Bill C-66

Military Justice System Modernization Act

An Act to amend the National Defence Act and other Acts

This enactment amends provisions of the National Defence Act that relate to the military justice system in response to the Report of the Third Independent Review Authority to the Minister of National Defence and the Report of the Independent External Comprehensive Review of the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces.
In response to those reports, the enactment amends that Act to, among other things,
(a) modify the process for appointing the Canadian Forces Provost Marshal, the Director of Military Prosecutions and the Director of Defence Counsel Services with a view to enhancing their independence;
(b) affirm the Judge Advocate General’s respect for the independence of authorities in the military justice system in the exercise of the Judge Advocate General’s superintendence of the administration of military justice;
(c) remove the court martial’s jurisdiction to try a person in relation to an offence under the Criminal Code that is alleged to have been committed in Canada and that is of a sexual nature or committed for a sexual purpose;
(d) remove the Canadian Armed Forces’ authority to investigate an offence under the Criminal Code that is alleged to have been committed in Canada and that is of a sexual nature or committed for a sexual purpose;
(e) expand the class of persons who are eligible to be appointed as a military judge;
(f) expand the class of persons who may make an interference complaint and provide that a member of the military police or person performing policing duties or functions under the Canadian Forces Provost Marshal’s supervision must make such a complaint in certain circumstances; and
(g) change the title of the Canadian Forces Provost Marshal to the Provost Marshal General.
In addition, the enactment amends the National Defence Act to remove military judges from the summary hearing system and to provide that, in the context of a service offence, an individual acting on behalf of a victim may request that a victim’s liaison officer be appointed to assist them.
It further amends that Act to harmonize the sex offender information and publication ban provisions with the amendments made to the Criminal Code in An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the Sex Offender Information Registration Act and the International Transfer of Offenders Act .
Finally, it amends the Criminal Code to, among other things, provide superior courts of criminal jurisdiction with the jurisdiction to hear applications for an exemption in respect of orders to comply with the Sex Offender Information Registration Act made under the National Defence Act and applications to vary the duration of such orders.

Military Justice System Modernization Act

[Marie-France Lalonde, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence]

Madam Speaker, before I begin, I would like to say that I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Scarborough—Guildwood.

It is truly an honour to rise in the House today to speak to Bill C‑66 and the important work that our government is doing to modernize the military justice system and the culture of our armed forces.

Members of the Canadian Armed Forces work tirelessly to defend Canadians, our way of life, and this magnificent country that we call home. Military members are deployed around the world to defend Canada's interests and support our international partners and allies. They also help communities across the country in times of natural disasters or other emergencies. As the minister said in his speech, supporting members of the Canadian Armed Forces is one of our top priorities.

The Canadian Armed Forces are the backbone of Canada's defence and we have their backs. For our military members to contribute their best work, it is our responsibility to ensure that they can show up every day as their true and authentic selves.

Our government is fully committed to ensuring that military members continue to have confidence in the military justice system. We are taking deliberate, coordinated action across the defence team to create this change in a sustainable and meaningful way.

The changes proposed in Bill C‑66 are designed to reform the military justice system, making it more transparent and more responsive to the needs of our constituents.

However, these crucial institutional changes are only one piece of the puzzle. For decades, the defence team has been grappling with the tough realities and experiences of military members and employees, including those who have been affected by misconduct, harassment and crimes of a sexual nature.

Since 2015, the Minister of National Defence has taken significant steps to prevent this behaviour and find solutions to the problem. One key step was the creation of the sexual misconduct response centre, which became the Sexual Misconduct Support and Resource Centre, an organization that provides support services to those directly and indirectly affected and is not subject to the military chain of command.

The sexual misconduct support and resource centre is available to current and former defence team members, as well as cadets and junior Canadian Rangers aged 16 and older and family members of the wider defence community.

Other efforts put forward at this time were steps in the right direction and laid some important groundwork, but they did not meet the need, nor did they go far enough to achieve enduring change. That is why in 2021, the department launched the chief professional conduct and culture, or CPCC, to redouble its efforts to create this lasting change.

The CPCC is the single functional authority for professional conduct and culture at National Defence. The CPCC is responsible for developing policy and programs to address systemic faults, enhancing tracking mechanisms for reporting professional misconduct and leading efforts to develop a professional conduct and culture framework that tackles discrimination, harmful behaviours, biases and systemic barriers.

By making this organization the focus of our efforts to change the culture, we ensure that all of our institutions can move forward in a unified and coherent manner. The CPCC has taken the time to listen to defence team members past and present at all levels, so that efforts to change the culture reflect the experiences and suggestions of our members.

The CPCC's work contributed to the publication of “The Canadian Armed Forces Ethos: Trusted to Serve”, which aims to ensure that military members carry out their duties professionally and with respect for the dignity of all persons.

The department's work is closely linked to the CPCC's efforts to respond to the recommendations outlined in four key external review reports related to culture change and the modernization of the military justice system.

The reports are the following: the independent external comprehensive review by Justice Arbour, which focuses mainly on the issue of harassment and sexual misconduct; the third independent review of the National Defence Act by Justice Fish, which includes recommendations for modernizing the military justice system; the report of the Minister of National Defence's advisory panel on systemic racism and discrimination, which aligns closely with the priorities of the Government of Canada; and the report of the national apology advisory committee board, which was developed to provide recommendations about the Government of Canada's apology to the descendants of No. 2 Construction Battalion.

We have already made significant progress on a number of these recommendations. We have taken measures to implement Justice Arbour's recommendation on how we define sexual offences in policies and how we talk about them. We have also repealed the duty to report in order to prioritize trust and safety, as well as the agency of victims, survivors and affected individuals. We also launched the Canadian Military Colleges Review Board, which is tasked with evaluating the quality of education, socialization and training at our two military colleges. Lastly, we published a new digital grievance submission form that allows armed forces members to access services and recourse options more easily, quickly and efficiently.

The department has also developed a plan to prioritize and sequence work across the defence team in a coordinated and collective effort to implement the remaining recommendations from all four reports. When the CPCC consulted with current and former defence team members from across the country, a common theme emerged: the need for the continuing evolution of the military justice system in response to developments in law and society, and the need to maintain trust in the system.

Through Bill C-66, we are introducing reforms to the National Defence Act to address key recommendations from the reports by former Supreme Court justices Arbour and Fish. They include Madam Arbour's fifth recommendation, as well as eight recommendations from Justice Fish's third independent review of the National Defence Act, designed to, among other things, increase confidence in the military justice system and help remove real or perceived influence from the Canadian Armed Forces' chain of command. Most notably, through Bill C-66, Criminal Code sexual offences that take place in Canada would be under the exclusive jurisdiction of civilian authorities.

Through Bill C-66, Criminal Code sexual offences committed in Canada will fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of civil authorities.

Bill C-66 also seeks to modify the process for appointing the director of military prosecutions, the director of defence counsel services and the Canadian Forces provost marshal. It will also expand the class of persons who can be appointed as military judges or non-commissioned members and it will expand the class of persons who can file an interference complaint with the Military Police Complaints Commission. It will enable those acting on behalf of a victim to have access to a victim's liaison officer under the victims bill of rights.

The well-being of the members of our armed forces is one of our top priorities. They work hard to defend us, our country and our partners around the world. It is our responsibility to ensure that they can work in an environment that is free from any kind of discrimination, harassment or misconduct.

Our government is committed to changing the culture within our armed forces so that every member of our defence team can be authentic and feel valued, included and encouraged to give the best that they can in service of Canada every day.

The changes that our government is making to the culture within our armed forces and our military justice system are part of an ongoing process.

In closing, I would like to salute our armed forces.

I thank all our members here in Canada and abroad for their extraordinary service. I really hope the House will find a strong resolution to send the bill to committee.

The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-66, An Act to amend the National Defence Act and other Acts, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

Madam Speaker, on one level, this is a relatively simple bill that would transfer the issues of sexual offences from the military's jurisdiction to civilian jurisdiction so that military personnel are treated in the same fashion that civilians are. This flows from a rather lengthy response.

No bill nor change in culture happens quickly, whether it is in the military or otherwise, but in the “House Standing Committee on National Defence (NDDN), MND Update to Parliament on Arbour Recommendations”, from December 13, 2022, on the last page of the 50- or 60-page document, is recommendation number five, which is that the Government of Canada proceed with this bill. It goes into some detail, which is not necessary, but I am happy to table it. It also outlines the implications of the efforts the government has made to complete this recommendation, including consultations with territories and provinces, and ministers, such as the national defence minister, public safety minister and justice minister, meeting with all the provinces and territories.

I will not detail all of the work that has gone into responding to this recommendation. It may well appear that it is a simple thing to take the jurisdiction from the military courts and put it into the civilian courts, but it is a lot of work, and I want to commend the ministers who have worked diligently on bringing us to this point today.

I understand that this bill will gain a lot of support in the House, and so it should. It is in some respects symbolic of what has been a slow and painful culture change in the military. It is a very symbolic bill, in that it is a particular marker of response by the military.

Canada's military today is not our fathers' military and it is certainly not our grandfathers' military. It is a far more sophisticated organization, and it calls upon a range of talents and abilities that probably could not have been dreamed of even 10 or 20 years ago. Therefore, Canada's military needs to be a welcoming and inviting organization for all of Canada's citizens to participate in.

I will point members to the first recommendation of the defence committee, from June 2022: “That the Government of Canada take decisive steps to transform the institutional culture within the Canadian Armed Forces to ensure an inclusive, safe and respectful workplace for all Canadian Armed Forces and Department of National Defence personnel.” That is the core reason this bill is in front of the House. It is because we need to change.

The threat environment, even in the last two years, has dramatically changed. We can think of Ukraine. We can think of the South China Sea. We can think of Palestine. This morning we had a threat briefing from three very able individuals, and I must admit that all of my colleagues on the committee came up to me afterwards and said that it was really excellent.

Because the threat environment has changed and we need a whole-of-society response to this change in culture, this bill needs to be passed, as it is essentially treating these kinds of offences in the same manner that offences would be treated in a civilian court. There should be no difference. There are difficulties with the military justice system. If there is an incident of some kind with two uniformed personnel, somebody is saluting somebody, and after the incident takes place, people still have to carry on their regular business of the day. It is extremely awkward and difficult. While we properly focus on the victim, we also need to keep in mind that there is justice on both sides.

In the Canadian military, we need a wide diversity of skills. I want everyone to think for a moment of a young woman or man contemplating a career in the Canadian military. In the past, and I hope no longer, there was a perception that over the course of a career, there was a high percent chance that a sexual incident would happen. Think of a young woman or man being invited into an organization where there is a significant chance that something will happen and, if something happens, there is a significant chance that the resolution will be unsatisfactory. They are not going into the same justice system as they would if the exact incident happened on the street, for want of a better term. That is going to affect their career, and the discharge arrangements for their career will not be as satisfactory as they otherwise could be. We should ask ourselves how that works for a military that is trying to recruit people. If we think of it from the standpoint of a young woman or man, that aspect of a career in the Canadian military is not attractive, but we need their skills.

In some respects, this bill would deal with one of the more egregious aspects of recruitment and retention. The Canadian military is significantly undermanned, somewhere in the order of 16,000 people. When I asked General Allen how many people were applying, she said 70,000 people. I then asked how many we are processing and she said about 4,000 or 5,000 a year. That is not a great outcome.

We need to up our game. The threat environment has changed dramatically. This bill would be a symbolic and real response to the need for culture change. We need skills available to the Canadian military, and I am rather hoping that with the co-operation of our friends and colleagues, we will move on this legislation so that we can demonstrate that we are serious about making this cultural change and reflecting it.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Madam Speaker, I was on the status of women committee when it studied sexual assault in the military, and the heartbreaking stories of the trauma that had been experienced demanded urgent action. However, here we are two and a bit more years later with nothing much done by the Liberal government. It is bringing forward a bill that may not even make it through the Senate by the time the next election happens.

In the bill, I am specifically concerned about the increase in ministerial powers to get involved in individual cases. We saw in the past the same members and ministers of defence obstructing in the General Vance case and in several other cases. Could the member comment on what protections will be in place to ensure that ministers do not intervene in a way that is detrimental to survivors?

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

Madam Speaker, a proper reading of the bill deals with the concern raised by the member. There is a concerted effort to simply treat this kind of incident in the same fashion as a civilian incident, period; end of sentence. I encourage the hon. member to read the response of the defence department in the final paragraph. The ministers and the governments have made efforts to make what appears to us to be a simple change, but it actually turns out to be fairly complicated and with some resistance on the part of civilian courts and the various governments they represent.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Madam Speaker, I really enjoyed the speech by my colleague from Scarborough—Guildwood. He is a wise man.

When he says that the example has to come from the top, I would remind him that former chief of the defence staff Vance was appointed in 2015 by the Conservatives and then protected by the Liberals. He was never charged during his entire tenure, but matters of sexual misconduct in his file shadowed him the entire time.

My question is this. The first report in 2015, the Deschamps report, covered essentially the same sexual misconduct information. In 2022, Ms. Arbour was asked to prepare a report. Her report said exactly the same thing. Ms. Arbour also said that she failed to understand why another report on this matter was even necessary when one had already been released.

Can my colleague explain why we are dealing with this issue today, after such a long time, and in such an important file?

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

Madam Speaker, we would all wish to move more rapidly; that is a given. Even Madam Justice Arbour, who is very familiar with how legislation gets created and implemented, recognized this was going to take time. I am rather pleased that during the interim, the government has, in many instances, responded quite significantly to the other recommendations that Madam Justice Arbour put forward and that have been in various stages of implementation. It is legitimate on the part of the hon. member to continue to call the government to account for the recommendations she has made.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Madam Speaker, the NDP has been fighting for meaningful legislation to be brought forward since government first announced the transferring of cases, but the government's delay in bringing this legislation forward has had the tragic consequence of survivors being robbed of justice by concurrent jurisdictions causing cases to be stayed. We want this legislation to reach committee quickly, we are hearing that around here, so we can strengthen the bill and ensure more cases are not stayed. We also know this bill needs to pass to protect future cases from potentially being stayed by undue delays in the transfer of evidence. Many survivors have expressed their frustration that this bill was created by Ottawa lawyers without their input.

How can the government protect survivors when the minister is not actually consulting them?

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am as interested in getting this bill to committee as the hon. member is. I chair that committee. Insofar as I have any authority in that committee, it will move as quickly as we can move it. I am looking forward to the co-operation of my colleagues.

[Fraser Tolmie, Conservative, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK]

Madam Speaker, it is good to be back after the summer break and have my first speech in the House and represent the good people of Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan. I would like to start off by saying that I will be splitting my time with the hon. member for Calgary Midnapore.

I am happy to have been given the opportunity today to speak to Bill C-66, a bill to introduce changes to national defence aimed at modernizing the military justice system, and responding to the recommendations made by two former justices of the Supreme Court of Canada. This is the government's long-overdue legislation to try and finally apply recommendations made in numerous reports regarding sexual misconduct in the Canadian Armed Forces.

We must continue to address sexual misconduct, discrimination, racism and other forms of harassment in the Canadian Armed Forces because all military members deserve a safe and respectful workplace. The previous Conservative government accepted all recommendations from the Deschamps report to eliminate all forms of sexual harassment from the Canadian Armed Forces. This important report was ignored by the government, and it is disappointing that the Liberal government has failed to act on this important report. Liberals cannot be trusted to stop sexual assault within the Canadian Armed Forces because of their soft-on-crime policies. After nine long years of the Liberal government and two more reports from former Supreme Court justices, victims of military sexual misconduct are still no closer to having their cases dealt with properly.

I support Bill C-66, but let me make this perfectly clear: it needs to be carefully studied at committee to ensure concerns from all stakeholders are taken into consideration and amended appropriately. There are also outstanding concerns about the ability of the civilian judicial system to handle these particular cases, given that the court system and courtrooms are already backlogged due to the Liberals' soft-on-crime policies and repeat offenders getting out of jail on bail and committing more crimes. It is a continual cycle that the Liberal government has created. Its present catch-and-release system is failing the people of Canada and, if implemented in the military, will fail both the military and the people of Canada.

The Liberals have had many reports that they could have already acted on, but instead we are in the last year of a parliamentary session, and only now are they taking any legislative action. The reports that I am speaking of include the 2015 Deschamps report, which I mentioned earlier; the 2018 Auditor General report on inappropriate sexual behaviour in the Canadian Armed Forces; the 2021 Justice Fish report; the 2021 DND Canadian Armed Forces ombudsman report on sexual misconduct; and the 2021 “Eliminating Sexual Misconduct Within the Canadian Armed Forces” report from the status of women committee. There would also have been a report by the Standing Committee on National Defence, but the Liberals instead chose to filibuster and keep the committee in the same meeting for three months, then prorogue Parliament for the Prime Minister's impromptu election in 2021. Instead of taking action, they asked for another report by another former justice and got the 2022 Arbour report.

I will add here that according to Statistics Canada data reported since 2015, disappointingly, total sexual assaults in Canada were up 74.83% and increased an additional 71% last year. These are horrific to hear. These are stats that we do not want to hear but we cannot ignore.

We did our own study in veterans affairs committee on women veterans, and spent a lot of time speaking with survivors of military sexual trauma. This study took the better part of a year. We heard several difficult stories, dating back to when women were first admitted into the Canadian Armed Forces. For me, personally, these were horrific to hear and have left a lasting impression on me that we need to act correctly and do better.

One of the issues we heard about was the Canadian Armed Forces' ability to investigate these claims. Jennifer Smith said in her testimony:

I've spoken about it in Federal Court. I've given this information to many, many high-ranking officials. I've even provided the names of some of my attackers as well as pictures. Again, I've never been offered the opportunity [to file a complaint]. I still don't know what avenue I have to go forward with this. I've been told to write it down on a claim form. I feel that this goes beyond that. This is criminal activity. I know who did it. I know some of the people who did it. I'm just wondering why no one has come to me or reached out to me. I've given the information. I haven't been asked if I want to go forward with that or been presented with some options. That has not happened.

Clearly, there is a need to have civilian courts investigate these cases outside the chain of command of military. Our committee made that recommendation. However, this same recommendation has been made several times before, going back to the Deschamps report of 2015, nearly a decade ago.

Just now, a year away from the next scheduled federal election, the government is finally going forward with legislation on this. It is instances like this that make it so difficult to take the Liberal government seriously, to reconcile horror stories I hear first-hand of pain and suffering and not acting.

On top of that, the Liberal government has spent the last decade pushing our courts to the breaking point. The Liberals' soft-on-crime bills, Bill C-75 and Bill C-5, have led to a skyrocketing crime rate in Canada. Statistics Canada lists total sexual assaults as increasing by 75% since 2015.

The Prime Minister has continuously shown that he does not take the safety and security of Canadians seriously. His Liberal government is watering down serious offences. These offences include date rape, drugs and human trafficking, which is on the rise. They once again prioritize the rights of criminals over the rights of victims. At a time when our courts are overworked and understaffed, this legislation aims to add more cases to their dockets. This is one of the serious issues that needs to be examined in committee.

I want to share that I have seen the military justice system work while I served. Whether it was summary trial, court martial, or dismissal of military personnel, I have seen it work. However, there has to be another level of oversight.

The next Conservative government would rebuild the Canadian Armed Forces by cutting down the bureaucracy and the consultants. We would make sure that the money is going to the Canadian Armed Forces. We would restore the honour and integrity of our military heroes that Canadians can be proud of. Finally, we would reverse the left-wing Liberal woke culture and return the war-fighting capabilities of the brave women and men in the Canadian Armed Forces.

[Marie-France Lalonde, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence]

Madam Speaker, my colleague is talking about a previous government that allegedly did all sorts of great things for military justice reform. His party did nothing. It did nothing at all during the nine years it was in power, and yet my colleague comes here to criticize.

We all agreed that this bill is important. A number of measures have been taken in recent years. Twenty of Ms. Arbour's 48 recommendations have been implemented. We are going to keeping working until 2025 to implement them all.

However, today, we are here to talk about Bill C-66, because recommendation 5 provides for a change to the National Defence Act.

Will my colleague agree to send this bill to committee so it can be studied and moved forward?

[Fraser Tolmie, Conservative, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK]

Madam Speaker, as I pointed out, under the Conservative government we did initiate reports, and they were delayed by the Liberal government. As I also stated, we believe not everybody has been heard on this, and because of the way this report is written, we want the bill to go to committee so we can make some adjustments and have input.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Madam Speaker, I enjoyed my colleague's speech, which was very sensible. There is still important work to do. We must continue to do it in order to protect people and especially our soldiers. Sending this bill to committee is a first step. We also need to leave enough time so that the bill can get to the Senate and then be given royal assent. That is part of our responsibility.

My colleague does not have confidence in this government, and we cannot blame him. That being said, does he have confidence in all of the opposition parties?

[Fraser Tolmie, Conservative, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK]

Madam Speaker, my answer is no. I have no confidence in the other parties in the House. I have full confidence in the Conservative Party, and I am grateful to represent the Conservative Party in my riding.

I want to see this report go to committee so we can have input and so some of the reports we have dealt with in the past can reflect this.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Madam Speaker, I am on the veterans affairs committee with the member. I was one of the lead people who put forward the study on women veterans. A focused study on women veterans had never been done in Parliament before.

One of the things we heard from those women was that because they were serving federally and moving from one province to another, sometimes where the incident happened was not where they were moved to, so cases got dropped. We need to figure this out in the civilian world so that does not happen.

I am wondering if the member is going to work seriously in this committee. I hope to see the committee move rapidly, because it is a big issue that needs to be addressed immediately. I hope the Conservatives will be dealing with real issues that matter to women veterans and, of course, not playing the games the Conservatives like to play.