Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I will save this address for the room in general and the members opposite here.
To our experts, I appreciate the answers to our questions. Although they are here as experts to answer some technical questions, I feel that it was a lot more like testimony in support of a bill they helped to draft and in defence of that. I just wanted to put that on the record for you, Mr. Chair.
The goal of Bill C-11 is very well intentioned, and I think we all agree with that. We've seen that culture changes need to happen. We're all very passionate about this. I truly think that everyone in this room is focused on getting something right for the survivors, although we have differences of opinion. The goal is to restore trust in the military justice system and provide justice for victims and how we achieve that, but it's also to improve the culture.
I have seen improvements to the safety and the culture in the Canadian Forces, although there's more room to grow. I know that when I joined many years ago, 25 years, some of this type of culture was terrible. Okay, it has been longer than that, but I don't want to say how long ago it was. There has been improvement in recent years, but it still has farther to go, and I think that if done right, Bill C-11 can help us achieve that.
It's also to provide trauma-informed safety and choice for the survivors while restoring military justice and improving the culture but still respecting those needs. Bill C-11, without the choice that we are presenting in our CPC-3 amendment, doesn't provide a solution for the survivors in terms of minor and grey cases. It's opening a Pandora's box that could destroy the good progress the CF has made and worked very hard for in the last several years. It would reverse that.
As we've heard today, it would be forced to resort to using administrative measures versus military justice measures for dealing with minor cases that would not be prosecuted at the civilian level. We've heard much testimony about those middle, lower and grey area cases that would just be left now, as we've heard, to administrative measures, and this is not a way. It is not trauma-informed. It is not going to improve the military culture, and it certainly will not restore trust in the military justice system. These are the stated goals.
We've also heard from the civilian police that they're beyond capable. I have full trust in Fiona Wilson, the chief of the Victoria Police Department, and their capability. She stated that they have the capability to deal with major cases, but they do not have the capacity.
Her question, which I brought forward to the minister, I believe, was about how much funding would be made available for the extra police officers required. This was specific to Victoria, but I thought that was a good example, because CFB Esquimalt is in there and that's a large base.
There was no answer. This bill as it is right now, without the amendment, doesn't provide the extra funding and training that are going to be needed. A lot of money is going to be needed. We heard examples of how long these cases can take, both the investigations and the prosecutions. There would also be a lot of training. There is no plan for the training. Our amendment solves that issue. Our amendment doesn't require a solution for the minor and the grey cases because there's already a system in place that will deal with those.
I contend—and I look everyone straight in the eye when I say seriously—that the military administrative system is not designed to do this and will not be able to deliver that justice. I understand how the administrative rules and steps take.... I've applied them myself for administrative issues, not serious issues like sexual misconduct. Whether they're minor or grey, that simply doesn't suffice. Without the amendment, that is not solved.
It's not trauma-informed. I don't want to beat that one too much or bang that drum. We've discussed that. It takes away freedom. This is also one of the goals of Bill C-11 that's not achieved. I think giving that choice is going to make it trauma-informed.
I'll conclude that Bill C-11, without our amendment, CPC-3.... I'm imploring everybody to consider, vote for and support it so that we can deal with restoring military justice, like the minister wants; improve the culture and continue improving the culture, as has been going on over time; and provide compassionate, trauma-informed choice and support for the victims, as we've heard overwhelmingly.
I would love to do the math on this. Maybe for the next time we sit down, I'll do the percentages in terms of comments we heard from experts, from victims and survivors and from people who deal with victims and survivors. Overwhelmingly, that's what we heard.
In my riding, on Vancouver Island, there are many veterans, because we're adjacent to CFB Esquimalt and have CFB Comox to the north. I know that from all the people I've met, whether in this job or before. On behalf of all my constituents and the many survivors I personally know and the many survivors I've met through this job, through advocacy work with Wounded Warriors Canada and through all types of advocacy work for veterans—and I know them well—I will be voting to support our amendment, CPC-3. I would ask everyone to consider it for the reasons I gave.
Thank you very much.
