Canadian Heritage Committee on Dec. 13th, 2022

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Good morning, everyone. I'm going to call the meeting to order.

Our regular chair is on her way from the Ottawa airport, so I'll be in the chair until Dr. Fry arrives.

I'd like to welcome everyone to meeting number 61 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage.

I would like to acknowledge that this meeting is taking place on the unceded traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people.

Pursuant to the motion adopted by the committee on Monday, June 13, 2022, and Tuesday, September 20, 2022, the committee is meeting on the study of safe sport in Canada.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format pursuant to the House order on Thursday, June 23, 2022. Members are attending in person in the room and remotely using the Zoom application. I'd like to make a few comments for the benefit of the witnesses and members.

Please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking. Those participating by video conference please click on the microphone icon to activate your mike, as usual, and please mute yourself when you're not speaking. For interpretation, for those on Zoom, you have a choice at the bottom of your screen of floor, English, or French. For those in the room you can use the earpiece. I will remind you that all comments should be directed here to the vice-chair.

In accordance with our routine motion I am informing the committee that we—

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

On a point of order, Mr. Chair.

Can you please confirm that sound checks have been done for each witness? That will help the interpreters in their work.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

That's what I was just doing.

Are you filling in for Mr. Champoux? Is so, we don't have a notification. It has not been sent.

Let me finish here and you guys in the Bloc can send a notification to the clerk.

I'd like to welcome our witnesses.

Thank you to the Honourable Thomas Albert Cromwell, senior counsel of Borden Ladner Gervais LLP, who is appearing by video conference. I notice, Mr. Cromwell, you're on the west coast. I believe there is a three-hour time change. Good morning out in the west coast. With you today is Nadia Effendi, a partner at Borden Ladner Gervais LLP, also by video conference. We also have Victoria Prince, who is also a partner, Borden Ladner Gervais LLP, by video conference.

The Honourable Thomas Cromwell, you have the floor for up to five minutes if you wish. I know you have opening statements. After that, we'll go around the room with several questions on your report.

The floor is yours, Honourable Thomas Cromwell.

[Thomas Cromwell, Senior Counsel, Borden Ladner Gervais LLP, As an Individual]

Thank you very much, Mr. Vice-Chair.

I'll be very brief in my opening comments.

It is an honour for me to be invited to your meeting today. I hope I can be of use to you in your important work.

I would like to say two things in order to preserve as much time as possible for your questions.

First, as you noted, I simply wanted to note the presence of my two colleagues, whom I've asked to join me this morning in order to assist me in providing you with the information you require.

Ms. Victoria Prince is the national contact person for the Charities and Not‑for‑Profit Law Section, and Ms. Nadia Effendi is the chair of the Public Law and Appellate Advocacy Group. Both of them work in the offices of Borden Ladner Gervais, in Toronto.

They helped me with my governance review and coordinated the work of the entire team.

Second, let me say a brief word about solicitor-client privilege, which I hope will put everyone's mind to rest on that subject.

My engagement with Hockey Canada was to perform an independent and impartial governance review as the terms of reference refer to it as an assessment of Hockey Canada's current governance models and practices. Our three reports have been made public. In those circumstances I'm of the view that there is no concern about solicitor-client privilege in relation to my review in testifying before you this morning. I can also confirm that Hockey Canada has indicated its agreement with my view.

With that introduction let me reiterate that I'm here to assist you as much as I can based on the governance review that I conducted.

Thank you, Mr. Vice-Chair.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Thank you, Honourable Cromwell.

We'll start with the Conservatives for six minutes. We will start with Mrs. Thomas.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Cromwell, for being with us here today.

I'll start off with a really basic question, and that is, it's my understanding that you were hired by Hockey Canada to do a review. Specifically, you were asked to look at their use of the national equity fund. Upon reviewing documents that were provided from Hockey Canada, you discovered that there was a second and a third fund, but that was not initially a part of the review that you were asked to do.

I'm wondering if there are even more things that perhaps you found in your review that you were not given permission or sign-off to disclose in your report.

[Thomas Cromwell]

For a short answer, absolutely not.

For a slightly longer answer, if you look at point five of our terms of reference, I was invited, in the area of governance, to make any other recommendations for actions that the board of directors and senior management could take to improve confidence. Once we started to realize that the reserve fund issue went beyond the national equity fund, we felt, obviously, that we had to look into that. We did and you have been able to read the results.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you.

Justice Cromwell, would you say that everything that you wished to disclose has been disclosed?

[Thomas Cromwell]

Yes.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Okay. Thank you.

You make it clear in your review that it wasn't clear to you where money was originating from and where it was going. There seemed to be a lack of transparency and accountability.

With money coming in and money going out, and not having clear record-keeping as to where money is originating or where it might be spent, I'm just curious if there's any chance that public dollars could have been put into one of these three accounts or funds and then used to pay for a sexual assault claim.

[Thomas Cromwell]

Obviously—

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Can we be assured that was not the case?

[Thomas Cromwell]

I can't provide any such assurance. I did not perform any kind of forensic audit. I looked at the records that I requested to see.

We noted some specific instances where there was no documentation for certain expenditures the public had been told had been made. On further examination, and for example, in one case, we found that the expenditure was made but from a different fund.

We encountered a few things of that nature, but I cannot stand before you today and say that I did a forensic audit. I wouldn't be qualified to do that.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Basically what I'm hearing from you then is that we can't know with 100% certainty that public dollars were not used.

[Thomas Cromwell]

I can't say one way or the other whether they were or they weren't.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Had proper record-keeping been kept, you would have been able to give that assurance. Would you not?

[Thomas Cromwell]

I think that would be—

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

I mean, if you can keep track of where money comes in and goes out, then clear record-keeping equals transparency, truth and assurance.

[Thomas Cromwell]

I think that question requires me to make a number of assumptions. As you can imagine, if you had a chance to look at the financial statements of the organization, it's complex. I'm not sure that, at the level of an audited statement, anybody could be sure where a certain dollar came from and where it ended up going.

That was not my focus. My focus was on what the fund was used for.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

When record-keeping isn't clear, it does cause questions. Doesn't it?

[Thomas Cromwell]

If there's an absence of consistency in recording, of course.

One of the things I recommended in the review was that there be clear policies about both the purposes and the uses of funds.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Hockey Canada approached you and asked for this audit to be done. You were paid by Hockey Canada. Is that correct?

[Thomas Cromwell]

That's correct.

I take exception to the word “audit”. It was the assessment of their governance, yes.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Okay, it was an assessment.

Now I'm curious whether, in your assessment, you found out when Hockey Canada became aware of the alleged sexual assault that took place in June 2018.

[Thomas Cromwell]

No, I did not.

My task was to evaluate governance. I think, as you'll see from our terms of reference, specifically excluded from it was the handling of individual cases.