National Defence Committee on Oct. 27th, 2025

[The Chair, Liberal, Charles Sousa]

Welcome to meeting number 10 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on National Defence.

Pursuant to the motion adopted on October 23, 2025, the committee is meeting to commence its consideration of Bill C‑11, an act to amend the National Defence Act and other acts.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the Standing Orders. Members are attending in person, and some are remotely using the Zoom application.

Before we continue, I would ask all in-person participants to consult the guidelines on the table. These measures are here to help prevent audio feedback incidents and to protect the health and safety of all participants, including the interpreters.

I would like to also remind the witnesses and members to please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking. For those participating by video conference, click on the microphone icon to activate your mic. Please mute yourself when you are not speaking. For those on Zoom, at the bottom of your screen you can select the appropriate channel for interpretation: floor, English or French. For those in the room, please use the earpiece and select the desired channel.

All comments should be addressed through the chair. For members in the room, if you wish to speak, please raise your hand. For members on Zoom, please use the “raise hand” function. The clerk and I will manage the speaking order as best we can. We appreciate your patience and understanding in this regard.

As I welcome the witnesses and members around the table, we are pleased once again to have the Honourable David McGuinty, our Minister of National Defence, with us.

We have General Jennie Carignan, chief of the defence staff of the Canadian Armed Forces; Stefanie Beck, deputy minister; Lieutenant-General Paul Prévost, chief of professional conduct and culture; Major-General Rob Holman, judge advocate general, Canadian Armed Forces; and Martin Gravel, chief operating officer, sexual misconduct support and resource centre.

I will now invite the minister to make his opening statement.

Sir, you have five minutes and only five minutes. It's over to you, sir.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. It's military precision, as always.

Mr. Chair and committee members, thank you for inviting me to appear before you as you begin your study of Bill C‑11, the military justice system modernization act.

Before we begin, I want to acknowledge that the topics that will be raised in these committee proceedings are of a sensitive nature. The sexual misconduct support and resource centre has a 24-7 hotline. For anybody watching or participating, if you feel the need, dial 1-844-750-1648 for assistance at any time.

I also want to thank you, sir, for arranging a special sitting of this committee to accommodate my appearance today.

Members of the Canadian Armed Forces work hard every day to defend the values of peace, freedom and democracy, both at home and abroad. They do it with unwavering dedication, professionalism and resilience.

We have all met with our forces across Canada and around the world, all of us. Their work has always been essential to Canada's security, but in today's unpredictable and volatile geopolitical environment, it has taken on renewed urgency. It is our responsibility to ensure they have a workplace where they feel protected, respected and empowered to serve. That means eliminating harmful behaviours from our institution, including sexual assault.

The amendments proposed in Bill C‑11 address key recommendations from the independent, external reviews conducted by former Supreme Court justices Arbour and Fish to ensure transparency and accountability in our system and align it with the expectations of Canadians.

First, Bill C-11 would remove the Canadian Armed Forces' investigative and prosecutorial jurisdiction over Criminal Code sexual offences committed in Canada. This means that all Criminal Code sexual offences will be investigated and prosecuted exclusively in civilian criminal courts. This addresses part of recommendation five in Justice Arbour's independent external comprehensive review.

Second, it would address eight recommendations from Justice Fish's third independent review, including modifying the appointment process for the Canadian Forces provost marshal, the director of military prosecutions and the director of defence counsel services; allowing non-commissioned members to be appointed as a military judge, expanding the class of persons who are eligible; affirming the judge advocate general's respect for the independence of authorities in the military justice system; expanding the class of persons who can make an interference complaint; and changing the title of the Canadian Forces provost marshal to provost marshal general, aligning it with other senior CAF designations.

Third, Bill C-11 would remove military judges from the summary hearing system and expand access to victim liaison officers under the declaration of victims rights to individuals acting on behalf of a victim.

Last, it would amend the National Defence Act to align sex offender information and publication ban provisions with the amendments made to the Criminal Code in 2023.

Together, these amendments would bring our military justice system in line with our civilian criminal justice system, ensure that it better responds to the needs of survivors and ensure confidence in our institution.

These legislative reforms are part of a broader effort to transform the culture of the Canadian Armed Forces to make it more inclusive and representative of the populations we serve. Any members who do not meet these requirements will be discharged as soon as possible. We have also modernized clothing requirements and made other improvements to attract and retain more women and ethnic minority Canadians.

We've also made progress on recommendations seven and nine of Justice Arbour's report. CAF members who experience sexual misconduct, sexual harassment, crimes of a sexual nature or any other form of discrimination based on sex or gender while performing their duties can now bring their complaint directly to the Canadian Human Rights Commission, without first exhausting internal grievance and harassment processes.

We believe these are all steps in the right direction, but our work is far from over.

Bill C‑11 is another crucial step towards this ideal, strengthening our commitment to protecting our people, supporting survivors and building trust in the Canadian Armed Forces.

It's our responsibility, colleagues, to make sure that our military justice system is fit for purpose, and I thank you for your part in helping us keep it modern, relevant and responsive.

I very much look forward to working with this committee as you examine the bill. I'm happy to take your questions.

Thank you again for allowing me and my officials to appear today.

[The Chair, Liberal, Charles Sousa]

Thank you, Minister.

I gave you some leeway. A few extra minutes would have been fine.

We'll take it away with James Bezan, our first questioner.

Mr. Bezan, you have six minutes.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister.

I want to start off by saying that the official opposition, we Conservatives, believes that everyone in Canada, especially those who put on the uniform in service to Canada, should never have to deal with sexual misconduct, racism and discrimination. We believe that this bill is the first good step.

Now that you've brought forward Bill C-11—it's been over a year since this House originally saw Bill C-66—as the new minister on this file, did you consider making any changes to the bill before retabling it?

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

That's a really good question.

In looking at the bill and getting briefed on it, Mr. Bezan, I felt that it was the right form now to enhance trust and transparency in the system.

What we did hear back about, and what I did insist on, was getting briefings and feedback from people who were applying and looking to enlist, to sign up to join us. They told us, in very large numbers and in no uncertain terms, that they wanted a 21st century workplace. They felt that this balance of measures, which we could deliver quickly and hopefully pass quickly together with all-party support, I hope.... The Canadian Armed Forces told us they were counting on us to get it done.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

There were some recommendations that came out of the work of this committee in the past. In November 2024, we had “Rebuilding Trust: Transparency and Accountability in the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces.” Was that taken into consideration in the new bill that you brought forward?

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

I don't think the details of that were.... Again, one of the reasons we're here is that we're very open to hearing more from all members about how to improve this bill.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Okay.

Since December 2021, even without the legislation, the Canadian Armed Forces has been moving all sexual offences that are criminal in nature over to the civilian system. Do you know how many cases have gone forward into the provincial justice system across the country?

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

I can't recall personally, but I know somebody at this table does.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Okay. We'll get to that in the second hour.

Do you know if there are any cases that have been delayed and the Jordan framework has come into play?

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

It was not in my briefings, no. What I've been told, in fact, is that we made great progress with Ontario in signing an MOU on how to deal with these cases. We continue to be in close contact with all provinces and jurisdictions, and we're very receptive to a two-way dialogue to make sure that we get these cases properly treated and dealt with.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Since you were sworn in as minister, have you spoken to justices Arbour, Fish or Deschamps on this file?

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

No, I haven't spoken to them. I've interfaced with Justice Deschamps in another capacity, but I intend to follow up after this hearing, when I'm back from travel this week.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

In this bill, there will be more people appointed through order in council, so they will be political appointments. Can you tell us the rationale behind some being four years and some being seven years? The ombudsman is a five-year appointment. Why is there a difference there?

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

I would begin by saying that the rationale for moving these appointments to GIC appointments is that the structure, the transparency and the robustness of that process are, we believe, superior to what exists now. It also helps make it plain that even the notion of the perception of chain of command pressures being brought to bear on these really important appointments would be overcome. Third, Justice Fish wanted to align these positions with other positions in the federal government.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

I think the standard is four or five years, not seven years. I'm really confused about this, but we'll get—

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

I think the director of public prosecutions has a seven-year term, so I—

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Usually, people in uniform serve about three or four years, max, in any position. Now we're going to five and seven. It's one thing that we want to drill down on.

Bill C-11 would give you, as the Minister of National Defence, the power to issue guidelines and directives with respect to particular prosecutions, which used to be done by the JAG. Will that not potentially lead to political interference?

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

I would be hard pressed to believe that any minister of national defence would want to insert themselves into a prosecution of this kind.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

You were looking at Bill C-11 and the department. Did you also look at other allied nations and how they have been doing this, as it relates to sexual misconduct in particular? Australia and the United Kingdom have independent prosecuting offices; that's the way they've handled it. Have you taken that into consideration and tried to look at that?

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

We did. Thank you. That's a good question.

We looked at comparative practice, but what we really relied on was the wisdom of Justice Arbour and Justice Fish and the benefit of all their hearings, the thousands of folks they spoke to, the research papers and the analysis, and this is where they came down. We support their views.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Why do you feel you need to have the powers of the Minister of National Defence to issue guidelines in prosecutions, when that used to be done by the JAG? Why would the minister do that, and not the Judge Advocate General?

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

That's a good question for the JAG.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

We'll get back to it. I'll make sure we circle back on that one.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Okay. Thank you.