Evidence of meeting #144 for Status of Women in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was caf.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Karen Vecchio
Thank you very much.
We're now going to move over to Rachel Bendayan. You have seven minutes.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
Rachel Bendayan Liberal Outremont, QC
Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Thank you for your testimony today.
Ms. Gagnon, I will ask my question in English, since your testimony was in English, but feel free to reply in French too.
I was a lawyer previously, and we've heard testimony from several witnesses now regarding the lack of their ability to pay for legal representation as the victim, and the reasons, in processes in the armed forces. I was wondering if your organization of volunteers included lawyers who provided legal counsel to victims, and if you would be in agreement with the proposal that we should be paying for, or at least assisting victims with their legal fees in order for them to have professional counsel during the dispute resolution process.
4:15 p.m.
Founder, It's Just 700
On the first question, no, we don't provide that but we do have some people with a legal background who do, and links to people who can provide it if people are willing to pay for it. Absolutely, you should get a legal counsel. The U.S. went that way. When the bill, which is the equivalent of Bill C-77, came to them, they said that the liaison was not enough and they actually had to give full-blown counselling because of the way the process was done. There are so many policies that are old and so on. They need additional help to just reach the same level as what civilians get as a service.
I would say also that the fact that we have a duty to report makes it that even more important because if you force somebody to go to court, what happens if she gets sued afterwards? It happened in my group a couple of times already that afterwards they were the ones who were being sued. Who pays for that? Who foots the bill even if they were forced to be the ones disclosing?
Let's say you're a supervisor and you say that your employee, your subordinate, assaulted you. If there's an acknowledgement that there was a sexual act but the consent part was uncertain, then in the military you could be charged afterwards for having an adversarial relationship—and it doesn't stop at that. We have another person who got charged for underage drinking after she reported the incident. The incident got sent to the civilian...but she got charged in the military under the disciplinary act for underage drinking.
If we're forcing people to disclose, I think that they need equal protection because they quickly can become the accused.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Rachel Bendayan Liberal Outremont, QC
Thank you very much. That's very helpful.
Dr. Breeck, you mentioned in your testimony that you had four specific recommendations. I know your time for opening remarks was very short. I wonder if you would like the opportunity to let the committee know your recommendations.
4:20 p.m.
Retired Military Physician, As an Individual
Unfortunately, I have more than four recommendations. I have four categories of recommendations. Maybe I'll just pick the ones at the top end.
Having listened to last week's testimony, I know training came up quite often. If I were to focus first on prevention, number one, it isn't just after they come to us. It is how the Government of Canada is communicating to Canadians about what the military is and who we are, and who is already being attracted to come to us. What do Canadians know and understand about the military and how do we attract them to us? How are we then screening them? Once they're in the door, how are we training them about the culture of CAF and what we want it to embody. Again, with that reboot idea, do we need to do a conscious re-look at the profession of arms doctrine and a re-look at what a good Canadian soldier is? Instead of all the documentation and visualizations, and stories of yesterdays, what are the attributes and skills sets? What does a good Canadian soldier of tomorrow look like?
Do a full SGBA on a military person's experience to make sure that from the get-go we have equipment, policies and medical support for everyone who comes in, and that women aren't clearly always “the other” and having to have adjustments made for us. We are then clearly a valued, equal team member. In my opinion, this would also help prevent some of the injuries we see in a higher proportion for women.
Continue all of this training throughout all the ranks and all of the career cycle, because as we move up, we start becoming more of a leader and influencing others. It isn't a one-time education. It has to continue and it has to continue all the way up.
One academic I've heard speak several times is a big proponent of all of our flag officers needing specific training. Because of who they are, it has to be one-on-one counselling that's specifically exploring their own personal implicit-explicit biases so that they're aware of what message they are potentially sending to their subordinates. Again, our culture is often very twofold as to what is said versus what people hear, the formal and the informal. Without that type of training, how do we capture that, when our leadership still sometimes says all the right words but that isn't what's heard?
We also need to actually look at our desired military behaviours and consciously do carrots and sticks. We're getting pretty good with the sticks. We're getting better with sticks, because we are charging. However, as you'll have heard many times, are we charging or doing the appropriate things in a transparent, timely and consistent manner? Are the punishments fitting the crimes? There's still a lot of mismatch there.
We haven't done a lot yet, that I'm aware of, for carrots. How do we reward the correct behaviour? How do we incorporate it into our reporting, our PER system? How do we incorporate it into our promotions and our incentive pays? If we move to screening, how do we potentially come up with early diagnosis?
We all have our phones now. We all have apps. Can we use our apps as an early warning monitoring tool that could actually be climate surveys and climate comments where I can just say, “Hey, I saw this and this happen at work today”, and we immediately get, at an organizational level, who is having problems, who needs extra help in their leadership, 360-degree reviews?
Also, we're the only military that I'm aware of that does not have uniformed clinical psychologists. We have a lot who are contracted. We don't have any in uniform. Again, it would be persons for prevention. As a person who did fight surgery, half my job was to be out with the people doing their normal jobs. You'd pick out who was already stressed. You were always trying to fix people before they got sick. Again, the idea of clinical psychologists is very aggressively used in the U.S. It's in all of the workplaces. Your chaplain is there. Your psychologist is there in the workplace to go have a coffee with you, versus waiting until things are already so bad that you're coming into the medical system. There's a lot more we can do on that early-stage prevention.
Restorative justice is a topic that still needs to come up in a multitude of different areas. There are a lot of people who just really love their jobs and their careers, but they want a bit of justice and restorative justice could make that better.
I have another page. I'll hold off on the rest of it in case anyone else has any other questions.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Karen Vecchio
Those are some excellent recommendations.
On behalf of the committee, I'd really like to thank Dr. Karen Breeck, Dr. Grazia Scoppio and Marie-Claude Gagnon. Thank you very much for coming.
We will be suspending for two minutes to switch up the panels, and then we'll reconvene.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Karen Vecchio
Welcome back to the 144th meeting of the Standing Committee on the Status of Women.
For this second hour, we are pleased to welcome, from the Department of National Defence, Denise Preston, executive director of the sexual misconduct response centre; Alain Gauthier, director general, integrated conflict and complaint management; and Commodore Rebecca Patterson, director general, Canadian Armed Forces strategic response team for sexual misconduct.
We're going to start with Commodore Patterson.
Please begin. You have seven minutes.
4:30 p.m.
Commodore Rebecca Patterson Director General, Canadian Armed Forces Strategic Response Team – Sexual Misconduct, Department of National Defence
Good afternoon, and thank you for the opportunity to contribute to this study on the treatment of women in the Department of National Defence and in the Canadian Armed Forces. I understand that as part of your study you're interested to hear about Operation Honour.
The vice-chief of the defence staff was looking forward to being here today to contribute to your study, but he is now required to appear at the committee of the whole this week, so I've been asked to represent him. It's a poor shadow, but I will try.
With me today I have Dr. Denise Preston, as you have stated, the executive director of the sexual misconduct response centre, and Mr. Alain Gauthier, the director general of the integrated conflict and complaint management program. It is our intent to provide you with an update on where the Canadian Armed Forces' efforts to address sexual misconduct are, and we're here to answer any questions you may have.
Operation Honour is increasingly making the Canadian Armed Forces a safer and more welcoming environment for all, and the leadership of the Canadian Armed Forces is absolutely committed more than ever to stamping out sexual misconduct. In February of this year, our fourth progress report on Operation Honour was published. This report offered a comprehensive overview of what the Canadian Armed Forces has accomplished to date in an effort to eliminate sexual misconduct. It also provides an analysis, statistics and information on a variety of initiatives that have been undertaken across the Canadian Armed Forces.
My opening remarks today will constitute a brief synopsis of that report and touch on a few of the more recent developments regarding Operation Honour.
Operation Honour was initiated in 2015. In recent years, we have significantly evolved and are confident that we have completed important foundational work, which was essential to addressing sexual misconduct and effectively supporting those affected by it.
It is important to state upfront, however, that, while we are consistently looking at ways to improve our approach, we have not gotten everything right. We recognize that there is much left to do. We have learned a lot through our own experience and analysis, through the collaborative work we do with the Sexual Misconduct Response Centre, from the assessment of the Office of the Auditor General of Canada, and from the feedback provided by external experts and stakeholders.
Some of the measures we have implemented along the way have resulted in unintended consequences, and some of the initiatives and changes did not deliver the desired outcome. For instance, we've not made sufficient progress in key areas such as policy and strategic cultural change. That has hampered our overall effort.
We've acknowledged that more work is required, specifically with respect to the 10 recommendations made by the external review authority, Madame Deschamps. Those 10 recommendations remain the primary barometer for our progress, and we're committed to implementing them to the fullest extent possible. This commitment is explicitly stated in the defence policy—“Strong, Secure, Engaged”.
Sexual misconduct, however, is a difficult and a complex issue, as Dr. Breeck mentioned, and there is still much to learn. In light of the Auditor General's findings and our own internal review of Operation Honour, we have assessed our progress on the implementation of the recommendations and determined the adjustments required in our approach in order to achieve that intent.
Currently we feel that two of the external review authority's recommendations have been fully achieved. The first is to acknowledge the problem: The Canadian Armed Forces has acknowledged that we have a significant problem. The second is to undertake and to address it, and to simplify the harassment resolution process, which includes sexual harassment.
One more has been achieved in a manner that meets the intent of the recommendation, while maintaining consistency with the Canadian Armed Forces' structural, functional and jurisdictional parameters. That is to allow victims of sexual assault to request the transfer of the complaint to civilian authorities.
We continue to make progress to varying degrees on the remaining seven recommendations, which are to establish a cultural change strategy; to establish a centre of accountability; to allow independent reporting without triggering a formal complaint process; to develop definitions and terminology; to develop a unified policy approach; to assign responsibility for providing, coordinating and monitoring victim support to the support centre; and to assign to the centre the responsibility for the development of the training curriculum and for the monitoring of training on matters related to inappropriate sexual behaviour.
I will now briefly expand on what we are doing to address these deficiencies.
We are currently developing a campaign plan to focus our efforts on moving forward. This plan will be informed by advice from external experts. It will have clear lines of efforts, as well as dedicated resources to ensure success. It will drive our work in areas such as prevention, engagement, policy development, cultural change and victim support.
Support for victims has been, and will continue to be, our main effort for the next phase of Operation Honour. It will be our priority to ensure that victims remain confident that the Canadian Armed Forces will support them through all legal and administrative processes. We will ensure that they have access to the support and services required to recover from the harm done to them.
The sexual misconduct response centre plays an essential role in providing—
4:35 p.m.
Cmdre Rebecca Patterson
We'll talk about the centre though questions.
The Canadian Forces' relationship with the sexual misconduct response centre is still evolving, and our goal is to achieve a posture that will be effective for the Canadian Armed Forces while not detracting from the independence of the centre.
Let there be no doubt; the Canadian Armed Forces is fully committed to this. Now more than ever, we are humbled by the scope of the problem and challenges we face in dealing with sexual misconduct effectively.
4:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Salma Zahid
Thank you, Ms. Patterson.
Next is Ms. Preston. The floor is yours for seven minutes.
4:40 p.m.
Denise Preston Executive Director, Sexual Misconduct Response Centre, Department of National Defence
Thank you.
Thank you for giving me an opportunity to speak today as part of your study of the treatment of women within the Department of National Defence. I am pleased to be here to give you an update on the evolution of the Sexual Misconduct Response Centre, as well as a snapshot of the projects my team and I are working on.
Since its inception in September 2015, the SMRC has built its operations on the provision of response and support services to members of the Canadian Armed Forces affected by sexual misconduct. It offers confidential, bilingual, client-centred services to members 24-7 and may be accessed by members no matter where in the world they may be. The centre's counsellors all have expertise in working with survivors of sexual trauma and do not have a duty to report.
While these services filled a critical gap, they are not sufficient to address the range of needs affected members have within the complexity of the CAF environment. There is also a need for better coordination of support services and specialized training for those who provide support.
These observations, together with the results of internal reviews and the recommendations of the Office of the Auditor General, identified a requirement for a significant revision of and expansion to the SMRC's mandate and role. As such, as a priority, we have drafted a revised version of our new mandate, a mandate that will support the defence team's overall approach to sexual misconduct by providing expert advice related to sexual misconduct, by monitoring CAF's implementation of policies, programs and services, and by delivering expanded, comprehensive, evidence-based response and support services.
Here's an idea on how we plan to deliver on this mandate. To start, we're in the midst of developing an enhanced response and support coordination program, otherwise known as a case management service. This program will provide better coordinated and broader support for CAF members who have experienced sexual misconduct, regardless of whether or not they have reported the incident.
Members will have a single point of contact in the centre who will provide case management services, assistance in navigating both internal and external services or processes, in-person support, practical assistance in completing forms or victim impact statements and accompaniment. These services will be available to affected members with consent from the time of first disclosure until such time as they indicate that support is no longer required.
The model is based on best practices in the field. In fact, we hired an external consultant with decades of experience in a parallel provincial victim support program to advise us. It's also based on gaps identified in internal and external reviews of CAF services available to victims and consultations with retired and still-serving CAF members who have experienced sexual misconduct.
We want to focus on ensuring that members are at the centre of our response and that their needs guide our actions.
Second, the centre will also be providing funding, through a contribution program, to centres assisting victims of sexual assault in close proximity to the 10 largest bases and wings in Canada. This will increase support options outside of the Canadian Armed Forces. This program is still in the design phase and has not yet been launched.
Third, the centre will play an important role in informing the national victim support strategy that is in the initial planning stages.
In relation to providing expert advice, SMRC has provided recommendations on a number of recent policy documents, and on the content and process for developing the new policy on sexual misconduct. Other examples include membership on the sexual assault review program, established by the Canadian Forces provost marshal, to review unfounded cases of sexual assault dating back to 2010; the provision of advice on cases of sexual misconduct within the military justice system or other complaint processes; and membership on numerous relevant working groups with CAF partners.
These examples speak to CAF's increasing recognition of the need for and value of specialized advice related to sexual misconduct and to the increasing credibility of the SMRC. These types of engagements are essential to the improvement of coordinated victim support services.
While I strive to work collaboratively with the Canadian Armed Forces, I remain committed to the centre's independence, as recommended in the external review in 2015. An external advisory council was established last year to enhance and support the centre's independence.
In the last few months, the external advisory council was instrumental in providing expert advice and recommendations on important interim documents directly related to the implementation of Operation Honour and the external review authority's recommendations. These documents include a clearer definition of sexual misconduct and a decision tree tool to guide members of the chain of command in responding to incidents. An important inclusion in the decision tree is guidance on including, consulting and informing affected members at each step of the process.
I believe that external advice and expertise is crucial to the success of Operation Honour as well as to the centre's mandate. I encourage my team to seek outside advice and expertise as often as possible, which is why last December the SMRC hosted a forum on sexual misconduct at which partners from the Five Eyes nations gathered for the first time to advance a common understanding of what is essential to improve support to victims of sexual misconduct in their militaries and to enhance prevention.
I was immediately invested in the forum, because we had an incredible opportunity to exchange best practices on how to effectively address sexual misconduct in our respective organizations and how to best meet the needs of military members.
One best practice that came out of that forum was the importance of grounding our work within an evidence-based prevention framework. I recently hired an expert with many years of clinical, research and administrative experience in the prevention, assessment and treatment of sexual misconduct. She will develop a comprehensive prevention plan and contribute to refining policy regarding perpetrators.
In terms of diversity, the StatsCan survey on sexual misconduct indicated that members of the LBGTQ2 community are victimized at higher rates. SMRC staff have received specialized training from community agencies and are researching enhancements to service delivery to better meet the needs of these and other specialized groups.
The needs of diverse clients will also be considered in the national victim support strategy that is under development. I am also seeking to add expertise in these issues to the membership of the external advisory council.
Finally, as we continue to identify and respond to developing trends by providing expert advice and monitoring CAF's efforts, my focus will remain on ensuring the provision of efficient, effective and compassionate support that is responsive to members' needs, helping them return to work in a healthy and respectful workplace.
Thank you.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Karen Vecchio
Excellent. Thank you very much.
Finally, we'll turn to Alain Gauthier. You have seven minutes...or are you supporting?
Okay, great. We will take your seven minutes back.
We're going to start off with our seven minutes of questioning. Our first round starts with Salma Zahid.
Salma, you have the floor for seven minutes.
May 14th, 2019 / 4:45 p.m.
Liberal
Salma Zahid Liberal Scarborough Centre, ON
Thank you, Chair. Thanks to the witnesses for coming today.
We have been hearing from various witnesses in this study. One complaint that we have heard from many witnesses in the course of the last weeks is that the complaint process is administered by their chain of command, although often the problem resides within that chain of command.
One suggestion given to us is to have the process be completely independent, handled by a separate organization within the Canadian Armed Forces and DND. Do you think this is a feasible suggestion?
I will start with Ms. Patterson.
4:45 p.m.
Cmdre Rebecca Patterson
Thank you for your question.
The Canadian Armed Forces is quite a complex organization, and the role of the chain of command within that organization is absolutely essential.
One thing that is absolutely important in order for us to maintain operational effectiveness is to know how and what our people are doing and how they are. Having a complaint system that is completely external to the chain of command would certainly be challenging.
I think, though, there are two parts to your question. One part seems to involve somebody in their chain of command who is actually the perpetrator of the incident. As we move forward—and we've mentioned trying to provide the tools the people at the coal face need in order to manage these—it is very clear that if there's any relationship between the two, then such a person would be removed from the process.
The other thing we have tried to do is put the guidance—
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
Salma Zahid Liberal Scarborough Centre, ON
Is it happening, or are you saying that it will be introduced?
4:45 p.m.
Cmdre Rebecca Patterson
It is happening now. We have just issued a number of documents.
While policy does not change things, the training that comes with it does. Things are interlinked, and while we certainly have provided guidance to the chain of command on how to effectively manage a complaint, which is a process issue, what has been absolutely critical there is getting and integrating the advice of the sexual misconduct response centre on immediately putting the needs of the affected person up front.
While I cannot speak to a specific case, if there is a case where someone in the chain of command is alleged to have committed an act, they will be removed and the focus is on supporting the person through the process.
Second, we have also issued a manual. You think, “Oh my goodness, not another manual”, but one thing about military culture is that we like to be able to read. This manual focuses on not just doing a process. It focuses on what the affected person needs. The affected person can also read this and know what they can ask for.
Then last, I'll go back to the sexual misconduct response centre. It's part of this process making sure the affected person has the right needs and support, connecting them through their immediate chain of command and recommending they call the sexual misconduct response centre, which also provides the support there.
Having a system that is completely external to the Canadian Armed Forces is a complex question, but we do have a process in place that tries to create and avoid that conflict I think you're referring to.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
4:50 p.m.
Executive Director, Sexual Misconduct Response Centre, Department of National Defence
I can't speak to whether or not it's feasible, or whether CAF can or will implement it, but it is certainly one of the recommendations we made when we provided essentially a briefing note to the CAF on all of the things that ought to be considered in drafting the new policy on sexual misconduct. It was exploring a number of issues around reporting, including the feasibility of some kind of investigative process outside of the chain of command.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
Salma Zahid Liberal Scarborough Centre, ON
Ms. Patterson, how do you do the education and awareness about what rights people have? It is also very important that everyone knows what their rights are and what they can ask for.
4:50 p.m.
Cmdre Rebecca Patterson
I would like to refer this over to Mr. Gauthier because the integrated conflict and complaint management is a good illustration of a system that shows you, not only that have we taken aspects out but also how we educate who has the rights for what within the system, including the chain of command, the respondent and the complainant.
Alain, I'll ask you to comment on the work you have been doing.
4:50 p.m.
Alain Gauthier Director General, Integrated Conflict and Complaint Management, Department of National Defence
As of July 2018, we've established 16 centres of excellence across the country and invested in 48 brand new civilian positions. Those are people who we have trained within National Defence to provide CAF members a safe place where they can go and ask questions in relation to the issues they are dealing with.
Those specialists have been trained to deal with all the issues or refer people to the right location, whether it's about harassment, discrimination, racism, a pay issue, an alcohol issue, or if it's about mental health. With the team in those locations, we've established protocol with SMRC, with the mental health facilities we have on each of the bases, and even further so that they can even refer to local services such as shelters.
They guide those CAF members in absolute confidentiality because those civilians don't have that duty to report. If it is specific to sexual misconduct and we see there's a need for assistance or guidance, then they are immediately transferred to SMRC. They guide the file and it comes back to us.
It is one way we have added brand new capabilities and services to CAF members to clarify issues and guide them on how to deal with them.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
Salma Zahid Liberal Scarborough Centre, ON
In the last panel, there was an indication that no uniformed clinical psychologists are there. Do you think there is a need for uniformed clinical psychologists?
4:50 p.m.
Cmdre Rebecca Patterson
Unfortunately, that is outside the scope of my work. However, I do know the incredible value of clinical psychologists in supporting members of the Canadian Armed Forces.