National Defence Committee on March 22nd, 2021

[Ray Novak]

Let me give you the example of watching Lieutenant-Colonel Eleanor Taylor's interview recently. I was absolutely struck by what our country has lost in her case: a highly capable, decorated officer, the first Canadian woman to, as I understand it, lead troops into combat. She has now resigned in disgust and left the forces. Potentially we have an entire generation of young Canadian women who may have taken their skills into the Canadian Armed Forces to protect our country, and now they may be looking elsewhere, thanks to what has gone on.

As I said earlier, when one appoints a chief of the defence staff, one is seeking a leader who will uphold the finest traditions of that institution and leave it in a better place than he found it. Clearly that has not been the case. I think the current government might say that also about their own recent appointment of a chief of the defence staff who only served a number of weeks.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

Thank you very much.

We'll go on to Mr. Baker, please.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Mr. Novak, I'd like to go back to confirm some information and then ask you a question.

My understanding is that the chief of staff to the veterans affairs minister brought forward rumours and those were shared with [Technical Difficulty—Editor] officials for investigation. Is that correct?

[Ray Novak]

That's correct.

In July of 2015 the chief of staff to the veterans affairs minister relayed a rumour to me, which I immediately reported to the national security adviser in the Privy Council and asked him to investigate.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Could you explain to us why you shared it with the Privy Council for investigation?

[Ray Novak]

Because, as we've discussed, the Prime Minister's Office is not an investigative body. The Prime Minister's Office acts and interacts with the rest of government through the Privy Council Office.

As I've described, the national security adviser operationally had led the ad hoc committee process that vetted candidates for the chief of the defence staff. When it comes to a rumour of this nature, reporting it to the national security adviser was the appropriate action for the Prime Minister's Office to take. That was the individual I asked to investigate and report back to the Prime Minister's Office.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Is there a reason you didn't consider sharing it with the Minister of National Defence for investigation at the time?

[Ray Novak]

The minister's office was absolutely made aware of both the rumour and the anonymous email. In this case, the Prime Minister's Office operates through the Privy Council Office. That is why I asked the national security adviser to investigate that rumour. The results of the investigation were briefed back to us, as I indicated to the committee.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Is there a reason you didn't have the Minister of National Defence investigate?

[Ray Novak]

The Minister of National Defence, through his chief of staff and his office, was absolutely aware of this and was briefed on the results of the national security adviser's investigation. As I indicated in my testimony, the NSA had interacted with the department and the Canadian Armed Forces, and had spoken with the general himself. They then reported the results of that investigation back to the PMO.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

What I'm hearing you say is that the Minister of National Defence was briefed, but was not asked or encouraged at any point to lead an investigation. Is that correct?

[Ray Novak]

It was the NSA who was asked to lead the investigation. The minister's office was absolutely aware of it. The officials that the NSA was interacting with certainly would have been available to the minister. If there were conversations there, I'm unaware. It was the NSA—one of the most senior officials in the Government of Canada—who led the investigation into the rumour that was relayed to us.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Okay.

Is there a reason that it wasn't going to the Minister of National Defence for an investigation? Why were the actions you took to have this issue investigated the appropriate actions? Why not get the Minister of—

[Ray Novak]

Because political staff and ministers don't personally lead investigations. Their responsibility is to take information, provide it to their officials, ensure that the officials are investigating and, if there are facts or results of the investigation, ensure that immediate action is taken.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Can you explain why ministers or political staff should not be driving or leading investigations?

[Ray Novak]

This goes to the structure of our system of government. We rely on our senior officials to undertake investigations of this matter.

I don't think any of us believes that the solution to the problems we've all seen in recent months is to empower political staff to start doing their own investigations. I think the issue here is making sure information is provided to the responsible officials for investigation and frankly, underlying that, making sure we achieve cultural and structural change in the Canadian Armed Forces so that women are not only safe but empowered to bring forward allegations for independent investigation.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

I hear you saying, Mr. Novak, that when an allegation is brought forward about impropriety, sexual assault, sexual harassment or something of that nature against the chief of the defence staff, this should be brought to the Privy Council Office for investigation. Is that correct?

[Ray Novak]

As I said in my testimony, in the case of the rumour I received in July 2015, I brought that immediately to the national security adviser. I believe that's the appropriate process. In the case I was dealing with, the NSA had been operationally leading the ad hoc committee process in making recommendations for the selection of the chief of the defence staff. I think the appropriate process in that case was to bring whatever information was received to the responsible officials, ask for investigation and act if necessary.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

Thank you very much.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

Mr. Barsalou-Duval, you have the floor.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. Novak, you said earlier that if you were a minister and you were made aware of important information such as the serious allegations of a sexual nature we have heard against the former chief of the defence staff, the least you could do would be to launch an investigation. It appears that the Minister of National Defence saw things differently. In fact, he decided to look the other way.

In your opinion, is this a lack of courage or, worse, willful blindness?

[Ray Novak]

I'm not going to speculate on how or why the current minister has handled this matter. All I can speak to is how I handled a rumour, as I have, the rumour that was brought to me in July 2015. I think it's entirely not only appropriate but essential that this kind of information, whether it's a rumour or an allegation, be immediately relayed to the responsible officials for investigation and, if there are facts coming out of that investigation, that appropriate and remedial action is taken immediately.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Please allow me to share my opinion: I think the minister has shown a lack of courage and willful blindness.

Let's take the hypothetical example of a woman employed in the Canadian Armed Forces, who has been sexually assaulted or sexually harassed. She finds that it was the chief of the defence staff who allegedly did such things, that the information was [Inaudible] to the minister's office, and that the Minister of Defence's office decided to do nothing. If I were that woman, I would be upset and truly disheartened.

Do you think the minister's reactions are helping to amplify the problem that exists in the Canadian Armed Forces right now? Could they in some way lead to a loss of confidence among female personnel or people who are experiencing these situations?

[Ray Novak]

I think it's up to the current government to speak to the facts of the matter. I think it's up to them to explain why General Vance served as many years as he did, even if there were questions or allegations being asked. All I can convey to the committee is what was known at the time of the appointment in 2015, which I think I've spoken very candidly to.