minutes, then another opposition party gets five minutes, then it's back to the Liberal Party.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: So we'll alternate. That's fine.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Is that clear now?

Mr. Louis Plamondon: Yes, everything is fine.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Good, so we won't need to argue about it.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: No, we won't.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): I'm glad to hear it. Thank you.

[English]

We are very pleased to welcome Mr. William Warren. I want to point out that Heritage Canada has a contract with the Canadian Olympic Association, and that the rules under which the contractors deal with the Government of Canada are not subject to the Official Languages Act. I believe Mr. Warren will address that issue for us, and will bring a degree of clarity in that regard.

Mr. Warren, without further ado, we welcome you.

[Translation]

Welcome to the committee.

[English]

Mr. Bill Warren (President, Canadian Olympic Association): Thank you.

[Translation]

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Bill Warren. I am the president of the Canadian Olympic Association.

As Canada's national Olympics committee, the Canadian Olympic Association is responsible for all aspects of Canada's participation in the Olympic movement, including the participation of Canadian teams in the Olympic and Pan-American Games.

[English]

Allow me to explain the relationship between the Canadian Olympic Association and the Government of Canada, as referred to by the chair.

The Canadian Olympic Association is not an agency of the Government of Canada. Since 1996, the Canadian Olympic Association has not received grants from the Government of Canada. We are totally independent and we are totally autonomous. We are governed by a board of directors appointed by the individual sports on the program of the Olympic Games, the Olympic Winter Games, and the Pan-American Games, or elected by our membership, which is drawn at large from the community.

Because we believe it is important, our board of directors on November 20, 1994, adopted our policy statement on official languages. This was not done because we were required to do so by government; it was done because we believed it was important. And in the material that has been provided to you, we have attached a copy of our policy statement on official languages.

• 1540

In July 1996, on the eve of the Atlanta Olympic Games, the Canadian Olympic Association signed a commercial agreement with the Government of Canada. Pursuant to the terms of that commercial agreement, the Government of Canada received as a licensee the right to use the Olympic rings—the Olympic symbol—and to identify themselves with the Olympic team. As I said earlier, we are responsible for all of that in Canada, and we license to the Government of Canada the right to use our properties. In consideration of that right, the Government of Canada paid us compensation to the extent of $350,000 a year for each of the four years from 1996 through to the Olympic Games in the year 2000.

I am here today because the Government of Canada is one of our sponsors, and one of our sponsors has raised an issue about one of our programs. The program the issue was raised about is the team reception that took place in Nagano on February 6 of this year. The issue is the disproportionate use of the French language and the English language at that team reception.

First, let me explain to you what the team reception is all about. We had 154 athletes representing Canada at the Olympic Winter Games in Nagano. You must understand that they come from a number of different sports and a number of different disciplines. In the course of their competition, they have very little opportunity to meet with one another because the skiers are in Europe, the bobsledders are in the United States, the lugers are in Asia. The Olympic Games create a unique experience for these athletes to come together and to meet one another as members of the Olympic team. The first purpose of the team reception is to create the environment for them to do that, to honour them as representatives of our country at this international event, to entertain them, and to choose the person who will carry the flag the next day at the opening ceremonies of the games—and that, of course, is the highlight of the team reception.

At the conclusion of this event on February 6, we assessed whether or not those objectives that I have just described to you had been achieved. We were satisfied that they had been. The athletes seemed to have enjoyed the evening, seemed to have appreciated the honour, and seemed to have appreciated the entertainment. However, in the 24 hours that followed the team reception, it was made very clear to us that we had created a problem.

You should know what we did in order to address the problem that we believed we had created. The first thing we did was publish an open letter to the athletes, and that letter is included in the material that has been left with you. The relevant part of that letter says:

Some of you also shared your thoughts that last night's event did not sufficiently reflect Canada's linguistic duality. Certainly, this was not intentional on the part of the Canadian Olympic Association. To those of you who were offended, we apologize sincerely. We welcome your comments and suggestions on this or any other issue that may concern you. We intend to make every effort to ensure that this type of situation does not occur in the future.

I want to do two things today. First of all, I want you to be very much aware of the fact that within 24 hours, we extended an apology to those members of our team who were offended by the minimal or relatively minimal use of French during the team reception, and that the apology was sincere. But we also made a commitment to the members of our team, and that was to ensure that this type of thing might never happen again.

• 1545

Upon the publication of this letter, we had reason to believe that the damage that had been done at the team reception had been controlled. The escalation of the issue by the media, the public, and the politicians was something that was both unexpected and frankly disappointing.

What have we done to fulfil the promise to the athletes that we intend to make every effort to ensure that this situation does not occur in the future?

First, we gathered data about the team reception itself. That data has been provided to you within our fact sheet. We analysed the program of that evening. There were 15 items on the program. We played the program back in our own minds, with whatever information we had relative to the program presented that evening. We have given you the outline of the program.

We assessed how much of the program was in the French language and how much was in the English language. As a result of that assessment, we have come to the conclusion that 30% of the program was conducted in French and of course 70% in English.

Second, we reviewed our policy with respect to the use of official languages at events, and that policy has been provided to you as well. I direct your attention to the official languages policy that is included with our fact sheet. There is a heading—I think it's the third or fourth heading on the sheet—that mentions what we do at events and meetings in order to comply with the guidelines and the policy we have approved.

The second bullet point under the heading “Events and Meetings” says that presentations should be in both official languages at the Canadian Olympic gala—which is not this event—the Canadian Olympic Hall of Fame induction—which is not this event—the Canadian Olympic Youth Camp—which is also not this event—and the Olympic Athlete Career Centre seminars—which as well are not this event. Our policy unfortunately does not speak specifically to the team reception.

But the events that I have just enumerated are events that are very similar in nature to our team reception, and in our judgment, the team reception is an event which is governed by this aspect of the policy. And the policy is that while a complete translation of all presentations is not strictly required, both official languages should be used, as befits the composition of the audience.

That led us to yet another evaluation, an attempt on our part to determine the composition of the audience at the team reception. And I would encourage you to believe that the audience at the team reception, as far as we are concerned, consists of the athletes, because it is a reception for the team.

Our analysis is that of the 154 athletes on the Canadian team, 113 claim English as their mother tongue and 41 claim French as their mother tongue. So if you need me to help you with the arithmetic, 72% claim English as their mother tongue and 28% claim French as their mother tongue.

The next step in our process of review was to examine our internal procedures because, I think, irrespective of the numbers that I've shared with you, we believed that the program at the team reception had not measured up to our expectations.

The program consisted of some speeches, and one of the elements of the program was a performance by the masters of ceremonies. And historically, the normal course of action for the Canadian Olympic Association is to have two former athletes as our masters of ceremonies. At the winter games in Lillehammer they were Mark Tewksbury and Sylvie Frechette. In Atlanta they were Mark Tewksbury—again—and Nathalie Lambert.

• 1550

At the team reception in Nagano, our two emcees were not drawn from the sport world. So we reflected on that, and we said that's an element of the program we were somewhat disappointed in, not so much what the masters of ceremonies said or did, but the fact that they had not been drawn from the sport world.

The second element of the program that took a great deal of time was the video presentation. I happen to be from Calgary. We looked at the video presentation, and it was a presentation of well wishes from personalities in Canada. As I sat and looked at the video, I saw most of the personalities were from Toronto. It wasn't as meaningful to me as it might have been had the personalities been more regionally represented.

So we asked the question, how do we, as a national Olympic committee, have the power within our internal regulations to review the program for our team reception and determine whether all of the equities we look for have been addressed? And I can assure you we have those policies in place.

We did not have a dress rehearsal of this program where we could sit with stopwatches and do those sorts of things, but our staff was generally of the opinion, when they reviewed the agenda, that the equities we seek—the gender equities, the regional representation equities, and the language equities—had been addressed, so we approved that the program should proceed.

This past weekend, in furtherance of our commitment to the athletes that we were going to ensure this not happen again, our executive committee met in Toronto—it was a regular meeting of our executive committee—and one of the agenda items we dealt with was our policy on official languages. If the team reception was conducted in accordance with our policy and if our review was to the effect that it met our policy, and yet we still had created an issue, then maybe our policy is at fault. We attempted to interpret those words, “as befits the composition of the audience”, and we asked ourselves the question as to whether our policy is vague or open to interpretation, and whether the interpretation we placed on that policy is something we're comfortable with.

Our executive committee has, in debate, concluded that we need to work on our policy in order to remove the issue of interpretation and be absolutely clear in our own minds what we require of ourselves. That's a process that will result in a recommendation moving from our executive committee to our board. If the board accepts the recommendation, then that issue in our policy will be clarified.

We have done one final thing in terms of, again, fulfilling our commitment to the athletes that we will ensure these sorts of things don't happen again. Because I knew I was going to be here today and I was in Toronto on Sunday, I stayed over, and I had the opportunity to meet the executive directors of nine of the 13 sports that had athletes representing our country in Nagano. I spent an hour with each of them. The other four I wasn't able to arrange meetings with.

The purpose of my meetings with them was to attempt to determine from them, now that they have returned home, the extent to which this issue was of concern to them and to their athletes. Our responsibility is to create for the athletes an environment in the Olympic Village that will allow them to optimize their performance during the games. I wanted to know whether the sports themselves were as concerned as the public is over this issue.

I can report to you that from my discussions with the executive directors of these sports, I believe we did achieve the objectives of our team reception. I believe the athletes were honoured. I believe the athletes were entertained. I believe the athletes were charged with electricity, as they went out of the room, to do the very best they could do on the field of play.

I specifically asked the question as to whether any athletes had expressed any concern to any of the sports about the use of languages during the team reception. I believe one or two of the athletes raised the issue that we had not respected the duality of languages in this country. To them, I'm very sorry, and I have expressed my apologies.

• 1555

You may be interested, nevertheless, to understand that at the end of team reception in Lillehammer, which was, I think, a very elegant team reception, two athletes—and the number is coincidental, I'm not suggesting it's the same two athletes—came up to me and said they were offended by the team reception.

I said “I'm sorry, I thought it was wonderful. What is the source of your concern?” The source of their concern was that their sport had not been depicted on the video when all of the other winter sports that were on the agenda had been depicted. Their sport had been omitted. I apologized to them for that oversight.

I guess I'm getting used to extending apologies.

I say to you all very sincerely that to the extent that we did something that we ought not to have done, to the extent that as a result of oversight we perhaps failed to represent the duality of languages in this country, it was certainly not politically motivated. If anything, it was oversight. I can assure you—and I want you to understand this very truly—that there was not one athlete whose performance was adversely affected by the incident.

I'm here to answer any questions you might have.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Thank you, Mr. Warren.

We will start with Mr. Breitkreuz.

Mr. Cliff Breitkreuz (Yellowhead, Ref.): Thank you, Madam Chair.

Good afternoon, Mr. Warren, and thank you for making your presentation to this committee, even though I fail to grasp why you had to come before the committee, especially since there are no contractual obligations between the Government of Canada, in terms of official languages, and the Canadian Olympic Association.

I didn't come here to grill you on the language issue. I came to commend you, to commend you and the team and the organization, the Canadian Olympic organization, for bringing home the most medals ever, for making Canadians at home watching the whole Olympic series very proud that their athletes were doing as well as they did. Of course, I also commend all the volunteers involved in making this thing such a tremendous success internationally, and making Canadians proud.

I certainly do want to commend you for that. I kind of apologize that you have had to come all the way from Calgary to appear before this 29th or 30th most influential or important committee on the Hill.

Instead of you being somewhat hesitant as to the kind of reception you might have received, I think you yourself should be getting some kind of gold medal for doing the kind of work you did.

I understand the Canadian Olympic Association has a budget of about $15 million. I also understand that all of that, except for 2%, comes from the private sector or whatever kind of organizations across the country. Very little comes from the federal government and hence, I suppose, there being really no contractual obligations with the federal government. That's why you don't have to comply with that.

I think you also mentioned that one or two of the athletes who perhaps were unilingual French— Were they the ones who complained to you, or was it somebody else?

• 1600

Mr. Bill Warren: I don't know who it was.

It's an unfortunate statement about our sport, but there's always a concern that if somebody expresses an opinion that's contrary to the majority opinion, there might be some form of retribution. I certainly didn't want to put anybody into that sort of a position, so I'm dealing with statistics, not with names.

Mr. Cliff Breitkreuz: Yes, because the way we understand it as well, while there were forty-some francophone athletes, there were only two or three athletes who were unilingual French.

When you look at the percentage—

Mr. Denis Coderre (Bourassa, Lib.): So what?

Mr. Cliff Breitkreuz: Yes, absolutely—so what? Then why are we here? Why is Mr. Warren here? That's exactly the point.

Aside from that— You know I'm just going to keep on going here, Madame Chair.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Not that long.

Mr. Cliff Breitkreuz: I would also say to you, Mr. Warren, don't be intimidated by the language police that are sitting behind you, because official languages doesn't enter into the Canadian Olympic Association.

Were there by any chance some volunteers that did a heck of an outstanding job at Nagano, whether they're individuals or a group, that didn't probably receive the kind of recommendation and recognition they properly deserved?

Mr. Bill Warren: Probably that's true, but the volunteers don't go for the purpose of receiving recognition. The volunteers are people who really have tremendous respect for the athletes, and they go to create this environment of which I spoke that will allow the athletes to optimize their performance at the Olympic Games.

I think their reward is not recognition. Their reward is a smile from an athlete who is pleased with their personal best on that day.

Mr. Cliff Breitkreuz: Well, if you come across some, certainly you can pass along from this part of the opposition that we certainly appreciate all their endeavours.

I wanted to bring that up so that you could go back with some feeling or confidence that you were appreciated, before you get struck at by some of the rest of the members of this committee. Thank you very much.

Mr. Bill Warren: Thank you.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Thank you.

I want to welcome the Commissioner of Official Languages in our midst. Thank you very much for being here.

Mr. Plamondon.

[Translation]

Mr. Louis Plamondon: Thank you for coming here today, Mr. Warren. This meeting will give you a chance to appreciate some simultaneous translation, and might give you the idea of having the Association provide similar services.

Thank you for accepting our invitation. I will begin with a remark on your bylaws.

Your bylaws, which have been distributed here today, were adopted on November 20, 1994. They were amended somewhat later, at an assembly held on December 1, 1996, then approved here, at the ministerial level on January 16, 1997. Those bylaws contain a section on languages.

In Section 17, you state that the bylaws are published in both French and English. In Section 18, you set forth all the activities and services that must be available in French, and then there are two pages on the official languages policy.

For example, these bylaws clearly state that videos are produced in both official languages. You state that all activities must be in both official languages. This is not something you are being told by the government, or by anyone else; this is in your own bylaws, in your own charter.

Now here is what I find surprising: for years, your association has had bylaws stipulating that everything must be done in both official languages. Yet not a single one of your board members seems to be concerned about an activity as important as the official opening ceremony.

• 1605

These bylaws even stipulate that, in matters relating to organization of the games, any contract concluded between the COA and a Canadian organizing committee must include a commitment by the host city to provide services in both official languages.

In your bylaws, you also define other criteria for candidates and for international activities. So, it startled me to see that you were taken aback by our surprise at the fact that you were not using both official languages during that reception.

In my opinion, your letter of apology was by no means strong enough, and came very late—some 48 hours after the fact—once you realized that some politicians were feeling a little offended. As far as you were concerned, everything was just great in English.

Ms. Suzanne Tremblay (Rimouski—Mitis, BQ): Or almost great.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: Or almost great. I have a second question, Madam Chair, and it will be my last. I would like you to tell me about—

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): What was your first question?

Mr. Louis Plamondon: My first question is this: please explain the contradiction between your bylaws and the way you operate as a group.

Second, you say that no athlete's performance suffered as a result of the fact that French was totally ignored. That is pretty much what you said. You said you had received no individual complaints.

But of course, complaints against your Association by francophone athletes are always filed after the athletes have retired. They don't want to be penalized, and find themselves with fewer subsidies and sponsors. They don't want to have problems with their coaches.

There is one aspect I would like to discuss here. You say that you provide an environment conducive to maximizing your athletes' performance, an environment that provides athletes with suitable coaches and equipment, and is also pleasant. You organize receptions, and arrange for athletes to travel comfortably wherever they go.

There is one aspect here that I wanted to discuss with you. In your opinion, is the cultural and linguistic environment in which an athlete trains important? Will an athlete's performance not be better if he is training in his own cultural and linguistic environment? Is this not an aspect that the Association has always failed to consider?

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Thank you. Mr. Warren.

[English]

Mr. Bill Warren: In response to the first question as to whether or not we as an association abide by the provisions of our own rules and our own charter, our commitment to our board of directors and to our members is that they will be allowed to speak in the language of their choice and we will provide simultaneous translation at our board meetings and at our annual general meeting.

Our commitment for events such as the team reception in Nagano is as I explained it to you earlier in my review of our policy. I would resist the suggestion that we are not willing to comply with our bylaws.

Interestingly enough, members of our board of directors who are francophone and who have the ability, which I don't have, to communicate in both languages have told us that the importance at our board of directors meeting is to communicate, and if they can understand communications in English, perhaps we should direct the financial resources that we expend in order to provide simultaneous translation to the translation of written text.

We have not accepted that recommendation. If you were to attend our annual general meeting and our board meeting, you would have the opportunity to have simultaneous translation. It would be provided to you.

• 1610

With respect to your second question, you must understand that the Canadian Olympic Association is not involved in the training of athletes. The training of athletes is the responsibility of the national sport federations. They provide the resources, the equipment, the coaching, and the venues that are most appropriate to the training of those athletes.

For example, in short-track speed skating, the venue that is chosen for the athletes to train in is the venue in Montreal. The culture of the short-track speed-skating team happens to be a French Canadian culture, so you have the happy marriage of a training facility located within the culture and environment these young people are used to. Unfortunately, economics being what they are, it is usually the availability of facilities that dictates where an athlete trains, not the availability of the cultural experience in the environment of where those facilities are located.

But please understand that the responsibility of the Canadian Olympic Association is at the level of the Olympic Games. The preparation of the athletes to attain that level is the responsibility of the national sport federations, and we have no jurisdiction over that.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Thank you very much.

[Translation]

Mr. Coderre.

Mr. Denis Coderre: Madam Chair, I will begin by expressing my extreme indignation once I heard the Reform Party member talk about the French-language issue in this fashion. We did not invite the Canadian Olympic Association here as sponsors. The Association works under Canada's flag. They are the people who represent Canada at the Olympic Games. I think that the least we can do is to ensure that Canada's linguistic duality is respected. The point is not to come up with excuses all the time, but to ensure that once and for all— It is appalling that we still find problems like this coming up in 1998, in this day and age.

I would also point out that, for a group which fights for Canada's flag, you show very little respect for the principle of linguistic duality. You should be ashamed of the things you have said.

Now, Mr. Warren, even though the Association is independent and autonomous, don't you think that it should at least ensure that francophones enjoy linguistic duality from all standpoints, in a fair and appropriate fashion, as do anglophones?

In looking at the program for the reception, I would say that, apart from the Japanese drummers who came in for the ceremonial rights, apart from the presentation of the flag, and apart from the confetti and the canons, I find yet again that the Olympic Association showed very little sensitivity towards Canadian linguistic duality.

I am not talking about the athletes now. I am talking about the journalists who had to deal with the Canadian Olympic Association. They tell me that French-language services were difficult to obtain when they were needed, and that they had trouble obtaining services in French.

This is 1998, Mr. Warren. Can you assure the committee that we will not have to invite you back, be it only on this issue? Can you assure me that, as a bilingual francophone, I will not have to invite you back to this table in order to hear your apologies once again? I will have another question after this.

[English]

Mr. Bill Warren: I pointed out to you that we made a commitment to the athletes that we would ensure we would address these issues, and I am sincere in my commitment to the athletes. As a result of fulfilling my commitment to the athletes, I will have fulfilled the commitment to you that you seek.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Second question, then, Monsieur Coderre.

[Translation]

Mr. Denis Coderre: Do you believe that Canada is a bilingual country, Mr. Warren?

Mr. Louis Plamondon: You are the only person who really believes that.

Mr. Denis Coderre: Can we drop the separatist rhetoric?

[English]

Mr. Bill Warren: I believe Canada is a country that has two official languages. I believe the Canadian Olympic Association, through its policy, has recognized that fact in the preamble to the policy. In terms of my own abilities, I am certainly not bilingual, and as a result perhaps not the best person to answer your question.

• 1615

[Translation]

Mr. Denis Coderre: Let's be clear on one thing, Mr. Warren. I am not shooting the messenger, but there are questions we have to ask. Here is one of them: how come no one saw the video before it was shown at the reception, and how is it that no one in the organization—say the general manager—Ms. Letheren, who is sitting right here— Why was the video not viewed by a committee before it was shown? Mistakes could have been fixed before they were actually made. Why do we always have to mop up spilt milk? You know full well that language is the most explosive issue in Canada.

Who watched this video, and how can you explain that no concern was raised about this video at that time?

[English]

Mr. Bill Warren: My information is that we did see the video. My information is that those who saw the video were aware of our policy and placed an interpretation on our policy that would lead them to the conclusion that the use of language within the video was consistent with the composition of the audience.

This is the difficulty with our policy, that phrase, because if you were interpreting that phrase in a mathematical sense—and believe me, I'm not saying you should—you may be led to the conclusion that if 72% of the audience is anglophone and if 28% of the audience is francophone, and if 75% of the video is in English and 25% of the video is in French, you have complied with the provisions of the policy.

You may also come to the conclusion, as many of the members of our executive committee did this weekend, that this is not right. You don't do the mathematical analysis. What you do—

[Translation]

Mr. Denis Coderre: Believe me, they tried to measure the French and English languages with a ruler in Quebec, with the PQ government, and it obviously did not work. Can we reach any agreement on that? We are not going to get involved in mathematical problems.

But I would like to tell you one thing: I perceive bilingualism from a standpoint of equity. It is not merely saying, for instance, that 80 per cent of the members of Parliament are francophones and that nonetheless, they should talk 50 per cent English and French. What I am requesting is that you show respect for the International Olympic Association. I was very proud of the International Olympic Association because you could always hear announcements both in French and in English. It was fair. The least I would request from the Canadian Olympic Association— And again, I do not feel that I am a sponsor, but rather that I am carrying my flag. So, I hope that next time, things will be 50 per cent in English and 50 per cent in French, and that you will not be calculating the number of people in the room in order to derive an equation. If you do not do it, we will be pleased to invite you back.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Thank you very much, Mr. Coderre. I think Mr. Warren made it eminently clear that he was not counting on a number figure. So I think the point was made.

Senator Beaudoin, please.

[Translation]

Senator Gérald Beaudoin (Rigaud, PC): I am attentive to everything said around the table about language. This debate comes up again perhaps every ten years. As for me this does not merely involve the Official Languages Act. The Official Languages Act is a very special Act which has precedence over many other Acts of law. It could even be considered as a quasi-constitutional act of law. But in my mind, it goes far beyond that.

In my mind, bilingualism is at the very heart of Canada's Constitution. It is found under article 133, as well as article 16 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Charter is a part of the Constitution. So, in my mind, this goes far beyond a mere legal debate. In my mind, Canada is constitutionally both French and English. There is no escaping that fact. I have no questions about the matter, but in this place I often hear the words: "Yes, but we don't represent the government." Of course you are not a Crown corporation, but you are nonetheless an organization which represents Canada.

• 1620

If you represent Canada, you must represent it as it is. And as it is, its Constitution is very clear. This is a country where both French and English languages are on an equal footing, and not in a 75-25 or 28-72 proportion. This is not what the Constitution says. It says that both languages are on an equal footing. This is not stated in an Act, but in the Constitution. As far as I'm concerned, this debate is leading us nowhere. Both dimensions of our country must be represented.

I see that your regulations are both in French and in English. Well done! Well done! This is very good for a start. But don't you think that when you represent our country in the world arena, with millions and perhaps billions of onlookers, that this is not a question of arithmetic, but rather a question of linguistic duality?

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Mr. Warren.

Mr. Bill Warren: I agree with you, and I agree with the previous speaker. As I said earlier, I was not defending the mathematical equation of athletes to linguistic use. I simply was saying that those who reviewed the video before it was shown might very well have placed that interpretation on our documents. And that's why our executive committee met this weekend as an executive committee and discussed the existing policy and said this isn't doing the job we want it to do. This isn't doing the job that we, the Canadian Olympic Association, believe is required.

That's why we're addressing the clarification of our policy in order to make it more consistent, which I think all of us want it to be.

[Translation]

Senator Gérald Beaudoin: In other words, once it had adopted the constitutional dispositions of 1867 and especially of 1982, our country had two resonant voices in the world: one in the francophone world and another in the anglophone world.

There is something that I fail to understand. We start out saying that we should do this, or that. It is a tremendous advantage to have two voices. They must be used, and there is only one way to use them. It is by giving both voices the same power and the same vigour. Otherwise, I don't think there would be any Canada. This is where all the beauty of Canada resides, the beauty of our country.

I have no more questions, Madam Chair. I have made my point. He answered and he said that he agreed with me.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): And he even added to your point.

An hon. member: With resonance.

Senator Gérald Beaudoin: With resonance.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Not only with resonance but

[English]

in the time allocated. You have two minutes left to question this witness before us.

[Translation]

Senator Gérald Beaudoin: What else could he do—

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Would you like a supplementary? Mr. Godfrey wants to use the two minutes and two seconds that are left of Senator Beaudoin's time. Are there any objections?

Mr. John Godfrey (Don Valley West, Lib.): I have a very quick question to Mr. Warren. Might I infer from what you've said that what we might be expecting in the future is a fifty-fifty policy for those sorts of events?

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): You're not a Conservative. I'm sorry, it was his neighbour.

Mr. Bill Warren: I wouldn't want to predict where we're going with this. I do know that we're not satisfied with where we are because we're vague. And I don't know where we're going to get to, but I do know we're going to clarify.

Mr. John Godfrey: Can I ask then on behalf of the committee, which I think has expressed very eloquently their concerns, that you convey our suggestions and the emotions that accompany those suggestions. Perhaps that might help you in your deliberations.

Mr. Bill Warren: That's a commitment I'm prepared to make.

Mr. John Godfrey: Thank you.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): I made a mistake. Will the committee allow me to allow Senator Comeau to complete the two minutes prior to going to the NDP?

[Translation]

An hon. member: Two minutes for the Conservatives.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Two minutes and thirty seconds.

Senator Gérald J. Comeau (Nova Scotia, PC): Thank you, Madam Chair. I will be very brief.

Mr. Warren, you made me very anxious at the beginning of your comments, when you mentioned the number of francophones present. Further along in your presentation, you indicated that you did not want to get into arithmetic. However, you did get into arithmetic. You told us that there were three times more anglophones than francophones, and our Reform Party representative, of course, immediately leapt to life and said: "Out of these 41 francophones, there were perhaps one or two who could not speak English".

• 1625

You have set a trap into which the Reform Party immediately fell with its comments. As all these francophones can speak English, why shouldn't we simply do everything in English? This is the kind of trap into which those people fall, who like the Reform Party, do not believe in the bilingual Canada which we want to preserve, but believe in an anglophone Canada, which would mean the destruction of our country, of course.

I wanted to ask you a question, while you were giving us these figures, had you just simply forgotten that we were not supposed to get into arithmetic, especially as we had heard Senator Beaudoin's comments, who said that both official languages must be protected for the sake of resonance?

[English]

Mr. Bill Warren: I am in a forum that is very unfamiliar to me, and if by presenting facts to you that are of a mathematical nature I've created a political opportunity for somebody—

Some hon. members: Oh, oh.

Mr. Bill Wareen: —it's because I'm not used to this forum.

But to answer your question directly, the Canadian Olympic Association recognizes the duality of language in this country. Of that there is no doubt. I recognize the duality of language in this country, and of that there is no doubt.

When our policy was set in 1994 we believed it was an extension of that understanding. We have now had an event that has allowed us to test the applicability of our policy, and we've come to the conclusion that it may not serve our interests well as it is presently worded because it's vague and it's open to interpretation.

We have committed, therefore, to go back as an executive committee to make a recommendation to our board to remove that issue of interpretation. I don't know what more I can say to you.

And I don't want to sound frustrated when I say this, but I don't know what more I can say to you, other than that as an association we do respect the duality of language in this country, whether we're required to by law, whether it's because we believe in our country. And I really can't say more.

[Translation]

Senator Gérald Comeau: Well, I wanted to demonstrate that there are people sitting in Parliament who do not respect the principle of bilingualism. Some of them are sitting right here at this table. You must be aware that some people really are like that.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Thank you, Senator Comeau.

A voice: It's a learning experience.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Yes.

All I can say, Mr. Warren, is that you should come around more often. You'll find a few other anomalies around here.

Some hon. members: Oh, oh.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Madam Vautour, followed by Monsieur Paradis, which will start the five-minute period.

[Translation]

Ms. Angela Vautour (Beauséjour—Petitcodiac, NDP): Thank you for your presentation.

I should say that this is my first time in this meeting. I'm replacing Mr. Godin. I've heard some things that really upset me. As an Acadian, and as an member of a minority in New Brunswick, I really have a hard time understanding some of the policies you implemented at the opening of the Olympic Games.

We must keep national unity in mind. I have a hard time understanding why we always have to come back to this and set the record straight. We all know that there are two languages in this country and we know that this is a problem. We want national unity. I have a very hard time understanding why in organizing such an important event, we don't first of all make sure that we are respecting both official languages.

Even if there were only one francophone in this group, this person would deserve to have a program in French. This is not a question of having 25 out of 75 or 3 out of 28. When I travel, I want to be served in French.

• 1630

This must be done and we must stop coming back to this over and over again. I have heard enough excuses. They always say: "Sorry, we didn't have time. We forgot". Francophones are tired of hearing that. I am very proud to be a Canadian and I am very proud to belong to Canada. I do not agree with the separatists, but I do think that we are creating a problem in the country if we refuse to recognize both official languages in this country.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): May I suggest that you formulate your question shortly?

[Translation]

Ms. Angela Vautour: I think that all the questions have been raised. Much of the organization is done far in advance. When did you begin planning Friday's reception, when the athletes were introduced to the media?

[English]

Mr. Bill Warren: I'm not sure. I think I can tell you that as a result of this hearing today and the work we have done following the team reception, we have already begun to plan our next team reception. So I would suggest from this that we probably began planning our team reception immediately following the team reception in Atlanta.

[Translation]

Ms. Angela Vautour: Can you explain to me how this situation could have arisen, since such programs are planned long in advance? We know that these days, national unity is a hot button issue, as they say. By creating such situations, we give reasons to those who want to separate and we help the Reform Party, which is even more dangerous than the others.

I have a great deal of difficulty accepting that there could be such a lack of regard for national unity in such an important program. National unity is a current topic. Even in the House, we talk about it every day.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: We're going to form a Bloc Acadien.

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Mr. Warren.

Mr. Bill Warren: I will risk another pitfall by responding to your question. I would suggest to you that while the language issue is an extremely important one in this country, and one that I recognize, and while I suggest to you that we could have done a better job in dealing with that issue at the team reception, I would like you to look at the national unity issue, which you say is an extension of the language issue, in the context of what this Olympic team did for national unity by their performance in Nagano and by the reception of the Canadian public for that performance.

There is no greater force in this country, to my knowledge, for the proposition of national unity than the athletes who represent our country, whether they are at world championships, world cups, or at the Olympics.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Even the disabled Olympics—

Mr. Bill Warren: Absolutely.

[Translation]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): — and the Jeux de la Francophonie were awarded to Canada.

[English]

Well, I took one second of your time, sir.

[Translation]

Mr. Denis Paradis (Brome—Missisquoi, Lib.): No problem.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Thank you very much. Mr. Paradis.

[Translation]

Mr. Denis Paradis: Mr. Warren, first of all, I will tell you that I represent a riding that is about 20% anglophone and 80% francophone. The two communities get along extraordinarily well, in all respects.

I have examined your linguistic policy at the Canadian Olympic Association; I also, when the problem was brought up, looked at your response and your immediate apologies to the people who were in Nagano.

• 1635

I am going to reiterate what was said by my colleagues around the table. I have looked at the information you gave us and the Canadian Olympic Association's figures regarding the evening event and the team reception. You calculate everything in terms of percentages and minutes. That is not the notion I have of bilingualism in this country. That is not it at all. When someone reacts that way, we wonder if we're speaking the same language. I am not talking about English and French, but about what our country is.

In my humble opinion, it is not measured in terms of percentages: 72% of athletes indicate that their mother tongue is English and 28% that their mother tongue is French. That is not how it can be measured, but rather through the notions of respect and appreciation that we have for each other, of sensitivity to the Canadian linguistic duality. The word "sensitivity" is important.

I had the opportunity to be part of the Canadian delegation to the last Francophonie Summit with Claudette in Hanoi, Vietnam. I must tell you that this was in the fall and that 500 journalists were in the auditorium at Hanoi. Canada's position is very clear. I saw there that Canada and France were the two countries that were bringing the Francophonie to the world level.

On the stage, up front, were Prime Minister Chrétien, French President Jacques Chirac, the Deputy Prime Minister of Vietnam and the Premier of New Brunswick, of course, who will host the Jeux de la Francophonie in 1999. The Olympic Games took place immediately after this world-level demonstration of the importance of the Francophonie for Canada. Just before, Moncton had been awarded the 1999 Francophonie Summit.

Your association projects a public image, an image of what our country stands for. There are billions of people watching the Olympic Games on television, and that is where this becomes important. It is not a question of relations. At one point, you were given a grant of $350,000 and you were no longer a government agency. We understand all that, but you project the image of our country around the world, and that is important. It becomes crucial, since most countries have greater control over their athletes than Canada has as a government.

Here is the question I would like to ask you. Since we are talking about representing our country in a certain way within the Canadian Olympic movement and also at the international level, do you think that the government should be more present? You receive $350,000 a year. Do you think that the government should be more present within the organization or at least with respect to this representation abroad that you do or that athletes do under the banner of this country, Canada?

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Are you asking for more money, Monsieur Paradis?

Mr. Denis Paradis: No, I'm asking—

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): I understood what you were asking.

[Translation]

Mr. Denis Paradis: More present. I did not say financially, Madam Chair.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: I was afraid that you wanted to subsidize something illegal.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Mr. Warren.

Mr. Bill Warren: My observation about the Olympic Winter Games in Nagano is that the Government of Canada had more presence than the government of any other country at the games, save only for Japan.

Again, I'm doing a comparative—I guess that's just the way I think—but I think the representation of the Government of Canada was quite pronounced at these games. Therefore, I guess the conclusion I would reach is that it ought not to be more pronounced than it is.

[Translation]

Mr. Denis Paradis: We can ensure, Mr. Warren— Is the time up?

• 1640

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): If you want to know, 4 minutes and 36 seconds

[Translation]

is up.

Mr. Denis Paradis: Thank you, Mr. Plamondon.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Don't worry. I promise you, monsieur Plamondon, I'm very—

[Translation]

Mr. Denis Paradis: Mr. Warren, you say that the government of Canada has sufficient presence. Given today's hearing and everything that has happened, am I to understand that the message that you are taking away from this is one of Canada's linguistic duality and that, in your future activities, this concept will be integrated into the way you react and organize events?

That is the question, Madam Chair.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Thank you, Mr. Paradis.

Mr. Warren.

Mr. Bill Warren: I hope I've made that clear. Again, I've tried to make it clear in the context of the promise that we've made to the athletes. Our responsibility is to the athletes. To the extent that we have said to the athletes that we will ensure that this sort of situation never happens again, and to the extent that we are doing things to fulfil that commitment to the athletes, then it follows that it won't happen again.

I may be splitting hairs here when I say what it is that I'm saying, but I want everybody to understand that the Canadian Olympic Association, a national association, an association that is privileged to represent the Olympic movement in Canada—and it truly is a privilege to be able to do that—has a responsibility to the athletes. If we fulfil our commitment to the athletes, then all of us are going to be happy, or at least we should be.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Who's next? We're into the five-minute round. Mr. Jaffer.

Mr. Rahim Jaffer (Edmonton—Strathcona, Ref.): Thank you.

First of all, I would like to thank Mr. Warren for coming in front of our committee today, and his patience with our committee—

[Translation]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Senator, I know that you arrived a few minutes late. You have five minutes now.

Senator Gérald Beaudoin:

[Editor's Note: Inaudible]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Very well. Go ahead, Mr. Jaffer.

[English]

Mr. Rahim Jaffer: I'd like to thank Mr. Warren for appearing in front of our committee today. It's interesting for me to hear the way that you, Mr. Warren, and the committee reacted, especially to some of the concerns that were raised around the table, and some of the concerns that were raised by journalists. I think it shows your commitment to making things at least reflect the Official Languages Act, and that French-English duality that we have. So I do appreciate the fact that you reacted in that way.

We have heard from the people around the table, the politicians and various others who have concerns about what took place at the Olympics, but I'd like to hear your perception of specifically the athletes and how they were affected by the fact that there wasn't that duality.

I agree with you when you say that it's the Olympics and events like this that bring us together and that promote unity in this country. I was very proud of our athletes, to say the least, and their performance at these Olympics.

I would like to hear from you maybe some of the reactions you got from the athletes. Were they upset that this duality didn't exist? Were they complaining about it? I want to know, because I've heard from everybody else except who was most concerned about it. If you could fill me in on that, I'd really appreciate it.

Mr. Bill Warren: I appreciate your saying “who was most concerned about it”, because I want to underscore the fact that these are the prime players in these games—the athletes. It's not me. It's not you. It's not even the public of Canada. We get very excited about what the athletes do when they're on the field of play. But all of this is about their moment in the sun and their ability to perform at a high level.

I made the comment that I have tried to find out the reaction of the athletes to this issue. The impression I get from my research is that it was not as large an issue with the athletes as it has become with the public and with the government, but that's not to say that there isn't an issue there.

I know and I recognize that athletes are not inclined to come to me as the president of the Canadian Olympic Association and say “I'm unhappy.” That doesn't happen.

• 1645

I'll personalize this a little bit. The reason I'm involved with the Canadian Olympic Association is because I'm a groupie. I love to watch athletes perform sport. I never had the ability to do it myself, but I live through them and I thoroughly enjoy their expertise and their performance, and I've come to know many of them quite well.

In Calgary, many of them would train, and I'd go out and watch them train. I think there's a familiarity that is beginning to develop between me, personally, not the president of the Canadian Olympic Association, and these athletes. I think the familiarity that exists is such that if there were a problem, they would feel comfortable in speaking to me as someone they know. That's not true of all of them, but that's true of many of them who have trained there.

I've worked with the bobsled federation, so it's the bobsled athletes; the speed-skating athletes train in Calgary, so it's them; it's the luge athletes; it's people I've come to know. No one has come forward and said to me, “Bill, we have a problem here that we have to deal with”.

I know we have a problem we have to deal with, and that's why we're here today, to seek your input and your recommendations as to how we might deal with that problem. But I think it's more of a problem that we believe exists in relation to our policies and our responsibilities to respect the duality of language in this country than it is a problem for the athletes.

Mr. Rahim Jaffer: Mr. Warren, I would like to clarify quickly one thing.

I was excited to hear you have that personal relationship, and I think that's very important for someone such as yourself who runs the Olympic committee.

The athletes you talked to that practise in Calgary, are they from all parts of the country? Are they specifically from one part? Do they come from Quebec as well?

Mr. Bill Warren: They're from every province in the country—

Mr. Rahim Jaffer: Okay.

Mr. Bill Warren: —including New Brunswick.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Thank you very much.

Let me give you the rundown now:

[Translation]

Ms. Bradshaw, Mr. Robichaud and Mr. Coderre.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: Mr. Robichaud is no longer here.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): I'm sorry, but that's who's on it.

[Translation]

Mr. Louis Plamondon: I have another meeting. I cannot wait.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): After Ms. Bradshaw, it will be your turn, sir.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: I only have a short question, but I will let you go ahead, Madam.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Ms. Bradshaw.

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw (Moncton, Lib.): Madam Chair, excuse me for being late, but tomorrow evening Acadian francophones are meeting on the Hill. I was in my office working on that.

I am Acadian as well, Mr. Warren. I would add that I hardly slept at all during the Olympics because I was watching the events all night. I would get to Ottawa pretty tired in the morning.

In my opinion, the Olympics is also about Canadian unity. You have done great work and we were very proud of our athletes. I even found sometimes that we should have won and we didn't.

That said, I think that that is why most of us around the table here were so saddened by what we saw happen. There was a complaint. Much of what you did was very well done, and you are to be congratulated.

However, I would like to tell you about a dream of mine. I dream that all Canadian children will one day be able to speak both languages and that they will even be able to speak perhaps three, four or five. Perhaps that is why, Mr. Warren, we had such high expectations and that our expectations were so disappointed. We were not expecting something like this to happen in an organization as important as yours. We did not think that this would become an issue.

I'm going to talk about two things and I will then ask my question. I arrived late, but I heard things that I must react to. The first thing that I heard is

[English]

“not politically motivated”. That is not what is important here. What is important is that all athletes are able to communicate and work in their own language.

[Translation]

I hope that changes will not be made because you were called before the committee or because the issue has become political. Today, we are having a good meeting and we are able to make each other aware of certain things. You must be aware of our importance and the importance of the athletes as well.

The other comment I heard that did not surprise me too much was this:

[English]

“Well, you don't have a contract with the Canadian government.”

• 1650

[Translation]

It is understood that an organization such as yours does not need a contract with the federal government to ensure that our athletes are able to communicate and work in their own language, and we assume that you are aware of everything that is going on in Canada and will act accordingly. We are so proud, not just of our flag, but also of the fact that most of us respect the two official languages. I am an Aries, so I say we must find a solution.

I have two questions.

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

An hon. member: Her birthday is coming up soon.

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: Yes, that's right.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): You only have about one minute, Claudette, to say it.

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: It's not going to take long.

[Translation]

I would like to make two suggestions. Would it be helpful to you if the Committee Chair or someone from official languages met with the staff in your head office to make them aware of the issue and explain to them why we asked you to come here today? We have a great deal of respect for all the work you have done, Mr. Warren, but at the same time, we want some assurances that such an incident will not happen again.

In addition, over the next two years—

[English]

Do you want me to say it in English? Okay. As an Acadian and a New Brunswicker, I can do it.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): —

[Inaudible—Editor] —

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: Well, his mike was broken.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Okay, so hurry up.

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: All right.

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: With all due respect, we are quite proud of what you've done and we are quite proud of our Canadians. But the two solutions I would put before you are these.

Would it help if someone from this committee, maybe the two chairs, met with you and your committee to have a good discussion about how important this was for us and how disappointed we were? I have to tell you, I was very disappointed when I saw this.

You're here alone today. Well, you have a couple of friends. Maybe it would help if somebody from this committee went to meet with you and we could have a briefing on that.

Number two, I can tell you we would be quite open to following through on your agendas for the next event to ensure this will not happen again, because for me, this cannot happen again.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Thank you.

Mr. Warren.

Mr. Bill Warren: I am also an Aries, so I too am looking for solutions.

One part of your statement reminds me to say something that hasn't been said yet. We're talking about the team reception. Be very clear in your own minds that the Canadian Olympic Association provides services to the athletes in both languages.

Every service that is available is, by our policy and by our practice, available to athletes in the village in both languages. If you want a massage, if you want treatment by a doctor, if you want to speak to somebody about equipment, and so on and so forth, the services are provided to athletes in both languages. Please don't interpret that we are not providing for our athletes in his manner.

As to the assistance in reviewing our agenda, the response we have had from the Canadian public guarantees without question that our agenda will be reviewed very carefully by the Canadian Olympic Association. While the offer is understood to be made for the right reasons, I really don't think it's going to be necessary.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Thank you very much.

We have about eight minutes, because we have a call to the bell and a vote in the House. The following are on the list: Monsieur Plamondon and Mr. Breitkreuz. It will be three minutes each instead of five so we can all get in.

And Monsieur Coderre, you will close up the shop.

[Translation]

Mr. Louis Plamondon: I will be brief, Madam Chair. Since I will have to leave immediately after your answer, Mr. Warren, I would like to thank you for coming here today to provide some explanations.

Before you leave, I would also like to leave you a message of consolation. This is not the first time that the two official languages have been forgotten when Canada has been involved in international events. I will give you two examples, briefly.

The All Stars Game in Toronto, which was televised in about 60 countries throughout the world, was broadcast in English only. Exactly the same thing happened with the NHL All Stars Game in Vancouver. And yet those events were held right in Canada.

Mr. Denis Coderre: That is not true. The game in Vancouver was bilingual.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: Excuse me. In Vancouver, part of the broadcast was bilingual, you're right. But I am sure about the All Stars Game in Toronto.

Mr. Denis Coderre: You don't watch enough hockey games; you spend too much time listening to your assistant.

• 1655

Mr. Louis Plamondon: On another matter, when I came back a little earlier, I spoke about the famous cultural and linguistic context. I think that if athletes felt they were part of this cultural and linguistic context, they could perform better. You placed the onus on the federations and said that matters directly involving the athletes such as equipment and personal comfort were the responsibility of the federations.

But you do have some power over these federations, because in order for them to have international recognition, you have to sign some sort of document of recognition.

So we have made you aware of the problem of bilingualism today, and the need to make some major efforts in this regard. Given your power over the federations, will you make a commitment to raising their awareness, as we have for you today?

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Thank you very much. Mr. Warren.

[English]

Mr. Bill Warren: Two things. First of all, our awareness of the issue of linguistic duality did not occur today. Our awareness of the issue of linguistic duality occurred on February 7, the day following the team reception. We are here simply to report to you today on what we have done since we became aware of the importance of the issue. We were aware of it before then.

Secondly, in terms of the international federations, the national sport federations require absolutely no certification from us to be recognized by the international federations. We're not involved in that process. So if you believe that to be the case, that's just not correct.

[Translation]

Mr. Louis Plamondon: Since you give these federations grants, you have some power over them, and could require more bilingualism.

[English]

Mr. Bill Warren: Well, they are members of our association. The membership of the Canadian Olympic Association are these very national sport federations of which you speak, and we have a number of policies that they adopt. I can't sit here and tell you they have adopted this policy or that policy, but they are part of us, rather than us being part of them, if you appreciate the distinction.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: Thank you.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Thank you very much.

Mr. Breitkreuz, you have exactly three minutes.

I'm sorry, ladies and gentlemen. You all want to get in, and we must leave for the vote. I don't want to cut you out, but you're going to get cut down on time.

Mr. Cliff Breitkreuz: Thank you very much.

There's been something said about the dual nature of the country and the Constitution, and I'm sure the athletes and the Olympic committee don't have the Constitution in the background. What they're trying to do is go and do Canada well, and of course bring home as many medals as they can and honour the country in that way.

We should keep in mind that the linguistic realities of this country are a fuss. It's primarily French in Quebec and in eastern Ontario and of course in some areas of New Brunswick, and the rest of the country operates in English. That's the linguistic reality of the country.

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

A voice: Manitoba, Ontario—

Mr. Cliff Breitkreuz: Oh, yeah, they're just all—

A voice:

[Inaudible—Editor]

Mr. Cliff Breitkreuz: You betcha. That's it. And I think you know that, Mr. Warren.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Will you ask your question?

Mr. Cliff Breitkreuz: That's what the Olympic Association and their athletes should be about, athletes, not to be politically correct in so far as language is concerned, for heaven's sake.

But anyway, I do commend you for having the bravery to come to this committee. Now of course you see what it's all about. It really isn't so much a committee as something else, and I guess I won't say what I really think it is.

I wish you continued good success and luck with our athletes as you prepare for the next Olympics. I certainly wish you well.

• 1700

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Thank you very much.

[Translation]

Ms. Vautour.

Ms. Angela Vautour: I would just like to clarify one thing. I am sure there are a lot of francophones in Calgary, because half of New Brunswick has moved there to find work.

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

Ms. Angela Vautour: I would like to ask Mr. Warren whether he would have been able to participate in this meeting as easily had he not had interpretation services. If 70% of the meeting was in French and 30% in English, would there have been some complaints?

[English]

Mr. Bill Warren: Yes.

Ms. Angela Vautour: Yes?

Mr. Bill Warren: Yes.

Voices: Oh, oh!

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Fine, good answer. Very good.

Well, we now have a flip of the coin. I know Senator Beaudoin wants to ask a short question, and Mr. Coderre is on as the last speaker. You have between you less than four minutes to share.

Senator Gérald Beaudoin: Give me just one minute of time.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): One minute to you, and two minutes to Mr. Coderre. I'm going to time you. I'd like to see you do it.

Ms. Angela Vautour: Try it.

[Translation]

Senator Gérald Beaudoin: My question is very brief. I would like to know why you have concluded that there is no need for the government to be more involved in your Olympic organization. I find that somewhat surprising. I think the government makes a financial contribution and that it could perhaps make a contribution in the area of official languages as well. I think the government could do something. Why do you say this is not necessary? I'm not saying you're wrong, I would just like to know why you say that.

[English]

Mr. Bill Warren: If I were to answer your question, it would take longer than one minute and I might disclose a political preference.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Fine, then we'll move on.

Senator Gérald Beaudoin: Yes, well, perhaps I made a mistake in asking you.

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

An hon. member: Put your tag on next time.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone) Mr. Coderre.

[Translation]

Senator Gérald Beaudoin: Next time.

Mr. Denis Coderre: Thank you, Madam Chair. I don't want to waste my time commenting every time the Reform Party intervenes, but I must say I have discovered a new definition of the word "dinosaur".

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

Mr. Denis Coderre: I have a few brief questions. Actually, they are probably, rather, some concrete suggestions that would allow you to look at your videos before they are broadcast at the Olympic Games, at the time of your presentations.

First of all, make sure you increase the number of francophones on the executive of the Canadian Olympic Association.

Second, ensure that there are some bilingual and francophone public relations people. When I say "bilingual", I don't mean just anglophones who speak French. You could also consider hiring some francophones.

Third, make sure the board of directors is bilingual.

Fourth, make sure that when the media ask for something in French at the Olympic Games, they are answered in that language. You did not answer my question on this earlier. Some sports journalists complained because there were not adequate services in French, so much so that you pushed the panic button, and found someone who spoke French badly just to ensure that there would be no problem this time.

If you are prepared to accept these suggestions, are you prepared to earmark some extra money from your budget to improve the situation of French within the organization?

In closing, Mr. Warren, please make a note of my name: Denis Coderre. I am offering to work as a volunteer for your association to ensure that services are available in French. I would work as a volunteer. Thank you.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen.

I would ask the members of the committee if they would support the steering committee's recommendation. We have already had the pleasure of having Mr. Warren express so clearly and articulately a deep regret and an improvement in anything that will take place in the future with respect to Canada's official languages. You are also inviting Professor Charles Castonguay, from the University of Ottawa, and Professor Jim Torczyner, from McGill University, in regard to an analysis of Statistics Canada's census figures for the next meeting. It was also agreed that Madame Bertrand from the CRTC will not appear on February 26, but will do so at a later date. And I do advise you that the Minister of Canadian Heritage will be here tomorrow, so please make note of that meeting. Would you all agree?

Some hon. members: Agreed.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Thank you very much.

Mr. Warren, on behalf of both myself and my co-chair, I thank you very much.

The meeting is adjourned.