National Defence Committee on May 15th, 2014

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Norlock]

Thank you very much, sir.

Your seven minutes is well over.

Mr. Harris, you have seven minutes.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Thank you, Chair.

First of all, congratulations, Mr. Walbourne, on your appointment. I understand that you are from the province of Newfoundland and Labrador. While that's not a qualification in itself, it's certainly a very good start and we are proud to have someone from our province in this important role in the Canadian Forces.

I have a number of questions about a variety of issues, but I'll start with one that is dear to my heart and which was presented to your predecessor, Mr. Daigle, around this time last year. It is regarding the fact that 40 years ago there were six cadets killed in the cadet camp at Valcartier as a result of a grenade explosion during, of all things, a safety demonstration. Some 60 people were injured and there were about 160 survivors of that incident. We are 40 years down the road and many are still suffering and have been seeking assistance from government, but to no avail.

Your predecessor wrote the Minister of National Defence last summer with the recommendation that it was in the public interest for a full investigation to take place, with recommendations to be made to the government. That was necessary because the events were pre the establishment of your office in 1998 of the CF ombudsman. Can you tell us, first, of your familiarity with that and whether you have looked at that already, and whether or not such approval is forthcoming?

[Gary Walbourne]

I'm happy to say that the approval has been received. We received official approval to move forward with the investigation yesterday afternoon. Prior to that, my DG and I had already engaged. We started to scope out what that project would look like, how in-depth, and how much detail. We have to start talking about how to engage those people and what to look at, so we are really starting through a project management approach now.

Most of the scoping is done, so we are a little bit ahead of the curve on this one. I had verbal confirmation that the approval would be coming, so on that note we moved forward. Alain and his group have done a tremendous amount of work to this point in time. As I say, the project plan is there. The scope is defined. We finished it yesterday, as a matter of fact, so I'm very pleased to let you know that we will be moving forward very quickly on this.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Thank you, sir. I am very pleased to hear that news. I know the individuals, who have been campaigning for this for some time and receiving to date, frankly, not very positive responses from the military and DND when seeking assistance, will be very delighted to know that this has moved to this step. We look forward to a full investigation by your office and we would be happy to cooperate in any way we can, but I think that's extremely good news and I'm delighted that you could present it to us today.

Sir, one of the issues raised by Ms. Gallant is also one that's at top of mind as a result of recent newspaper and magazine articles from L'actualité and Maclean's regarding sexual assault in the military, and some surprising reports as to the possible extent of the sexual assault. They also kind of alluded to what appears to be the revictimization of those who have been victims of sexual assault. It came as a shock, I think, to most to see some of the facts there. Whether they are all proven through full investigation is probably a matter for another time.

First off, what I see from the Chief of the Defence Staff and the minister is an announcement of an external independent review of, and here's the quote, “workplace policies and procedures”. I'm wondering, sir, whether you think it's adequate to simply look at policies and procedures, or whether or not there ought to be a significant investigative role or particular review to find out.... As an ombudsman, you look at it on a case-by-case basis, but if we have a systemic problem, which appears to be the case, ought there not be an in-depth review of the individual cases that make up...helping to define what the problem is before changes can be made? Would that be a role that your office could play?

[Gary Walbourne]

As I said, we stand ready for any role they would bring, and I think that's one we could play.

You know, when they talked about the review of workplace policies and procedures, that was a very macro-level statement, but I do believe—

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

It could be a paper review.

[Gary Walbourne]

Yes, understood. But I believe it was focused indirectly on sexual assault inside the military. In terms of the scope of where this is going to be, the terms of reference have not yet been finalized, but I do agree with you that we have to look at not just policy and procedure. We will have to review each case in and of itself to get a collective view of what is actually happening on the ground. I don't think any meaningful change can come unless and until that's done.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

The former ombudsman, and of course this committee, has been seized with the whole issue of the treatment of ill and injured soldiers within the military, and by Veterans Affairs as well. In his last remarks as ombudsman to the Senate defence committee, your predecessor indicated some concern that members have to fight Veterans Affairs to prove that their health issues are service-related. They don't get the benefit of the doubt. The concern expressed was that Veterans Affairs and DND have different criteria in assessing disabilities. It appears stricter on the Veterans Affairs side than on the military side.

I wonder, sir, as someone who was in the Veterans Ombudsman's office for...what was it?

[Gary Walbourne]

It was just over three years.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Three years.... So with that experience, and with what you know and will know from your work as a CF ombudsman, is there any opportunity for bridging that gap? Do you operate as a separate silo from the Veterans Ombudsman on these issues, or is there a possibility of an attempt to bridge that impasse?

[Gary Walbourne]

As I mentioned in my opening comments, the veterans affairs ombudsman and I have started to work together. One of the things I see happening is that things come to an end when your career ends with the Canadian Armed Forces. Then you start another episode when you start with VAC. There seems to be a hand-off, never a handover.

One thing we talked about when I was with the Veterans Affairs office, and we've also had the conversation since I've taken this new role, is that the piece that gets a Canadian Armed Forces personnel released from the military should be enough, in my opinion—it's my humble opinion, as no research has been done on this—to get a person into the VAC system. Why are there different levels? Why, if a CF medical doctor has said that this is the cause and these are the consequences of it, do we need another doctor to review these as we move forward?

So I think there is a lot of work we can do together there. That's why the Veterans Ombudsman and I will be working on trying to move forward that part of the file.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Norlock]

Thank you very much, sir.

For the next round of questioning, we'll go to Mr. Leung.

[Chungsen Leung, Conservative, Willowdale, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Congratulations on your appointment. I think it's been barely more than a month.

My questions have to do with the complexity of the modern Canadian Forces. Not only is Canada a society of diverse cultures; we also are multi-faith, multilingual, of multi-religious backgrounds, multiracial, multi-whatever-it-is. This makes a highly structured organization like the Canadian Forces or any military organization very...I won't say “difficult”, but it's hard to integrate and keep all these components separate with respect to all this multiplicity of diversity within the Canadian Forces.

From your past experience and moving forward, perhaps you can share with us how you tackle this diversity in the Canadian Forces in the modern era.

[Gary Walbourne]

You're right, Canada has a very diverse population, and members from all of those groups make up part of the Canadian Armed Forces. I don't want to pound this to death, but it goes back to education. We have to understand different backgrounds, how people engage, what religion means to people. All of those factors have to be taken into consideration.

I do believe the Canadian Armed Forces does a good job with diversity. I do believe their mix of personnel is good. I'm sure there's always room for improvement, but again, it's an educational issue and a respect issue.

[Chungsen Leung, Conservative, Willowdale, ON]

From your past experience in Veterans Affairs, there are methods and approaches that you might consider in dealing with veterans. How would these translate into an active force? Let me be more specific. How do you deal with faith issues such as going to combat or dealing with equality in terms of male-female roles, or with the broad issues that one encounters in a diverse society?

[Gary Walbourne]

I believe with every engagement, every theatre where we place personnel, the chain of command understands the personnel they're deploying.

I may defer to my DG of operations here; he is an ex-military member.

I'm sure when they're on the ground, consideration is given for that. But I do believe it's a management issue, knowing the makeup of your personnel, who's part of your contingent, and just respecting their beliefs and their systems as much as can be allowed.

[Chungsen Leung, Conservative, Willowdale, ON]

As I perhaps suggested to you earlier, I have been on public corporations where I had to act as the person who handled whistle-blowing types of issues. There's a high degree of confidentiality that needs to be put in place.

With the Canadian Forces, though, with your particular role as this ombudsman responding to the chain of the command, do you feel you have to maintain that high degree of confidentiality when these issues are being addressed? How does your office intend to protect that anonymity?

[Gary Walbourne]

Well, confidentiality is one of the cornerstones of the ombudsman. There's no doubt about it. There's impartiality, neutrality, and confidentiality. Without confidentiality, we would not have a client base.

The only way that we can ensure those who approach us.... We talk about revictimization. They have to understand and be assured that the information they share with us is confidential and it will not be shared with anyone without their consent to do so. That's a guarantee that we give our constituency up front. It's like trust; once lost, it's lost forever. We cannot, in any way, shape, or form, break the confidentiality we have with our constituency. It just can't happen.

[Chungsen Leung, Conservative, Willowdale, ON]

Finally, in terms of sensitivities, do you feel that our population as a whole, especially as the Canadian military, need to go through sensitivities to deal with the diversity of our culture: sensitivities in religion, linguistic differences, cultural differences, and racial differences? Has that been part of your training, to bring that experience to your new role?

[Gary Walbourne]

I've spent 15 years or so as a public servant, so I have been exposed to all of that training. I'll speak to the civilian side, and I'll let Alain speak to the Canadian Armed Forces.

On the civilian side, there is diversity training, harassment training. That is mandatory, and it's held every year. I know that happens in this world, and those are the things that I bring to the table. I'll ensure, as a matter of fact, going through the budgeting process very recently, that these things are put on the calendar so they're there and they're funded moving forward.

That's on the civilian side. Do you want add something about the Canadian Armed Forces?

[Alain Gauthier, Acting Director General, Operations, National Defence and Canadian Forces Ombudsman]

It's exactly the same on the Canadian Forces side. They have mandatory training. One way for us to gauge whether there are issues with diversity, sensitivity, and all, is by looking at individual complaints we receive. I would say that we receive very little about this subject. It's one indicator that it's not a huge issue and it's essentially on track.

[Chungsen Leung, Conservative, Willowdale, ON]

In the military, is sensitivity training a requirement for commanding officers or for senior ranked officers?

[Alain Gauthier]

There's annual training that is required for all the troops, so that's everybody. When they go through their command courses at the various levels, there's also training for the chain of command.

[Chungsen Leung, Conservative, Willowdale, ON]

I see.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Norlock]

You have 45 seconds.