Scott Stinson: What changed at Hockey Canada?

What seemed like it could be a watershed moment for Canadian hockey instead turned into something much more narrow in scope.

Jul 25, 2025

By: Scott Stinson

When what became known as the Hockey Canada scandal was blowing up three years ago, there was one significant, unanswered question: what changed?

What happened, that is, between 2018, when the organization first learned of allegations that a young woman had been sexually assaulted by members of its World Junior team, which led to a cursory internal investigation that went nowhere and was dropped, and 2022, when a lawsuit alleging much the same thing was quickly and quietly settled?

It’s a question that has all the more relevance today, now that the criminal trial that ultimately stemmed from that settled lawsuit has ended without convictions for any of the five accused. A judge in London, Ont., rendered not-guilty verdicts on Thursday after an eight-week trial.

Why did Hockey Canada settle the lawsuit, with executives at the time saying they accepted that the woman, who was 20 years old at the time, had suffered “harm” as a result of the incident, if years earlier they let it drop once she declined to speak to their investigator?

The suspicion, all along, is that it was about damage control. When the allegations hadn’t been made public, Hockey Canada was willing to let the matter drop. Former executives told a parliamentary committee in 2022 that they hadn’t even learned which members of the 2018 junior team were alleged to have been involved in the incident.

But when the lawsuit landed, with its stark allegations of a fearful victim submitting to a group sexual assault in a London hotel room after a night of drinking, Hockey Canada didn’t give the alleged assailants a chance to respond before crafting a settlement. It used its own funds to settle the lawsuit, even though it had insurance for such things. Former executives said this was done with the woman’s best interests in mind, but this path also avoided public scrutiny, at least until TSN reported the existence of the lawsuit.

That, of course, led to all kinds of blowback. Hockey Canada executives were called before a parliamentary committee in 2022 to explain the response, or lack of it, to the allegations raised four years earlier. Those executives admitted some degree of fault in not taking the matter seriously enough, but they insisted that the organization would do a better job in the future. Meanwhile, there were revelations that Hockey Canada had been using a portion of funds raised through grassroots registration fees to settle legal claims through what sure looked like a slush fund. Eventually, after weeks of insisting that leadership change at Hockey Canada wasn’t necessary, senior executives resigned, right about the time that the former interim chair of the board wondered aloud if the lights of the nation’s hockey rinks would remain on if such changes had to be made — the PR equivalent of shooting the puck into one’s own net.

New leadership came in, and Hockey Canada went on to implement an Action Plan that includes mandatory training on issues related to sexual assault and consent for all players and staff, public tracking of complaints, and greater transparency on how its funds are spent.

The reckoning, such as it was, was over. Thursday’s verdicts shouldn’t really change any of that, although it’s hard not to suspect that it will. Instead of a story about a victim who received justice after her initial allegations were doubted, it’s now also about five men who lost years of their professional careers, at least in part because Hockey Canada decided to settle that lawsuit on their behalf.

Share The Line

And while it should very much stand as an example of why women rarely come forward with allegations of sexual assault — the woman, known only as E.M. due to a standard publication ban, underwent a week of cross-examination by lawyers for each of the five accused — it will almost certainly be seen by some as proof that Hockey Canada had it right in the first place. That they were right in 2018, and should have stuck to that position four years later.

Three years ago, as the story led newscasts and sponsors pulled their money from Hockey Canada, it was easy to wonder how much the hockey-development system in Canada would be changed by this case. Aside from the resignations, there were questions about hockey culture — which Hockey Canada itself called “toxic” — and about the very junior-hockey system where the young men who go on to represent their country on Team Canada prepare themselves for a possible professional career. It wasn’t hyperbole to think that the 2018 incident might end up having lasting and profound effects on all of it.

But in mid-2025, none of that seems likely. The system rolls on. The World Juniors were held in Ottawa last winter, to sellout crowds. The next edition will be Minnesota, where arenas will be full again.

What seemed like it could be a watershed moment for Canadian hockey instead turned into something much more narrow in scope: a sexual-assault trial that dealt with thorny, complicated questions around consent. Once it entered the courtroom, with two dramatically different versions of the incident presented by the Crown and defence, it was bound to leave one set of observers deeply disappointed. And many others not sure what to think.

That this whole story would, in the end, be responsible for a quickly settled lawsuit, an overhaul of the operations of Canada’s national hockey organization, and little else, doesn’t feel like a satisfying conclusion for anyone.

Some Hockey Canada executives lost their jobs, and some organizational changes were made. It’s justice of a sort, given the ham-fisted way the former executives responded in 2018 and again in 2022.

It’s just, obviously, not the justice that E.M. had in mind.

Scott Stinson is a journalist in suburban Toronto.

The Line is entirely reader and advertiser funded — no federal subsidy for us! If you value our work, have already subscribed, and still worry about what will happen when the conventional media finishes collapsing, please make a donation today.

The Line is Canada’s last, best hope for irreverent commentary. We reject bullshit. We love lively writing. Please consider supporting us by subscribing. Please follow us on social media! Facebook x 2: On The Line Podcast here, and The Line Podcast here. Instagram. Also: TikTok. BlueSky. LinkedIn. Matt’s Twitter. The Line’s Twitter.Jen’s Twitter. Contact us by email: lineeditor@protonmail.com.