National Defence Committee on Feb. 19th, 2021

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

Mr. Bezan, we'll look into it. We'll see what's available to us.

Thank you very much, and thank you to all our witnesses for joining us here today.

We'll now suspend for about two or three minutes so we can change panels.

Thank you, everyone.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

I call this meeting back to order.

The committee is continuing its study of addressing sexual misconduct in the Canadian Armed Forces, including the allegations against former chief of the defence staff, Jonathan Vance.

With us today by video conference for the second hour are the following witnesses from the Privy Council Office: Christyne Tremblay, deputy clerk; and Janine Sherman, deputy secretary to the cabinet, senior personnel and public service renewal.

I extend a heartfelt welcome to the two of you.

I would now like to invite Madam Tremblay to make her opening statement. Then it will be followed by questions from the floor.

[Christyne Tremblay, Deputy Clerk, Privy Council Office]

Thank you very much.

Madam Chair and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today.

Before I begin, I would like to acknowledge that the land from which I am joining you virtually today is the traditional unceded territory of the Huron-Wendat people, while my colleague Janine Sherman is joining you from land that is the traditional unceded territory of the Anishinabe people.

I am Christyne Tremblay. It is my pleasure to be meeting with you today. I am the Deputy Clerk of the Privy Council, Associate Secretary to the Cabinet and Deputy Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. I was appointed to this role a little over five months ago. Since my arrival, in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, my primary focus has been to support and advise the Prime Minister, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and cabinet on federal-provincial-territorial relations, but also on coordinating federal support when provinces or territories face particular issues relating to the pandemic.

With me today is my colleague Janine Sherman. As the Deputy Secretary to the Cabinet for Senior Personnel and Public Service Renewal, she is responsible for advising the Prime Minister and cabinet on Governor in Council appointments, which we commonly refer to as “GICs.”

Before I delve further into the roles and responsibilities of the Privy Council Office, PCO, I would like to underscore the importance of safe and inclusive workspaces. Every person working within the Government of Canada has the right to work in a safe, healthy and inclusive environment.

As deputy clerk, I take this important issue very seriously. I understand that every situation is unique, but that the right to a safe workplace, free from harassment, applies to all people who work within public organizations. I also understand that it is our responsibility to take all appropriate measures when there is evidence of inappropriate conduct.

To give the committee some background and context for what I can say today, I will provide further details about PCO's responsibilities with respect to GICs.

PCO supports the Prime Minister in the exercise of his prerogative for appointments by providing policy and operational advice. In practical terms, this translates into the recruitment, appointment and management of GICs over the span of their tenure.

As the deputy secretary to the cabinet responsible for senior personnel, my colleague Ms. Sherman advises the government—that is to say, the Prime Minister and cabinet—on: policy and operations related to GIC appointments; the terms and conditions of employment for GICs; and the management of GICs throughout their appointment. In the context of the committee's study, this last element includes advice on any complaints made against a GIC.

Four main principles are central to managing a complaint: respecting procedural fairness for all parties; supporting investigations that are independent, fair and free from bias; safeguarding personal information of those implicated to respect legislative frameworks—in particular, the Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act; and respecting the confidentiality of advice provided to ministers and the government of the day.

In general, when we have information to provide advice on an issue related to the conduct of a GIC, we rely on the legislative and policy frameworks based on the four principles I just described.

Every case is unique, and our advice takes into account the specific circumstances. At all times, respecting the confidentiality of the process and personal information is paramount. Officials have a legal responsibility, as well as a general duty, to protect the personal information provided in the context of complaints.

On the specific issue the committee has chosen to study, I would note that the Canadian Forces National Investigation Service has opened an investigation, as it was mentioned during the previous panel's appearance.

When an active investigation of a GIC is underway, we must respect the rule of law and preserve the integrity of the investigative process. Consequently, Ms. Sherman and I will be limited in our ability to respond to questions related to specific circumstances.

We would both be pleased to answer your questions within these limitations.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

Thank you very much, Ms. Tremblay.

I will now open the floor for questions.

Mr. Benzen please.

[Bob Benzen, Conservative, Calgary Heritage, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses.

So I'm curious; it's been reported in the media—in March of 2018—that these allegations of sexual misconduct against the former chief of the defence staff, General Jonathan Vance, were brought to the attention of the Privy Council. Is that correct?

[Christyne Tremblay]

At that time, I was deputy minister at the Government of Quebec's ministry for sustainable development, the environment, and the fight against climate change. I was not a member of the federal public service. I was appointed to the federal government only in August 2016 as deputy minister at the Department of National Resources, a position I held until last September.

You will understand that I cannot answer any questions relating to the mentioned events that occurred on those dates, as I was in no way associated with them. That is why, with your permission, I invite the committee members to allow my colleague Janine Sherman to answer those specific questions.

[Janine Sherman, Deputy Secretary to the Cabinet, Senior Personnel and Public Service Renewal, Privy Council Office]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I would say that the information we would have is personal information. It is nothing that could be spoken about here. It is our obligation, as my colleague noted, to be respectful of the Privacy Act and the confidentiality of the processes and information that we receive. We are not in a position to respond to that.

[Bob Benzen, Conservative, Calgary Heritage, AB]

Well, I mean, it's very important for us to create this timeline of when this information first came about. We know that March 1, 2018, there was a meeting where the minister was informed of an alleged misconduct. We know that—again, reported in the press—the Privy Council decided in March that there wasn't enough information to have an investigation.

So it's important to know when you got this information. When in March did you first find out, in the Privy Council, about these allegations?

[Janine Sherman]

Well, I think as mentioned, I believe the issues that have been reported in the press are, you know, reported in the press. The facts, on which the Privy Council Office response is based, are that we did not have information at that time that would have allowed us to take any action.

[Bob Benzen, Conservative, Calgary Heritage, AB]

Okay: So you did have some information, because it was enough to make a decision not to do anything.

[Janine Sherman]

We—

[Bob Benzen, Conservative, Calgary Heritage, AB]

Do you know if anybody in the Privy Council talked to anybody in the Prime Minister's Office about these allegations?

[Janine Sherman]

If I may, Madam Chair, the allegations that I believe are being spoken about came to light, as the minister commented, I think, in his recent testimony, only a couple of weeks ago. So I think the comment by me and the Privy Council Office in terms of the information that has been talked about is that we did not have information that would have allowed any action to be taken.

[Bob Benzen, Conservative, Calgary Heritage, AB]

So there were no conversations between the Privy Council and the Prime Minister's Office. That is a no.

[Janine Sherman]

In respect of the allegations that you were asking about that have recently arisen?

[Bob Benzen, Conservative, Calgary Heritage, AB]

Yes.

[Bob Benzen, Conservative, Calgary Heritage, AB]

So there were no conversations between the Privy Council and anybody in the cabinet or the Prime Minister himself.

[Janine Sherman]

That is correct.

[Janine Sherman]

I cannot speak to the allegations that have given rise to the investigation, as we cannot get in the way of that investigative process, so there is nothing I can say in that respect.

[Bob Benzen, Conservative, Calgary Heritage, AB]

There is an order in council, number 2019-0496, dated May 9, 2019; backdated to April 1, 2018. This order in council was to give General Vance a $45,900 raise. Since the allegations occurred before this, I am assuming that, as this order in council was going through, there would have been a review done of his job and his performance—a performance review or a professional review of General Vance.

Obviously these allegations would have needed to be reviewed at that point. Do you have any comment about that?

[Janine Sherman]

I would say that you are correct. The orders in council are done on an annual basis in respect of setting terms and conditions for GIC appointees, and changes in their rates of pay are also reflected in those orders in council.

There is the performance management program that is applicable to Governor in Council appointees. The information and structure of that applies across all GICs. It is available on the website. It is an annual process, by which individual GIC appointees submit objectives in written form. On evaluation, there is a rigorous process of review each year in respect of what we call ”pay at risk”, so a portion of a GIC appointee's salary is re-earned every year. That review process takes place, and recommendations are made to the Governor in Council in respect of what that pay at risk may be in the case of each individual. That is a process that does apply to all Governor in Council appointees.

[Bob Benzen, Conservative, Calgary Heritage, AB]

Certainly, if there had been on March 1, 2018—as we have been told—this conversation where this allegation of abuse was brought forward, this certainly would have impacted whether he would have received his raise. He probably would not receive a raise with that allegation. It is troubling to think that this information was out there, and that this raise happened after the fact.

The other thing I would like to ask here is about the way the Privy Council has handled this. When there was the slightest allegation against the Governor General, immediately, there was a big investigation done through a third party. Consultants were brought in, and it was a very broad investigation. There was, in fact, at that time not even any formal complaint. Now we are talking about allegations, yet then nothing was done at all.

Is there not a double standard going on here with the Privy Council and the way it handled one versus the way it is handling the other one?

[Christyne Tremblay]

Madam Chair, do you want me to answer?

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

Yes, please.

[Christyne Tremblay]

In the case of the Office of the Secretary to the Governor General, it was reported that the organization's employees felt they had no other recourse. So they turned to the media. The media reports were consistent with the information obtained through a survey of federal public servants.

As each case is unique, our advice takes into account specific circumstances.

Concerning the case the committee is considering today, in light of the comments made by the previous panel, it is clear that various other avenues of recourse were possible, both inside and outside the organization.

The case that was just brought up is different.