In this episode of Heavy Or Not – Season 2 - #51 we report on Canada’s fragmented sports system, its chronic funding gaps, and why safe sport is now the top priority.

We also examine the current complaint mechanisms and explore concrete proposals for a unified, safer future.

• How Canada’s multi‑layered sport governance (federal, provincial, NSOs, CSOs) creates funding and safety challenges.

• The link between chronic under‑funding, the “Own the Podium” model, and rising abuse scandals.

• Existing safe‑sport frameworks (SDRCC, OSIC, CCES) and critical gaps such as legal aid and mental‑health support.

• Prevention tools in play: the Rule of Two, background screening, and education/training programs.

• Proposed reforms: a centralized sport entity, stronger governance code, and three options for a national safe‑sport complaint authority.

Canada issued a report and is working to unpack problems and find more comprehensive solutions to benefit all citizens.

#51 - Canada Sport Reform Full Transcript

Guy Moderator
Sport isn't just physical activity here. It's woven so tightly into our communities. It's about well-being, character, even our national identity.
AI Voice
Welcome to Season 2 of the podcast, Heavy or Not, the OG Swim Guide. We hope you subscribe and share this with your friends, family and teammates. Tell the coaches too, Season 1 has 50 episodes and they are well worth your time as we've already covered plenty of topics. See the links at blog.swimisca.org.
Mark Rauterkus
Hey, we're back for a new season and just finished summer and Labor Day. And I want you to know that the International Swim Coaches Association and myself and our friends have been working hard to make your work life much easier. We've got some new things that are going to happen. Start by subscribing and referring the podcast, heavy or not, to your friends, relatives, coaches, teammates, because we've got a lot of things in store for the future, for season two and beyond.
Mark Rauterkus
But back from a trip to the Northeast, we went to Rockport, Massachusetts, beach, tourist. The one thing that was missing were the Canadians. No Canadians were there. They often go to the beaches of the Northeast and they're avoiding.
Mark Rauterkus
United States. But we're going to make up for it today and with our connections. We're building a bridge to Canada from the United States. I think it's really important we focus on what they're doing with regards to safe sport and their sporting infrastructure because in some ways we can use it as a way to balance and gauge what we're doing here in the United States.
Mark Rauterkus
And by the way, here in the US we have a new CEO and I'll have some things to say about that in the very near future. But first, let's look at the Canadian sports model. And they also refer later about what they're doing in the UK and Australia. And I think there's some very important points that can be made with how we treat sport inside of our society and how we govern it.
Mark Rauterkus
Boy, they've had some serious meltdowns with regards to some bad cases that have made the news. Some with some hockey players and other sports. So I'm just trying to keep an eye out and keep that bridge open between the US and Canada. And someday, hopefully, we'll be able to see more travelers visiting with us here at our big meets, as well as our expertise being more readily available to our friends in the North.
Guy Moderator
Beneath this thing we all love, this activity we share, the actual sports system is often described as fractured.
Female moderator
Fragmented is another word you hear a lot. It lacks a clear kind of strategic vision.
Guy Moderator
It's a strange paradox, isn't it? Something so central, so important to us, operating in this really complex, sometimes pretty disorganized way. We're going to really unpack the Canadian sports system. We'll navigate its intricate landscape, tackle the critical issues around safe sport, and look at some pretty bold recommendations for a more unified, equitable, and crucially, a safer future for everyone involved.
Female moderator
And this really does matter to you listening, whether you're an athlete yourself, maybe a parent driving to those early morning practices or
Guy Moderator
coach,
Female moderator
a coach, a volunteer keeping a club running, or honestly, just someone who cares about where sport is heading. Understanding all these different layers is key to appreciating the effort and frankly, the big challenges in creating truly safe and inclusive sports environment.
Guy Moderator
Why does it feel so disjointed? Let's navigate this fragmented landscape. When we talk sport in Canada, It's not one neat organization. It's more like a network, different government levels, federal, provincial, territorial, municipal.
Guy Moderator
They all have a hand in funding policy buildings.
Female moderator
And the reason it's so spread out is sport isn't actually mentioned specifically in the Constitution Act. So that silence means responsibility is shared, often kind of decentralized. And beyond government, you've got this whole ecosystem of players. National Sport Organizations, NSOs for specific sports, then National Multisport Service Organizations, MSOs, think the Canadian Olympic Committee.
Female moderator
Then you go down to provincial or territorial sport organizations, PTSOs, and right down to the community sport organizations, CSOs, the local clubs. It's vast.
Guy Moderator
And within that, the human element just blows me away. A quarter of Canadian adults volunteering in sport, dedicating, what, an average of 105 hours a year.
Female moderator
It's incredible. It's an incalculable human contribution, as one report put it. These volunteers, they're literally the backbone, especially at the grassroots.
Guy Moderator
Truly unsung heroes.
Female moderator
Without a doubt. Now, the federal government's main way in is through Sport Canada. They have three sort of main funding pillars. The biggest is the sport support program.
Female moderator
That was over two hundred and twelve million dollars last year.
Guy Moderator
and its goals are pretty broad. Boost participation, especially for underrepresented groups, aim for world-class results, technical leadership, and advancing Canadian values. There's even a specific part called the Community Sport for All Initiative. That's over $10 million targeted specifically for black, indigenous, racialized communities, to SLGBTQI plus folks, low-income people, persons with disabilities, newcomers, seniors, trying to reach everyone.
Female moderator
Then there's the Athlete Assistance Program, right? That's direct money for high-performance athletes.
Guy Moderator
Nearly $32 million last year, going up slightly to about $33 million soon. It's a tough selection process based on performance, potential, deciding who gets that crucial funding to train and compete.
Female moderator
And the third one is the hosting program for Canada Games international events.
Guy Moderator
That was over $26 million last year. Support's bringing those big events here.
Female moderator
So if you add all that up, what's the big picture federal investment look like? Across those three, it averages around a quarter of a billion dollars a year. Over five years, it's well over a billion. But here's the sobering part.
Female moderator
Sport funding makes up a tiny, tiny fraction of the total federal budget. Only .082%. Wow, that's
Guy Moderator
small.
Female moderator
Yeah. And this leads to a pretty blunt truth we have to talk about. An underfunded sports system is often an unsafe sports system.
Guy Moderator
Oh, so what's the connection there?
Female moderator
Well, it's not just about, you know, cutting corners on equipment. It's systemic. When money's tight, organizations are forced into impossible choices. Maybe they can't afford proper background checks or enough trained staff or robust safety protocols.
Female moderator
Participant safety gets compromised because of financial pressure. That makes sense. and the NSOs. They're heavily reliant on this federal money, like 90% for most of them, but their core funding hasn't really increased since 2005.
Female moderator
Factor in inflation. In real terms, the system's funding has been shrinking for nearly two decades, while the demands, especially around safety and inclusion, have just grown and grown.
Guy Moderator
and that stagnation, that pressure, it must shape the culture, the priorities. Which brings us, I guess, to Own the Podium. That's been pretty controversial.
Female moderator
Extremely. This chronic underfunding feeds right into criticisms of Own the Podium's model, which heavily influences funding based on performance reviews. Many argue it creates a winning-at-all-costs culture.
Guy Moderator
Prioritizing medals over grassroots participation.
Female moderator
That's the core criticism. Medals and elite performance seem to trump broader participation, grassroots development. Plus there's that 80-20 funding split people point to favoring Olympic over Paralympic athletes.
Guy Moderator
I can see the concern. But just to play devil's advocate for a sec, isn't there an argument that elite success does inspire people, creates role models, national pride? Does it have to be either?
Female moderator
That's a fair question, and it hits the core tension. The criticism isn't usually that elite success itself is bad. It's about the balance. Has it skewed too far?
Female moderator
The argument is, yes, winning can inspire, but when it comes at the expense of supporting the foundation's grassroots diversity and critically safety, If the current funding isn't enough,
Guy Moderator
and maybe not balanced right, where else could money come from? Are people looking at other revenue streams?
Female moderator
They are. It's a big part of the conversation. Recommendations include looking at other government sources, like maybe tax revenue from single sport betting, which is growing.
Guy Moderator
Oh, right. Lotteries, too.
Female moderator
Lotteries, yeah. Also exploring more private funding, boosting business sponsorships, and even maybe dedicating a slice of the GST from sports equipment sales back into the system. It's about diversifying, finding more sources.
Guy Moderator
And we absolutely have to talk about the indigenous sport context here too. Sport is deeply rooted historically, culturally for indigenous people.
Female moderator
Immensely so.
Guy Moderator
But sadly, anti-indigenous racism in mainstream sport is a real and persistent problem. And that exclusion has led to what some call two parallel sports systems.
Female moderator
But what's really striking is the resilience. Organizations like the Aboriginal Sports Circle, the North American Indigenous Games Council, They've stepped up, providing culturally relevant programming, making sure indigenous athletes have pathways that honor their heritage.
Guy Moderator
That's so important.
Female moderator
And it connects directly to the Truth and Reconciliation Commissions. They call for long-term indigenous athlete development, stable funding for community programs that reflect diverse cultures. It's about way more than just playing games. It's cultural preservation, empowerment, reconciliation through sport.
Guy Moderator
Given that whole fragmented picture and the funding issues, the cultural pressures, it feels almost inevitable that the conversation had to shift hard towards protecting people within the system. So let's pivot now to that critical push for safe sport initiatives. And this isn't brand new, right? Concerns have been bubbling up for a long time.
Female moderator
You can go back to the 1990 Dubin report. It was already emphasizing broad participation, access for everyone, gender equity, supporting disadvantaged groups, disabled athletes, not just focusing on the elite. Right. But then more recently, between, say, 2019 and 2023, we saw this wave of really alarming reports and investigations.
Female moderator
Allegations of maltreatment, abuse really brought things to a head. It showed this wasn't just isolated stuff. It was systemic. Urgent reform was needed.
Guy Moderator
and that wave led to a really significant moment. The Aiming High report from McLaren Global Sports Solutions in late 2020. It had, what, 101 recommendations? All focused on creating an independent, national independent mechanism, a NIM, to prevent and address maltreatment.
Female moderator
The core principles were crucial. First, it had to be truly independent from sport bodies. That's key for trust, avoiding conflicts of interest. Its job, protect all participants from maltreatment, offer confidential ways to report issues, conduct investigations, recommend disciplinary actions, even provide legal help for victims.
Female moderator
And a big focus on prevention, education, compliance, the whole package.
Guy Moderator
Like a dedicated, safe sport body.
Female moderator
The report even sketched out roles like a chief operating person, director of investigation, talked about handling high-risk cases like sexual maltreatment exclusively, providing mental health support. It was a really comprehensive blueprint for change.
Guy Moderator
So with that vision out there, what mechanisms do we actually have now in Canada for handling complaints? There's the SDRCC, right? Sport Dispute Resolution Centre of Canada.
Female moderator
Yeah, the SDRCC. Created back in 2003, it's a non-profit designed for alternative dispute resolution in sport. It's got different parts, a secretariat, a prevention resource centre, the Office of the Sport Integrity Commissioner, or OSIC, and a director of sanctions, plus various tribunals for different kinds of disputes, doping, safeguarding, appeals.
Guy Moderator
And for a while, OSIC ran the Abuse-Free Sport Program.
Female moderator
That program enforced the Universal Code of Conduct to prevent and address maltreatment in sport at the UCCMS. It applied to organizations that signed up, and by March 2025, there were 90 of them. Participants had to sign a consent form.
Guy Moderator
What else did OSIC do?
Female moderator
It could also kick off or respond to requests for sport environment assessments. Basically, looking into systemic issues within an organization, making recommendations, publishing reports, checking up on progress. It was a big step towards standardizing things.
Guy Moderator
But then things changed again recently, April 1st, 2025. The responsibility shifted.
Female moderator
That's right. It moved from OSIC to the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport, the CCES. They now run the Canadian Safe Sport Program, or CSSP. The idea was to better preserve the independence of both the program and the SDRCC itself.
Guy Moderator
So CCES now handles the UCCMS enforcement for federally funded NSOs and MSOs using its contract authority.
Female moderator
Correct. And a really key piece of the old abuse-free support program was support services. There was a legal aid program, free confidential legal advice for complainants and respondents.
Guy Moderator
That seems vital.
Female moderator
A mental health support program for those 16 plus affected by maltreatment. But here's a potential issue now. CCES isn't currently offering that legal aid through the CSSP. Sport Canada is apparently exploring options.
Female moderator
That's a critical gap. Navigating these processes without legal or mental health support, it's incredibly tough.
Guy Moderator
Okay, so that's reacting to complaints. But prevention is crucial, surely. What's happening on the proactive side, education, training?
Female moderator
But I hear there are critiques of the training. Many participants agree education is vital for everyone, coaches, athletes, parents, but they feel it often focuses too much on just what not to do
Guy Moderator
rather than what to do to build positive environment.
Female moderator
And online courses sometimes get called checkbox exercises. People want more interactive in-person training, national standards. There was Project Lighthouse, a joint effort, provinces trying to harmonize education. Seems like that needs more investment.
Guy Moderator
and TrueSport. It was values-based, right?
Female moderator
Yeah, TrueSport, run by CCES until recently, focused on principles like fairness, excellence, inclusion, fun, seen as a good model for driving cultural change, not just ticking boxes.
Guy Moderator
What about other preventive rules, like the Rule of Two?
Female moderator
Ah, yes, the Rule of Two. The idea is simple. Always have two responsible adults present with any single sport participant. Ensures interactions are open, observable, justifiable.
Female moderator
It's meant to reduce opportunities for abuse.
Guy Moderator
Seems sensible on paper, but I can imagine that being tricky in practice. Like a parent trying to get one kid to hockey practice in a small town, finding that second adult isn't always easy.
Female moderator
You've hit it exactly. It's a great example of how a well-intentioned policy can clash with real world logistics. Easy rule to write, much harder to implement everywhere for every volunteer coach or parent.
Guy Moderator
So what's the feedback on its effectiveness?
Female moderator
It's mixed. People see the value, but there's inconsistent enforcement. And yeah, those grassroots challenges like transportation in rural areas, it's tough. It shows rules need to be practical to really work.
Guy Moderator
And finally, background screening. That feels like a must have.
Female moderator
Absolutely essential. Criminal record checks, vulnerable sector checks, references. These are common, often mandatory for getting funding. But again, consistency is an issue.
Guy Moderator
Inconsistent across the country is what I read.
Female moderator
Yeah. Often less thorough at the grassroots. Plus, it's an administrative burden for clubs already stretched thin. There's a real push for consistent, harmonized screening standards everywhere.
Female moderator
You can't have gaps when you're protecting vulnerable people.
Guy Moderator
Which brings us squarely into part three, the ongoing challenges, the criticisms, and the path forward. Because even with all these efforts, there are still major critiques of the complaint systems. What's the core frustration?
Female moderator
Oh, the frustration runs deep. People dealing with OSIC, or now CSSP, talk about unclear processes, really difficult online filing, and just agonizingly long waits for resolution. months, sometimes years, and big concerns about evidence rules, transparency, and due process, especially for respondents. Some felt provisional measures like immediate suspensions were applied without them getting a chance to even give their side first.
Female moderator
Concerns about feeling guilty before proven.
Guy Moderator
That sounds incredibly stressful.
Female moderator
It is. Plus, lack of awareness or access to that crucial mental health and legal support we mentioned. And the whole process itself. People describe it as re-traumatizing.
Female moderator
Instead of helping, it becomes another ordeal.
Guy Moderator
So a system meant to help is seen as cumbersome, maybe even harmful. And you mentioned jurisdiction before. The CSSP only applies nationally.
Female moderator
Right, and that's a huge limitation. Most maltreatment actually happens at the local grassroots level. I think you mentioned a majority of calls to CCES in the first month were outside their jurisdiction.
Guy Moderator
Yeah, that was striking.
Female moderator
It shows the gap, right? If the national system can't reach where most sport happens, the most vulnerable aren't fully protected. Expanding it would need more funding, and they'd have to figure out how to avoid the crazy costs of the old fee-for-service model.
Guy Moderator
And what about those independent third parties, the ITPs, that NSOs use for other complaints?
Female moderator
They face really harsh criticism too. Often the ITP staff are seen as lacking expertise, especially with complex issues like child maltreatment. Procedures are inconsistent, unclear, unpredictable, complicated, and obscure was one description. And the biggest red flag, massive conflict of interest concerns.
Female moderator
These ITPs are hired and paid by the very organizations they're supposed to be investigating.
Guy Moderator
How can that be independent?
Female moderator
Exactly. It fundamentally undermines trust in the process. It sounds like a deeply flawed setup overall, struggling to cope.
Guy Moderator
So what's being proposed to actually fix this systemically? What are the big ideas?
Female moderator
Well, there seems to be what's described as an overwhelming consensus around needing a centralized sport entity.
Guy Moderator
Okay, what would that do?
Female moderator
Basically, provide the strategic leadership, the coordination, the oversight that's currently missing, address that lack of direction and vision. This could potentially pull together funding, governance, safe sport, maybe even a national parasport strategy, all under one roof.
Guy Moderator
What might it look like? A government department?
Female moderator
And what about improving governance within sport organizations themselves? Big focus there, too. There was the Canadians First Governance Code. It started as mandatory for NSOs getting federal funds, but now it's down to meeting five core requirements.
Female moderator
Still, the emphasis is on good governance, transparency,
Guy Moderator
and athlete representation.
Female moderator
Huge push for that. Meaningful representation of athletes on boards with actual voting rights. The idea is their unique perspective has to be in the room when decisions are made. Who knows better?
Female moderator
And going further, recommendations for mandatory representation of Black, Indigenous, and People of Color on boards too, with reporting, training, because voluntary efforts just haven't been enough to get diversity at the table. Plus, more public transparency, posting board minutes, funding details, activity reports online, build that accountability and trust.
Guy Moderator
This all sounds like it points towards better alignment, better connections between all the different parts of the system.
Female moderator
Alignment is key. Vertically encouraging NSOs to work with their provincial territorial bodies for policy consistency, maybe even merging into single national organizations with regional branches. You mentioned Parasport there. It often
Guy Moderator
feels like
Female moderator
an add-on. What's the vision for better integration? There's a strong push for a dedicated national Pairsport strategy. Integrate Pairsport into mainstream organizations where it makes sense, but crucially, without losing focus on the specific needs of athletes with disabilities.
Female moderator
Ensure it doesn't just become a secondary focus. True inclusion, fully integrated.
Guy Moderator
Okay, so if we have this vision of a more aligned, better governed system, we still need to figure out the complaint mechanism nationally.
Female moderator
You
Guy Moderator
said there were three options being discussed. 3
Female moderator
main collaborative frameworks on the table for handling safe sport complaints across jurisdictions. Option 1 is basically creating a brand new body. A National Safe Sport Authority or Tribunal. It would be a joint federal-provincial-territorial thing set up with legislative power to administer safe sport laws everywhere.
Female moderator
The big plus. comprehensive reach, real legal teeth across the board. It's totally new, so building it takes time and money. Provinces might refuse to join in.
Female moderator
It could be expensive. And being highly formalized might make it less flexible procedurally.
Guy Moderator
OK. Option two, expanding what we already have.
Female moderator
Sort of. Expanding the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport, the CCES, and its Canadian Safe Sport program. Extend its reach to cover all levels, national, provincial, territorial, community, through collaboration, linking it to funding requirements.
Guy Moderator
Advantages there.
Female moderator
Leverages an existing structure, which could be faster, maybe cheaper, but provinces could still say no. CCES isn't actually a court or tribunal with legal enforcement powers. Sport bodies might struggle to enforce decisions on their members, and it might not be fully immune to existing governance politics.
Guy Moderator
Right. And the third option, conditional grants.
Female moderator
Yeah, here the federal government keeps CCES for the federally funded level, but then it gives conditional grants to provinces and territories, the condition. They have to set up their own centralized complaint systems that meet federal standards, handling complaints within their jurisdiction.
Guy Moderator
So that respects provincial differences more.
Female moderator
It does. That's the main advantage. But the big worry is you could end up with different standards, different levels of protection, depending on which province you're in, a potential patchwork system.
Guy Moderator
Clearly no easy fix.
Female moderator
Yeah.
Guy Moderator
Each path has real trade-offs. Can we learn anything from other countries, even if we can't just copy them?
Female moderator
We can look, definitely. Australia has Sport Integrity Australia. Their framework covers all levels, which is interesting, but they don't have the power to actually impose sanctions. They investigate, support, but rely on sport orgs to act.
Female moderator
That's a key difference from what's being proposed here.
Guy Moderator
So reach, but maybe not enough teeth.
Female moderator
Potentially, yeah. It shows a unified framework is possible, but maybe not with the enforcement strength needed. The UK has sport integrity, focused on high performance, independent. But again, Canada's size, our federal system, makes direct comparison hard.
Female moderator
The main takeaway, I think, isn't a specific model, but the principles. Consistency, independence, and real authority seem to be what everyone agrees is needed.
Guy Moderator
We have definitely covered a lot of ground today, from that universal love of sport we started with to the really complex, fragmented system underneath. Yeah. We've hit the urgent need for safe sport, the history, the McLaren vision, the current mechanisms.
Female moderator
Yeah, and the prevention efforts, like the rule of two, the training. plus all the challenges and deep criticisms people have. And then looking forward, that potential centralized sport entity, governance reform, alignment, those three options for complaints.
Guy Moderator
It's a massive undertaking.
Female moderator
It is. But what's really clear, I think, is that this isn't just about changing flowcharts or policies. It's about fundamentally shifting the culture of sport.
Guy Moderator
Moving beyond just winning.
Female moderator
Truly prioritizing safety, equity, access, inclusion, making sure that the joy of sport isn't wrecked by fear or harm or injustice.
Guy Moderator
So for everyone listening, we really encourage you to think about how these changes, these ideas might play out in your own local sports communities. The real question isn't just who's in charge. What does good sport really look like? It's an ongoing conversation.
Guy Moderator
What kind of legacy are we building for that next generation?
AI Voice
See the links at blog.swimisca.org.
Singer
O Canada! Our home and native land! True patriot love in all thy sons command! Quand ton bras sait porter l'épée Il sait porter la croix Ton histoire est une épopée Des plus brillants exploits God keep our land Glorious and free O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.
Singer
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.