National Defence Committee on March 26th, 2021

[Leona Alleslev, Conservative, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

The reason this is so serious, to your mind, is that DND as a representative of an objective, professional and truthful document with the weight of DND behind it put that document before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, an outside organization, while the document in fact contained false and prejudicial information about you.

[LCol (Ret'd) Bernie Boland]

Absolutely.

In my complaint about this up the chain, I made that explicitly clear. I'm sure the expectation of any outside agency such as the Canadian Human Rights Commission is that a large organization like DND will provide vetted, verified, legitimate and validated data.

[Leona Alleslev, Conservative, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

You made everyone in the chain—ADM materiel, DGs and the deputy minister herself...and there's documentation signed by the deputy minister back to you. Is that accurate?

[LCol (Ret'd) Bernie Boland]

Yes, I had several letters that came back and spoke about due process. There are many different documents. The deputy minister, for the most part, didn't respond to things I sent her.

[Leona Alleslev, Conservative, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

But she did acknowledge through her signature that she was aware, even though she didn't respond to the substance of what you were asking her to respond to. She made a response, just not an answer to what you were asking her to respond to. Is that correct?

[LCol (Ret'd) Bernie Boland]

Her responses got to me, and she responded to my MP Pierre Poilievre on my behalf in [Technical difficulty—Editor].

[Leona Alleslev, Conservative, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

This must be incredibly stressful for you. Can you give us a bit of an idea? Have you had any support? How much work has this been? What kind of toll has this taken on you, when you were the one who sought to look after the person who reports to you and to do the honourable and right thing to try to stop this kind of behaviour in the Canadian Forces?

[LCol (Ret'd) Bernie Boland]

I've had absolutely no internal support from DND or anybody. As soon as I brought this up, I was ostracized. My employment was threatened initially. Disciplinary measures were recommended. I received a letter of expectation. I've moved on from that employment site, fortunately. I was able to find other work in DND.

The toll this has taken.... We're only midway through. Right now I am proceeding to the Federal Court to have things addressed and to find the opportunity to have my voice heard by a judicial body that will allow me due process and a chance to advocate for my position and represent myself. None of that was provided in DND.

[Leona Alleslev, Conservative, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

You're doing what is right. Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Robillard now has the floor.

[Yves Robillard, Liberal, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Good afternoon to the witnesses. I thank them for being with us today.

My questions are for Ms. Sherman.

I would like to clarify one last time, did the ombudsman provide you with information that would have allowed you to investigate the allegations against General Vance?

[Janine Sherman]

No, and he did not provide me with any documents or information. We had a conversation based largely on the emails we had exchanged in terms of the importance of the confidentiality and how that was a responsibility for him and his undertaking to the complainant who had come forward.

[Yves Robillard, Liberal, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

Did you ask him to do anything, such as obtaining the survivor's consent to disclose information that would have allowed you or other officials in the Privy Council Office to further the investigation?

[Janine Sherman]

I want to be careful in terms of the information that I can share. I'm trying to stay within the confines of the information that is available through our email exchanges. The conversation that we did have remains...I think it's important to keep that confidential

I would say, though, as a matter of course, and as I think the ombudsman's emails indicate, that the concern for the complainant who has come forward is paramount. In these kinds of situations, and I think as I have described a little bit about our role in PCO in terms of providing advice and looking at the process and the way forward, it would not be unusual for me to offer support in any way that we could in terms of whatever direction the complainant provided to the ombudsman.

As someone who is concerned and responsible for the conduct for managing the issues that arise in the conduct of a GIC appointee, we would want to be supportive and available should there be any information that could be shared. That is a general principle in how we would approach those kinds of conversations.

[Yves Robillard, Liberal, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

Did you pass on any of the information he gave you at that meeting or afterwards? What did you do with it? Also, if the information provided had been complete, what would have been the procedure to follow?

[Janine Sherman]

To be clear, I did not have information specifically provided by the ombudsman, either specific to the complaint or of a more general nature, but as I have described, if information is provided to us about an allegation, our role [Technical difficulty—Editor] supporting the management of Governor in Council appointees would be to assess the nature of the complaint and provide advice in terms of a review of a situation, an administrative review. The consideration could be to launch a third party independent investigation, or any of those opportunities, or, as I [Technical difficulty—Editor] to the appropriate police authorities if needed. These would all be avenues that we would have considered in terms of providing advice on next steps.

[Yves Robillard, Liberal, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

Madam Chair, do I have any more time?

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

No. Unfortunately, you don't.

[Yves Robillard, Liberal, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

Okay, thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

Thank you, Mr. Robillard.

Mr. Barsalou-Duval, you have the floor.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Ms. Sherman, I would like to return to where I was earlier.

I am putting myself in your shoes, in your role at the Privy Council Office. The ombudsman goes to the Minister of National Defence with a serious situation, namely allegations of sexual assault against General Vance, the top man in the Canadian Armed Forces. The minister tells the ombudsman that he does not want to touch it, that the issue is too hot and that he wants nothing to do with it. The minister shares that with you. You then talk to the ombudsman. You ask him for more information, but he says he can't give you any because he doesn't want to reveal the victim's identity. You then decide to close the case and take no further action, since you do not have enough information.

Don't you feel this is still an extremely serious situation, even a critical one? The reason the ombudsman went to the minister, who then came to you, is that he was able to assess the credibility of the allegations, based on the information he had obtained from the witness and the victim.

I am trying to understand how it came to be that the case was closed without going any further.

[Janine Sherman]

I understand the point you're making, and I have said that we do take concerns being raised very seriously. We want to make sure that those concerns are heard and acted on wherever possible.

We do have to understand and respect the confidentiality of the process. First of all, the ombudsman had provided the person with options and was awaiting direction in terms of next steps. From our perspective—

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

Ms. Sherman, I know that the individual was given opportunities and all that. I am not even talking to you about the victim; I am talking to you about the admiral, and about the general who is the top man in the Canadian Armed Forces. It seems to me that this goes beyond the victim; we are also talking about the integrity of the Canadian Armed Forces and its senior leadership. Do we not take that seriously?

[Janine Sherman]

Yes, I think that is being taken seriously. That can be said by virtue of the fact that, as specific allegations have come forward most recently, there are investigations under way.

In 2018, we did not have specific information. I think it is fair to say that being aware of that is something that, in the context of managing—

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

Thank you, Ms. Sherman. I understand that, in your opinion, you did not have enough information—