Evidence of meeting #122 for National Defence in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was armed.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Jonathan Vance  Chief of the Defence Staff, Department of National Defence
Julie Dzerowicz  Davenport, Lib.
Richard Martel  Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, CPC

11:30 a.m.

Liberal

Yves Robillard Liberal Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank General Vance for his excellent testimony in both official languages.

I want to use this opportunity to wish all our armed forces members and their families a merry Christmas and a happy new year.

On October 3, the Iraqi president, who was elected earlier in the year appointed Adel Abdel-Mehdi to the position of prime minister. The latter is also the acting minister of defence and the interior.

Given that the Iraqi Parliament seems to be more divided than ever, can you paint us a picture of the relationship between Canada and the new Iraqi prime minister and tell us how that affects the relationship between our Canadian armed forces and the Iraqi forces?

11:30 a.m.

Gen Jonathan Vance

Thank you for your question, Mr. Robillard.

I will answer in English so I can be completely comfortable.

I think the relationship is emerging. This is a brand new government. They are still working to put in place their plans as to how they will move forward.

The Iraqi Parliament has changed its face somewhat, in terms of its representation and political representation.

All I can tell you is that the Iraqi government has made it clear that they welcome and acknowledge the need for continued coalition support. They've been particularly.... They've said specifically that they welcome the NATO mission, and indeed enjoy the fact that a Canadian is leading it.

11:30 a.m.

Liberal

Yves Robillard Liberal Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC

Thank you.

As you are here to talk about operations, we saw last weekend that the Canadian armed forces were always ready to help civilian authorities as needed through Operation Lentus. We know that this has been very important for the people of the Magdalen Islands. Can you tell us more about the state of preparedness and the capacity of our forces to respond to those kinds of emergencies? How are you adapting to the changes in circumstances, from floods to forest fires to snowstorms?

11:30 a.m.

Gen Jonathan Vance

Thank you once again for your question.

I have to tell you, sir, I'm very proud of our response to that, as I am every time we respond to support Canadians. I've said it before and I'll say it again: All members of the armed forces love to support Canadians first. It's a real point of pride, when Canadians are in trouble and we are asked to support, that we can be there.

We've learned a lot over the years about how to make that faster, so we have good liaison—in this case with the Government of Quebec—and excellent work through the government operations centre, where, from the provincial level down through the ministerial level and to orders to me to act—because I cannot act in Canada without a request—and in support of other government departments, we responded.

In this case, it was with Hercules and troops to support not only the movement of Hydro-Québec and other workers onto the island, but also, which was important, to do a welfare check of individuals to support the police, not in a law enforcement role but just to make sure that everybody was okay. The time from when we were requested to think about this until we left and started doing the job was, I think, 24 hours or less.

I would say that the impact of such things as climate change or the advent of natural disasters has certainly made it clear to me.... You asked me about how we are prepared to respond. We maintain force structure. We maintain a part of the armed forces at readiness, and in some cases quite high readiness, to be able to respond to Canadians in need. We have now a process whereby we anticipate fire season, flood season and increases in the requirement for search and rescue response, depending on when people will be out on the water and land. We are then poised to respond more quickly.

It has, though, become not a case of the odd occurrence. It's now almost routine. We have, I think, for the last three years, deployed to support provinces in firefighting and managing floods. It's now becoming a routine occurrence, which it had not been in the past. We take that into consideration in terms of the force structure and employment of the reserves. I've given direction to look at developing ways to make the reserves far more capable and ready, in terms of initial response, because they are present there.

11:35 a.m.

Liberal

Yves Robillard Liberal Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC

Thank you.

As members of Parliament, we often hear about the difficulties of living in a military family. We hear and know that deployment and all the travelling across the country are a challenge. We have put this question to the deputy minister, but we should also hear your point of view.

Can you update us on the seamless Canada initiative? What has been done concerning military family resource centres and the relocation policy?

11:35 a.m.

Gen Jonathan Vance

Thank you for the question, sir. I think I answered this question once, but I'm happy to do it again. Perhaps I can just abbreviate.

I would stress that living in a military family is also wonderful. I grew up in a military family.

Where it is clear to me that the nature of life today in Canada for a highly mobile armed forces has challenges is in things like the wild variations in housing prices, differences in the tax rates, differences in operational tempo and differences in the school systems.

I would suggest that what we are trying to do is to make that situation better.

11:35 a.m.

Liberal

Yves Robillard Liberal Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC

Thank you very much.

11:35 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Stephen Fuhr

We'll go to five-minute questions, now.

The first five-minute question will go to MP Fisher.

11:35 a.m.

Liberal

Darren Fisher Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

General, it's great to see you again after seeing you at the security forum a couple of weeks ago in Halifax.

When the deputy minister was last before us at committee for the supplementary estimates, there was a lot of talk about the Team Canada flight and the Department of National Defence's public affairs team. At that meeting the deputy minister was given the opportunity to address comments that were made on the matter here at committee.

I wonder, since we have you here today, if you would consider commenting on transparency and Team Canada.

11:35 a.m.

Gen Jonathan Vance

I'd be delighted. Thank you for the question.

I have given direction in writing and verbal guidance to my commanders—and that has cascaded down to the forces—to seek to be transparent and to lean into that transparency, that where there's a doubt, be transparent and communicate. I've encouraged my senior commanders—and I lead by example in this regard—to try to ensure that we answer questions and that we do that with integrity and credibility.

As it relates to Team Canada, the first job of the chain of command was to attend to the needs and care of the affected person. In consultation with that affected person, a course of action was selected. In hindsight, there was another course of action, but nonetheless a course of action was selected that ensured that our drill as it related to Operation Honour was to take care of the victim first. That was done in consultation with the victim. Decisions were made, and I was briefed on those decisions.

Thereafter, an investigation was commenced. That investigation was interrupted when the police, the NIS, commenced an investigation. That investigation, once completed, with charges laid, allowed us to recommence the administrative investigation by the RCAF. That investigation was completed. I read it. It didn't answer all my questions. I launched a more formal, detailed summary investigation led by a two-star rear-admiral not inside the air force.

That investigation, which is called a summary investigation, was completed. I read it. I still had more questions. I sent it back for more questions to be answered. It was answered. When I finished that, I made all of those reports, including my final letter, available to the media as quickly as I could, proactively, so that those who were interested and who were covering this could see what our objective was: job one, take care of the victim; job two, find out what happened; job three, ensure it never happens again. It's my responsibility. I have to make certain that it never happens again.

In the course of answering questions throughout the investigation, we answer the questions that we know to be true, but until the investigation is complete I don't know all of it. We are slower than the media because I cannot deal in maybes. I have to deal in facts. Once the investigations were complete and once the summary was complete, I proactively made them available. More importantly, I've given direction to the armed forces so that this never happens again. I am accountable for that and I take full responsibility for it. My job going forward is to ensure it doesn't happen again.

Meanwhile, there is another process, a legal process, under way with the alleged victim and assailant that will be taken care of and that I have absolutely no part in.

I believe I have been as transparent.... I believe in the transparency of this. I want people to understand what happened, and I have offered all the available information that I possibly can.

As it relates to costs, costs were offered as we went, as we knew. I think we've learned lessons in this process about how to do better. Again, it goes to I think even our procedures and that which we include in costs, including full exposure of costs. We must be prepared to do that more quickly and more readily.

At no time was there ever a decision made or advice given to deliberately mislead anybody. We gave what we had, and if it wasn't good enough and we found out more later, we gave that too. There was no effort to deliberately mislead the media—ever.

11:40 a.m.

Liberal

Darren Fisher Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS

Thank you, General.

I think I have one minute left.

11:40 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Stephen Fuhr

You have 20 seconds for a question and a response.

11:40 a.m.

Liberal

Darren Fisher Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS

I will not be able to accomplish that, Mr. Chair.

11:40 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Stephen Fuhr

Okay. We might have some time at the end.

I'm going to give the floor to MP Gallant.

December 6th, 2018 / 11:40 a.m.

Conservative

Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Through you, I thank the general for coming.

General, I guess it's an early Christmas present, because we haven't seen you in three years—

11:40 a.m.

Gen Jonathan Vance

Last year....

11:40 a.m.

Conservative

Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON

—for Operation Impact. That's how long we've been asking for a technical briefing, so thank you.

Our troops are currently on the ground in Iraq as part of the NATO training mission for Iraqi forces. This is not the first time that Iraqi forces have been trained by western powers to maintain peace and security in their country, yet despite all the training they received from the Americans and the British forces they were unable to stop ISIS from taking over large parts of their nation.

How can we be certain that our training efforts will result in success this time around?

11:40 a.m.

Gen Jonathan Vance

That's a great question.

I think that the issue of certainty is one that eludes us, when we are not dealing, really, with the aspect of training. I can be very certain about training an individual to be a good soldier and putting them in platoons, companies, squadrons and regiments and having them acquit themselves well.

If you are an armed forces that has been well trained yet you are still under government control or in a country that hasn't yet solved the societal schisms or the challenges within their country as it relates to how they are managing the country, then even the best military can't withstand that. To put it bluntly, there's really no point in having a great military inside a country that is not equally great.

The Iraqi military was overtaken by a number a things, not the least of which was that their country was failing.

11:40 a.m.

Conservative

Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON

ISIS is diminishing, but the ideologies that have led to the creation of that vile group have not disappeared. Instead, many of the group's cells and leaders have gone underground or blended into civil society, as you mentioned. How is Canada preparing the Iraqi military for the counterterrorism and counter-insurgency tactics that will be required to permanently destroy ISIS?

11:40 a.m.

Gen Jonathan Vance

Once again, it's a great question.

The permanent destruction of ISIS in its military form and complete eradication is unlikely to ever happen. I think there will be disaffected persons who may or may not wish to conduct crimes against their state. However, as an organized credible force that could unseat government, or indeed bring harm to the state...I think they are well on their way to achieving that.

It's more serious than just Iraq. It's Iraq and Syria. The phenomenon of ISIS has spread and is spreading, and they have franchises, if you will, spreading globally.

Attacking and dealing with the ideology is not a question of the use of military force. Military forces can help set conditions. We can collect intelligence. Where necessary, we can use force to stop activities and actions by another armed group. This is really about establishing the legal and political frameworks and about supporting countries that may fail or are failing as it relates to the protection of their borders, which creates that ungoverned space that allows for organizations like ISIL to thrive.

We are involved in that actively around the world, and not just in Iraq. We are doing capacity building around the world. We are involved in intelligence gathering. We are involved across government departments in supporting and trying to prevent governments from failing in the face of these kinds of pressures.

11:45 a.m.

Conservative

Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON

Is there any chance our troops will be forced into an active combat role in Iraq through the NATO mission?

11:45 a.m.

Gen Jonathan Vance

I don't really know what you mean by “forced”.

Let me take it two ways. One, our troops are never forced to do anything. They're given orders and they follow those orders.

Might they be in a situation where they must defend themselves? Yes. Will they use combat actions to do so? Yes, they will. Will the NATO mission morph or change into a mission where we are conducting offensive operations against Daesh? No. That is not the mandate of the mission.

11:45 a.m.

Conservative

Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON

We're seeing the new NATO mission is focused on Iraq, but ISIS has gone into both Syria and Iraq. Is there any chance the mission will extend into Syria? Also, if Canadian Armed Forces trainers are accompanying the forces that enter Syria, would we follow them over the border?

11:45 a.m.

Gen Jonathan Vance

There's no chance.

11:45 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Stephen Fuhr

I'm going to have to hold it there, General. There might be some time to answer that after the fact, but I now yield the floor to MP Dzerowicz.