National Defence Committee on March 8th, 2021

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

Eventually, we did find her, but not with much notice.

Ms. Vandenbeld, do you want to read out the amendment, to make sure we're all clear?

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

At the end of the first paragraph, where it says, “the committee issue a summons to the following witnesses to testify”, it would now say, “the committee issue a written invitation to the following”. Zita Astravas would be a), and b) would be deleted.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

Go ahead, Mr. Bezan.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

I have a question for Ms. Vandenbeld. You're saying that Mr. Wernick is ill. Are you positive of that, or do you have Mr. Shugart confused with Mr. Wernick?

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

I'm not confused. I'm not positive of that, but I stand by the amendment I put forward.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

On a point of order, Madam Chair, I don't understand how the parliamentary secretary would know that Mr. Wernick is ill if the committee can't even find him to get an invitation to him. She knew how to reach him, because she found out he was ill.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

We did eventually find him, but it was at the very last moment. Again, it's very difficult when we want to invite witnesses with 24 or 48 hours' notice. That's often the challenge.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

We weren't inviting them for today, Madam Chair. We were just putting them on notice that we're inviting them.

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

We were calling the question. I had asked to call the question.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

Yes. Let's have a recorded division.

(Amendment agreed to: yeas 7; nays 4 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Go ahead, Madam Vandenbeld.

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

As I mentioned earlier, I think that for a full study on this we need to look at what happened previously, when General Vance was appointed. There have been a number of news articles, including on February 5, and I know that the former chief of staff to Prime Minister Harper, Ray Novak, declined to comment on that media interview, even though there was some suggestion in the media that perhaps some of this was known at that time.

Having said that, and also in wondering why it took three months—when the norm is about one month—before the change of command happened after General Vance was first named as chief of the defence staff, I would move a motion that, in addition to the names that are listed, under that, the committee invite the following witnesses: that we also add e) and f), and that would be Ray Novak, chief of staff to Stephen Harper when he was prime minister; and Gerrit Nieuwoudt, chief of staff to Jason Kenney when he was minister of defence.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

Is there anyone who wants to offer comment on this new amendment?

Mr. Garrison.

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

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

We previously issued an invitation to the former defence minister, Jason Kenney, to appear. I wonder whether we could have a report on whether we received any response to that invitation.

Otherwise, I believe we have so many allegations here, stretching across so many years, that it's useful for us to understand what the real commitment was to tackling sexual misconduct within the Canadian military by those who were in charge. The two witnesses suggested in this amendment could be useful.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

Thank you very much, Mr. Garrison.

We did get in contact with Mr. Kenney, and he said that due to schedules and demands he would not be available, in answer to your question.

Mr. Bezan.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

I would just say that I think in Premier Kenney's case he has a pandemic that he's fighting and he has his hands quite full doing COVID vaccine rollout, so I don't think we should expect him to come.

Perhaps having former chiefs of staff appear who were working for Mr. Harper and Mr. Kenney at that time may shed some light. However, we know that there was an investigation, and it may raise more questions about the investigative service, as well as the PCO vetting. I think that is critical information that we should look into—how some of these things slid through.

The same can be said about the employment of Admiral McDonald, because it seems that it was quite well known within the armed forces about the incident that occurred over a decade ago, and yet that never seemed to come to light within the PCO or in the minister's office. Maybe it did, though, and we didn't know what happened there.

I think there are a lot of questions around the employment process that we ought to look at.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

Thank you, Mr. Bezan.

Is there anyone else who wishes to speak to this second amendment?

Let's do a recorded division.

(Amendment agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0)

The amendment to the motion passes.

Now we will go to the main motion, unless there's some reason not to. We will do the recorded division on the main motion, which has had two amendments.

(Motion as amended agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Thank you.

Go ahead, Mr. Bezan.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

I have a second motion to present that has also been circulated to all members. I'll read it into the record and then I'll speak to that motion, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

Just a minute, Mr. Bezan.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Both motions were sent to you.

I'm going to read it into the record as we're dealing with business, and I'll make sure it gets forwarded in.

It's just been sent to you for confirmation, Mr. Clerk.

That, in respect of the committee’s study regarding the allegations of sexual misconduct against former Chief of Defence Staff General Jonathan Vance, the committee send for all electronic and paper correspondence including, but not limited to, emails, text messages, memos, and briefing notes, concerning the allegations against General Vance in March 2018 and the period of April 1-May 31 2019 inclusive between; a) Gary Walbourne and the Privy Council Office b) Zita Astravas and Gary Walbourne c) the Minister of National Defence or Deputy Minister and the Privy Council Office d) Zita Astravas and the Privy Council Office, e) Elder Marques and the Privy Council Office, f) Zita Astravas and Elder Marques and (g) Elder Marques and Gary Walbourne; that the Parliamentary Law Clerk remove any information that could identify the person or persons making an allegation or who may have been the subject of misconduct by General Vance, and that these documents be tabled at committee no later than ten days following the adoption of this motion; should these records not be turned over within ten days to the Parliamentary Law Clerk in an unredacted form, that the Chair, at the earliest opportunity report to the House the following report: Your Committee, having requested and not received certain documents from the Department of National Defence and the Privy Council Office, therefore recommends that should this report be concurred in, that an Order of the House do issue for the unredacted version of all documents produced by the government in response to the March 1, 2018 order of the Standing Committee on National Defence, and that these documents shall be turned over to the Parliamentary Law Clerk within one sitting day of the adoption of this Order, and that the Parliamentary Law Clerk remove any information that could identify the person or persons making an allegation against or who may have been the subject of misconduct by General Vance before turning the documents over to the Standing Committee on National Defence.

Madam Chair, I'll speak to that, and we'll make sure the motion is received and circulated as quickly as possible to everyone. That's my error. I apologize for that.

We are seeing a lot of documentation that has been released already in the media through ATIP requests.

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

I have a point of order. I would request that, until we get a copy of that motion—because it was very long and I didn't quite catch it—we suspend until the motion is distributed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

All right. We're going to suspend, and then we'll get that out there.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

Let's call this meeting back to order.

Go ahead, Mr. Bezan.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

One of the responsibilities of dealing with work here at committee is the power of the committee to demand the production of papers from government departments. We know a number of memos and briefing notes have been accessed by the media through access to information requests, and those have now been published. I believe most committee members would agree that there is probably a paper trail in the minister's office, the deputy minister's office, the PMO, and the PCO over the report that Gary Walbourne gave to the minister back in March 2018. I think it's pertinent to the study to look at the exchange of information and to find out why no action was taken on the report of sexual misconduct allegations against General Vance.

You'll also notice that the motion mentions a time from April to May 2019. We need to look at those documents as well. As we all know, General Vance received a significant boost in salary at that time. We should find out why and look at his performance review that was submitted from the minister's office to the PCO for consideration as a Governor in Council appointment. We should look at whether or not that reflects the issue of the allegations that the former defence ombudsman brought to the attention of the minister. From all the communications, we know that others in the minister's office and the deputy minister's office were aware of the allegations. I think it is pertinent to all this to know what happened.

The critical information is correspondence and communications. As Gary Walbourne pointed out, he was summoned to the PCO. We need to know how that took place. All the paper and electronic communications are critical to the study, especially as we look at process and ensuring a transparent and fair process free of interference for sexual misconduct allegations that are brought forward. We also want to make sure they are being respected within the chain of command, including at the political level, within the minister's office and the PMO. That's why Elder Marques is part of the correspondence.

With that I would like to make sure that everybody can support this, because I think it's germane to our study on sexual misconduct and improving the system to protect our women in the Canadian Armed Forces.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

Thank you very much, Mr. Bezan.

We have six people on the list. Messrs. Bagnell, Spengemann, Baker, Garrison and Brunelle-Duceppe.

Go ahead, Mr. Bagnell.

[Larry Bagnell, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I would have preferred to have this a little in advance. As was said, this is fairly complicated. It would have been nice to have some time to look at it in more detail. Do these documents include the ones that were available during the appointment of General Vance?

My main point is that I want to go back to what I said previously today and at the last meeting. Maybe I'm the only one, but I want to make sure our study is on the things that can most help the women in our military feel protected, and that's changing the systems so the various investigative systems are open and independent and available and women feel protected. I want to make sure we have witnesses and information that will help them. The experts who have testified so far say it's a change in culture, so those witnesses will be suggesting mechanisms to change the culture. I'm going to continue to lobby for that throughout this study.

Thank you.