But the more questions that were answered, the more they were asked. Here, we try to delve deeper into some of the biggest and most important issues covered in the hearing. Author’s note: The following story deals with sexual assault and may be embarrassing to some readers. If you or someone you know needs support, those in Canada can find provincial centers, crisis lines and services here. For readers in America, a list of resources and references for survivors and loved ones can be found here. Why did Hockey Canada appear before a parliamentary committee on a settled civil suit? Hockey Canada relies on funding from the federal government, amounting to six percent of its annual budget, or about $ 7.8 million. Although MPs were uniformly intimidated by allegations of sexual assault on a woman by eight CHL players, at least some of whom were on the 2018 junior world team, the committee’s original intention was to find out if taxpayers’ money was used for payment. for the settlement caused by the woman’s civil suit. In the statement of claim in the case, which was copied by Sportsnet, the woman demanded $ 3.55 million in damages. The final settlement amount is not known. Was this a criminal proceeding? The hearing was not a criminal proceeding and no charges could be brought against him. However, the information disclosed at the hearing could be used by the authorities to launch a new investigation and the actions requested by the committee – such as requesting documents and calling witnesses – must eventually be complied with. Who testified on Monday? Hockey Canada CEO Tom Renney, who formally resigns on July 1, has been sworn in. President of Hockey Canada. Hockey Canada Chief Business Officer Scott Smith; and Hockey Canada Foundation President Dave Andrews. Former Canada Hockey Risk Manager Glenn McCardy was invited to attend, but the committee was acquitted because his father had recently died. Also present but did not testify was Andrew Winton, a Canadian hockey lawyer. What are the key elements of the political case? On April 20, a woman filed a lawsuit against Hockey Canada, the Canadian Hockey League and eight CHL players in Ontario Superior Court in London, Ont. In the lawsuit, the woman says she was sexually assaulted by eight CHL players – including some members of the Canadian Junior World Championships 2017-18 team – in a hotel room in London after a golf and gala event by the Hockey Canada Foundation on June 18, 2018. The woman chose not to reveal her identity, nor the identities of the eight players and are referred to in the lawsuit as John Does 1-8. The lawsuit was settled out of court in May, and the case has not been heard in court. The terms of the settlement have not been made public. Does Hockey Canada know who the eight John Does are? Hockey Canada said Monday it did not know the identities of the eight John Does, citing an “incomplete” investigation by Toronto-based third-party lawyers Henein Hutchison LLP. Smith said neither the law firm nor the London police could identify John Dush because the woman did not identify them. Smith would not answer a question from MP Sebastien Lemire about what Hockey Canada would do if a player were identified as one of John Does. Smith said Hockey Canada did not order or order all players on the team to participate in the investigation. Will the law firm’s report be made public? In an exchange of views between Smith and committee vice-president John Nater, Smith said Hockey Canada would not want to submit the report because it was incomplete. Nater replied that the committee could force Hockey Canada to submit the report. What is the timeline of the events surrounding the Hockey Canada investigation? Renney said that Hockey Canada was notified by the woman’s father on the morning of June 19, 2018, shortly after the incident. Hockey Canada discussed the report internally – Smith said he and Renney were on a plane returning to Calgary later in the day – and officials reported it to the London Police Department around 6-7 p.m. pm ET. Hockey Canada contacted the law firm in the early stages of the investigation. Sports Canada was informed of the incident on June 26, 2018. Renney said that the speculation that the incident was “covered” is “inaccurate”. Smith later added that he “strongly opposes” the proposal that the incident be covered up. In February 2019, Hockey Canada was notified that there would be no further investigation by the London police. Hockey Canada continued its investigation and suspended it in September 2020 because it could not identify the eight John Does and did not receive a statement from the woman. Renney said early in the hearing that four to six players took part in the survey, but Smith later said he thought the number was more like 12-13. “The independent investigation we commissioned could not be completed because the young woman chose not to speak to the investigator,” Reney said in his opening remarks. “It was her right and we respected her wishes, as we continue to respect her clear and repeated wishes not to identify herself or the players involved. “While we understand the public frustration that the players involved have never been identified or disciplined, the young woman has a responsibility in this matter and we encourage everyone to receive due attention and respect for her fundamental desire for privacy above all else.” So who is investigating the incident? NHL commissioner Gary Bettman and deputy commissioner Bill Daly said ahead of last week’s Stanley Cup Final 1 match that the league, in collaboration with the NHLPA, was investigating the incident. If Hockey Canada was unable to complete its investigation, why did it settle the lawsuit? “We settled the claim quickly because we felt a moral obligation to respond to the alleged conduct that occurred at one of our events by players who attended at our invitation,” Reney said in his opening remarks. “We believed that the correct response to the woman’s legal request was one that did not require her to participate in a lengthy court process. The settlement allows her to seek any support she may need as she tries to overcome this incident.” Was the taxpayers’ money used to pay the settlement? Smith said Hockey Canada “liquidated some of its investments” to pay for the settlement. He added that Hockey Canada was looking forward to the scrutiny requested by Sports Minister Pascale St-Onge and that no state funding had been used. Are there other, irrelevant investigations into similar incidents? “In recent years, I think we have reported three cases of assault as required, and I know this is one of them,” Smith said. “I can not comment on the level of research of the other two. I do not have this information in front of me. “I understand that we have had one to two cases on a yearly basis in the last five to six years. I’m sorry, I can not give you more details. “The last five to six years are a lot. And that’s why we’re changing the culture in this game.” What is Hockey Canada doing to prevent this from happening again? Renney and Smith both said that Hockey Canada strengthened the code of conduct for players in the fall of 2018, adding training on sexual assault, bullying and harassment. Renney said events like the gala fall in a “blurred” area because it is not an ice activity, which is more closely monitored by Hockey Canada, but was expected to make it more rigorous so that non-ice events are also covered by the code of conduct. Smith added that Hockey Canada recently hired a director of safe sports, who will set up a department to better train players, coaches, etc. What punishment could Hockey Canada impose if it discovered the identity of John Does? That’s a good question. Hockey Canada has players in its national teams only for a short time, so the real punishment in cases like these is unclear. Hockey Canada could suspend players from future international games, such as playing for Canada at the Olympics or world championships. The real punishment could come from the NHL investigation. “On the advice of our third investigator, we could not impose sanctions,” Smith said. “They advised us that there would be a lack of due process for them. It’s not something we take lightly. I have said many times that, if further information emerges, we will re-undertake the research process and handle the research and any possible discipline exactly the way we intended to handle it in the summer of 2018. I take responsibility. We take responsibility for this. “ What is going to happen next? The committee is scheduled to meet again on Wednesday, 3: 30-5: 30 p.m. ET, in view of the expected summer suspension of the Parliament on Thursday. The Parliament bulletin states that the meeting will be behind closed doors, which means closed to the public. One member of the committee speculated that the next steps would be taken at that meeting, but more witnesses were unlikely to be called. The MP added that most members of the committee will attend by teleconference and of course not. But eventually the direction of the committee will be determined by President Hedy Fry.
