Good day, Madam Chair and committee members. Thank you for your time to hear my testimony today.
I'd like to take this opportunity to acknowledge and thank all of my fellow current and former Canadian Armed Forces service members for their service to this great nation.
My name is Raymond Trotter, and I am a lieutenant-commander in the Royal Canadian Navy, stationed in CFB Esquimalt. I have 21 years of service in the navy. Outside of my naval service, I do have service with the army. I volunteered at the height of the Afghanistan conflict and served in Kandahar in 2008-09. From that, to this day, I still suffer from general anxiety disorder and severe depression from my time during that conflict.
It is my understanding that I have been summoned to this committee to answer questions and address my recent experiences with Operation Honour and sexual misconduct reporting in the Canadian Armed Forces. I will provide you with an opening statement that may address some of your questions.
As many within the Canadian Armed Forces, I was shaken when I learned about sexual misconduct allegations against General Vance, our former chief of the defence staff. Having worked so hard to progress in rooting out sexual harassment and misconduct in the military, it was a big blow to the Canadian Armed Forces.
Shortly after the allegations about General Vance became public, I had an interaction with a Canadian Armed Forces member on February 3, who related to me a traumatic incident that implicated the current chief of the defence staff, Admiral Art McDonald, in allegations of serious sexual misconduct.
The complainant was fearful about reporting the incident. When I advised that I was obligated to report the information, as it involved very serious allegations of misconduct by another member of the Canadian Armed Forces, she indicated that she understood but implored me to keep her name and information confidential.
I found myself in a very difficult position. I understood it was my legal and also ethical duty as an officer to report these serious allegations, but it was much less clear to me to whom I should report an allegation about the chief of the defence staff. The matter was further complicated by the complainant's fears and her request that her name be kept confidential.
That same day, I did inform my commanding officer of the matter. I indicated to my commander that a serious allegation against a senior officer had been reported to me, but that I needed to keep the details confidential. I informed my commander that I would take appropriate steps to report the sensitive matter and simply wanted him to be aware. I have the confidence of my commanding officer, and he indicated that he trusted me to do the right thing.
For the rest of that day, I weighed the appropriate course of action. There was no policy guidance in the Operation Honour directives for a situation like this. Normally, an allegation of sexual misconduct should be reported to the commanding officer of the respondent, but there was no military commanding officer in this case.
The chief of the defence staff is at the top. I also did not feel comfortable reporting the matter to the CF national investigation service as it is within the chain of command and ultimately reports to the chief of the defence staff. After considering the matter further, I decided that I should report it to the sexual misconduct response centre, or perhaps the office of the Minister of National Defence.
The next day, on Thursday, February 4, I called the sexual misconduct response centre, or SMRC, first thing in the morning. I explained that I wanted to report an incident of sexual misconduct involving a senior officer. I was advised by the intake officer that the SMRC is not a reporting tool, and that its role was to assist with counselling, guidance and support for complainants.
I then called the phone number for the office of the Minister of National Defence in Ottawa. I spoke to someone who I understood was a civilian employee, something like a switchboard. I identified myself and explained to the call taker that I wanted to speak to someone within the minister's office, as I wanted to report a serious sexual misconduct incident involving a high-ranking officer. I said I needed to protect the details until I spoke to someone with appropriate authority.
I was placed on hold and then another person came on the line, who I understood to be his supervisor. He asked me to confirm my rank, name and organization, which I did. He checked me against the Canadian Forces database, the defence-wide area network, and confirmed who I was.
I explained again that I needed to report a serious allegation of misconduct involving a high-ranking officer to the minister's office and that the matter was sensitive. The supervisor took my phone number and said someone from the minister's office would be in contact with me.
A few hours later, on February 4, the SMRC intake officer called me back and explained that, after checking up several levels within her supervisory structure, she could confirm that the SMRC was not a reporting mechanism. It was recommended that I should report it to the Minister of National Defence's office or the CFNIS.
I explained that I was uncomfortable with going to the CFNIS given that the respondent was very high-ranking and the CFNIS would be potentially in a conflict of interest. The call ended on that note.
Later that same day, I received a call from someone in the minister's office. She identified herself as the chief of staff to the minister. At this point I believed I was in contact with an appropriate authority and I told her I needed to report allegations of sexual misconduct against the chief of the defence staff. She responded that allegations against General Vance were already reported in the press. I then clarified the allegations were about the current chief of the defence staff, Admiral Art McDonald. I recall that she was very surprised by this revelation.
The person who identified as the chief of staff directed me to report the incident to the SMRC. I advised that I had already done that and that the SMRC had already told me twice they were not the appropriate reporting mechanism. I said the SMRC had suggested that I should report the incident to the minister's office as there was no one else senior to the chief of the defence staff. The chief of staff, as she described herself, told me she would look into it and get back to me.
Before I heard from her again, i.e., the minister's office, I was called by a warrant officer with the Canadian Forces national investigation service in Ottawa. He inquired about the complaint that I was raising, and I understood he had learned about the matter from the SMRC. At this point I felt like I had been running in circles all day, and I said I was willing to talk about it. The warrant officer advised that I would be contacted by CFNIS, the Canadian Forces national investigation service, in Esquimalt, which is where I'm based.
My last call of the day was from the minister's office again. The person who identified themselves as the chief of staff advised me she had spoken to a subject matter expert in the deputy minister's office and told me that it was their view that the SMRC was the appropriate reporting tool to respond to a complaint like this. I reiterated, in detail, my interactions with the SMRC and indicated that I felt the subject matter expert she consulted was wrong. She was surprised by this and said she would be bringing the allegation itself to the minister.
The following day, on February 5, I was contacted by the Canadian Forces national investigation service in Esquimalt. I was invited to attend an interview that day, and I did attend. I provided a statement. Nearly three weeks later, Admiral Art McDonald stepped away from his duties as chief of the defence staff.
This is very difficult for me as I was trying to do my duty to the Canadian Armed Forces and to the complainant. I wish there had been more guidance for me. There are many policies, but I am unsure if Operation Honour has been widely accepted within the Canadian Armed Forces yet.
I was involved in another sexual misconduct report later in February, i.e., the next week, and I was disappointed in that experience as well, as some senior personnel I interacted with minimized this other incident. In fact, I was berated in a very demeaning manner for following through on my reporting. I believe I was treated this way because the complaint was also about another senior officer. It was a very discouraging and disappointing experience.
In this environment, I can certainly understand why so many victims of sexual misconduct would be reluctant to come forward.
Thank you, Madam Chair. That concludes my opening statement.
