Canadian Heritage Committee on Nov. 15th, 2022

[Bob Nicholson]

I'm sorry, but I couldn't get that question clearly. I apologize for that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Perhaps in your other round, Monsieur Lemire, you might be able to repeat your question. Thank you.

I'm going to move to the—

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

Madam chair, if the witness did not understand my question, I will simply take back the 30 seconds and ask it again so that he can answer it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

All right, go ahead. You have 30 seconds—however, not more than that.

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

Thank you.

We learned yesterday that Hockey Canada, the National Hockey League and its members had benefited from the federal government's largesse, having failed to file the documents required to obtain not-for-profit organization status, including their by-laws and annual financial reports.

Does this practice of not filing documents date back to when you were the head of Hockey Canada?

[Bob Nicholson]

From the NHL standpoint, I'm not aware that money was received from the government for this. That would have to be addressed with the league office in New York.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you very much.

I now move to the next questioner, and that's for the New Democratic Party.

Peter, you have six minutes, please.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

We have seen, over the course of the last few months, Hockey Canada appear before this committee. Each appearance has been, I think, more disastrous in terms of the erosion of public confidence. We've seen the loss of sponsors, the loss of government support and, above all, the loss of confidence from hockey parents across the country who scrimp and save to put their daughter or son into Hockey Canada programs.

We had the most disastrous appearance last month, on October 4, and subsequent to that, as we're all aware, the board chair resigned and the CEO resigned. The board has seemingly finally understood the message that has come from Canadians from coast to coast to coast: The only way out is for Hockey Canada to come clean and to be transparent.

My first question today is the same question that I asked back on October 4, and that is regarding Navigator, the public relations firm that seemingly provided the advice around Hockey Canada's stonewalling and refusing to answer questions.

Mr. McLaughlin, I would like to ask you whose decision it was to hire Navigator. Will Hockey Canada finally come clean and tell us how much of the public's funds has been spent on Navigator for public relations?

[Pat McLaughlin]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Julian, for your question.

Before I start, there are two things, I think, that speak directly to your comments, Mr. Julian, and certainly from previous testimony as well that you've had in the hearings.

My two main concerns coming in today are, first, that I do the best on behalf of our organization to provide the answers that everyone deserves. I am concerned that in some areas if I don't have the answers it may look like I'm not trying to provide them, but I'm going to do my best. That's my commitment. The second is that in my opening statement I talked about the importance of us working together. For those who know me, I'm true to my word, and I truly mean that.

Specifically to Navigator, Hockey Canada staff were directed by the board in early July to contact Navigator. I contacted Navigator on July 5, and I had a follow-up discussion with them on July 7. They started to do work with Hockey Canada on July 8.

I can tell you that it's not a communications exercise that they had been involved with. This has been about, as you have said, transparency. They've given the board significant advice in terms of governance. They've helped us in terms of trying to find prominent Canadians to be part of our action plan—the oversight committee. They've also helped us on a day-to-day basis to work with the media. We have a small communications team that's primarily focused on events and communication.

I know that your next question will be about the dollar amount. I can tell you that as of the year to date, I've been told that our dollars have been about $1.6 million with Navigator, and there have been no public funds that have been spent on that.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

I appreciate your finally providing that answer.

As part of the mandate given to Navigator, did that include being critical of journalists or journalistic coverage around the scandals that had been flowing around Hockey Canada? Was it part of Navigator's responsibility to go after journalists or to go after stories?

[Pat McLaughlin]

Again, thank you for the question, and I understand the nature of the question.

I know that you, Mr. Nater and certainly Mr. Housefather in the last hearings all spoke to Navigator and the disappointment...what you've read in the minutes. What I want to share with you is that the answer to that is no.

I want to share something with you and the committee that I feel is very important, if I could—

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

I'm very sorry, Mr. McLaughlin. Thank you for answering that, but I have other questions.

[Pat McLaughlin]

Okay.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

When we talk about non-disclosure agreements, consistently with Mr. Smith in July and Mr. Brind'Amour and Ms. Skinner in October, the question has been raised about Hockey Canada releasing people from non-disclosure agreements.

Has anyone been released from non-disclosure agreements? Has there been any discussion at all within Hockey Canada in that regard?

[Pat McLaughlin]

Again, thanks for the question.

This is an area that's not my expertise. What I can tell you, though, is that I read an excellent article on the weekend—I believe it was in the Toronto Star—about the advancement of the thinking around NDAs. They used Hockey Canada as an example. There were a few experts who were part of that article, including a P.E.I. case where they said that our issues have certainly expanded the minds and the thinking in and around that and—

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

I'm sorry, Mr. McLaughlin. I'll have to cut you off again. I have other questions—

[Pat McLaughlin]

Okay.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

—but what you're saying is that no one has been released from non-disclosure agreements.

[Pat McLaughlin]

To my knowledge, Mr. Julian, no one has been released.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

This is a rhetorical question: Why, when we've had this issue out for months?

I will now go on to the issue of the complaint process. You mentioned it in your opening remarks. If somebody has a complaint, if there are serious allegations of sexual violence or sexual abuse, what do they do at this point? Whom do they contact? Who is responsible for the complaint process?

[Pat McLaughlin]

Thanks for the question.

Again, it's not my area of expertise, but I did talk to our safe sport vice-president to ensure I could answer this question to the best of my ability. If it's at the national team level—

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

You have 30 seconds.

[Pat McLaughlin]

—they would work—I'll be quick—directly with OSIC. If it's at a non-national team level, we've instituted the third party mechanism, and all the member branches in Hockey Canada have special buttons on their websites to direct people to get that support should they need it.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

I have a final question—

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you very much, Peter. You have 10 seconds. You may not get an answer.