Canadian Heritage Committee on July 26th, 2022

[Lisa Hepfner, Liberal, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Thank you for your testimony here today, Ms. Robitaille.

I'm also kind of seized with the issue that we heard from my colleague Ms. Vecchio, namely that everything stopped when the complainant didn't feel comfortable speaking to anyone. I'm wondering if you can reflect on that a bit more.

If there's a complainant who, for whatever many good reasons, doesn't feel comfortable or safe speaking to an investigator like you or to police, as an investigator, what do you think about that? Is it acceptable that we drop any further investigation because there's no official complaint?

[Danielle Robitaille]

I would say that it depends on the investigation, and each case turns on its own facts. In this case, it was not a simple allegation. There was some complexity to the allegation, and the complexity involved also the interviews that I was to conduct.

I don't want to say much more for the reasons that I raised earlier and the potential to taint, but I would say that an investigation of breaches of a code of conduct is different from, say, researching for an article or for a publication in a newspaper. There are obligations to due process and fairness. There are obligations to notify respondent witnesses of the allegations that they are faced with. So, it's not a matter of simply walking through every door and opening every window. There is a gold standard in terms of how one proceeds through these investigations.

I appreciate that it's very frustrating to Canadians that we don't have an outcome yet. This is something that we have seen in the area of sexual violence in the justice sector as well. What I can say is that justice takes time. My investigation is taking time, but justice and fairness sometimes take time.

[Lisa Hepfner, Liberal, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

The complainant, or the survivor in this instance, did sign a non-disclosure agreement. Did that play any role in your investigation? If we look at the non-disclosure agreement, we see that she wasn't supposed to talk to anyone. There's no police or investigator exclusion from that non-disclosure agreement. Would that have played a role in her potential hesitance to speak to anyone?

[Danielle Robitaille]

I've never seen that document, so that's number one. I do have knowledge that it's a document that came into play in the spring of this year, so it would not have had an impact in the difficulty that I encountered in obtaining her version of events earlier in the chronology. I was not involved in the negotiations of the civil suit. As I've indicated, she is prepared and, indeed, participating in my investigation.

[Lisa Hepfner, Liberal, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

Thank you.

Since you've resumed your investigation, do you have any sense of how many of the 19 players will be willing to speak to you and participate in the investigation?

[Danielle Robitaille]

I know, Madam Chair, that the committee has been provided with correspondence from a group of eight counsel who represent eight of the remaining nine players that I have yet to interview. They have expressed concerns about my investigation, particularly as it relates to comments made by politicians and members of Hockey Canada. They have a concern that the issue has been prejudged.

I am attempting to address those concerns and assuage those concerns, and I hope that I will receive voluntary compliance with my investigation. However, I have also been equipped with the tool that should a player not participate in my investigation, Hockey Canada has advised me that they will receive a lifetime ban from participating in Hockey Canada and that this would be conveyed to them and made public.

[Lisa Hepfner, Liberal, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

Just to clarify.... There are repercussions this time if a player—

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

You have 30 seconds.

[Lisa Hepfner, Liberal, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

—does not participate in the investigation.

[Danielle Robitaille]

That's correct.

[Lisa Hepfner, Liberal, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

In your experience in conducting investigations, was there anything unusual about this investigation—any unusual parameters or expectations or direction given by Hockey Canada—that you would say is somewhat different from other investigations that you've conducted?

[Danielle Robitaille]

No.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

I am sorry. That answer will have to come to someone else at another time because we have run out of time here, and we're going to run out of time at the hour.

I have two more questioners, and they are going to be Monsieur Lemire for two and a half minutes and then Mr. Julian for two and a half minutes before we end this session.

Please be concise.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Ms. Robitaille, is it true that the victim, through their lawyer, recently said that they were willing to co‑operate with your investigation?

[Danielle Robitaille]

Was it recently? Yes.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Was the first investigation you did, the one that Tom Renney refers to as a preliminary report, considered a full investigation at that time?

[Danielle Robitaille]

That's an interesting question.

At that time, in September of 2018, we reported on the policy and systemic issues that arose to date in our investigation. It may be that, once the conduct investigation has concluded, there are additional policy and systemic issues that, as an independent investigator, I conclude I want to raise with Hockey Canada. I may do that.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

So you were paid in September 2018 as if the report you had submitted was final and complete, because you had no mandate to go further and Hockey Canada had ultimately moved on.

Is that correct?

[Danielle Robitaille]

That's right—

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

[Inaudible—Editor]

[Danielle Robitaille]

I'm sorry, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

I'm sorry. We have very little time, so just be as quick a possible in your answer, yes or no.

[Danielle Robitaille]

Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to be—

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Continue, Mr. Lemire.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

So you were paid for this investigation into the alleged events of 2018 as if it were final and complete up until the time these facts were made public.

Could you tell me who subsequently asked you to resume the investigation starting in 2022 and when that person did so?