A review of Canada Soccer's governance recommends that the governing body modernize its bylaws, make changes to its board structure, improve its communication and transparency and improve athlete participation.

The independent review was requested in May 2023 by Pascale St-Onge, then Minister of Sports, and was carried out by Methodes LBB, a sports consultancy led by sports lawyer Benoit Girardin.

The 48-page report concludes that Canada Soccer “complies, overall, with many standards and principles of good governance, and is even a leader in some respects.”

“That said, we also found significant gaps in [Canada Soccer’s] a governance structure and culture that will require courage, innovation, openness and a willingness to change,” he added.

The “crucial and most pressing issue is to modernize the membership voting structure, which will require innovation, trust, openness and simplification,” according to the report, which notes that the board of The current administration and new CEO Kevin Blue “have made significant efforts.” in 2024” to modernize the governance of the organization.

Canada Soccer says it will review the report's recommendations “and determine next steps, in consultation with CONCACAF and FIFA.”

The review, conducted between September 2023 and April 2024, involved more than 40 individual and eight group interviews with Canada Soccer, as well as 20 “additional questionnaires.”

• The report does not cover topics such as the controversial deal between Canada Soccer and Canada Soccer Enterprise or the current labor dispute with its national teams.
• The report calls for modernizing the membership voting structure or distribution of votes by “eliminating or reducing the power imbalance among members.” A more balanced distribution of votes will result in better participation for everyone [Canada Soccer] members.”
• As for Canada Soccer's board of directors, the report recommends reducing its size from the current 14 members. While this size allows for “more diversity and a range of skills and competencies,” it can also lead to “potential issues such as board effectiveness in decision-making and director engagement.” .
• The report suggests a “smaller and more independent” board of nine or 11 directors would be preferable.
• It also strongly recommends that the position of president be appointed by the directors once elected by the members.

“The potential risk of the chair being elected by the membership is the possibility of political interference or the election of an officer who does not necessarily have the best skills or governance acumen to lead the board,” the report says.

Looking at the composition of the current board, the report concluded there was a “good mix of diverse skills, experience and skills”.

The board “lacked business acumen and experience”

But that wasn't everyone's impression.

“Interviewees from both internal and external stakeholders felt that the board, as a collective, lacked business acumen, experience or education in good governance. [and not just in FIFA governance]financial monitoring, enterprise risk management (ERM) and football acumen.

“We disagree with those interviewed and believe these skills and abilities are present within the board. However, we agree that administrators [and members] We will be much better educated and trained on issues of good governance and FIFA statutes.

The report also recommends more specific term limits for the board of directors.

Currently, the term of office for a director is three years with a maximum of three terms, while the president and vice president are limited to two four-year terms.

“If a director exhausts all three three-year terms and then becomes president or vice president, that could add up to a total of 25 years when including two vice president terms and two president terms,” the report said. “Being a board member for 25 years is considered too long compared to modern governance practices. »

The review also recommends that the board should not be involved in the recruitment or selection of national team coaches, saying this is “contrary to good governance practices and principles”.

The “search, selection and evaluation” of national team coaches should be left to the general secretary/CEO.

“This is an operational decision,” he concluded.

The review says Canada Soccer will “involve athletes in other committees or working groups where deemed appropriate to ensure their voices are heard.”

And calls for more transparency and communication.

“The fact that minutes, updates or reports are not published [the Canada Soccer] website or otherwise communicated, combined with uncertainty as to the [general secretary] The transition and the problems linked to the CSB and the collective agreements of the national teams, have contributed to a certain level of distrust towards [Canada Soccer’s] common leadership,” the report states.

He concluded by saying that Canada Soccer “showed courage in conducting this independent review and making it public.”

“Once completed, it is time to adopt decisive measures, which will allow [Canada Soccer] become a more engaged, modern and progressive organization.