National Defence Committee on April 30th, 2021

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

There is only one question, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

Madam Alleslev, please allow the witness to answer the question.

[Katie Telford]

I would just like to correct the member, Madam Chair, that in the briefing note, it was talking about succession planning and actually providing options, none of which were imminent around the chief of the defence staff, and planning ahead.

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

Thank you.

You're saying that someone did inform the Prime Minister of the serious allegations against the CDS.

[Katie Telford]

Madam Chair, I'm not sure what the member is referring to here.

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

I'm asking, was the Prime Minister made aware of the serious allegations against the chief of the defence staff?

[Katie Telford]

Madam Chair, the Prime Minister—

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

Yes or no.

[Katie Telford]

—became aware of the allegation, the nature of the allegation, the substance of the allegation, in March 2021, when it was publicly reported, and we all learned the details and the nature of the complaint.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

Thank you. We're at five minutes now.

We'll move on to Mr. Spengemann, please.

[Sven Spengemann, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Welcome to the committee, Ms. Telford.

If you will indulge me for a moment, I just want to put a couple of points on the record. I think there was some discussion earlier with respect to the nature of the action, and whether or not it was sexual in nature.

Three witnesses appeared before this committee, and I just want to put on the record what they said.

Elder Marques testified before us on April 19. He said:

I believe I was told that the issue was an issue of personal misconduct.... I think my presumption was certainly that it could be of a sexual nature, but I don't think I was actually given that information specifically.

The former Clerk of the Privy Council, Michael Wernick, in testimony before our committee on April 6, stated:

I learned of the specific allegations earlier this year in the media reports. I was not aware of the specifics of the allegation. I became aware of them this year.

Finally, Ms. Sherman, deputy secretary to the cabinet, testified before us on March 26, and said:

As I have mentioned, based on my conversation with the former ombudsman, I did not have information about the nature of the complaint or specifics that would have enabled further action.

That's just for the record for the benefit of colleagues, Madam Chair, and our witness as well, and I thank you.

Ms. Telford, if I can just take you back to your opening remarks, you focused on the role of the public service when it comes to seeking advice and conducting a follow-up, specifically in this case, the Privy Council Office. You noted that PCO assured you that it was the most appropriate body to look into this.

We also heard directly several times from PCO officials, including about the central role they play when it came to Governor in Council appointments, of which the former CDS was one.

Could you expand on this a bit more? If political staff—and you made reference to this earlier—were charged with overseeing this type of circumstance with an appointee, do you think this would be seen as a legitimate process, when it comes to trust in the public service, trust in the Canadian Forces and trust in investigative processes?

Would we have that, when we give this kind of scenario to political staff or elected officials, as you pointed out?

[Katie Telford]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I think that given how difficult it has been, even of late, for all of us to keep partisanship out of these discussions, it's just a further demonstration of how important it is for there to be independent and objective people who are.... It is why the public service is there, and also to manage ongoing Governor in Council appointments that go perhaps beyond the life of a government.

They are there to manage. They are also experts in doing this. They have spent their careers in becoming experts in the areas in which they work. I have deep respect for the advice they give, and it's why we followed their advice in this case.

[Sven Spengemann, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Thank you very much, Ms. Telford.

I want to take you back to the conversation about Elder Marques. We heard from Mr. Marques recently on his role and his engagement with the PCO.

I understand at the time, Mr. Marques, as you described, was a very senior member of your staff in the Prime Minister's Office.

Going back to the ordinary course of business in PMO, would you consider it the normal process for you to ask a senior member of your office to seek advice from PCO and then to keep you updated with respect to any developments that flow from that?

[Katie Telford]

Absolutely.

We have an incredible and hard-working group of senior staff, who have worked extremely hard for many years now, and Mr. Marques was definitely one of those staff. He unfortunately doesn't work with us anymore, but he is somebody I could turn to to follow up on any number of files or phone calls from chiefs of staff who needed advice on something.

It was completely normal and par for the course to then...whether it was to wander upstairs from here, where the Privy Council offices are, or to pick up the phone and call our counterparts in the Privy Council Office for advice. That is how things work, day in and day out.

[Sven Spengemann, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Thank you, Ms. Telford.

I only have about 30 seconds, but I'm wondering if you could briefly give us your reflections on your reaction when the word came back that really nothing more could be done in this case; nothing came back from PCO that would help in any way, or from the ombudsperson.

How did you react to that conclusion?

[Katie Telford]

I was concerned, as I think I said in my opening statement. I was troubled by it, and that's why Elder and I talked through if there was anything else we could suggest to them to do, or anything else that could give us any sense of what this was about.

He did keep pushing and still couldn't...and then we asked a question around whether we could at least be given any assurance around whether it was a safety issue or safety-related issue, and we were assured it was not.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

All right. Thank you.

[Sven Spengemann, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Thank you, Ms. Telford. I think that's my time for this round.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karen McCrimmon]

That's your time, Mr. Spengemann.

Mr. Barsalou-Duval, you have the floor.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Unless I am mistaken, the chief of staff to the Prime Minister generally attends cabinet meetings.

The ombudsman first spoke to Minister Sajjan. Did the minister talk to you about the case at any time? Have you had any interaction with him?

[Katie Telford]

“Participate in” might not be the right word. I do have the great privilege of sitting in cabinet meetings at a table to the side of the room.

In terms of Minister Sajjan and whether he and I spoke to this at the time, no, I don't believe we did.

His office contacted us on his behalf immediately, and we then immediately followed up, or had the Privy Council follow up, rather, to give him the advice that he was seeking.

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

So you never had a conversation with Mr. Sajjan about General Vance?

[Katie Telford]

Certainly I have had conversations over the years with the minister about General Vance, but not on this specifically.

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

I still find it surprising, because the allegations against General Vance are serious, and you are the Prime Minister's chief of staff.

His chief of staff contacted you. It seems to me that it's a cumbersome process to have to wait your turn in line, when he could have interacted directly with you.

At the time when the Privy Council Office was unable to get information, did you ever think to ask Mr. Sajjan to meet with the ombudsman? He refused any meeting afterwards and refused to read the documents.

Did you not recommend that he read the documents?

[Katie Telford]

There are a few things. I treated what I was told about like it could be a serious allegation, but I didn't know how serious it was or was not. I had absolutely no information on it. I just want to make that very clear, because I know that that has been confusing for us all, as a lot of information has come out recently. I want to remind us of what we did and didn't know in March 2018.

Second, in terms of lots of phoning around, which does feel like day-to-day life here—it is a lot of emails, phoning and meetings in my job, as I often say—why didn't I speak to Minister Sajjan? I'm not sure there was any more information on this that he and I could have appropriately discussed. I had...via Elder Marques and the chief of staff at National Defence, what had transpired. We sought advice on that.

The advice on that, to your last point—