As I mentioned, there are existing global sport governance frameworks, such as the sports governance observer. These are benchmarking tools that enable organizations to improve governance by scoring on specific dimensions. You have transparency, democratic processes, societal responsibility, and internal accountability and control. These have been implemented as far back as 2011 in some European countries.
They work. These assessments ensure that organizations are advancing in the intended direction, and they also serve as a supportive process to support the objective of fostering ethical growth. With these audits, entities can be held to a higher standard of accountability, because you are requiring them to maintain and hopefully improve their capacity in a way that can be measured, in a way that can be assessed. Transparency, including the aforementioned athlete's anonymous feedback and employee feedback, also allows the public, including Canadian taxpayers, parents, athletes and media, to determine if the leadership is effectively doing its job.
Just to corroborate what Ms. Demers said, I would like to add that in some nations, public funding is conditional on compliance with good governance principles, and, for all audits, sport organizations have absolutely no say in who is doing their audit.