Status of Women Committee on May 14th, 2019

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

Good afternoon. Welcome to the 144th meeting of the Standing Committee on the Status of Women. Today's meeting is in public.

Today we'll continue our study on the treatment of women within the Department of National Defence. For this meeting I am pleased to welcome as individuals Dr. Karen Breeck, a retired military physician; Professor Grazia Scoppio, associate professor, Canadian Defence Academy and Royal Military College of Canada; and from It's Just 700, Marie-Claude Gagnon, who is a founder.

I'll turn the floor now over to Marie-Claude.

You have seven minutes.

[Marie-Claude Gagnon, Founder, It's Just 700]

Hello. I would like to thank the committee for the opportunity to present today. I will be sharing my views as a former Canadian Armed Forces servicewoman, a military sexual trauma survivor and a founder of the group It's Just 700.

It's Just 700 was built as a result of the online reprisals surging from the 2015 external review of sexual misconduct in the Canadian Armed Forces. I wanted to create a safe space in which military victims could connect with peers and learn about services and opportunities available to them.

It did not take long before we identified trends and gaps in the services provided to us. Here are a few issues that in my opinion are worthy of study.

First is that the lack of independence of the SMRC from the Canadian Armed Forces leadership has been hurting victim support. The sexual misconduct response centre's annual report 2017-18 seems to indicate that the SMRC has been enhancing its consultation and training support to the CAF leadership while the victim support remains the same. This means that while the SMRC is providing hands-on services to CAF leadership, victims are getting over-the-phone active listening and a referral service. We do not get a case manager, help with accommodations or someone advocating for our needs. I am sure you can see how these kinds of services would have been helpful to some women who testified in front of you last week.

Maybe this is the reason that, according to the same report, from CAF leadership who use the services SMRC has an overall satisfaction of 87%, while from victims the overall satisfaction rate is 64%. Maybe this is the reason there has been a decrease of victims using the SMRC and an increase of CAF leadership using it. Offering this kind of limited victim support means that only 2% of the 21% of victims who reported a sexual misconduct contacted the SMRC between 2017 and 2018. Given this very small sample, even the SMRC within its report expressed concern about its own ability to provide an accurate picture of the issues, trends or needs of the victims.

Second, government-funded programs for the ill and injured should not focus only on male-dominated types of injuries. The same report revealed that more than half of the military sexual trauma victims indicated that the SMRC should include peer support and face-to-face consultation. According to the fourth Canadian Armed Forces progress report on sexual misconduct, in-house peer support will not happen.

This means that while Canadian Armed Forces members dealing with operational stress injury—mostly men—and even their spouses are getting peer support through the military, we MST survivors would be referred to sexual assault groups for women in the community we just happen to be posted in. Giving us a subsidiary standard of care away from military view and our peers using a temporary budget is not the solution.

Third, policies, programs and research are still being built without the GBA+ lens and are not being challenged. I have two recent examples of Canadian Armed Forces initiatives that did not use a GBA+ lens. The first example came when I tried to navigate the Canadian Armed Forces transition website released on March 25, 2019. As you can see in annex A to my speaking notes, the only care advertised for the ill and injured on this website is through OSISS, which is operational stress injury social support services.

OSISS does not have a mandate to help MST survivors. The only group support tailored to women, military and civilian, that I ended up finding while navigating was The Royal Ottawa mental health centre website, where I was greeted by the phrase, “Come and join us for self-care, learning and shopping.”

I found the second example when I read the 2019 “Suicide and suicide prevention in the Canadian Armed Forces” report. Just like the report of 2016, it only covers male suicide. By being a minority group, female Canadian Armed Forces members will never meet the required threshold to be studied in a survey designed for a homogeneous population. The Canadian Armed Forces must invest additional resources if they want to understand the needs of its women.

I would like to conclude with a few open questions. Where is the independent oversight? Who advocates for victims' needs and their well-being during studies such as this one? Where is the accountability?

No entity should be policing itself. It never works. It never has and it never will. Unless the Deschamps commission is fully implemented with complete external and independent oversight, a deep knowledge of the military and its structures and challenges, as well as an ability to hold the military and National Defence accountable for oversight, as I stated previously, I can't foresee impactful results for women.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

Thank you very much.

We're now going to turn the floor over to Dr. Karen Breeck.

Karen, you have seven minutes.

[Dr. Karen Breeck, Retired Military Physician, As an Individual]

Good afternoon and thank you to the chair and committee for inviting me to attend today. I apologize up front to everyone in the room and those listening; I'm still finishing up a cold.

First, I want to thank the witnesses who gave testimony last week. Listening to their stories gave me the courage to agree to be here today. As a retired military physician, I was deeply touched by the fact that two of your four witnesses last week were medics. I've always had an interest in medical support needs specific to female soldiers. I spent most of the 20 years of my regular force career supporting the air force. I had the good fortune to be selected for advanced medical education, completing both a master's of health sciences in occupational medicine, and a certificate in women's studies.

My subsequent medical residency was in aerospace medicine, which is a preventive medicine sub-speciality. I also had the honour of being a past president of the Federation of Medical Women of Canada and I have continued, since my release in 2009, to advocate for equitable health outcomes for all Canadian military women.

Last week's testimony provided the committee with a number of first-hand experiences that have occurred after the implementation of Operation Honour. I think we can all agree that despite the sincere efforts and hard work of many, Operation Honour has not achieved the levels of effectiveness we all had hoped for.

There is no question that the military has come a long way and deserves acknowledgement and credit for that hard work. However, as a physician, I want to highlight that a lot of that hard work has been on the backs of those most impacted. All of your witnesses last week were first impacted by their workplace incident and then made to feel responsible to name the problem with their subsequent treatments, determine how to best solve that problem and advocate for the needed systemic changes.

The chronic stresses related to these and other workplace aftermaths consistently, in my experience, end up having negative impacts on people's health and well-being, with these health issues, therefore, for the most part, to me being preventable service-related injuries and illnesses. If I had closed my eyes and listened to last week's testimony, it easily could have been confused for listening to conversations that I regularly would have had in my same doctor's office 30 years ago. Although much has changed, much has not.

CAF has ordered its people to stop harassment. It hasn't worked. CAF has ordered its people to follow the harassment policies. It hasn't worked. However, my question is, why is this a surprise and is this anything unique to the Canadian Armed Forces?

In the medical sphere, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in the United States released a comprehensive report in June 2018 on sexual harassment and its effects on women in male-dominated fields of study. They found no evidence that policies, procedures or legal focuses alone would result in any reduction in sexual harassment rates. These are all necessary but not sufficient drivers of the changes needed to address sexual harassment. Their summary advice was that we need to be focusing on system-wide holistic change, inclusive of culture and climate.

There has been much ado about the Canadian Forces military culture and whether it's sexualized or just simply male normative. Either way, it's a culture that is proud to boast that it eats policy for breakfast.

It was Einstein who warned us that we cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them. Perhaps what is needed most here is a moment of pause: a reboot, a paradigm shift. Maybe what is needed is a transformational solution instead of yet one more committee with committee recommendations resulting in the same levels of downstream impact as moving deck chairs around on the Titanic. Maybe it's time that we moved from traditional political and military linear thinking and acknowledged that culture and gender are both context-specific topics that are best addressed as complex systems. They're also known as wicked problems.

As physicians, we use these approaches within health care. We know that if we want to make improvements in a health care system, we have to be looking at it in a holistic, dynamic approach. As military physicians, we have a basic framework on how we try to maximize healthy workplaces and fulfill our mandate of conserving manpower, and it's never one thing. It's always a multitude of things that all have to happen at the same time.

First, we always, always have to focus on prevention. Also, it's not either-or. It's prevention and screening, and it's early diagnosis, immediate care and rehabilitation. As well, how do we get you back to work, and if we can't get you back to work, how can we make you the best you can be? Last, this is with feedback loops with constant quality assurances between all of these levels. It is that last bit—the feedback loops—that is often the most important key to success.

How can we apply this approach and address these necessary culture changes so that we can truly, finally and fully integrate women into CAF? I do have specific recommendations under each of those four categories, but for reasons of time, I will move to my conclusion.

This committee was set up with terms of reference specifically to explore if the Government of Canada has given CAF all the resources it needs. I leave you with a clear and simple answer to that question: no.

It was only one career length ago, 30 years, that CAF was very legitimately a workplace and culture designed by men, for men and about men. In the 1980s, when the military was ordered to open to women the 75% of its jobs previously held by men only, a crucial Government of Canada decision was made. It was decided that the legal ruling was to be implemented into CAF with no concurrent, systemic top-down review or designated financial support to ensure gender integration was set up for success.

Gender integration was instead left largely to the women on the front lines, such as the ones testifying in front of you last week and who, for the last 30 years, have said, “We need help.” For 30 years Canadian women have stepped up, signed the dotted line and tried to make the military a better place to work in for those behind them, often at the cost of their own health and well-being. For 30 years they've been waiting to be met at least halfway by the Government of Canada, their employer, to be enabled their proper top-down systemic reviews.

CAF needs more money, more people, more training and more data. The Minister of National Defence and the Minister of Veterans Affairs need strategic funding for the full integration of not just GBA+, but SGBA, sex gender-based analysis, throughout DND, CAF and VAC. Furthermore, these departments need money to develop a health and policy partnership with CIHR, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, to accelerate the quality of sex and gender science for military women. Service injuries and illnesses from chronic sexual harassment and assault perpetuated within our own workplace is not the war any women I knew signed up for.

There are many other issues that impact military women other than just sexual trauma and sexual harassment, and we look forward to working together with the Government of Canada, as our employer, to address them all.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

That's excellent. Thank you very much.

We'll now move over to Grace.

Grace, you have seven minutes.

[Dr. Grazia Scoppio, Associate Professor, Canadian Defence Academy and Royal Military College of Canada, Department of National Defence, As an Individual]

Good afternoon, everyone.

I will make my comments in English, but I can answer your questions in English or in French.

I'm honoured to be here, and I would like to thank the chair and the committee for inviting me.

I'm Grazia Scoppio, dean of continuing studies and professor in the department of defence studies at the Royal Military College of Canada, RMCC. I've been asked to appear as an individual, based on my expertise, so I'll speak on my own behalf and not on behalf of the Department of National Defence.

I will give you a brief overview of my research on diversity, provide some observations standing on my recent research on gender in the military colleges, and I will conclude with a few comments drawing on my own personal experience as an academic at RMCC and DND.

One of my main research interests as an academic is multiculturalism, immigrant integration and diversity. Since joining RMC in 2002, I've led several studies on diversity in organizations, including in the CAF. For example, I did a comparative study looking at diversity strategies in military forces and police forces in Canada, Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States. In a follow-up study, I travelled to New Zealand to see how the Maori were integrated in the New Zealand defence force.

For the past few years I have led a study with a team of researchers investigating gender issues in the Canadian military colleges. I'm currently organizing an international panel looking at international perspectives on immigrant participation in the military. That's just to give you an overview.

On this international research on diversity in military organizations, comparatively speaking, Canada is doing well in some areas such as opening all military occupations to women since 1989 with the exception of submarines, which were open in 2001 following a Canadian Human Rights Tribunal decision directing the CAF to remove all employment restrictions and integrate women in all military occupations.

Canada also has an Employment Equity Act that has applied to the CAF since 2002, which requires the collection of self-reported data on designated groups and the establishment of EE plans and goals, among other things. Clearly, all these changes were a reaction to legal and legislative obligations rather than proactive initiatives.

I will now provide a few observations stemming more specifically from my research on gender in the Canadian military colleges.

In 2016 my research team and I started a study, which was requested by RMC, to investigate whether gender bias existed in the recruiting process for the colleges as well as to look at the experience of officer cadets in the military colleges versus those attending civilian universities. The study adopted a gender-based assessment plus, GBA+, as a framework for the design and the analysis, and it involved three stages.

In the first stage, we analyzed existing data on ROTP—regular officer training plan—applicants and recruits from 2006 to 2016. This revealed that there was a downward trend in the representation of ROTP female applicants and recruits. Also, the proportion of female applicants was consistently higher across the years than the proportion of females who were recruited. On average, female applicants were about a quarter, whereas female recruits were only 17%.

The highest percentage of women were recruited in support occupations such as health care, administration and logistics. Many females were not enrolled in their preferred choice of occupation, and the percentage of female recruits who were offered their academic program of choice was lower than that of the males.

In the second stage, we conducted surveys and interviews with ROTP officer cadets in the military colleges and civilian universities. The key findings related to the recruiting process revealed that, although there was no gender bias identified by the respondents, they experienced delays and other challenges during the process. Also, gender and ethnicity differences were found in the reasons for joining the CAF, which suggests that more effort is needed to tailor marketing and outreach to such groups as females, visible minorities or males specifically. Also, recruiters should provide information that is more realistic and consistent to ensure that both females and males are equally informed about military careers.

The key findings related to the experience at the military colleges or at civilian universities revealed that, overall, both males and females in military colleges perceived more gender differences than their counterparts in civilian universities. For example, more female cadets experienced gender bias than males and fewer females than males reported that they were treated in a respectful manner. Some officer cadets, both males and females, cited the difference in the fitness test for males and females as a source of concern regarding equal standards across genders.

Over 80% of females and males in civilian universities would recommend to friends that they apply through the ROTP to attend a civilian university. However, only half of the officer cadet males and females in the military colleges would recommend to friends that they apply through the ROTP to attend a military college, for various reasons. In the qualitative analysis, some of the reasons included poor leadership, harassment and what they perceived to be an inferior learning environment in the military colleges compared with civilian universities.

Overall, these findings suggest that the organizational climate, culture and environment of the military colleges should be improved, while at the same time also increasing women's representation in order to enhance gender integration and make the experience of female and officer cadets more positive.

The third and final stage of the study included surveys and interviews with ROTP applicants, and the report is still in progress.

Finally, I will conclude with a few comments drawn from my personal experience as an academic at RMC within the Department of National Defence. I began my academic career with DND in 2002 as section head at the Canadian Defence Academy, transitioning in 2013 to associate dean of continuing studies at RMC, culminating in my current appointment in 2017 as dean of continuing studies at RMC. Concurrently, I continue to teach in the RMC's department of defence studies.

I believe that, to be an effective female leader in the defence environment, it is important to have a strong understanding of military culture and also of the culture of other organizations that work in collaboration with defence.

It is also important to have the ability to work in a male-dominated environment, as the percentage of females in leadership positions in DND is not very high. For example, at RMC less than 25% of the civilian faculty is female. Currently I am the only female dean. Before me, there were only two previous women deans. One was dean of arts for two years, so did not finish her term. One was an interim dean of arts for one year.

To be effective as a woman in defence, it is important to have a combination of hard and soft skills, including quite a bit of resilience, empathy, interpersonal skills, cross-cultural skills and strong communication skills.

Thank you for this opportunity to provide my perspective.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

Thank you very much for your testimony.

Now we are going to do our seven-minute round of questioning, and we are going to start off with Eva Nassif.

Eva, you have the floor for seven minutes.

[Eva Nassif, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

First, I would like to thank the witnesses for their most helpful presentations.

My question is for Ms. Scoppio.

You said that you were a cadet and a dean.

[Dr. Grazia Scoppio]

I was not a cadet. I am a dean. Our research was on the cadets.

[Eva Nassif, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

Okay.

You mentioned a time around 2001.

Which year was it?

[Dr. Grazia Scoppio]

I am sorry. You want to know in which year—

[Eva Nassif, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

In which year did you become dean?

[Dr. Grazia Scoppio]

In 2017.

[Eva Nassif, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

Okay.

In terms of comparative analysis, could you tell us about your personal experience and whether that analysis is practiced in the Canadian Armed Forces?

[Dr. Grazia Scoppio]

Which comparative analysis are you referring to?

[Eva Nassif, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

The one dealing with the recruitment of cadets and the behaviour in that situation.

[Dr. Grazia Scoppio]

Okay.

As I said, we found that cadets enrolled in military colleges and cadets recruited by the Canadian Forces but studying in civilian universities perceived their experiences differently.

There are fewer of the latter, of course. By way of illustration, if I recall correctly, our sample of officer cadets enrolled in military colleges was 925, almost 1,000, compared to fewer than 150 cadets enrolled in civilian universities. However, we were still surprised to see as many differences in the perceptions that those cadets had of their experience. It was generally more positive in civilian universities than in military colleges.

Did you also ask me to talk about my personal experience?

[Eva Nassif, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

Yes.

[Dr. Grazia Scoppio]

Madam, it is very difficult to be the only female dean in an environment that is completely dominated by men. It is very difficult.

[Eva Nassif, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

In your opinion, what percentage of the public servants working in the Department of National Defence identify as women?

[Dr. Grazia Scoppio]

That is a good question.

In support positions, there are a lot of women. However, in the management positions you were talking about—

[Eva Nassif, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

Positions like your own.

[Dr. Grazia Scoppio]

Not many.

I am sorry, but I do not have the exact percentage at hand.

[Eva Nassif, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

Is it possible to compare the number of women in management positions such as you mentioned just now—by which I mean middle and upper management, like your own position of dean—with the number of women in the department? Is it similar or less?

[Dr. Grazia Scoppio]

In the department, many units include both military and civilian employees. The situation is similar in the military college, where civilians and military employees work as a team. However, what I want to tell you is that management positions are often held by men. For example, the deans provide the college's academic leadership and there are no women.