Thank you, Madam Chair.
I've been concerned by some of the comments I've been hearing today. I say that honestly as a parliamentarian, as a parent and as a parent with kids in hockey, ringette and organized sport. I come back to the phrase “accountability versus responsibility”.
I acknowledge that Hockey Canada has tried to take responsibility for this incident, but I'm quite concerned that you're not taking accountability for this situation. I've heard comments about education, about improving education around the code of conduct, but my God, sexual assault is wrong, and it's always been wrong, and there ought not to have been a need for education that sexual assault is wrong. I say that as a comment because I find it troubling. I find it troubling that in the past four years no one has been held accountable.
I recognize that some changes have been made, and I think that's important, but I recognize that no one has been held accountable. No one lost the privilege of wearing the maple leaf on their jersey. No one was disciplined by the organization. No one lost their employment at the organization. No one was truly held accountable by the organization. I recognize that no one wants to reveal the identity of the victim, but individuals who wore the maple leaf—individuals who were on the national team—were alleged to have participated in very serious sexual assaults. We know that the NHL is now conducting its investigation, and I think it will be a black mark on the organization of Hockey Canada if the NHL holds individuals accountable and Hockey Canada fails to do so.
I'm going to share my time with Mr. Waugh afterwards, and I'm going to give you an opportunity to make a comment in just a second.
I've heard “zero tolerance” mentioned today. I wish that were true, but if there were truly a zero tolerance situation, there should have been more than six or eight players or 10 players who participated in that third party review. Every single player who was in London that weekend should have been mandated to participate in that review or lose the opportunity and the privilege of being associated with Hockey Canada. The club organization could be its own situation, but Hockey Canada should have said, “Those who do not participate in this third party review are no longer affiliated with this organization.” That could have been one way that Hockey Canada could have taken accountability four years ago, but that didn't happen, and now, four years later, we're only just finding out about what happened four years ago.
I'll give you an opportunity to comment on that. Then Mr. Waugh has a question.
Thank you.