The Minister responsible for Sport, Recreation and the Outdoors, Isabelle Charest, tabled a bill this week that could be a game-changer for ensuring the safety and development of young people. Its project to create a position of protector of athletes with real investigative powers places Quebec among the vanguard nations in Canada to prevent physical, sexual or psychological violence from remaining unpunished.
The Protector of Integrity in Leisure and Sport will replace the Complaints Officer, an organization with mixed success created by the Legault government in 2021. The uniqueness of the approach adopted by the former Olympic skater lies in the powers that will be granted to the athlete protector. The latter may investigate upon receipt of a complaint or on its own initiative, in all sports federations, leisure clubs and schools. He will have the possibility of forcing a coach suspected of wrongdoing to testify. He may even go so far as to recommend to a federation or to the minister the banning of a coach.
Finally, the Sports Safety Amendment Bill will require sports organizations, including schools, to conduct criminal background checks on coaches, a responsibility that previously fell to sports federations. The safety net was so loose that abusers could easily sneak up on young people by navigating the gray areas of the system. Since sports or leisure clubs were not always members of a federation, this resulted in uneven background checks.
The opposition parties welcomed the bill, the end of their analysis being “finally”: the Sports Safety Act had not been amended since 2007.
In recent years, the movement to denounce sexual misconduct has extended to the world of sport. Predators such as Bertrand Charest, sentenced to more than 10 years in prison for sexual assault on nine young skiers who were under his supervision, constitute a minority among the coaches and volunteers who dedicate themselves to transmitting the passion for sport and physical activity to future generations. But they cause irreversible damage, sometimes through the indolence or impunity of the organizations which should have ensured the safety of young people. The case of minor hockey, in Quebec as in Canada, is the most obvious example of this blatant carelessness which rots the organizations at their head.
This reform does not solve everything. Centralization at the head of the athlete protector will offer an illusion of security if lasting changes are not seen at the base of the organizations. Sports and leisure are sectors that are excessively decentralized by force of circumstances. Handball Québec has nothing in common with Patinage Québec, to take two examples at random. Not all federations have the same means to educate their staff, detect reprehensible behavior and act accordingly. Some federations benefit from significant human and financial resources, while others are held together by the miracle of volunteer commitment.
All of these federations and clubs must devote themselves to tightening their governance rules so that young people, parents and coaches can know the limits within which their role is exercised. Since 2021, federations must have policies to protect integrity. The National Coaching Certification Program, the gateway to the coaching profession, now includes modules on safety to prevent physical, sexual and psychological violence. These are initiatives that are in line with the changes desired by Minister Charest, which aim to ensure that the sporting experience is a “positive and enriching” experience over time.
We will see in use how the athlete protector will fit into the current system. In matters of child protection or acts of a criminal nature, it cannot, however, replace the DPJ or the common law courts.
Furthermore, this system will not replace the vigilance and judgment that must be exercised at the base. Parents and volunteers who operate in the world of youth sports and leisure cannot predict or anticipate predatory behavior. But they can act, within their means and availability, as agents of positive change. In federations or clubs where they see watered-down governance rules, a lack of transparency or the concentration of power in few hands, they will have every reason to raise red flags, because these are warning signs of potential dysfunction. .