National Defence Committee on March 22nd, 2021

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

Given the important role that the national security adviser plays, based upon the testimony we heard today, in carrying out and heading up both the vetting process and the investigations within the PCO, I think there are a lot of questions to be asked. It's only fair to all committee members that we hear from Daniel Jean for a full two hours.

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

Madam Chair, I know that, one by one, having witnesses just for two hours.... I know traditionally we have had panels. Also, I note, Madam Chair, that you've been very good about making sure panels are of like mind so that we can ask similar questions. I don't think the motion said that we would have this single witness for two hours. If we do that with every witness, we're going to be on this study for months. If that wasn't in the motion, then I think we can leave it to the discretion of the chair.

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

Just for clarification, I didn't ask for him to appear individually. I just asked for two hours.

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

Okay. Then we're good.

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

Actually, ideally, I'd like to see him appear alongside Mr. Wernick.

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

Then we're good.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

I just need to clarify with the clerk.

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

On a point of order, Madam Chair, it is not customary to have panels. It has become an abnormal series of meetings to have panels. However, we find that if we have more than one person on a panel at a time, we do not have adequate time to ask the questions of the individuals on that panel. Please don't build up the panels to the point where we don't have an opportunity to ask the necessary questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

It's been my experience that panels are more the norm than not, but I understand what you're asking for and we will take that into account.

Do you have Mr. Bezan's motion? Can I read it?

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

On a point of order, Madam Chair, I moved an amendment to Mr. Bezan's motion. I just want to make sure we have an opportunity to vote on that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

I guess we have to deal with the amendment first, reducing from two hours to one hour. Is there anyone who is against that amendment?

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Madam Chair, if I may, I apologize. I'd like to seek unanimous consent to withdraw that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

Okay.

Does anyone deny unanimous consent? No.

(Amendment withdrawn)

We go to the main motion to invite.... I would appreciate at least having something on paper. It really makes it a lot easier for me to keep it straight.

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

Madam Chair, we'll get that in to you. That was one we did just based upon what we heard.

It's a table drop, and I moved it verbally based on the structure of previous motions. I'll read it one more time just so everybody is clear on it.

I move that the Standing Committee on National Defence, concerning its study on addressing sexual misconduct issues in the Canadian Armed Forces, including the allegations against former Chief of Defence Staff Jonathan Vance and Admiral Art McDonald, summon Daniel Jean to appear for no less than two hours; and that these meetings be held in public and be televised.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

Go ahead, Madam Vandenbeld.

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

I understood the first time the member said it that he asked to “invite” Daniel Jean—

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

Yes, it's “invite”, not “summon”.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

The clerk is asking that you repeat it once again. This is why if we could have a quick written copy, that would be good.

Go ahead, Mr. Bezan.

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

I've asked my office to send it in, but I'll do it one more time. It says:

That the Standing Committee on National Defence, concerning its study of addressing sexual misconduct issues in the Canadian Armed Forces, including the allegations against former Chief of Defence Staff Jonathan Vance and Admiral Art McDonald, invite Daniel jean, former National Security and Intelligence Advisor to the Prime Minister of Canada; that the witness appear for no less than two hours; and that the meeting be held in public and be televised.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

Okay.

Are we ready to vote on that motion?

(Motion agreed to)

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

Madam Chair, I'd just like to move the motion that I gave notice on. I move:

That the Standing Committee on National Defence, concerning its study of addressing sexual misconduct issues in the Canadian Armed Forces, including the allegations against former Chief of Defence Staff Jonathan Vance and Admiral Art McDonald, invite Gregory Lick, Ombudsman for National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces to testify before the Committee, that the witness appear for no less than two hours, that the meeting be held in public and be televised, and that the witnesses be called to testify within 15 days of this motion passing.

Madam Chair, we have seen that Ombudsman Lick has been in the news recently talking about the role that Gary Walbourne has played in the past, that he was treated unfairly and that the ombudsman's office should be made independent.

Madam Chair, I think it is only responsible on our part to hear from the current ombudsman about the role of the ombudsman's office as well as the treatment of Gary Walbourne.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

Thank you.

Madam Vandenbeld.

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

Madam Chair, I think that's a very reasonable person to call before the committee. Having said that, of course we have Friday's meeting already booked and then no meetings for 14 days, so I would like to propose an amendment to say within 21 days, not within 14 days.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

We have an amendment to the main motion on the floor, which amends the timeline for the invitation from 14 days to 21 days.

Is anyone against that amendment?