Veterans Affairs Committee on Nov. 28th, 2023

[Jane Hall]

It's slowly going in the right direction, but when the chief justice who was handling the Merlo Davidson case had to make a public plea for serving female members to come forward and say that they should not fear reprisal if they're still working within the RCMP, that's fairly recent history.

During that time there were a number of women, both veterans and one serving member, who contacted me directly because I'm in the public eye, and she had a very bad situation. E Division had come up with a new strategy, and it just so happened that her section officer was a good friend of mine from E Division, from North Vancouver. “It still, in the end,” she told me, “did not work out.” I said, “The only thing I can suggest is to join the Merlo Davidson.”

We should not still be stumbling over this. I can say, as a baby boomer, that I'm offended. We were prepared to make the sacrifices so our daughters would not have to face that. It's still there as an issue, so we have to finish the job. It's solvable: We have the solutions.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

Thank you.

On that note, you mentioned there are bad apples. The majority of the officers are great, but there are these certain ones that cause a lot of problems. What is the best way to get rid of them? What is the systemic problem we have?

[Jane Hall]

First of all, I'll push back on the idea—and it's not your idea—of “a bad apple”. That's one way for the organization to say, “It's not us. It's that one person.” No, it's organizational, and it's the federal government's responsibility to make sure that people they give positions of authority to deserve them. It's the federal government's responsibility to have mechanisms in place to identify the bad ones and to listen to the people who are working around them who say, “This is a problem ” and to fix that problem and provide a safe work-life balance. The organization suffers when good-hearted people leave because of a toxic work environment. The organization weakens and the people are weakened too.

It's not a matter of a few bad apples: It's a matter of an organization that has failed to implement a strategy to identify when a toxic workplace is happening. It's easy enough to look at when somebody who's in a position of authority comes into a really high-performing section and all of a sudden its productivity goes way down. What happens? People get sick, people leave, and that person goes on to the next promotion. Just look for those patterns. Organizations and the federal government....

We can be world leaders on this. This is an opportunity. If there weren't a solution, I would just walk away, but there is a solution. It's the political will that needs to be there to move forward on this.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

Thank you.

It's actually a very good perspective that as you said, you can see it just from the productivity of a section. It's not just a single act, but the productivity and health of that section will determine if the work environment for everyone is better there or not.

[Jane Hall]

Absolutely, and as in an exit interview, when somebody's leaving a section, they ask if you would you work for that person again or come back to that section. That's a really easy way to say.... If that person says no and enough people are saying no, then you ask, “Well, what's different?” It's not rocket science, you know: It's political will and organizational will to just get out of denial and start dealing with it.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

Are you aware of any sections in the RCMP or any other government sections that are doing such exit interviews or such reviews of sections? That would be helpful to bring forward. Is there any other public sector, provincially or federally, that you're aware of? With your work in the U.S., is there any other public sector you've seen that has done a good job of following up on this?

[Jane Hall]

I am not aware.

As I said, we recommended this to Deputy Commissioner Dubeau, who's retired now. He seemed somewhat interested, but never followed up, so it fell into the black hole. That's the answer.

I guess we got the flag.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you very much.

Now we have the last two rounds of questions. They're short ones of two and a half minutes each.

Mr. Desilets, the floor is yours for two and a half minutes.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Turmine, your website points out that veterans are best served by other veterans.

Is that right?

[Marion Turmine]

Yes, it is.

We always have two clinicians at our programs, in addition to two peer supporters who are graduates of our programs. They are the ones who make the link between the clinical and military aspects of the transition. Because they are familiar with our programs, they know what the veteran is going to feel. The peer supporters are therefore extremely important. The other two witnesses talked about this. We use a lot of peer supporters in all our programs. There are always two and I can see that it makes a difference.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Is it difficult for you to recruit them? I understand that they took the training, but are they eager to come? Do you have to do some arm-twisting?

[Marion Turmine]

No, it's not at all difficult. It's their decision. We offer peer supporter training and they come willingly.

We also provide training to help them. We stay in touch with them. It's important to remember that they are veterans who have their own challenges, but their assistance is invaluable. Following our training, veterans often ask to become peer supporters.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

That's very interesting. You probably know that all of us would like to see more veterans in our governmental organizations, including Veterans Affairs Canada, of course, for the reasons you mentioned.

Why do you think it's so difficult for the government to recruit veterans to work at Veterans Affairs Canada?

[Marion Turmine]

Once you've heard what the two witnesses today, two women, experienced in the armed forces, it's easier to understand why women may not want to work for the government any more.

I also think that we need to show that things can be changed. You're here today, and I think you could do it. If you demonstrate that you can change things, then I think women veterans would come here to work. It's only women like our two witnesses here today, who can change things. They know what they lived through.

I'm not a veteran, and that's why I'm not speaking on my own behalf, but I've seen it among the women who contributed to the program as peer supporters, and they need to have their trust in the government restored. If we give them the right to speak out and if you make some changes, women—and men—will come and work for the government. These women don't want their daughters, if they follow in their footsteps in the armed forces, to have to undergo what they did.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Thank you very much, Ms. Turmine.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you very much.

For the last intervention, I'd like to invite Ms. Blaney for two and a half minutes, please.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

I will come to you, Ms. Miller.

You said in your testimony earlier that one of the problems and concerns that you have is that there is no clear definition of what “sexual assault” means and what “MST” means. I know we've heard a lot of testimony from lots of veterans that if it isn't documented correctly when you're serving in the CAF, when you get over to Veterans Affairs, you spend a lot of time trying to prove the reality that you experienced, which you either didn't feel comfortable telling or you did try to tell and it wasn't documented properly.

Could you talk about why that is such a problem and what a clear definition would mean for you, and what it would mean in terms of accessing Veterans Affairs services?

[Jessica Miller]

Thank you for that question.

I think the problem with not having a definition means that young, vulnerable new recruits, who enter the forces with bright eyes and expectations that they're going to serve their country proudly, don't know when they've been harmed, or if this is right, or if they should speak up. There is still this ongoing feeling that if you do speak up, you're going to lose your job.

Let's be honest: It happens to this day. We are punished, and the perpetrators move up the ranks.

I think by giving it a definition, you would have fewer vulnerable women understanding what is happening to them. I still don't understand why we need to give what happens in the forces any other name than sexual assault, sexual harassment—a man couldn't keep his hands off you.

The forces and civilian life are not different from each other. The only difference is that we are forced to continue working with them once it's happened. Where is the safety to come forward? There really is none, because the second you come forward, it spreads. The CO knows and the other people know, and you become revictimized all over again.

Until we can stop that, I'm not sure if we can even fix the problem in the forces.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Thank you.

I only have a few seconds left.

Ms. Hall, I don't know that I'll be able to ask you to answer this question, but you did talk about women's reproductive health, and that has been brought up about veterans and women in the CAF. If you can't answer now, because we have to go, I would really appreciate if you could give us something written about your thoughts about reproductive health for RCMP women. I think it's incredibly important.

[Jane Hall]

Yes, it really comes into play with isolated postings and young women first out the gate. I can give you something in writing.

I don't think I was clear enough on the transition question. Yes, the RCMP needs better transition. If it exists at all, it's non-effective. The impact on men's reproduction is unaffected. They can continue on regardless of their age, whereas when we're taking 23-year-old women and putting them up north in northern Saskatchewan for their most productive time, we'd better have an egg bank. We'd better have something in line so that they don't have to make a bad choice or miss out on something later on.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

On behalf of members of the committee and myself, I'd like to thank the three of you for sharing this testimony with us.

Ladies and gentlemen, today we welcomed Ms. Jane Hall, a member of the RCMP Veteran Women's Council, Ms. Jessica Miller, founder and director of the Veteran Farm Project Society, and, via videoconference, Ms. Marion Turmine, director of Quebec operations at the Veterans Transition Network.

Once again, I'd like to give them a big thank you for having taken part in this study we are conducting on the experience of women veterans.

We are going to continue this study next Thursday. But right now, I would like to know if the members of the committee are willing to adjourn the meeting.

I see that everyone is in agreement.

The meeting is adjourned.