Public Accounts Committee on Jan. 29th, 2019

[Jody Thomas]

Thank you for your kind remarks.

There are problems reporting, depending on where you are. Dr. Preston is working on that with the environmental chiefs as we speak.

If you're on a ship, making a report to the centre can be difficult if you don't have connectivity and if you're not comfortable reporting to your chain of command. So, how do we effect that? That affects the functioning of the armed forces, absolutely, so we have to find ways, and we are working on ways to do that.

I believe we've fixed the problem with those who are serving abroad. They have access to the centre. Generally it is when they're at sea that we have the largest problems and that has to do with data and bandwidth and getting access, and we're working on those things.

At the same time, the chain of command has to understand that they have a responsibility to protect people who've been affected, and so yes, MRC is there to provide independent advice and an independent ear and voice for people who have been affected by inappropriate behaviour. The chain of command also has to be part of that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Dr. Preston, are you in on that, or not?

[Denise Preston]

I'll let you know.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

General?

[LGen Charles Lamarre]

Perhaps I could just add a bit there to re-emphasize what the deputy minister just said. Not only does the chain of command have a responsibility to do this, they have a great interest and a passion to do so, and that point can't be forgotten.

When it comes down to it, whether you're on a ship or you're deployed anywhere around the world, or if you're in Canada, the effectiveness of your unit depends on the ability of each member of your team to feel like they're part of the team. So you can bet that every member of the chain of command wants to make sure that's addressed properly. If you have miscreants in there, they'll be rooted out and taken out. I think that's an important aspect of it.

Even when you're deployed, if for some reason you're not there, it's not only your chain of command that's going to be able to help you, but you have the multiple levels that we spoke about earlier on, multiple chains. There are your chaplains, your physicians' assistants, your medical officers. You often have the MPs who are deployed as part of any task force.

There are numerous ways in which a person who has been affected can seek that assistance. If, by chance, they were not able to immediately get to Dr. Preston's organization, again, with the connectivity we have in deployed operations now, folks have the ability to do that. Interestingly enough, it's not only potential victims or those who have been affected, but many members of the chain of command also call in to Dr. Preston's organization to get advice from our specialists. I've done so myself on two occasions since the centre came into existence and I found it to be useful in both incidents. There was one case specifically, a long-standing event, that resulted in correcting something that had occurred over 25 years ago, and that individual now is wearing the rank of colonel in the regular force.

So, we do use this centre as a resource. It's available to the people here, and it's available to people all around the world.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Mr. Arya. It was a good question.

This will be our final question, and then we will ask everyone to exit fairly soon so that we can have an in camera meeting after.

Mr. Christopherson.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

The first thing I want to do—and I already had it down before he started—is to echo Mr. Arya. I think it's important that the deputy hear from, not just government members, who could be said to be self-serving in terms of supporting their own appointees, but also from the third party over here, which is about as far from real power right now as you can possibly get.

I want to say that, Deputy, I have found your accountability to Parliament, which is what this is about.... It's not us. This is the premier oversight committee of Parliament, and when people are brought here to be accountable, you're accountable to Parliament. Deputy, you have a very difficult file and have had difficult files previously, and I have always found you to be very forthright. You don't play games. When you're put on the spot, you respond honestly and with commitment, and you follow up. Your comment about taking data seriously is music to our ears.

What you have said here today is good, and I'm satisfied that you've made enough personal commitments in this action plan that I think it's going to happen. I want to join Mr. Arya and thank you, Deputy. You're doing an excellent job. You're getting close to the gold standard in terms of what I look for from a deputy, and, as you know, that's not an easy ladder to climb. My faith is in your personal commitment to making this happen. I believe you.

General, not so much, sir. Now, I mean this sincerely. You said you weren't sure which criticisms I was talking about. A quick read of the report shows you that there were data problems. The gaps in services were the same. The training is not being done in a coordinated way. The duty to report has caused a problem that wouldn't have been there if it had gone through the original recommendations. That's just the beginning of it. If you want to drill down, you'll maybe understand why the deputy approaches this committee the way she does.

Page 25, 5.109, “What we examined”, and this is the AG.

I'll leave you, sir, to answer or not. I'll leave it rhetorical, if you wish not to answer, and if you want to answer, I'll be keenly interested in what it is.

It states:

What we examined. We examined whether the Canadian Armed Forces adequately oversaw Operation HONOUR to know whether it was working as intended, and whether it was being improved continuously.

Then 5.110, page 25:

Independent, external oversight. In 2016, the Chief of the Defence Staff—

That's your boss, right?

[LGen Paul Wynnyk]

You know it is, Mr. Christopherson.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

—committed to receiving independent oversight and advice for Operation HONOUR by creating a steering committee and an external advisory council.

You asked me what it was that I was having a problem with. The next sentence:

However, we found that the advisory council had met for the first time only in June 2018, and at the time of the audit, the steering committee had never met.

Did the chief of the defence staff know that the council had not met? The steering committee didn't meet until 2018 and the department.... I got it wrong. The advisory council met for the first time only in June 2018, and at the time of the audit, the steering committee had never met. Given that the chief of the defence staff, the top of the house, said that he was creating those two bodies to ensure that Operation Honour was being implemented effectively, did the chief of the defence staff know that the advisory council hadn't met until June 2018 and that the steering committee had never met? If he did, it tells me that it wasn't too darn important. If he didn't know, there's some incompetency in terms of accountability back to the top of the house.

[LGen Paul Wynnyk]

First of all, I cannot say what the chief of defence staff knew and didn't know. I want to take it on notice that there could be multiple reasons why that committee met when it did. We'll check into this. Perhaps the members had not been convened. I'll follow up on that.

Mr. Christopherson, I want to get back to the points that you mentioned. I think it's the nub of the issue. I appreciate your passion on this, and I want to emphasize, if I haven't appeared to be taking this seriously, that I am taking it very seriously.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

It's not a lack of seriousness, General. I'd like to hear a little more accountability.

[LGen Paul Wynnyk]

On the data, training and duty to report, which are the points that you mentioned, I can assure you we're doing a lot in that regard. I mentioned that the new data analysis system, the Operation Honour tracking and analysis system, is well under way. It was under way at the time the Auditor General did the report. It's a bespoke system. It's the first among the Five Eyes countries in the world.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

If you want to go back and forth on this, General, I can go into detail too. I read this report very carefully and the problem was that the external review committee recommended that the centre take responsibility. They had informal ways of deciding whether to go on or not. Within the military, the duty to report required that someone has to go ahead. In fact, it noted that some of your decision-makers took it upon themselves not to follow the letter, which is really serious in your business, but they did the right thing. I hope they were commended for it.

[LGen Paul Wynnyk]

The duty to report is an important aspect that we've looked at. There will always be a duty to report. Anything that's wrong in the Canadian Forces under the code of service discipline, we're going to report.

We have learned as we've gone along how we respond to that and the involvement of the victim. How we respond to that is very important.

[Jody Thomas]

If I could just have one final word on the external advisory committee, thank you.

Part of the reason it didn't meet frequently and only had its first meeting as noted in June 2018 was my fault. The members who were originally nominated, I didn't think answered the question. We wanted experts. Dr. Preston of course has contacts around the country, people who are experts in this field whether victim support, data experts, psychologists or sociologists who understand the root causes, all the things we need to look at within the Canadian Armed Forces and the Department of National Defence.

We revamped the EAC from scratch before the first meeting. I think that while we were slow in getting it moving, we have a better committee for that. It is an adviser to Dr. Preston. She then gives advice to the chain of command based on the EAC. They've met multiple times since, and I think are doing very good work.

You can hold me accountable for why they didn't meet. Dr. Preston had a better idea for it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

I want to thank all of you. I have one other thing to add. We talked about meeting recommendations, whether or not timelines will be met. We have looked at the timelines, and in speaking to our analysts, they seem very reasonable. I hope we are on a good track as far as being able to keep up on those recommendations in the time allotted to them.

I can guarantee you that if we find that those timelines are not being met or are being postponed, we will look forward to seeing you appear here before our committee again. I hope these recommendations and the action plan will be kept.

Thank you very much for your attendance here today. We are going to suspend our meeting and we then will go in camera.

[Proceedings continue in camera]