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.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
12:25 p.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
I just want to clarify a point.
I'm not asking for legal advice, Mr. Novak, but certainly the chief of the defence staff serves at the pleasure of government. Is that not correct? There was a member implying there would need to be some reason to remove a chief of the defence staff. If they serve at pleasure, could not the government decide a new chief of the defence staff could be necessary at any time?
12:25 p.m.
As an Individual
I believe the member is correct. This is an “at pleasure” appointment. I believe it can be changed at any time.
12:25 p.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC
While you were in the Prime Minister's Office, you referred to how three times the chief of the defence staff changed and there were new appointments. Was this because it was the normal practice for them to serve a term, and then have a new chief of the defence staff?
In other words, is what happened with General Vance unusual in terms of being extended as the chief of the defence staff?
12:25 p.m.
As an Individual
I don't believe there's a set term. If the member reviews the history of the duration of incumbents in the position, generally speaking, it seems to be two, three or sometimes four years. Clearly, there is no set term. I can't speak to why the current government made the decision that it did with respect to General Vance.
12:25 p.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC
Thank you very much, Mr. Novak.
It seems, as we're probably coming to the end of some of our time here, what we learned today is that Prime Minister Harper and Minister of National Defence Kenney knew about allegations of sexual misconduct against General Vance before he was appointed, and, of course, we already knew the current Minister of National Defence knew at the time of his extension, and probably Prime Minister Trudeau.
When there are so many other senior officers of distinction in the Canadian Armed Forces, why do you think the appointment of General Vance proceeded? Weren't there other possible appointments that could have been made that would have better fit the needs of the Canadian Forces at that time? Maybe I'm asking you in retrospect, but it certainly seems true to me that there were other, better appointments that could have been made.
12:30 p.m.
As an Individual
In hindsight, knowing what we know now six years later, particularly with the allegations we've all seen—very disturbing allegations—I think that's a fair question. At the time, I can't speak to the committee's deliberation on other candidates.
I have shared very candidly with the committee the issue that was known in March, which was related to the general's deployment in Italy and how he met his wife. I've spoken very candidly to the rumour that we received in July. That was the information that was available to everyone at that time.
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Again, thank you, Mr. Novak, for your candour today.
An interesting thing in your testimony today and the questions that followed is that, when a chief of staff to a minister received an allegation and a rumour, they reported it directly to you. Is it normal practice for chiefs of staff to ministers to report to the Prime Minister's chief of staff?
12:30 p.m.
As an Individual
Certainly in the case of something as serious as a rumour pertaining to the chief of the defence staff, I think it's entirely appropriate and expected that a chief of staff to a minister, or frankly any political staffer in the government, would undertake to relay that forward to ensure it was investigated and reviewed.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
When you received this rumour, the second one about Gagetown, did you share that information with Prime Minister Harper at that time?
12:30 p.m.
As an Individual
As I indicated, when I received the rumour, I immediately relayed that information to the national security adviser and asked for an investigation. The Prime Minister was briefed, as was the Prime Minister's Office, on the results of that investigation some time after that.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
With any responsible government, you would think that the chief of staff would have briefed the Prime Minister, including that Prime Minister Trudeau would be briefed by Katie Telford. I don't expect an answer on that.
Coming back to the evidence that was presented to Minister Sajjan and his pushing away and refusing that evidence, wouldn't it have been more responsible to have accepted that evidence and shared it with the appropriate authorities, like the national security adviser, rather than giving this argument that it was political interference?
12:30 p.m.
As an Individual
All I can say to the member.... I assure you, Madam Chair, I've never told someone I don't want to hear it when it comes to a rumour or an allegation of serious misconduct, harassment or anything else. I think how this rumour was handled in July 2015 was entirely appropriate in relaying it to senior officials and asking them to investigate.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
I think it's very unfortunate that information wasn't gathered at that time by Minister Sajjan and shared with the national security adviser.
Can you dive deeper into why the national security adviser is such an important person within the Privy Council Office and why it's important that they are the lead on vetting someone like a chief of the defence staff?
12:30 p.m.
As an Individual
The national security adviser, as I spoke to earlier, is one of the most senior public servants in the country. As chief of staff for the Prime Minister, I interacted with the NSA daily, sometimes multiple times a day. It's an individual who, in my experience in government, is briefing the Prime Minister often daily—at least a few times a week—on matters of national security. It's a key position in the Privy Council in our system of government.
When it comes to the selection process for a chief of the defence staff, operationally, that individual, the NSA, is a key member of that process, who in fact led that process. When there are issues or concerns, he is the responsible individual in the Privy Council Office who would then, working with the Canadian Armed Forces senior members, with the department, access those other bodies, ensure that investigations were carried out and report the findings back to the Prime Minister's Office and the Prime Minister for any action that was necessary.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
In the situation, if the NSA had come back on General Vance with more substantive allegations of sexual misconduct, there's no question in your mind that the government of the day would have stopped the appointment of General Vance as CDS.
12:30 p.m.
As an Individual
As I said, in July 2015, if either the anonymous email that was received or the rumour I received that I asked the NSA to investigate.... If either of those two issues had yielded additional facts or frankly any additional questions or avenues that needed to be pursued, or opened investigations, I am very confident in saying that appointment would not have proceeded at that time.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
Yvan Baker Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
Mr. Novak, I want to circle back to the line of discussion we were having, when I asked questions in the last round.
We spoke about the fact that the chief of staff for the veterans affairs minister brought forward rumours, and that those rumours were shared with officials for investigation.
Is it fair to assume the minister would have known about those rumours?
12:35 p.m.
As an Individual
I believe the minister did know about those rumours.
I've been very candid that it was his chief of staff who relayed them to me as I would expect, and I asked for them to be investigated immediately by the national security adviser.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
Yvan Baker Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
You spoke earlier in your discussion with me about the fact that investigations should not be lead by political offices or politicians, and that they should be led by the appropriate people, in this case, the national investigation service.
Can you explain why that is? Why is it important that it be led by an investigative service?
12:35 p.m.
As an Individual
It's abundantly clear that political offices, political staff, are not equipped. It would be entirely inappropriate to have the political organs of the government leading investigations.
As we discussed, in our system, what is necessary and appropriate is for any information that anyone acquires to be relayed to the responsible officials for full investigation and to ensure that those investigations are pursued. If there is information, facts or otherwise that require remedial action, that action should be taken immediately.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
Yvan Baker Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
Mr. Novak, for the people who are watching this hearing, who may not be familiar with the specifics as to how government operates or how investigations are run, what is it about the investigative services that makes them, in your view, the appropriate place for allegations like this to be brought and investigated?
12:35 p.m.
As an Individual
The perspective I can offer on that is from someone who spent 10 years in the Prime Minister's Office. Clearly, political staff are not equipped, trained or appropriate for these kinds of investigations. That's why we have senior officials. That's why we have structures in the Canadian Armed Forces and in the department.
Candidly, clearly, given the allegations we've all witnessed in recent weeks, there is a very real question about the culture and structure in the Canadian Armed Forces that seem not to empower and enable women to come forward to have allegations investigated by appropriate independent authorities.
