Evidence of meeting #22 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 ombudsman.
A video is available from Parliament.
1:55 p.m.
Bloc
Xavier Barsalou-Duval Bloc Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC
Actually, Ms. Sherman, what I want to ask you is—
1:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Karen McCrimmon
Your time is up. I was trying to let that go for a little bit.
We will move on to Mr. Garrison, please.
1:55 p.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
I want to start by echoing the thanks to retired lieutenant-colonel Bernie Boland for being with us today. It's an unfortunate task he's had to take on in corroborating the culture within the Canadian Armed Forces and DND, which appears not to have been one of zero tolerance, but one of willful blindness toward complaints of sexual misconduct.
I'll return in my next round to him, but now I want to stay with the Privy Council Office.
Let me start by saying, Ms. Sherman, that I take no pleasure in having to question you in committee, but the committee was left with little choice since both the minister and the Prime Minister referred to your office as an independent investigating authority. They actually directed our questions to your office. I would much rather have had a more fulsome explanation by the ministers responsible.
The question I have for you to start with it, the military ombudsman came to you saying, “I have seen evidence that [Technical difficulty—Editor] and it requires an investigation of General Vance on the grounds of sexual misconduct.”
Why do you need to know more than that before you would launch—not you personally—but before an investigation would be launched?
1:55 p.m.
Deputy Secretary to the Cabinet, Senior Personnel and Public Service Renewal, Privy Council Office
The ombudsman went to the minister, as I think has been described. I was asked by the Clerk of the Privy Council to follow up on that conversation. I did not have specific information.
That is why I sought to meet with the ombudsman to follow up on that and to try to understand the nature of the complaint, respecting the fact that he was clear that the information he had was given to him in confidence and that the complainant had not provided any permission or direction on how they wished that complaint to be managed.
1:55 p.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC
With respect, Ms. Sherman, you're doing the same thing that the minister did. You had evidence that there was a well-founded complaint of sexual misconduct against the chief of the defence staff, and neither the minister nor, it turns out, your office did any investigation or took any action. Instead, General Vance remained for more than three years as chief of the defence staff, and we now know there are additional allegations of sexual misconduct being investigated. I fail to understand how that wasn't sufficient.
Second, did the question of national security come up in the discussion of these complaints? It's quite clear that as chief of the defence staff, General Vance would have held the highest security clearances possible and was in a very sensitive position. Anyone who's being accused of things like sexual misconduct perhaps has their ability to act compromised. Was there a discussion in any of these documents, or between you and the Clerk of the Privy Council, of the issue of national security and the threat to national security that these kinds of complaints present?
2 p.m.
Deputy Secretary to the Cabinet, Senior Personnel and Public Service Renewal, Privy Council Office
Just a clarification, I did not have information of a well-founded, investigated complaint. Indeed, we were—
2 p.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC
I want to stop you right there, Ms. Sherman, because what you're doing right now is questioning the credibility of the military ombudsman. When you say that, you say he has no credibility as the military ombudsman. Is that your intent today?
2 p.m.
Deputy Secretary to the Cabinet, Senior Personnel and Public Service Renewal, Privy Council Office
Thank you for that question—
2 p.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC
He came to you and said there's a well-founded complaint.
2 p.m.
Deputy Secretary to the Cabinet, Senior Personnel and Public Service Renewal, Privy Council Office
If I could clarify that, it is not my intent in any of my comments today to discredit the former ombudsman. In fact, our respect for his office, for his mandate and for his ability to manage the complainant and their wishes in regard to confidentiality and how next steps should be undertaken is what we focused on.
My concern, Madam Chair, was simply to clarify that I did not have a complaint that, to my understanding, had been investigated or for which there was an undertaking to do an investigation at that stage back in March of 2018. Because we take the safety and security of the workplace to heart—this is a very important, fundamental responsibility we have—we do in fact want to make sure that the conduct of GIC appointees is looked into, and we tried to get information that would help us to determine what those next steps were.
Our role in the Privy Council Office, and my role in supporting the minister, the Prime Minister and the government in terms of managing the conduct of GIC appointees where an issue has arisen, is to provide advice and some counsel on what next steps could be taken. That was our objective in terms of trying to understand what information the ombudsman could share that would be consistent with his responsibilities as ombudsman and in protecting the confidentiality of the person who had raised some concerns and an allegation that we did not have information about.
2 p.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC
When presented with what I still will assert was the ombudsman telling you there was a well-founded complaint on sexual misconduct, did you open the file, so to speak, of General Vance, and did you have access to the fact that he had been previously investigated on the basis of similar allegations?
2 p.m.
Deputy Secretary to the Cabinet, Senior Personnel and Public Service Renewal, Privy Council Office
I cannot speak to the specific information about General Vance. That would be personal information. As I have said, we do take concerns that are raised very seriously. It is something that we did not...at the time of my conversation with the ombudsman in March of 2018 [Technical difficulty—Editor], but it was something that we definitely had to think about and be aware of. That is why I reported back to the Clerk of the Privy Council about the fact that we did not have information that would enable further action at that time.
2 p.m.
Conservative
Leona Alleslev Conservative Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Thank you to both of the witnesses for being here.
I'd like to direct my questions to retired lieutenant-colonel Bernie Boland.
You were in the air force, but currently and throughout the process that you've described in your testimony today, you and all of the other people to whom you refer were civilians. Is that correct?
2 p.m.
LCol (Ret'd) Bernie Boland
Madam Chair, yes they were all civilian at the time. A number were retired military personnel.
2:05 p.m.
Conservative
Leona Alleslev Conservative Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON
This whole process has been going on since early 2016. Is that correct?
2:05 p.m.
LCol (Ret'd) Bernie Boland
It's been since late 2016. The various conflicts were brewing in our organization from early 2016 onward.
2:05 p.m.
Conservative
Leona Alleslev Conservative Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON
Could you explain to us how you ended up having to bring it all the way to the defence minister's chief of staff, and what involvement he has had?
2:05 p.m.
LCol (Ret'd) Bernie Boland
I brought it there because I was going to be diligent and make sure my issues came forward. I wasn't going to be satisfied to be silenced. I literally walked into the office, presented him with documentation, and had him sign for the documentation that I was providing. I sent him emails and provided him information and documentation to clearly express my concerns about what I was dealing with and, as transparently as possible, reflect what was occurring to me, what wasn't occurring to me, denial of due process, my procedural rights failing—
2:05 p.m.
Conservative
Leona Alleslev Conservative Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON
Did he say that he would advise the minister?
2:05 p.m.
LCol (Ret'd) Bernie Boland
I explicitly asked him to do that, and I staffed complaints directly to the minister, using his name. I sent correspondence by email to the minister's parl.gc.ca email address.
2:05 p.m.
Conservative
Leona Alleslev Conservative Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON
By doing so, you made him aware that DND officials, including the deputy minister, were aware of and had been engaged in not overturning the false report that was authored and sent on DND letterhead to the Human Rights Tribunal. Is that correct?
2:05 p.m.
LCol (Ret'd) Bernie Boland
Yes, I complained that I was being made a scapegoat and explicitly being blamed for the alleged human rights abuses that were reported.
As I said in my opening testimony, I had no opportunity to defend myself against the allegations made against me. It was done secretly. The only reason I was aware of them was that the individual in front of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal disclosed that information to me and asked me if I was aware of it.
2:05 p.m.
Conservative
Leona Alleslev Conservative Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON
What was her reaction to finding out that they had blamed you rather than the person that she had filed the complaints against?
2:05 p.m.
LCol (Ret'd) Bernie Boland
I think she was outraged, but not surprised.