Status of Women Committee on March 25th, 2021

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 23 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on the Status of Women.

Today's meeting is taking place in the hybrid format, pursuant to the House order of January 25, 2021. The webcast will always show the person speaking rather than the entirety of the committee.

As usual, please make sure, when you're not speaking, that your mike is on mute, and when you are speaking, that you speak slowly and clearly and that you address your comments through the chair.

With that, I would like to welcome our guests today. Our witnesses are from the Canadian Forces national investigation service—

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

I have a point of order, Madam Chair.

Can we take a moment to discuss the notice of meeting that was posted yesterday? Some things can be dealt with today after we are done with the witnesses. There's a lot of work that residents expect from us during the constituency weeks, so we all prefer not to lose time.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Absolutely. Just let me clarify for the committee the reason we are calling for committee business. In the motion for this study, there were specific witnesses listed and we were to have four consecutive meetings. However, some of the witnesses are not available to appear before April 16. We don't have any direction then as to what to do because the additional witnesses we talked about aren't due until Friday.

I need direction from the committee. Do we want to skip the consecutive meetings? Do we want to move forward the deadline for submission of the additional witnesses and start putting those panels together?

I will just go in order here. The next person on the list is Ms. Zahid.

[Salma Zahid, Liberal, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I want to talk about the same issue Ms. Sidhu raised. Yesterday we received a notice of a meeting, without any consultation with committee members and during a constituency week. As members of Parliament, our responsibility is to our constituents. Cutting time out of that would not be advisable.

We had a list of witnesses who were not added to the motion the other day. We can provide that list. I think it should always be there. That way, if some witnesses are not available, we can go down the list.

We can submit to you a list of witnesses at any time you want. Holding a meeting during a constituency week doesn't make sense because it's cutting our time with our constituents. They're in a situation because of this pandemic. They have lots of needs, and as a member of Parliament, they are my responsibility. I already have a lot of meetings planned with my constituents—telephone and Zoom calls—and also with stakeholders. They are looking to us for many answers and I think we should fulfill that commitment. We should look into this issue of holding meetings during constituency weeks.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Just for your information, I think the clerk has already received a list of some of the additional witnesses that the Liberals would like to get, but we haven't received any from the other parties. Usually they try to ratio it to the membership of the committee.

Ms. Alleslev.

[Leona Alleslev, Conservative, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I want to stress that we wish to get on with the witnesses today. We only have this one-hour panel for these two very important witnesses. That should be our focus and priority. Many of us are not available at 1 p.m. today, so that would not be the right time to discuss this.

I'm wondering if we could have a meeting to discuss our planning agenda or whatever in the break week. We could deal with all of that then, so that we'll know who we want to call, and in what order, on this important study. We could have an actual meeting dedicated to planning on such an important topic.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Yes, and just to let the committee know, the reason I put two hours for the meeting on the Tuesday is that, in addition to this study, we actually have a number of other things to consider. We received letters from previous witnesses that we need to discuss. We have the unpaid work study, for which we identified a whole bunch of other witnesses, but we didn't say how many meetings we want to have or what we want to do with those. The same is true on the rural study. That is why we have a lot of things to talk about.

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Madam Chair, let's not delay the witnesses' time. I will bring it at the end of the meeting and we will discuss it then. Let's start the meeting.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Thank you very much.

Let's go then to our witnesses. I was in the process of welcoming you, so I'm going to welcome you again.

From the Canadian Forces national investigation service, Lieutenant-Colonel Eric Leblanc, who is the commander.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Madam Chair, I have a point of order.

The sound is extremely bad. It is if I am hearing an echo of the interpretation. I don't know whether I am the only one experiencing this issue.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Can I ask the clerk to check into this?

Is it better? Can you hear me loudly, or is it not good?

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

It is better, but it's not completely resolved. I have already had this happen a few times, in this committee, where the sound would be bad and I would hear an echo of the interpretation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Yes. I remember you had some difficulties last time. I don't know if the clerk can identify whether the problem is at this end or perhaps on your computer end.

[Alexandre Roger, Legislative Clerk]

Ms. Gladu, I'm very sorry to interrupt the meeting. I'm Alexandre Roger. I'm helping Stephanie Bond with the committee.

Ms. Larouche, I am being told to ask you to unplug your headset and plug it in again, as it would appear that the problem is on your end. We will try this method if you are amenable.

[Marc Serré, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

The French interpretation is working well on my end, Madam Chair. I am not hearing an echo.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

I just plugged in my headset again. Let's hope that will resolve the issue.

I'm sorry for this interruption. I yield the floor to the witnesses.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Okay. We will continue.

From the national defence and Canadian Forces ombudsman office, we have Gregory Lick, who is the ombudsman, and Robyn Hynes, director general of operations.

You each will have five minutes to address the committee. Then we will go into our rounds of questions.

Eric, we will begin with you for five minutes.

[Lieutenant-Colonel Eric Leblanc, Commander, Canadian Forces National Investigation Service]

Madam Chair and committee members, my name is Lieutenant-Colonel Eric Leblanc. I'm commanding officer of the Canadian Forces national investigation service, also known as the CFNIS. The CFNIS, like other military police units, is an independent investigative unit that falls under the command of the Canadian Forces provost marshal.

The CFNIS provides an investigative capability for the purpose of supporting the fair and impartial administration of military justice. Our independence, as laid out in the National Defence Act, enables the conduct of thorough investigations without outside influence.

The primary mandate of the CFNIS is to investigate serious and sensitive criminal and service offences in relation to Department of National Defence property, DND employees and CAF personnel serving in Canada and around the world. We are similar to a civilian police force's major crimes unit. Like all credentialed military police members, the CFNIS has jurisdiction to investigate offences committed on or in relation to defence establishments as well as offences committed by those subject to the code of service discipline, regardless of their rank or status. This jurisdiction exists throughout Canada and the world.

The safety and security of the defence community is our top priority. Every allegation or complaint we receive is reviewed to determine if it meets the CFNIS benchmarks for investigation, and if so, an investigation is launched.

Each case assigned to the CFNIS is unique, but in all cases investigations are conducted to determine the facts, analyze the evidence and lay charges where appropriate.

CFNIS investigators are professional police officers. They receive contemporary police training in areas similar to their civilian partners, often working in consultation or coordination with civilian police, and are, by experience and circumstance, well informed of both military culture and environment. As recently as this month, the CFNIS participated in a large OPP-led operation called Project Weaver, helping dismantle criminal networks in southern Ontario.

In addition to being deployed with CAF operations around the world, CFNIS investigators operate out of six permanent detachments across Canada, with each detachment having, amongst other capabilities, a sexual offence response team, known as SORT.

SORT teams were stood up as a direct result of the recommendations brought forth in the Madame Deschamps report from 2015. The SORT increases the ability of the CFNIS to protect and support victims of sexually based offences by identifying, investigating and helping prosecute persons responsible for criminal sexual offences. They, and all CFNIS members, have specialized training in sexual assault investigations, including training on employing a trauma-informed approach.

The CFNIS also operates their own victim services program, which acts as a referral service between victims, survivors and the various support resources they may need. While CFNIS investigations, at a minimum, collect all reasonably available evidence bearing on the guilt or innocence of any person who is subject of the investigation, victim considerations are always at the forefront.

CFNIS investigators remain under my command at all times, regardless of where they are employed within Canada or abroad. As their commanding officer, I am well aware that CFNIS investigators take pride in ensuring their investigative responsibilities are conducted in a professional manner and that they recognize the importance of their work at all times.

I would like to thank you, Madam Chair, for the opportunity to speak with you all today. I look forward to answering any of your questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Excellent.

We'll now move to Robyn or Gregory, I'm not sure which.

You have the floor for five minutes.

[Gregory Lick, Ombudsman, National Defence and Canadian Armed Forces Ombudsman]

Good morning, Madam Chair and committee members.

This is my first time appearing before the Standing Committee on the Status of Women.

The issue of sexual misconduct in the Canadian Armed Forces is not new. It is, however, newly at the forefront of public consciousness and the subject of study of both this committee and the Standing Committee on National Defence.

I think that we all agree that there is a need to collectively find a way forward to finally stamp out this problem and ensure that members can trust that their complaints and concerns will be dealt with in earnest.

There have been conflicting statements in recent weeks regarding the role of my office in addressing complaints of sexual misconduct within the military. I would like to provide clarity on this matter today.

First, my office does not have authority to investigate criminal offences of sexual assault. Neither does it have authority to investigate sexual misconduct matters that would result in charges under the code of service discipline.

Second, I must stress that my office cannot and will not investigate matters without the consent of the complainant, no matter the nature of the complaint. In my predecessor's testimony before the Standing Committee on National Defence, we heard that the complainant did not wish to be identified and did not wish to pursue an investigation, but hoped that the information could be brought to the attention of someone who could effect change.

Third, the current reporting structure of the ombudsman is directly to the Minister of National Defence, not to the Privy Council Office or any other body. This is a critical point that needs to be made in order to correct the record. Had I been faced with the same facts, I would have done exactly as my predecessor did. I would have reported the facts within my direct reporting structure. There was no other body to which the matter could have been referred—this is particularly important—given what we know of the member's wishes.

Regardless of the solutions proposed to address culture change or to ensure that survivors come forward, I would hope that they would take into account several important points. In specific cases of sexual misconduct, it is crucial that victims have control over how and when their complaint moves forward. Victims must be empowered to make their own choices about what steps to take next. As Justice Marie Deschamps said in her 2015 report, “victims should not have to bear the burden of the complaint process”.

Victims of sexual misconduct must not fear reprisal or possible career consequences for making their complaints. This is not a new problem, nor is it limited solely to sexual misconduct. It applies to all forms of misconduct and unfairness in the armed forces. Victims are less likely to feel safe coming forward without the assurance that their complaints will be dealt with by a mechanism that is free of outside interference or control. This is why there needs to be a mechanism external to the chain of command and any other vested interest, political or administrative.

My office was established more than 20 years ago outside of the chain of command, but with administrative ties to the department and reporting to a minister of the party in power. We have been making the argument for full independence since our creation, but there has been no political will to act. This issue of sexual misconduct is an unfortunate illustration of how constituents fall between de cracks of a closed system with no fully independent recourse mechanisms.

We have heard bits and pieces of information in the media and in testimony before committees that consideration is being given to creating a new and independent mechanism to address matters of this type. However, there have been no details about what this will look like. For the record, my office has not been consulted.

Whatever approach is taken, the body that addresses this issue must have full administrative independence, be external to the chain of command, have a legislated mandate and a direct reporting relationship with Parliament. Anything short of this will not provide victims with the assurances they need to come forward and have these matters dealt with.

My colleague Ms. Robyn Hynes and I stand ready to take questions from the committee, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Thank you very much.

We'll start with our first set of questions.

We're beginning with Ms. Alleslev for six minutes.

[Leona Alleslev, Conservative, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Thank you to both witnesses for this important testimony.

I would like to ask Lieutenant-Colonel LeBlanc a question.

Can you let us know how and when you begin an investigation?

[LCol Eric Leblanc]

Thank you for the question.

In terms of receiving an investigation, there are a few different avenues that a report can be made to the CFNIS. I could receive a direct tasking from the Canadian Forces provost marshal or direct contact from a victim or a witness to an event. Also, through units' chains of command, we could receive a call from a unit.

[Leona Alleslev, Conservative, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

The chain of command could include the chief of the defence staff or the Minister of National Defence.

[LCol Eric Leblanc]

Anybody within the chain of command who has a report to make can make a report to us.