Is that agreed?
House of Commons Hansard #36 of the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was victims.
House of Commons Hansard #36 of the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was victims.
This summary is computer-generated. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.
Ukrainian Heritage Month Act First reading of Bill S-210. The bill declares September as Ukrainian Heritage Month across Canada annually, recognizing the contributions of Ukrainian Canadians and the importance of preserving their heritage, especially given Russia's actions in Ukraine. 200 words.
Military Justice Modernization Act Second reading of Bill C-11. The bill C-11] modernizes the military justice system by [transferring jurisdiction for sexual offences committed in Canada from military to civilian courts. Members support the principle but debate its effectiveness. Concerns include 10 years of government inaction, potential political interference, civilian court capacity, and different treatment for overseas cases. Parties seek further study on cultural change, victim support, and implementation details. 22300 words, 3 hours.
Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, I ask that all notices of motions for the production of papers be allowed to stand.
Motions for PapersRoutine Proceedings
The House resumed from October 6 consideration of the motion that Bill C‑11, An Act to amend the National Defence Act and other Acts, be read the second time and referred to a committee.
Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, QC
Mr. Speaker, we are resuming the debate from two days ago on a very important bill about a very sensitive subject. We must be serious and rigorous in doing this work, since it concerns misconduct in our armed forces, more specifically, sexual assault. That is why we need to take the time to do things right.
This is an important issue. Every time the army has been faced with an internal problem, it has been able to take control of the situation and deal with it properly. Two days ago, I was talking about some sad events that took place in the 1970s in Loretteville, where I live. Alcoholism was a serious problem for many of our soldiers at the time. People died as a result, and the army took the situation in hand and corrected the problem.
It was the same thing later on, in the mid-1990s. Sadly, members will recall that the internal traditions of the Canadian Army's paratrooper unit were resulting in inappropriate behaviour. Crimes were also committed when this unit was operating in Somalia. Once again, when the army was faced with an ethical issue, people acted appropriately, and things have improved since then.
From 2015 to 2025, we have been grappling with the issue of sexual misconduct by some of our military personnel. I say from 2015 to 2025 because it is important to remember that, during this period, three reports were produced on the same subject, and the conditions were the same.
The first report was tabled by retired Supreme Court Justice Deschamps in 2015. It contained 10 recommendations for addressing the scourge of sexual misconduct. Unfortunately, the government that was elected a few months later failed to act for years. Five years later, another investigation was conducted and it reached the same conclusions, namely that the problem had to be addressed. Subsequently, a third report recommended taking action.
All of this coincided with the sad episode involving Canada's number one soldier, General Vance, who was facing such accusations. What started as rumours became allegations; testimony was given, a trial was held and a decision was rendered.
It was time for the government to take action. We might even say that we wasted 10 years before doing the right thing in this case. Nevertheless, some progress has been made because of all the attention this issue has received. What the government is currently proposing deserves attention, of course. Fundamentally, we agree. That is why we are going to work hard on this bill in committee.
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate some of the comments the member has made not only just now but also when he introduced his comments the other day.
As the member just said, the principle of the legislation, which takes sexual harassment and assault out of the military court system and puts it into the civil system, is something that, it would appear when listening to all the debate, everyone inside the House wants to support.
If he supports the principle of it, would the member not agree to get into some of the details? This is not to prevent debate, but, in order to get into some of the details, it might be a good thing to see it go to committee, where we will have ample time for more debate.
After that, there will be more debate once it gets to third reading.
Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, QC
Mr. Speaker, obviously, as I said earlier, we agree with the principle of this bill, which addresses this serious issue.
With all respect to my veteran colleague, I just want to tell the member that he and the government should have done something 10 years ago. Unfortunately, they delayed and delayed. As said clearly by a colleague in the Bloc Québécois two days ago, who expressed the time frame of everything exactly, we have seen a cover-up by the government.
Yes, I welcome the comment by my colleague, but he should have done that 10 years ago.
Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC
Mr. Speaker, it is true that it has been 10 years. That was the timeline we saw with the Liberals.
My hon. colleague and I worked together on this file, and I remember studying this issue. With all due respect, I would like to ask him a question. Who appointed Mr. Vance 10 years ago? Was it not the Conservatives?
Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, QC
Mr. Speaker, on April 12, 2021, the Bloc enabled the Liberals to stop the work being done at the committee with respect to Mr. Vance.
The reality is that all parliamentarians are united in facing the challenge posed by this bill. We must tackle this sad and unfortunate reality head-on in order to fix the problems associated with sexual misconduct. This needs to be properly studied in parliamentary committee.
As we have seen over time, particularly on April 12, 2021, the committee was unable to do its work because members of the Liberal Party and the Bloc Québécois decided to shut down the proceedings.
Eric Melillo Conservative Kenora—Kiiwetinoong, ON
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the great work of the member.
In sharing his comments, the member spoke a bit about the intent and principle behind this bill versus what the bill actually achieves. I am just wondering if he wants to add any more comments to that.
Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, QC
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his hard work in his riding and here in the House of Commons. I remember pretty well when he got elected for the first time. I had some responsibility at that time to welcome him, and I was very proud to welcome him. I am prouder than ever to see that he is doing a very good job here in the House of Commons and also in his riding.
For sure, we all share the same principle of having to stop the sexual assaults and all that stuff in the army. Everybody agrees with that. With the colours that we defend here, we fight for the will of the people. The best way to address this issue will be in the committee, where we will study it correctly.
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Mr. Speaker, just six months ago, we had a new Prime Minister elected here in Canada, with a new government. He has brought forward this legislation, so I think it is good timing.
With that as background, would the member not agree that, in principle, if we support it, we should get it to committee stage, where it can be thoroughly discussed? Ultimately, we can get it back for third reading, when we can have a lot more debate.
Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, QC
Mr. Speaker, this should have been done 10 years ago.
Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC
Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by saying that I will be sharing my time with my hon. colleague, the member for Laurentides—Labelle.
Today, we are talking about Bill C-11, the military justice system modernization act. This is an issue that I have been following since the beginning of my first term. As the Bloc Québécois critic for the status of women, I have had to take a stand on this issue and study it at not one but two committees, namely the Standing Committee on the Status of Women and the Standing Committee on National Defence, which is why this reform is so important to me.
I will begin with a bit of background. Next, I will address the issue of women in the Canadian Armed Forces and the fact that they are victims of a closed system. I will then talk about the Liberals' inaction and the Conservatives' silence. I will also address the Bloc Québécois's position, and I will close with a few statistics.
Bill C‑11 seeks to modernize the military justice system and remove the military's jurisdiction over sexual offences committed in Canada. This is a direct response to the 2022 Arbour report and the 2021 Fish report, which were released after decades of sexual misconduct scandals in the Canadian Armed Forces. Justice Arbour called out the military's culture of sexism and silence, where women were afraid to come forward.
The Bloc Québécois will support the principle of Bill C‑11 so that it can be studied in committee, but we denounce the past inaction of Liberal and Conservative governments. We are looking forward to a more in-depth study of this bill because our goal is ultimately to ensure that justice is independent, credible and sensitive to the realities of victims. This topic was the subject of two studies at the Standing Committee on National Defence, where I witnessed Liberal filibustering that was quite striking. At the time, I was replacing my colleague, the member for Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères. This situation led to this file being submitted to the Standing Committee on the Status of Women for a study in hopes that the less partisan spirit of this committee would lead to the creation of a report, while everything was at a standstill at the Standing Committee on National Defence.
Since the Deschamps report in 2015, all reports have pointed to the same culture of misogyny and impunity. Some have even drawn parallels with the #MeToo movement of victims speaking out. Mr. Vance, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Sajjan and Mr. Trudeau are concrete examples of political leaders failing to bring about real cultural change in the armed forces. Despite the announcements and Operation Honour, victims continued to be betrayed by the chain of command. Ironically, in July 2015, despite the allegations against Vance, he was appointed chief of the defence staff and put in charge of this operation. That is just insane. The Bloc Québécois maintains that no credible reform can be achieved without an independent military justice system. That is the main idea we heard during the two studies.
Women in the armed forces have been the victims of a closed system. Jonathan Vance is the symbol of this contradiction: He was leading the fight against sexual misconduct while being accused of it himself. Victims feared repercussions on their careers, and investigations were often biased or hushed up. That is what we heard from witnesses. What is changing with Bill C‑11 is that sexual crimes are being transferred to civilian courts. This is a major step forward. It will end the conflicts of interest, as investigations will be conducted by civilian police. The bill provides for the independent appointment of key military justice actors, such as the provost marshal, the director of military prosecutions, and the director of defence counsel services. It also provides for the introduction of a liaison officer for victims, ensuring more compassionate support. Finally, it ensures that provisions on criminal offences and publication bans align with the Criminal Code.
However, women are still waiting for meaningful culture change, which includes respect, listening and transparency. They want mandatory training for civilian prosecutors on military realities and trauma. They are waiting for stable and predictable funding for victim services. They also want rigorous monitoring of the implementation of the Arbour report.
Madam Arbour said she was surprised when she was contacted and responded that she thought the work had already been done with the previous report. She finally tabled her own report in May 2022.
I would now like to address the Conservatives' silence and the Liberals' inaction. As I said earlier, the Conservatives appointed Mr. Vance, despite the allegations that had already been made against him. The Liberals were warned by their ombudsman, and they refused to intervene for years. In 2019, they even raised Mr. Vance's salary retroactively to 2018. The government finally took action, but only after pressure from the media and the public, particularly following a Global News article in February 2021.
In the meantime, women saw their careers destroyed, their mental health compromised and their trust broken. I remember the testimony of Stéphanie Raymond, a former CAF master corporal, who was so courageous throughout this whole affair. She appeared before the committee and shared her terrible ordeal.
The Bloc Québécois supports the principle of Bill C‑11 at second reading. However, the Bloc Québécois is demanding that justice be independent and transparent. We also want a feminist and inclusive approach to implementation, as well as collaboration with Quebec and the provinces and territories in order to align services. This is important. We often say that, while it is good to identify the situation and have a Criminal Code, the implementation of everything that has to do with the justice system is the jurisdiction of Quebec and the provinces and territories. This is important to keep in mind. We must fight against sexual violence by listening and being respectful and fair. Quebec and the provinces are responsible for providing appropriate psychological and social support and social services for victims.
We must also be conscious of intersectional realities. Women, LGBTQ communities, indigenous people and people with disabilities often do not share the same circumstances. At the end of the day, what the Bloc Québécois wants is culture change. There is no other way to tackle an issue as serious as a culture of misogyny and toxic masculinity. The Bloc Québécois called for a complete culture change in sport, and we are doing the same thing now for the armed forces, because women deserve to feel safe in that space.
I have a number of statistics to share about sexual misconduct in the Canadian Armed Forces: 7.5% of women in the regular force were sexually assaulted in 2022, compared to 2.8% of men; 27.3% of women reported being sexually assaulted at least once in their military career; 64% of victims did not report the incident to an authority; 41% said they did not speak up because they feared retaliation, and others were convinced that it would not make any difference. About 86% of assaults occurred in the military workplace. In 2017-18, disciplinary action for sexual harassment was taken in only 20 cases, which is paltry.
Intersectional data is also available for LGBTQ+ communities. I would like to mention that some non-heterosexual military members report higher rates of assault and that 67% of members have witnessed discriminatory or sexualized behaviour, often related to gender or sexual identity. The LGBT purge left a dismal legacy: From 1950 to 1990, hundreds of soldiers and police officers were fired for their sexual orientation. I want to thank the members of the Fondation Émergence who came to my office here in Ottawa and filled me in on this sad story. I also want to acknowledge Martine Roy, an activist and former member of the armed forces. She said that the military justice system needs to be improved to make it fair and reliable, to strengthen support for victims, which is essential, and to give civilian authorities the jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute Criminal Code sexual offences committed in Canada. These are all important messages.
In closing, here are some more important facts: 19% of military personnel were exposed to sexualized or discriminatory behaviour in the previous year, 34% of them being women. The reported rate of assault has increased since 2016, rising from 1.7% to 3.5% in 2022. Only 21% of victims reported the incidents, down from 2018. Sixty-one per cent agree that sexual misconduct remains a major problem. Young people, indigenous women, people with disabilities and LGBTQ members are the most at risk.
Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Shefford for her very informed speech. She is always very well prepared for all the debates she takes part in.
I am pleased that she mentioned in her speech that the Bloc Québécois supports this bill in principle. As I said, my colleague always backs up what she says in her speeches with facts and figures.
Beyond supporting this bill in principle, does my colleague have any specific proposals for improving it?
Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC
Mr. Speaker, in my speech, I mentioned some proposals. What women are still waiting for is a real culture change, so there is some action that can be taken.
We also want civilian prosecutors to receive mandatory training on military realities and trauma. It is all well and good to set up independent tribunals, but we must also proactively educate people to ensure that they are truly aware of the different realities faced by military personnel. I am thinking in particular of PTSD, a reality we can openly talk about now, as well as mental health. It is therefore essential to provide better training, as well as stable and predictable funding for victim services, which is something we are still waiting for.
Careful oversight is also needed. Some of the recommendations from the Arbour report have not been addressed in the bill. Perhaps an analysis should be done to determine what is in the bill and what is missing from it.
Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton, QC
Mr. Speaker, in her speech, my colleague did a good job summarizing the Bloc Québécois's position, which is what I will be standing up for at the Standing Committee on National Defence when this bill is studied there, probably soon.
In short, we are thinking that it is about time. We will not say it is too little, too late. It took a while, but at least there is something now. While it is far from perfect, we applaud the intent.
What does my colleague think about how long this took and the fact that General Vance was able to be hired, reappointed and even given a raise, by bipartisan consensus, when there were known internal allegations of misconduct?
Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC
Mr. Speaker, that question from my colleague from Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton is important and essential. My colleague will be the one who will be able to propose improvements to this bill in committee on behalf of the Bloc Québécois.
As I said, issues related to purges and cases of assault have existed within the armed forces for decades. These situations have dragged on. Although the Conservatives knew about them in 2015, they still appointed Mr. Vance. Subsequently, despite what the Liberals knew, they kept him on and even gave him a raise.
If the media had not exposed the situation in February 2021, would the Conservatives or Liberals ever have voluntarily taken action, or would they have continued to sweep it under the rug and hide this culture that needs to change?
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, it is important for all of us to realize that we have substantive legislation before us that would take cases out of military jurisdiction and put them in civilian jurisdiction. We have been waiting a long time for this. We have a new Prime Minister who was just elected a number of months ago, and he has made this a high priority.
Would the member not agree that we can continue to have the debates and discussions at committee, and that if there is a need for amendments, at least there is an opportunity to propose those amendments? After all, it will come back to the House for third reading, where we can continue to debate it. Would she not agree that timely passage to committee would be helpful in dealing with this issue?
Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC
Mr. Speaker, we still have to do the work in a reasonable and rigorous manner in committee, as the Bloc Québécois always does.
What we do know is that the media reported on this story in 2021, and it is now 2025. Things need to change.
Among other things, the Quebec government's report on rebuilding trust recommended the creation of independent tribunals and the transfer to the civil system. This was requested by many victims during their testimony. It is one way to restore victims' confidence in the system so that they feel truly listened to and so that they no longer believe that the armed forces system is about friends protecting friends.
Marie-Hélène Gaudreau Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Mr. Speaker, today, it is my turn to address the House, and I do so as the Bloc Québécois critic for veterans affairs.
Because of my background in psychosociology, I see victims in a very specific light. The Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs is looking at various issues facing veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder. For instance, these men and women may attempt suicide or develop substance abuse problems in response to the trauma they have experienced.
Bill C-11, which we have been discussing for several days now, deals with a truly important topic. We must address it seriously and with empathy, and honestly, we need to consider the purpose of the bill from an intellectual perspective. As I was saying, we need to address this topic with the dignity and respect it deserves.
That is my hope today as I address all my colleagues. Bill C-11, or the military justice system modernization act, seeks to address gaps and systemic wrongs that directly affect the lives of many women and men.
For the record, I would like to highlight an important article published in April 2014 in L'actualité by Alec Castonguay and Noémi Mercier, which alerted us to cases of sexual misconduct. The article talks about Lise Gauthier, a 51-year-old woman from Sherbrooke who spent half her life in the Canadian Armed Forces. I would like to quote the first paragraph of the article: “Lise Gauthier does not have enough fingers to count the number of times that she was raped, assaulted or sexually harassed by her fellow soldiers.”
On March 27, 2015, former justice Marie Deschamps released a scathing report on sexual misconduct in the Canadian Armed Forces. This report discusses the existence of a sexist culture, as my colleague the member for Shefford would say. I would like to think that this culture does not exist anymore.
The military turned a blind eye to these inappropriate behaviours for many years, starting in the backrooms. I think everyone knows about Jonathan Vance, who has been the subject of much discussion. He had just been appointed the future chief of the defence staff. At the time, the investigations went nowhere. The system was protecting itself.
In 2018, military ombudsman Gary Walbourne held a private meeting with the then minister of national defence, Mr. Sajjan. Mr. Walbourne tried to discuss a case of sexual misconduct involving Mr. Vance. The victim had decided not to pursue the matter out of fear of retaliation. It was hoped that Mr. Sajjan would intervene to protect the victim, who was Mr. Vance's subordinate. He could have easily derailed her career.
The crux of the matter is that the chief of the defence staff was at the centre of the military prosecution process. That does not even meet minimum ethical standards. He then became toxic toward anyone who had the misfortune of being in his sights or who spoke out about issues. To be clear, I would call it a military #MeToo.
The then minister of defence, a career soldier, wanted to protect chief of the defence staff, General Vance. What is more, he gave him a $50,000 pay raise. He did not just turn a blind eye. He did worse than that. Let us put ourselves in the victims' shoes for a moment. They must have thought that something did not add up and that things did not make sense. How must they have felt knowing that their attacker was Canada's highest-ranking military officer and that he was untouchable, and then finding out that, on top of that, the minister was going to give him a pay raise? A person cannot be both judge and jury.
I think of all those who have chosen to enlist in the Canadian Armed Forces. We can only commend them for their decision with dignity and respect. Whether they are actively serving, reservists, or even retired from the forces, we owe them respect, and above all, we must protect their dignity.
It is always good to get back to the heart of the matter. Dignity is an intrinsic value of being human. It is what makes people worthy of respect, regardless of their circumstances, actions or social position. With that as our moral foundation, every person must be treated with dignity, never simply as a means to an end. These women and men were not treated with dignity.
Bill C‑11 aims to close this appalling loophole where man and system are one and the same. Under this bill, the government would select the provost marshal of the Canadian Armed Forces, the director of military prosecutions and the director of defence counsel services.
This would transform the appointment process into a political process instead of leaving it in the hands of military leadership. These individuals would therefore be immune from any form of blackmail. This is what I want to draw my colleagues' attention to. Jonathan Vance, who had sexual relations with a subordinate, allegedly boasted about how the victim could not file a complaint because he had full control over military investigations.
As I said at the outset, we are currently studying suicide prevention at the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs. We are talking about the trauma experienced by our veterans. I have one major wish. Now that we are closing this gap, it is essential to respectfully provide these people with all the necessary services and supports. They have serious needs.
Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
Mr. Speaker, I am deeply grateful for the support of my colleague from Laurentides—Labelle. She listed the reasons why these sexual offence complaints need to be handled by civilian courts.
She talked about the importance of implementing policies that support military members and veterans who intend to file complaints. Would she be able to elaborate on the type of policy she would like to see proposed when the bill is studied in committee?
Marie-Hélène Gaudreau Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Mr. Speaker, we simply need to look at how the complaints process works. Even here, in the House of Commons, we have a system that prevents us from being unethical and stopping anyone from reporting an incident and filing a complaint. The process will be specifically designed to allow the people who examine and analyze these situations to function as a wholly separate and impartial justice system.