Thank you.
Evidence of meeting #18 for National Defence in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was investigation.
A video is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #18 for National Defence in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was investigation.
A video is available from Parliament.
3:55 p.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
I guess my concern here is somewhat similar to Elizabeth's, in that we seem to have gotten focused in the committee on what Mr. Walbourne did or didn't do. He's been very frank with us about what he did and how that fit with his view of his responsibilities. The person who obviously was not frank with us in his appearance before the committee was the minister.
I will have a couple more questions for Mr. Walbourne, but I just want to note that, as I said in the last meeting, I think we do need to invite the minister back so that he can—now, taking into account Mr. Walbourne's testimony—see if he wishes to change anything that he had to say to us.
We now have a second chief of the defence staff. The current chief of the defence staff has stepped aside, as it's being characterized, because of an allegation of sexual misconduct.
Mr. Walbourne, would you have seen this as a possible outcome of the information that you took to the minister?
3:55 p.m.
Former Ombudsman, National Defence and Canadian Armed Forces, As an Individual
I think it's quite apparent that it could have been. If this is what we've done in the current situation, I don't see much different.
3:55 p.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC
Do you feel that the information that you brought to the minister, which he refused to look at, was serious enough that it might have had the same outcome?
3:55 p.m.
Former Ombudsman, National Defence and Canadian Armed Forces, As an Individual
I'm not going to talk any more about that allegation.
3:55 p.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC
Okay. Fair enough.
Another peculiar thing about some of the questioning today is...if we didn't have ministerial responsibility in Parliament. When people talk about a court martial, you don't have to be a military justice to know that there's some question about whether you can actually court-martial the chief of the defence staff, since a court martial requires an officer of the same rank or higher to conduct proceedings. There are some real problems there.
I'll go back to something you said to us that I think was very important—that is, that you and the chief of the defence staff both reported to the minister. Would you have expected that the minister might have asked the chief of the defence staff if he had anything he wanted to talk about as a result of your meeting?
3:55 p.m.
Former Ombudsman, National Defence and Canadian Armed Forces, As an Individual
That sounds like a logical response to me.
3:55 p.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC
Again, I'm back to where as a committee member I actually need to be able to ask these questions to the minister. When PCO did not take any further action....
I just want to go back to this, because I've kind of lost the thread here. The minister never contacted you again for any follow-up, and in fact refused meetings with you repeatedly after that. One would presume it was out of fear that you might ask him the same question or present him with the same evidence. I can't impute motive, but the point is that the minister never got back to you with any advice or any suggestion that he'd done anything about this matter.
4 p.m.
Former Ombudsman, National Defence and Canadian Armed Forces, As an Individual
That's correct.
4 p.m.
Conservative
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I again want to thank Mr. Walbourne for his candour, his service for so many years to Canada and especially his time as defence ombudsman.
There's no question that, with your testimony today, it's clear that Minister Sajjan failed to take actions on these allegations of sexual misconduct by former chief of the defence staff General Vance. Your testimony proves that the minister failed to live up to his own standard of zero tolerance for sexual misconduct in the armed forces. Really, the question now comes down to the Prime Minister having to answer how this is acceptable conduct by a member of his own cabinet.
I am disappointed with the attacks coming from Liberal MPs here, trying to muddy the waters, trying to attack your credibility on decisions you made and how you handled these allegations.
I just want to remind everyone that under the National Defence Act, it says right in section 4 that the minister “has the management and direction of the Canadian Forces”. That's all the Canadian Forces. He has four people who report directly to him: the chief of the defence staff, the deputy minister, the judge advocate general and the ombudsman. As long as the CDS is in position—I know the Liberal colleagues know this—there's no way anyone is going to seriously investigate the CDS as long as they're sitting in the chair. We know that there was going to be some cover-up.
Mr. Walbourne, you said that you met with Janine Sherman from PCO. Did she ever tell you how the Privy Council Office was informed a day later? Did it come directly from Minister Sajjan, or did it come from somebody else in his office?
4 p.m.
Former Ombudsman, National Defence and Canadian Armed Forces, As an Individual
No, I never got that detail from Ms. Sherman, other than that she knew about the allegation.
To the other point you were making, I would go the other way, Mr. Bezan. I would say thanks to the Liberal members for finally reading the mandate of the ombudsman's office.
4 p.m.
Conservative
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
Okay. I appreciate that.
With regard to the seven meetings you requested with the minister after March 1, 2018, you said you had various issues you wanted to bring forward. Do you think he was saying no because he was afraid you would again bring up the issue of the allegations against General Vance?
4 p.m.
Former Ombudsman, National Defence and Canadian Armed Forces, As an Individual
Well, that's a distinct possibility. I would suspect it would have been in the back of his mind.
4 p.m.
Conservative
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
Just to change gears a bit, you know that I've long supported the idea of having the office of the military ombudsman as independent, as well as making the sexual misconduct response centre independent. You have proposed bringing those two offices under one umbrella and reporting directly to Parliament.
How do you visualize it working with, say, an allegation you were dealing with, an allegation against the chief of the defence staff? If it came into your office as an independent ombudsman, would you then be free to take that to the sexual misconduct response centre, or would you have to take it to committee, through an in camera process, to get action?
4 p.m.
Former Ombudsman, National Defence and Canadian Armed Forces, As an Individual
Again, it would depend on the type of allegation that was made: informal, formal, systemic or whatever it was. I suspect there would have to be structures created just above as a reporting-in for that entity, but I would assume that's where it would go, either to committee or to cabinet, one way or the other.
4 p.m.
Conservative
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
As you start looking at independence and being able to do investigations beyond what you do, can you just clarify for us—because Liberal members were somewhat confused—what powers the ombudsman has to investigate, whether it's misconduct, harassment or sexual assault? What are the limitations currently, and where do we need to go to make it better so that we can start stomping out sexual misconduct in the armed forces?
4 p.m.
Former Ombudsman, National Defence and Canadian Armed Forces, As an Individual
As I said earlier, sexual harassment, in the same vein, is handled in a different way. There are resources you bring to get the person the right counselling and to get them into a good place and to deal with what's happening in that particular environment, either through the chain of command or through mediated conversations. There are many approaches to that.
As for the second part, for me it just comes back to the basics. What are we going to do? How do we give assurances? The structure has to be such that it is separated enough so that those coming forward know that there is not going to be blowback because they've come forward. It has to be such that there is an entity other than the minister or the chief where it stops completely.
I just think we have to stop talking about this. It does not take World War III to get this to happen. The ombudsman's office was set up to handle sexual assault and harassment. The SMRC, I think, has come a long way. Dr. Preston and her group are doing good work over there. God bless them. I think now's the time. I think we're at the right time, the right place and in the right time in history to get this right.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
Yvan Baker Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
Thank you very much, Chair.
Mr. Walbourne, I'd like to go back to some of your testimony today. You've spoken about how you approached the minister with allegations, but you have also spoken about how you were obliged to protect the confidentiality of the person coming forward.
Help me understand this a little bit better. You needed to protect confidentiality, but you went to the minister and you have said that you would have wanted him to act. What, reasonably, could he have done under those constraints? What's your advice in that regard?
4:05 p.m.
Former Ombudsman, National Defence and Canadian Armed Forces, As an Individual
My advice would be to do something. Again, as I said, there are many levers inside the NDA that the minister has available. I don't have visibility on all of them. There are actions that could have been taken. We've seen some recent action taken.
There are many things I think could have happened, but doing nothing wasn't the response I was looking for. Throwing it over to PCO and not coming back to me with advice on what I was I supposed to do with this.... I'm sitting with the allegation. I am trying to protect the complainant who has come forward to me, but I have an allegation against a chief. What do I do with that? Who do I go to? My only reporting structure was to the minister.
