National Defence Committee on Sept. 29th, 2016

[LGen Christine Whitecross]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We're very honoured to have Admiral Bennett as part of our group, because, as you're aware, she actually helped run the reserve and cadet program. I'll ask her to speak on the specifics.

I want to add that the cadet program, which is overseen by the Canadian Armed Forces, is still bound by duty and respect for all. Our premise is that, whether it's the cadet leaders or the volunteers, people will follow suit on the objectives of Operation Honour, in addition to the men and women who work on bases and wings across the country and our reserve colleagues.

[RAdm Jennifer Bennett]

While I'm not currently in charge of the portfolio, I am very well aware of the programs for the two youth programs, the junior Canadian rangers in addition to the cadets. The programs are somewhat unique because of the environment and the communities from which those participants are drawn. In the cadet program, for both cadets and junior Canadian rangers, while they are not members of the Canadian Armed Forces, we are entrusted with their care, and that is a responsibility that we hold most dear and we take very seriously. We realize families put their trust in us to lead them.

From the outset, there's extensive screening for all volunteers, adults, who work with the program, whether they're members of the Canadian Armed Forces or civilian volunteers. There's also specialized training that has been created. A new program created in the last two years called social relations training is now mandatory for all cadets and adult leaders. That training was designed to enhance awareness and understanding, to encourage action and reporting, and to facilitate some of the existing harassment training in both programs.

The junior Canadian ranger program has a different network of support options based at the community level because of the differences there with police and community health services. There are special outreach programs provided at the community level before incidents occur and awareness training for both cadets and junior Canadian rangers, but also before summer camp and at the camps.

Because the majority of cadets are youth and therefore underage, our programs and the information is protected. The cadets are protected, and extra care is given to ensure that the care is appropriate, not only for that cadet, but for other members of the corps and squadrons and their families. There's quite a variety of extensive programs from the training, the awareness, and the support programs.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

Thanks very much.

I also want to acknowledge that there's been some very creative work done in cadets on accommodating transgender cadets, and it's world-leading.

My second question is about families on base, especially children on base. There's been some confusion over the years about who has jurisdiction in cases of harassment or assault of non-serving family members on the base and, in particular, minors on the base. Is this the responsibility of the civilian police or the military police?

The military's had a spotty record in the past in terms of its handling of domestic violence and sexual assault against children because of this jurisdictional problem, I think, largely. Whose responsibility is it to protect kids living on base? Are the services of the sexual misconduct response centre available to families?

[LGen Christine Whitecross]

The sexual misconduct response centre takes calls from all of the people, as you saw from their progress report. They take calls from military, civilian members, public servants, family members, and cadets. Though our priority right now in Operation Honour is to deal with military members, they take calls from these people and they help facilitate the support that they need. They would never just let them take their numbers; they actually try to facilitate assistance as much as possible.

In terms of jurisdiction, our military police on bases and wings across the country have relationships with all of the civilian police departments or the federal police department, depending on where they are. In the cases where there are only military because they're out by themselves, say they're on deployment or whatever, then obviously it resides within the military police purview. However, if it has to do with non-military members, they actually try, as long as there are civilian police in the local area, to give the file over to the civilian police, and then they work in consultation in order to be able to effect whatever needs to be done for that situation. In the grand majority of cases across the country, those jurisdictions will go to the civilian police.

[The Chair, Liberal, Stephen Fuhr]

And that's time.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

I hope I'll get another round. I have many other questions I'd like to ask. Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Stephen Fuhr]

Mr. Gerretsen, you have the floor.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

To the general and admiral, thank you very much for your work on this. It is obviously not an easy subject to tackle, but I admire your willingness and passion to do it.

I represent a riding, Kingston and the Islands, which has CFB Kingston in it. I was born and raised in Kingston. I've had many friends whose parents have been in the military, and I have been quite exposed to the culture that exists within the military.

I know of the subordinate nature of that culture, and the ranking in that culture. Quite often, I have heard—anecdotally at least, from what I would see within the community—of instances where, even when there were matters that took place off the base, proper repercussions were handled within the military structure, even though those individuals were in the broader community at the time. I understand and appreciate the rich sense of discipline that is ingrained within the culture of the military.

I recognize the fact that, as you say, the culture will take a long time to change—generations. How do you crack that nut of encouraging people to come forward, to voice their concerns, and to file their complaints but still appreciate the discipline that exists between the different levels of command?

How do you ensure that the culture can be adapted appropriately to respect that discipline but still ensure that individuals will be treated with the respect and the seriousness of their matters as they are concerned, especially when that culture has so ingrained in it a sense of “we will handle this” or “the next rank up will handle this”?

I have been dealing, in my riding, with the issue of the Phoenix pay system. I have a lot of military personnel, and I have a lot of personnel from Corrections Canada. The ones who come banging on the door at my office are the ones from Corrections, because they know that, when they need to, they will make noise. The military respect the discipline of reporting to your superior. I am curious whether you can expand on that.

[LGen Christine Whitecross]

I would submit that there is more than one culture in the Canadian Armed Forces. There are cultures depending on your occupation; on whether you are in the air force, the navy, or the army; and on whether you are SOF, special operations forces. There are cultures depending on whether you are an officer or an NCM.

Of the two specifics you are addressing, one has to do with our culture of a hierarchical system, which is very much who we are. You know where you are in that proverbial totem pole, and you know your roles and responsibilities based on your position and your rank.

Your responsibilities as a supervisor are at the heart of what Madame Deschamps has said in her report—and I'll go to the sexualized culture in just a moment. The heart of her report is that the people in the chain of command—not in every case but in the cases she is aware of—did not do the right thing.

That hierarchical culture, which is the backbone of military cultures around the world, in this respect is broken, in that people are not taking account of what their people are doing or, when someone has come forward, have not done the right thing. Again, it's not in all cases. I certainly don't want to broad-brush those who are doing the right thing.

When General Vance determined that he needed to give orders to the Canadian Armed Forces, Operation Honour, he did it on that premise, that as military members—which I understand a number of you have been—we understand what orders are, and the orders are that the chain of command will take care of their people.

Now, one could argue that it should never have to be an order, because it is implicit, but in this particular case, as it goes to that sexualized culture, the requirement for an order is there, to be sure that people are aware of what is and what is not going to be appropriate or put up with by the chain of command.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Thank you for that. I appreciate it.

There is one other part I want to touch on before I run out of time.

In the scope of Operation Honour, and sexual misconduct in particular, a lot of the discussion focuses on women and the way they are treated, at times inappropriately. I think that's justified.

I also represent RMC, and I had the great pleasure of serving on a city council in Kingston with one of the first female cadets in the first year. I have heard about some of the horror stories that can exist in that male-versus-female relationship.

I think the reality of the matter is that there is also sexual misconduct between males at times. Can you expand on how Operation Honour will protect those individuals as well?

[LGen Christine Whitecross]

I think we've made it clear, not just in the town halls but in the Operation Honour nexus, that every member of the Canadian Armed Forces, man or woman, regardless of their sexual orientation, will be treated with due dignity and respect. In Madam Deschamps' report, she did speak predominantly of women, but she also spoke about male-on-male rape, and a couple of other things specifically to do with male, or the LGBTQ, community.

Our premise is that every single person, as a standard, must be treated the same. So we go back to the gender-based analysis, the unbiased assumptions that people make based on what people look like and the like, and then ensure that our policies, our training, and everything else actually does that.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

That's where I was going with it. Will the training—not necessarily the policies, because those are overarching—be to the benefit of also the, perhaps, male on male?

[LGen Christine Whitecross]

Absolutely.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[RAdm Jennifer Bennett]

Could I add, just to reassure you, we are consulting with peer support groups and advocates, male support groups, male survivors, and we have been working quite extensively to gather training resources as well, to ensure that we are covering the diverse range, and that is included in our victim testimonials and our training scenarios. Yes, this is not a gender-based specific-to-women challenge that we have.

[The Chair, Liberal, Stephen Fuhr]

Thank you for that.

We're moving to five-minute questions now. Ms. Alleslev, you have the floor.

[Leona Alleslev, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you very much, and thank you for coming today. It's an honour to have you here.

I can't help but notice, though, that the leadership roles in this particular initiative, including the gender-based analysis that you made mention of earlier, are all women. Is it possible that that could be interpreted as being a women's issue that can be solved by women, and not something that, perhaps, male officers, of which there is a significantly higher percentage in the Canadian Forces, should concern themselves with?

[LGen Christine Whitecross]

That's a very good point, and I would add that when I was first named to lead the effort, it was something I had to deal with myself. In the eyes and ears of the Canadian public, perhaps, I was a spokesperson on this, what I would term, insidious behaviour.

When I took a step back and realized that I personally—I'm just going to speak about me and then I want to speak about my colleagues—am so passionate and dedicated to effecting change on this, I stand here in the belief that I'm the right person, and Jennifer is the right person, to take it in the initial stages.

I have two additional points. General Vance has made it very clear it is his priority. He is the spokesman. This is his issue, and he leads it for the Canadian Armed Forces. He has ensured that every one of his direct reports...so my colleagues at the lieutenant general rank also have to own this and they need to own it throughout their ranks. Institutionally, Admiral Bennett and I are taking care of the institution, training, education, and policies. But when it comes down to leadership and the command and control issues, that is done by every single one of my colleagues and my peers, right down to the lowest level, men and women, in command.

[Leona Alleslev, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you, and please don't misunderstand me. It was in no way a question—

[LGen Christine Whitecross]

No, I understand.

[Leona Alleslev, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

—of your capability or the job that you have been doing, which is outstanding. However, it can be misinterpreted, perhaps, that while General Vance is taking it seriously, he also is the chief of the defence staff and has other things on his plate as well as this.

I know that you have focused on understanding the problem and then responding to the incidents and then, of course, supporting victims, and then prevention. You've stated that you are making significant progress, but I would like to understand what the key metrics are in each of those categories that you're using to define the progress that you're making.

I was an officer in the Canadian Forces. I was at Royal Military College in Kingston, and back in 1998 I was able to be trained under SHARP, which was then a significant program around harassment and racism, which included gender equity. I was recently at my 25th reunion and was speaking with some of the cadets there, and it's difficult to know what progress has been made. I think I'd like to understand from you what significant metrics, measurable outcomes, you're using to be able to define progress.

[LGen Christine Whitecross]

Thank you.

Mr. Chair, if I could, I'd like to defer to Admiral Bennett. She's working on the actual metrics issue, and she'll be able to provide you more detail.

[RAdm Jennifer Bennett]

That is one of our greatest challenges. We realize that it's easy to demonstrate intent and action, but it's a matter of outcomes. It's the “so what?” We're only at the beginning of that stage, and so a great deal of our measurement at this point is anecdotal as we look at what impact we are having.

The first line, understanding, which you spoke about, is ongoing. That's engaging our institution for a better understanding of the scope and the nature of the problem, but we're finding that the conversations are changing at the base and wing levels. This topic is being more openly discussed. We're getting more questions and inquiries through my team, through the sexual misconduct response centre. People are asking questions, asking for resources to better understand.

[Leona Alleslev, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

So that's something we would probably see the actual metrics and outcomes on as you develop them later.

[RAdm Jennifer Bennett]

The Statistics Canada survey will give us a baseline about prevalence, and about awareness and understanding. We've also changed and developed specific metrics for recruits, for cadets in both of the military colleges. We're doing our unit climate surveys. We're enhancing a number of our current measurement strategies, but we're also having that discussion. We will then look at retention, recruiting, and a number of other factors, but we're only beginning.