Status of Women Committee on April 15th, 2021

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

Thank you very much.

I'd like to open by saying what an honour and a privilege it is to be with you, the witnesses, today and to say that all of us were junior officers in the late 1980s when we started our careers. If I could be so bold, I'd like to take a moment to say, wow, we haven't done half bad, eh? This is just testimony to why we make a meaningful contribution to the Canadian Forces, whether we decide to stay for our entire career or go to do other things. This is the value and the contribution that sometimes gets overlooked, but that women make to our society. This is why it's so important and such a gift for us to have.

The depressing part, of course, is that we're here to talk about something that is so serious and so significant and that shows that we perhaps haven't made all of the progress we needed to make over the last 30 years.

The military is highly effective at setting objectives and performance metrics, measuring against them and determining if we're achieving those outcomes. Could you share with me the metrics around the number of women per classification, per rank? Do we know how many are remaining in rank relative to the men before they get promoted? What is our attraction and retention rate by classification and trade and all those kinds of things? Could you give me an idea of what we're measuring and how we're doing against those metrics?

[RAdm Rebecca Patterson]

Madam Chair, if you like, I can take this one.

Those metrics do exist. Unfortunately, I don't have them with me today. If we could take that question on notice, we can provide that information for you.

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

What I'm actually looking for is just what is measured. Yes, I'd love to see what the actual numbers are, but can you confirm that we do have (a), a strategy and (b), that we measure the number of women by trade and by classification? How are we keeping them? Do they tend to leave earlier than men, and do they get promoted at the same rate as men? Are we measuring all of those those kinds of time and rank retention variables and, therefore, doing something about them?

[RAdm Rebecca Patterson]

Madam Chair, I can confirm that we do have metrics on those things. They come through a number of different forms. It could be social science research done through the DGMPRA, our research arm within the Canadian Armed Forces—they certainly have that type of information—as well as regular statistical reporting of percentages by occupation, gender and where they're located. Most certainly, that's a question we can take on order. We will get more details for you.

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

Who's accountable for that? What mechanism reviews that data to see if we're doing better or worse? Who's accountable for it?

[RAdm Rebecca Patterson]

Madam Chair, the data is actually held in the chief of military personnel command. That is who holds that information and reports on it.

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

Yes, but they're a reporting organization, and not accountable for changing the metrics and ensuring that we move against them. Yes, they're the data collection guys, and they can tell you, but who's accountable for making sure that the time and rank, on average, is the same for women and men? Who is ensuring that the retention rate for master corporal supply techs is the same, regardless of gender or minority? Who is accountable for watching and taking action?

[RAdm Rebecca Patterson]

Madam Chair, that is a great question.

As you know, all members of the Canadian Armed Forces have unique and distinct reasons why they remain in the Canadian Armed Forces for certain periods of time, so equal is not necessarily equitable.

With regard to the data that we collect, I think it's very important that we are able to go beyond counting and do a little deeper dive on what it actually means. That progress is starting and is under way. Again, I have to say that we know that we have a lot more work to do. I think the greatest advancement for us is the fact that we're even taking that data in and collecting that data to start with.

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

And how long—

[A voice]

[Inaudible—Editor]

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

Go ahead.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Brigadier General, did you want to say something?

[BGen Lise Bourgon]

Yes, Madam Chair.

I just want to add that we're doing very well at understanding why women join the military and also why women leave the military. Every time someone leaves the military, there's an exit survey that is being done where we ask the question “Why are you leaving?” This is being tracked. We are looking at those results so that we can put in place initiatives for the retention of women and minority groups. Recruitment is very, very important, but retention is even more important. Every person who leaves the military needs to be replaced. We need to keep tracking and really making some changes so that we can recruit and retain our people longer.

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

Do we have a high level of confidence that—

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

I'm sorry, but that's your time.

Ms. Larouche, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I thank the three witnesses today, who confirm the importance of working to improve the confidence of women in the Canadian Forces. They have a place to take. I hope that the latest denunciations will not discourage too many women from joining the forces.

Ms. Patterson, Ms. Carignan and, of course, Ms. Bourgon, I congratulate you on your involvement in the armed forces.

I think it was Ms. Carignan who pointed out that between the three of you, you have over 100 years of combined experience, which is remarkable.

I'd like to start by going back to your opening remarks.

Ms. Patterson, you mentioned forums and consultations. I'd like you to talk more about that. How would that help women begin to trust the forces again?

[RAdm Rebecca Patterson]

Madam Chair, the group I'm talking about is the Defence Women's Advisory Organization. Under our employment equity program we have employment equity groups for women, visible minorities, indigenous persons and persons with disabilities. These groups, again, come from both the Canadian Armed Forces and the Department of National Defence, because we work together and are one team. These forums are voluntary groups that exist pretty much on every base and wing across Canada. They give chances for people to get together, to have a conduit for a voice to share successes, but also to pass up concerns.

We have an annual conference when all the national co-chairs of these defence organizations come together so they can share with senior leadership in the whole of the department the things that we need to look at to address barriers to true equity and inclusion within the Canadian Armed Forces.

The next layer to this group, of course, is the champions that you've heard about. People like me as champion for women also give them a voice within the most senior leadership levels, and I will add that I have a co-chair, Chief Warrant Officer Crystal Harris. The intent is to try to address some of the barriers to speaking in a hierarchical structure, and so we have very active men and women in the Canadian Armed Forces who are very willing to share their impressions of what's going on.

I'm sorry, I meant to add that we have very recently set up the LGBTQ2+ defence team pride network, which I've been connected to and am very proud of.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Of course, you and your forum are champions at discussing this, so I guess we can discuss some of the recommendations a little later.

I would now like to address Ms. Carignan.

Ms. Carignan, you talked about women being perceived as weaker than men. You also talked about military ethics, saying that sexual assault and misconduct were symptoms of a much larger problem. Can you elaborate on that for us?

You also talked about the importance of having a culture free of retaliation. We've heard from witnesses on this committee that they felt like they were retaliated against by their superiors when they engaged in whistleblowing. I'd like you to talk about what could be done to avoid these retaliations against women who decide to start a process to report their abuser.

[MGen Jennie Carignan]

Thank you for your question.

The military culture, in and of itself, allows people to do extraordinary things as a group and as a team. The values that make a team capable of dealing with very hostile environments are good, and fundamental to that team's success. Values like obedience, loyalty, and fighting spirit are all things that are very important to having cohesive teams.

However, if this is not framed by discipline, toxicity can easily set in within teams. Very quickly, bullying can be confused with leadership, arrogance with confidence, lying with loyalty, and so on. If there is no strict discipline in this regard, toxicity sets in and all this creates power dynamics within the hierarchy. That's what makes things like sexual misconduct and other unprofessional behaviour happen as well.

I could go on and on, but I think I have answered your question. At least, I hope so.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Yes, of course.

To conclude, I'll address Ms. Bourgon.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

That was the end of your turn.

Ms. Mathyssen, you have six minutes.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I, too, want to express my gratitude. To see such strong women leaders in your roles....

You all spoke about these changes. While they are slow, they are happening, and that's good to hear.

The status of women committee—this committee—did a study of the Canadian Armed Forces and women serving in 2019. What the committee heard was really quite disturbing in some regards, and clearly there was a need for change.

I want to ask a few questions about whether, even in these last few years, there have been changes from that. For example, there were stories from women who came forward and talked about starting their basic training, even leadership training, who mentioned how all future soldiers had to go through various medical tests where their proficiencies were checked and so on. As well, all the women had to have pregnancy tests. Before they can even start their course in any way, shape or form, women who are pregnant are often removed, even from the beginning in those training courses.

Is that still the practice, or has that stopped? Ultimately, I see that as a discriminatory practice.

[RAdm Rebecca Patterson]

Madam Chair, because of my day job with health services, I should probably take that question.

I have to admit that I don't have the answer for you. What would do justice to you is if I took that question on notice and provided you with a response and some context around that as well.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Absolutely. Perfect.

In 2019, the committee heard specifically from Ms. Nash. She started naval officer training, and she became pregnant. One of you—I think it was Madam Carignan—talked about this misperception that women who serve can't be mothers at the same time. Because of Ms. Nash's pregnancy, she was immediately removed from her environmental training program. She was denied the opportunity to even start within that program.

Could you talk about and expand upon, hopefully, the changes that you've seen even from just a few years ago? Has that changed from what you've seen?

[MGen Jennie Carignan]

There are a couple of factors that we have to take into account with regard to pregnancies and also as a commander. One, we have to make sure that the mother and the baby are provided with a safe environment. Two, operationally, is that we can continue the mission. Three, we want to make sure that the mother is supported through this process and that her career is not being impacted by the pregnancy.

Currently, there are policies to manage pregnancies, but policies don't necessarily cover all of the cases. We have to exercise judgment and work this out with the service woman and her particular condition. This is multilayered, and it is not simple to manage because we're talking about a person who we want to make sure we support through this process. At the same time, we want to support her career.

The policies could probably be reviewed to be more focused towards women. There is work to be done in that sense. I think General Bourgon has done extensive work in that field, and she could probably expand on more of the policies to specifically support women throughout their service.