Evidence of meeting #41 for Canadian Heritage in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was players.
A video is available from Parliament.
Noon
Conservative
Kevin Waugh Conservative Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK
I have only 30 seconds left, Chair. I'll take the third round.
Noon
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Good. Thank you, Kevin.
Now we'll go to Mr. Housefather for the Liberals.
Anthony, you have five minutes.
Noon
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
Thank you so much, Madam Chair.
Mr. Smith, your last appearance here, particularly as related to the settlement agreement, raised a lot of questions. When did the board of directors authorize an individual from Hockey Canada to sign the settlement agreement? What date did the board authorize it?
Noon
President and Chief Operating Officer, Hockey Canada
Madam Chair, just for clarity, the board of directors authorized the maximum amount of the settlement. The settlement was negotiated between Mr. Winton, who's to my right, and Mr. Talach, the lawyer for the young woman.
Noon
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
In my experience as a general counsel of a multinational, you would normally have board minutes that would state someone being authorized on behalf of Hockey Canada to sign the settlement agreement and the board authorizing the settlement agreement. You've now stated that the board authorized the maximum amount. Where is that minuted in a board of directors meeting?
12:05 p.m.
President and Chief Operating Officer, Hockey Canada
As I stated earlier, in camera sessions for the board of directors are not minuted.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
So basically, according to Hockey Canada's practices, you could never prove in the future whether the board did or did not do what you said. I can only say that you need better legal advice and you need better lawyers if that is your practice, sir.
Coming back to the settlement agreement, you settled on behalf of the John Doe players. A number of John Doe players have come forward to say that you never contacted them to even tell them about the claim. Can I understand how you contacted the John Doe players?
12:05 p.m.
President and Chief Operating Officer, Hockey Canada
We advised all players after we settled with the young woman. We made the decision to settle on behalf of Hockey Canada and the other named defendants. We did so in the best interest of the young woman in protecting her privacy and also her benefit going forward.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
What legal right did you have, sir, to settle a claim on behalf of people unknown, or people that you did know who you did not consult with? If I am sued, I have a right to be involved in the question of whether or not there's a settlement paid and whether or not somebody settles on my behalf.
Did you obtain written consent from the other defendants to settle on their behalf?
12:05 p.m.
President and Chief Operating Officer, Hockey Canada
I advised the process that we undertook to settle.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
So basically, you didn't contact people even though you had their emails and you had their legal counsel representation. You chose to settle without consulting with them. You then settled on their behalf. Okay.
You had a claim and you settled it within three weeks or four weeks of the date you received the claim. That is highly unusual. Let me understand this. You and Mr. Renney, at the last committee hearing, professed that you did not even know which individuals were involved. You said there were some statements in the claim made by the plaintiff that were false, and others that you couldn't validate, because she was never interviewed by Henein Hutchison and never interviewed by your counsel, and she made no statement to the police.
Why did you not use the lawsuit as an occasion to depose the plaintiff to see if her claims were credible?
12:05 p.m.
President and Chief Operating Officer, Hockey Canada
I believe this is consistent with my statement on June 20. We made the decision to settle in the best interests of the young woman and to respect her privacy. We did not want to subject her to further discussion or debate that we have now seen through the media in the last 10 to 12 days. We made that decision at the time to help her on a go-forward basis. We stand by the decision to settle with her.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
Okay. So basically, you settled the claim. You didn't know whether you had legal risk or any risk. You didn't know who was involved. Would you do that if somebody else sued you tomorrow?
12:05 p.m.
President and Chief Operating Officer, Hockey Canada
Sorry. There was a phone ringing. I missed that question.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
—on behalf of numerous people, and you didn't know whether you had legal risk or exposure or not. Would you do that if someone else sued you tomorrow?
12:05 p.m.
President and Chief Operating Officer, Hockey Canada
I don't know if it would be fair for me to surmise what we would do if something happened tomorrow. I do know that we immediately entered into discussions between our representative and the young woman's counsel. As I said, we did so in her best interest, and really wanted to ensure that we were looking after her on a go-forward basis.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
The time is up.
We're going now to Mr. Lemire for two and a half minutes.
12:05 p.m.
Bloc
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mr. Smith, your attitude when you appeared before the committee in June is precisely why you are back here today, in my view. Obviously, that appearance before the committee was necessary in order for things to change drastically.
What did you take away from your appearance before the committee on June 20?
12:10 p.m.
President and Chief Operating Officer, Hockey Canada
When you said our study, are you referring to our action plan?
12:10 p.m.
Bloc
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
I was referring to your appearance before the committee, here, in the House of Commons. Your attitude then was quite different. On June 20, I didn't feel that you had taken the order to appear before the committee seriously or that you were facing up to your responsibility, unlike today.
I genuinely believe that, had you adopted the same attitude you have today back on June 20, we wouldn't be here now.
Unfortunately, there is no rewriting history, so why did you have the attitude you did on June 20?