Evidence of meeting #21 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.
12:05 p.m.
As an Individual
The appointment is made by the Governor General on the advice of the Prime Minister.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Anita Vandenbeld Liberal Ottawa West—Nepean, ON
Yes, I wanted to clarify, because I think there was some confusion earlier. I'd like to make sure that I'm getting your testimony exactly right.
You mentioned that, after the initial part of the vetting process, allegations or rumours were brought to you about an inappropriate relationship in Gagetown—and I'll note that's not Naples, but in fact, Gagetown—which was the relationship with his then fiancée, now his wife, which is consistent with what we heard later from Major Brennan, and that this allegation came to you from the chief of staff of the then minister of veterans affairs.
Erin O'Toole was the Minister of Veterans Affairs then, and I understand the chief of staff is still his chief of staff today. The person who alerted you to this was the chief of staff to the current Leader of the Opposition.
12:05 p.m.
As an Individual
No, that's not correct. The chief of staff to the Minister of Veterans Affairs at the time was a different individual.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Anita Vandenbeld Liberal Ottawa West—Nepean, ON
Okay. I apologize for that, but that was Erin O'Toole who was the Minister of Veterans Affairs, and it was his most senior official who brought the allegations to you.
12:05 p.m.
As an Individual
That's correct. Minister O'Toole was the minister at that time and it was his chief of staff who conveyed the rumour to me.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Anita Vandenbeld Liberal Ottawa West—Nepean, ON
My understanding is that, when you heard that rumour, you then took that to the appropriate independent authority, which was PCO, and I would note that the NSA is in PCO. You took that to senior officials in PCO, asking them—I'm paraphrasing a bit what you said—to investigate this and report back, and that when nothing further was returned, there was nothing further to be done at that time. Is that correct?
12:10 p.m.
As an Individual
I'm not sure which part of the testimony the member is referring to, but if we're speaking about the rumour, that is correct. The rumour was conveyed to me. I asked the national security adviser in Privy Council to investigate the rumour immediately, which he undertook to do and did and reported back to us, as per my testimony.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
Anita Vandenbeld Liberal Ottawa West—Nepean, ON
What I would ask is this: How is that different from when Minister Sajjan, similarly heard—and we now know from the media that it was an email about inappropriate behaviour—again an allegation from somebody who wanted to remain anonymous and immediately, within hours, brought it to PMO and PCO and asked PCO, because the investigation began with the ombudsman, to be in touch with the ombudsman to continue that investigation.
When nothing further was coming—there was no copy of the email, no name of the person, no indication that the person wanted to go forward and there was nothing further reported—wouldn't that be the exact same process that you would have used?
You have an allegation, you take it to PCO, you ask them to investigate, they get to a point where there is nothing further reported, and then they come back with the fact that there is nothing further to be done about it.
12:10 p.m.
As an Individual
I obviously am not privy to all the details of who knows what in the current government between the minister and the Privy Council. All I can say is that, in my case, when rumours were brought to me, I immediately conveyed them to officials, asked for an investigation and ensured there was an outcome, and if there had been facts, then decisions would have been taken accordingly.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
Anita Vandenbeld Liberal Ottawa West—Nepean, ON
Okay.
I would note that in the case when Minister Sajjan was made aware of rumours, it was the very next day that PCO called in the former ombudsman and tried to do an investigation at that time. What I would like to know, though.... We've heard in this committee that it is really difficult. The system was not set up to deal with allegations against the highest-ranking military official, the chief of the defence staff, but when you were dealing with this, he was not yet the chief of the defence staff. Similarly, you had rumours. You had one allegation that you had already known had been investigated. You had another one that came to you through the office of Erin O'Toole, the Minister of Veterans Affairs at the time.
What is the threshold? Again, I go back to my initial statement. What kinds of things are rewarded and what kinds of behaviours are seen as not relevant or peripheral when you're making this kind of very important appointment? Why at the time did that not give you pause?
I think the threshold, when appointing someone, is very different from a threshold once they're there. You have to have a reason to be able to then remove them, but when you're vetting somebody, this would have been enough reason. If not you, was there anybody else on the political side—the minister, the Prime Minister—who raised concerns that maybe this wasn't the most appropriate person in terms of even just the questions being raised?
12:10 p.m.
As an Individual
I've been very candid on what information was known. I've been very candid that the then prime minister directly asked General Vance, in March of 2015, about the issue from the NATO deployment relating to how he met his wife, and I have been very candid on what his answer was to that.
With regard to the rumour, the rumour was relayed to officials. We asked for an investigation. They reported back that there were no facts.
I think the real challenge at the heart of this is that, if there had been other facts or other information, then another decision would clearly have been taken. Really, underlying all of that, I think, as the committee has been deliberating for weeks, is this: How do we achieve cultural and structural change in the Canadian Armed Forces to not only keep our women in uniform safe but to ensure that they are empowered to bring forward allegations for independent investigative review?
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
March 22nd, 2021 / 12:10 p.m.
Conservative
Leona Alleslev Conservative Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you for this excellent testimony today.
My first question, if I may go back to the allegations and rumours around Gagetown, is this. You said that you acted to have them investigated. Did you also make the then minister of national defence aware of these rumours? Was he aware of them?
12:10 p.m.
As an Individual
Yes, I believe that in early July, when the rumour was received and conveyed to the national security adviser for investigation, there was, in the days thereafter, a discussion about the need potentially to defer or cancel the change of command ceremony. In that context, there was a discussion between the Prime Minister's Office, the Privy Council Office and the office of the Minister of National Defence.
12:15 p.m.
Conservative
Leona Alleslev Conservative Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON
In your opinion, under the National Defence Act, is the Minister of National Defence legally accountable for the direction and management of the Canadian Armed Forces?
12:15 p.m.
As an Individual
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I can't give the committee a legal perspective on that. That is my understanding, but I can't give the committee a legal opinion on it.
12:15 p.m.
Conservative
Leona Alleslev Conservative Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON
That's fair enough, but this is the way you were operating, as if it were his responsibility.
In that light, would you consider that there is a somewhat different process for vetting a potential candidate for chief of the defence staff and an actual sitting chief of the defence staff, who reports directly to the Minister of National Defence?
12:15 p.m.
As an Individual
Yes. The committee process that we used for appointing three chiefs of the defence staff—I obviously can't speak to the one used by the current government—was, as I described, an ad hoc committee constituted for the purpose, composed of the most senior officials in the Government of Canada, which, I think, clearly speaks to the importance of the appointment.
12:15 p.m.
Conservative
Leona Alleslev Conservative Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON
Your responsibility was obviously a very important one. Had the allegations been made around a sitting chief of the defence staff and had the Minister of National Defence brought this to your attention, would you have advised conducting an investigation?
12:15 p.m.
As an Individual
Yes, absolutely I would have. I think it is incumbent on the political leadership of the government, if they are made aware of either rumours or serious allegations regarding the comportment of a senior official, especially someone who is leading the Canadian Armed Forces, that the government insist that the matter be immediately investigated and that appropriate action be taken, if necessary.
12:15 p.m.
Conservative
Leona Alleslev Conservative Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON
Would it have been your advice to suspend the individual during the course of that investigation, considering his serious and important position?
12:15 p.m.
As an Individual
I think it is entirely dependent on the exact nature of the allegations and the context. I'm not sure I can speak to that. I think the important point for the committee to deliberate on is that if allegations—whether they are rumours or allegations or complaints—are raised to the political level of the government, they be immediately reported to responsible officials and that there be an investigation and, if there are facts or outcomes from that investigation, that action be taken immediately.
12:15 p.m.
Conservative
Leona Alleslev Conservative Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON
If the minister had required an investigation and had wanted the results to be reported back to him, would that have been viewed in your mind as political interference or as his doing the job for which he is responsible to the Canadian public?
12:15 p.m.
As an Individual
I don't view that as political interference. Particularly given the very serious nature of this topic, given the very disturbing allegations that we've all seen in a range of recent interviews, I think it is essential that any allegations or even rumours relating to these matters be reported to the appropriate officials and that immediate action be taken, if the facts warrant the taking of action.
12:15 p.m.
Conservative
Leona Alleslev Conservative Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON
Thank you.
Knowing what you know now, do you regret the appointment of General Vance as chief of the defence staff?
