Evidence of meeting #13 for National Defence in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was civilian.
A video is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Cheryl Gallant Conservative Algonquin—Renfrew—Pembroke, ON
Since your retirement as the DMP, would you characterize the state of our military justice system as being in a worse position than when you left?
Col (Ret'd) Bruce MacGregor
Well, I'm very concerned, because I'm well aware of the professionalism of the actors within the military justice system, including prosecutors, defence and the judges.
With the transfer of cases of sexual offences to the civilian system, they are not getting the attention there that they would be getting within our system. That's a fact, and we take it very seriously.
As I said, we have a different purpose from the criminal justice system. Ours is to promote discipline, efficiency, morale and operational effectiveness. The role of the criminal justice system is to put the evidence before the court, see if this is a criminal offence and then deal with it that way.
Conservative
Cheryl Gallant Conservative Algonquin—Renfrew—Pembroke, ON
In your observations, do you think the current senior leadership within the CAF is in a better or worse state than when you retired from your position when it comes to combatting military misconduct?
Col (Ret'd) Bruce MacGregor
I wouldn't want to comment on that. I'm certainly not in a position to. I haven't followed it nearly as much as I would have while I was in uniform, so I'm really not at liberty to comment on that.
Conservative
Cheryl Gallant Conservative Algonquin—Renfrew—Pembroke, ON
Are there any other parts—
Did you just cut me off, Mr. Chair?
November 18th, 2025 / 3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Cheryl Gallant Conservative Algonquin—Renfrew—Pembroke, ON
Okay. Have you heard of any complaints about the contents of Bill C-11 and its inadequacies in terms of reforming the military justice system? Are you aware of any?
Col (Ret'd) Bruce MacGregor
No. All I have done is follow what your committee is doing, and I've listened to other people's input and followed some of the speeches in Parliament. That's about it, and I've formed my own opinions.
It's also based on my extensive knowledge with the heads of prosecution, the International Association of Prosecutors, my former prosecution role, my former defence role and my former role as a federal prosecutor, agent and municipal prosecutor. I've dealt with police for probably about 35 years, so my opinion is based on all of that.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Charles Sousa
Thank you, Colonel.
Thank you, Ms. Gallant.
Viviane Lapointe, you have up to six minutes, and I'll be counting.
Liberal
Viviane LaPointe Liberal Sudbury, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Dr. Breeck, regarding the Hill Times op-ed that you mentioned in your opening remarks, you wrote about how women veterans have often been made invisible through gender-blind systems and legacy policies built on the assumption that a soldier is a soldier is a soldier. What helps ensure that women veterans' experiences and needs are genuinely seen and understood when institutions are undergoing major reforms like the one proposed in C-11?
Medical Doctor, As an Individual
Thank you for that important question.
I'm also acknowledging that I'm at NDDN today and not at ACVA. I think therein lies part of what—in my now 35 years of being in this field as well—we constantly see as this mother-father separation that consistently tends to cause the slowness in actually moving stuff forward.
One of the questions would be, how can women veterans be seen? Are we part of the defence team, or are we not part of the defence team? It seems like that changes depending on the political wish or needs of the day.
If it were recognized that we're part of the defence team, we would be a regular part of these discussions, especially being aware that we are now not in uniform and are able to speak in a very different way from how we could while we were still in uniform. I think that's part of the motivation for a lot of us to be at these kinds of events, because we know that our peers still in uniform do not have that same privilege to speak truth to power, so it doesn't allow people like women veterans to regularly be viewed as part of these discussions.
Again, the two committees are separate, and for many years we have wondered why, for certain topics like this, which clearly cross boundaries, we cannot have—I don't know the right words for it—a subcommittee that's half NDDN and half ACVA. Then we could actually get to the end of some of these things instead of doing half of the problem at NDDN and then waiting and doing half of the problem at ACVA, so that nothing actually happens.
Until we can actually acknowledge that the problem crosses the two departments, especially for women, I think a lot of our issues aren't necessarily so focused on what percentage of money we're getting for disabilities.
We had injuries related to equipment, and we can fix the equipment. We want it to be better for the women behind us. We want it to be better for the women who are signing up today—the daughters and granddaughters—in that the system has thought of them and has expected them, that they're not the anomaly, and that they're not given male equipment and told to suck it up. When they have injuries, we don't want them to be told that those injuries aren't recognized. We don't want them to be misdiagnosed and told they're not considered service-related injuries when they hit Veterans Affairs. That's still, unfortunately, our state of affairs.
I would challenge, especially.... I'm really excited to see that there are people who have such dedication to these topics, who are part of the bases, who have kids in the military and who have lived experience. This is a very exciting committee group here, to me. We can do better. We can do it differently, and we can actually fix some of these problems instead of handing them off to each other.
Most veterans I know only come back over and over again because we're trying to make it better for those behind us. Empowering us to have that voice, to be heard as part of the defence team on a more regular basis, to me, would be one of the really easy ways.
In case anyone isn't aware, there was a one-year study on the experience of Canadian women veterans done by the ACVA committee. It was tabled, and we actually had our celebration in this room. This is my first time in this room since June 12, 2024, when all parties signed 42 recommendations of things that we can do.
Again, if you look at those recommendations, my count is that about 50% of them cannot be done without CAF and DND. There is a significant overlap, so we need to work together on these issues. That would be my short answer.
Liberal
Viviane LaPointe Liberal Sudbury, ON
Also in your opening comments, you provided some recommendations of changes that you would like to see in Bill C-11. In one of those, you spoke about adding mandatory data collection. Can you expand on that?
Medical Doctor, As an Individual
There's a medical phrase that might be appropriate for this time: “The surgery was successful, but the patient died.”
In my lived experience of now over 35 years of watching, for the most part, women doing what they were ordered to do when we still had the duty to report, they had no choice. They were ordered to come forward with certain issues, but following and doing what they were ordered to do over and over again ended their careers. It ended their health. It ended their relationships. Even if two years, three years or four years later, somehow something happens and the justice system says, “Yes, you were correct,” I've yet to see a situation in which they felt like they had won.
Again, the justice system doesn't necessarily provide justice. Even if you did go forward and lay charges, and even if those charges were successful, in my lived experience, for the most part, people still felt like they had lost.
How are we capturing that? It isn't just how many cases go to civilian; it's also how many get carried forward, and then what the results are, but at what price? When we're in the military, it's very different. If I have outstanding legal issues, can I be moved? Can I go on my course? Can I get promoted? My entire career can come to a stop, and there is still sort of that scarlet A that you're doing something on the outside. You're doing something disloyal, because you're outside the family, out doing that civilian lawyer stuff, and nobody knows what's happening.
It still does impact your relationships within the military family. There is an ostracization, and there is social isolation. There is still such a price to be paid, because it is not a good fit with still having a successful career and still feeling like you belong as part of a unit in the military when you still have outstanding legal cases that often are years in the making.
Liberal
Bloc
Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'd like to thank the witnesses for being with us today.
As you know, we are here today to study Bill C‑11 and propose any necessary amendments, so we welcome any suggestions you have. Then we can figure out how to make this bill better.
Ms. Breeck, in a letter published in The Hill Times in October, you said that reservists, rangers and cadets had largely been overlooked in the bill.
Why do you think that is?
Medical Doctor, As an Individual
If I understood the question correctly, it was on the bill and how it is impacting the rangers and the cadets.
I will not claim to have expertise on the legal inclusion or non-inclusion of them. I was using it mostly from the statements that were made by Lori Idlout of the NDP as part of the second speech on the documents. Those concerns from the NDP members were documented. It would be a legal issue of where that line is of who's covered and not covered. That's where I got that data from.
Bloc
Senior Legal Counsel, As an Individual
Mr. Chair, I can get back to the committee with a written response. I'm not able to provide an answer right now.
Bloc
Bloc
Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton, QC
In your letter, Ms. Breeck, you refer to Bill C‑11 as a 2015 solution brought forward in 2025. That's more or less what you said. That means the landscape has changed significantly.
You said earlier that even if the bill does go forward, the burden on those who have experienced these situations is significant. You also said that federal funding could help equip civilian police forces with the tools they need to handle more complex military cases fairly and effectively.
There have been two review commissions, and it's often said that the people who suffered these experiences have been extensively consulted. You don't think it's enough, though. Is that correct?
Medical Doctor, As an Individual
If I'm understanding the question correctly, we've already consulted a number of people, and we've had all these reports. Is it not enough?
I'd just like to comment, as someone who's been adjacent to all of those commissions and has been involved, including as a witness to them as well, that sometimes it appears that there's some cherry-picking of what was said and how it was said. Certainly, it's been my lived experience that during that time period especially, when there was a very united concern that we needed the cases moved to civilian.... What I keep hearing not included in that political discussion is the fact that we needed the cases moved to civilian because our rights were not the same at that time. It was only at such time that they were equivalent that it would be better to be coming back.
Again, the problem was duty to report. We had an obligation by law. We were potentially getting charged if we did not report, yet we had no supports when we reported. We had no legal access when we reported. We had no victims' rights when we reported. We didn't have an SMSRC when we reported. Under those circumstances, I think the community was fairly strong that we needed to move. Those were the conversations, in my memory, of what really helped force Deschamps and Arbour to feel so strongly on this.
Again, not knowing if it's possible, I personally would love to hear from those two amazing justices on where they sit under the present situation, because it's not the same military situation.
Bloc
Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton, QC
Would you like to add anything, Ms. David?