Evidence of meeting #60 for National Defence in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was deschamps.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
Joyce Murray Liberal Vancouver Quadra, BC
Thank you.
Major-General Whitecross, you mentioned 25 members of the strategic response team. Can you tell me what percentage are women and what percentage are from the LGBTQ community, who essentially have been some of the primary victims of the culture of misogyny according to Madame Deschamps?
4:15 p.m.
Commander, Canadian Armed Forces Strategic Response Team on Sexual Misconduct, Department of National Defence
I'm sorry, Mr. Chair, I don't have those statistics, but I will get them for you.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
Joyce Murray Liberal Vancouver Quadra, BC
Okay, thank you. I'd appreciate that.
The initial Chief of the Defence Staff initiating directive, which was footnoted on the April 30 response action plan, places a number of restrictions on you. One of them is the assumption that the current sexual misconduct and investigation and justice system authorities will remain unchanged. Have you received a replacement directive to the one that was your orders, or are the directives drafted on February 25 still in place?
4:15 p.m.
Commander, Canadian Armed Forces Strategic Response Team on Sexual Misconduct, Department of National Defence
The initiating directive that I received from the Chief of the Defence Staff was to allow me the ability to put a team together and to set in motion some of the work that was needed to be done prior to receipt of the final report from Madame Deschamps. In no way have I been hamstrung in any of the work that we're doing moving out on the 10 recommendations from the report.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
Joyce Murray Liberal Vancouver Quadra, BC
I'm taking it from your comment that the initiating directive is still in place, the one that appeared to be behind the lack of fully accepting all of their recommendations. Eight of them were accepted in principle. For example, the directive stated that it would be the Canadian Armed Forces that would be in charge of the centre of accountability, which was contrary to Madame Deschamps' recommendation. I'm disappointed to hear that that initiating directive has not been rescinded or replaced by another.
Of the eight recommendations that were initially accepted in principle in your report, in other words, not fully accepted nor were they rejected, and certainly no one from this committee ever implied that they were contrary to the committee member's previous assertion.... Can you tell me which of the other eight have been fully accepted, or are they still accepted in principle?
4:20 p.m.
Commander, Canadian Armed Forces Strategic Response Team on Sexual Misconduct, Department of National Defence
Mr. Chair, I can say that we are moving out on every one of the recommendations from Madame Deschamps.
Madame Deschamps has identified particular tasks in particular organizations within the centre, and as we've said and as she has implied, we need to understand better how other organizations have put their centres together and what they have taken in, because they are all different, and what is the best way to bring this into a Canadian context.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Joyce Murray Liberal Vancouver Quadra, BC
Okay.
I'm taking that to mean they're accepted in principle, which was the confusion in the first place. There may be some elements that were critical to Madame Deschamps' recommendations that don't find their way into the final framework that is put together, which I'm disappointed by.
Madame Deschamps, prior to your starting your external review, you were, in my opinion, hamstrung in a number of areas. For instance, the way the Canadian military police and judge advocate general's office handled sexual assault reports was excluded from scrutiny, meaning that the review was not able to examine the systematic failure to investigate or prosecute sexual crimes in the military. Do you believe that this should be examined?
4:20 p.m.
External Review Authority, As an Individual
There is a review process that is provided by the statute of the military justice system. There is a report that was handed to me in the fall of 2014, the LeSage report. I understood my mandate as looking at what goes on upstream. Because there are so few reports, very few cases get to the military justice system. If the Chief of the Defence Staff wanted to get at the root of the problem, he needed to have a better understanding of what goes on on the ground.
In that way, it might be a different perspective. Maybe it would be a good thing to do it more often than what the law provides for, but there is a review process for the military justice system. In that way, I did not find that I was limited in what I needed to look at, and I made a number of recommendations on sexual assault—
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Joyce Murray Liberal Vancouver Quadra, BC
Okay, thank you. Excuse me, but I have another question.
It sounds like that—
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Joyce Murray Liberal Vancouver Quadra, BC
—might be a fruitful place to have some additional investigation. I see you're nodding at that.
I just want to ask whether you believe that, as committed as Major-General Whitecross is, having this implementation of a new structure done from within the military is adequate, or that it should be done at arm's length, or at least advice at arm's length on how to implement the details of your recommendations.
4:20 p.m.
External Review Authority, As an Individual
In my report and in my opening statement I mentioned that independence is crucial, fundamental—the many words I use in my report. I'm still of that view. I don't have any other facts that have come to my attention. My review is completed.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Peter Kent
Thank you. That's time, Ms. Murray.
Mr. Bezan, the first questioner of the five-minute rounds.
Five minutes, please.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake, MB
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and through you to our witnesses.
I want to first thank both of you for the work you're doing on this very difficult file.
I appreciate the report that you prepared, Madame Deschamps.
General Whitecross, I'm glad you mentioned that you're proud of your military career, because I want to thank you for everything that you've been doing throughout your career. This probably is one of those very challenging assignments that you've received, and I know that you're going to do wonderfully in setting up the independent centre and carrying through with the strategic response team, dealing with all 10 recommendations.
Madame Deschamps, I like how you started your presentation. You talked about two things: victims and trust. Part of the trust falls into this issue of the culture that we have within the Canadian Armed Forces. As you said, it's very sexualized. How do we start changing that culture? I think the first step has been done by your providing this report, and General Whitecross with the strategic response team. I should point out that they are meeting with our men and women in uniform right across this country.
The first part of dealing with this issue is awareness, and then comes education. I'm asking both of you to talk to how you visualize having the new independent centre be that place where people can come, feel comfortable, and have trust that there's going to be an outcome, both from the standpoint of their rights as a victim and—as I know from some of the reading I've done, looking at the U.S. model, the Australian model and others—in the work that they can do in improving education and awareness within the military so that the whole dynamic within the culture can start to shift.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake, MB
Could you both talk from the standpoint of how the centre would deal with, first of all, the rights of the victim and the trust factor and how critical it is, and then also go into the area of education and awareness?
4:25 p.m.
Commander, Canadian Armed Forces Strategic Response Team on Sexual Misconduct, Department of National Defence
Mr. Chair, I can't comment on what will be our ultimate option, because we obviously haven't made it to that point yet, but I can state that in the Australian model victim support is a bit of a paradigm shift. The idea of their whole structure is to take the care and needs of the victim as a priority. They have developed, as the Americans have, restricted and unrestricted reporting, which allows a victim to identify whether they only require assistance to deal with the issue at hand or whether they want to engage their chain of command in a more official manner. That's one of the things, obviously, that we're looking at.
I would just like to comment on the independence centre. It is my objective to identify a comprehensive option for an independent centre to go forward. That is an issue that our group is working diligently on as we speak.
4:25 p.m.
External Review Authority, As an Individual
Your question goes to the culture and to how the centre can be linked to the culture.
The culture is a notion that's much broader than the centre.
The centre goes to the support of the victims and to the re-establishment of their confidence. They know there will be no consequences if they report. For example, if they were to file a restricted report, the kind of report where the person seeks only support, then what I describe in my report as the effet boule de neige, the snowball effect, which destroyed confidence because of a story being told to the others of the bad consequences, could be stopped. You could stop this reaction.
The centre in a way is one of the elements of the puzzle, of the whole strategy to reinstate the confidence in the organization, because victims will know that if they seek support, they will not suffer any negative consequences.
The change of culture requires much more than the centre. It requires the involvement of the leadership. It requires putting a lot of effort into training. The change of culture is a process that involves resources to be put at every level.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Peter Kent
That is your time, Mr. Bezan.
Ms. Michaud, you have the floor and you have five minutes.
May 25th, 2015 / 4:25 p.m.
NDP
Élaine Michaud NDP Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I thank the two witnesses for their presentations and for the particularly important work they have done on this issue.
I am from a military family, and in fact my parents are still serving in the armed forces. Thus I feel the work you do is particularly important.
I would like to put a brief question to Ms. Deschamps.
As was mentioned, last February you submitted a preliminary version of your report to General Lawson. Can you tell us whether the report contained the 10 recommendations that are to be found in the final version of your report?
4:30 p.m.
External Review Authority, As an Individual
The report contained 10 recommendations. The wording of some of them has changed a little but the substance remains the same.
4:30 p.m.
NDP
Élaine Michaud NDP Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
So General Lawson had your report, basically, and your recommendations, in February when he drafted his memo.
4:30 p.m.
NDP
Élaine Michaud NDP Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Thank you very much for that comment.
Ms. Deschamps, you said that not examining the military justice system did not necessarily hinder your capacity to examine the issue of sexual harassment and sexual misconduct in the forces.
Do you think that that exclusion could have an adverse effect on the positive repercussions a change in the culture of the forces could bring, or on the creation of an independent centre? Do you think the fact that that dimension is not being looked at could be an obstacle to the improvement of the situation in the armed forces?
4:30 p.m.
External Review Authority, As an Individual
The objective of my recommendations is to give victims as many avenues as possible. One recommendation bears more specifically on military justice, and I recommend that victims be asked to choose.
I made that recommendation because I noted that civilian courts have a lot more means in large centres. However, in smaller centres that is not necessarily the case. I wanted the victims to be supported in their choices, first of all. That is why I suggest in the report that there be an advocate, to help the person choose, so that the victims can say whether they prefer to turn to the civilian justice system.
I think that the victims should have a choice. The military justice system is one option they could consider.