National Defence committee  I don't believe there's a set term. If the member reviews the history of the duration of incumbents in the position, generally speaking, it seems to be two, three or sometimes four years. Clearly, there is no set term. I can't speak to why the current government made the decision that it did with respect to General Vance.

National Defence committee  That's correct. In July of 2015 the chief of staff to the veterans affairs minister relayed a rumour to me, which I immediately reported to the national security adviser in the Privy Council and asked him to investigate.

National Defence committee  Because, as we've discussed, the Prime Minister's Office is not an investigative body. The Prime Minister's Office acts and interacts with the rest of government through the Privy Council Office. As I've described, the national security adviser operationally had led the ad hoc committee process that vetted candidates for the chief of the defence staff.

National Defence committee  The minister's office was absolutely made aware of both the rumour and the anonymous email. In this case, the Prime Minister's Office operates through the Privy Council Office. That is why I asked the national security adviser to investigate that rumour. The results of the investigation were briefed back to us, as I indicated to the committee.

National Defence committee  The Minister of National Defence, through his chief of staff and his office, was absolutely aware of this and was briefed on the results of the national security adviser's investigation. As I indicated in my testimony, the NSA had interacted with the department and the Canadian Armed Forces, and had spoken with the general himself.

National Defence committee  It was the NSA who was asked to lead the investigation. The minister's office was absolutely aware of it. The officials that the NSA was interacting with certainly would have been available to the minister. If there were conversations there, I'm unaware. It was the NSA—one of the most senior officials in the Government of Canada—who led the investigation into the rumour that was relayed to us.

National Defence committee  Because political staff and ministers don't personally lead investigations. Their responsibility is to take information, provide it to their officials, ensure that the officials are investigating and, if there are facts or results of the investigation, ensure that immediate action is taken.

National Defence committee  This goes to the structure of our system of government. We rely on our senior officials to undertake investigations of this matter. I don't think any of us believes that the solution to the problems we've all seen in recent months is to empower political staff to start doing their own investigations.

National Defence committee  As I said in my testimony, in the case of the rumour I received in July 2015, I brought that immediately to the national security adviser. I believe that's the appropriate process. In the case I was dealing with, the NSA had been operationally leading the ad hoc committee process in making recommendations for the selection of the chief of the defence staff.

National Defence committee  Thank you, Madam Chair. I can't give the committee a legal perspective on that. That is my understanding, but I can't give the committee a legal opinion on it.

National Defence committee  Yes. The committee process that we used for appointing three chiefs of the defence staff—I obviously can't speak to the one used by the current government—was, as I described, an ad hoc committee constituted for the purpose, composed of the most senior officials in the Government of Canada, which, I think, clearly speaks to the importance of the appointment.

National Defence committee  Yes, absolutely I would have. I think it is incumbent on the political leadership of the government, if they are made aware of either rumours or serious allegations regarding the comportment of a senior official, especially someone who is leading the Canadian Armed Forces, that the government insist that the matter be immediately investigated and that appropriate action be taken, if necessary.

National Defence committee  I think it is entirely dependent on the exact nature of the allegations and the context. I'm not sure I can speak to that. I think the important point for the committee to deliberate on is that if allegations—whether they are rumours or allegations or complaints—are raised to the political level of the government, they be immediately reported to responsible officials and that there be an investigation and, if there are facts or outcomes from that investigation, that action be taken immediately.

National Defence committee  I don't view that as political interference. Particularly given the very serious nature of this topic, given the very disturbing allegations that we've all seen in a range of recent interviews, I think it is essential that any allegations or even rumours relating to these matters be reported to the appropriate officials and that immediate action be taken, if the facts warrant the taking of action.

National Defence committee  Let me give you the example of watching Lieutenant-Colonel Eleanor Taylor's interview recently. I was absolutely struck by what our country has lost in her case: a highly capable, decorated officer, the first Canadian woman to, as I understand it, lead troops into combat. She has now resigned in disgust and left the forces.