Parliament should oversee appointment of incoming VCDS

OTTAWA—Members of the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) serve the Crown at the pleasure of and are accountable to Canadians as their representatives, at home and abroad. History has shown that when the CAF is shielded from public scrutiny, it can lead to less than glorious results. It is for this reason that, in his 1997 Report of the Commission of Inquiry into the Deployment of the Canadian Airborne Regiment to Somalia, then justice Gilles Létourneau of the Federal Court of Appeal repeatedly highlighted the need for the CAF to embody the principles of “openness, responsiveness, transparency and accountability” to the people of Canada. Civilian control and oversight Civilian control of the military places the ultimate responsibility for a country's strategic decision-making in the hands of the civilian political leadership, rather than professional military officers. Such control is dependent upon an informed and vigilant Parliament. The need for civilian oversight of our military has never been clearer. For example, Operation Honour, which was designed and run by the military for the military, has so far failed to bring about a counter-culture to address the reported sexualized environment. The 2016 comprehensive survey conducted by Statistics Canada has shown that the problem is both enduring and deep-seated. Yet, military leaders continue to stumble in search of solutions. As a result, thus far, millions of dollars have been spent in resources, travel, pointless surveys, wallet-sized reminder cards, and call centres that are closed on weekends. All of which suggest that the military is unable to fix this fundamental socio-cultural problem on its own. Therefore, “Operation Honour” is unlikely to rank as a success in military annals. It will most likely be seen instead as an illustration of the disconnectedness between the military and the expectations of civil society. Also, a procurement scandal saw Canada’s second-ranking soldier, Vice-Admiral Mark Norman, the vice chief of defence staff (VCDS), (temporarily) removed from the performance of his duties. This is unprecedented. Despite public appetite and outcry, the CAF has imposed a wall of silence to shut out the very people they serve. The removal of Norman from command and waning public confidence in the CAF provides an opportunity for this government to recapture their rightful control over the CAF. VCDS is a key player The VCDS is a central figure in our military complex who acts as the chief of staff to both the deputy minister and the chief of defence staff at National Defence headquarters. This means that he coordinates cross-boundary issues between the military and the defence staff, helps to resolve differences among group principals and service chiefs, and provides support to the minister of National Defence, the deputy minister, and the chief of defence staff. Moreover, the VCDS is the senior resource manager developing and overseeing the department’s strategic management, the armament and procurement planning process, and provides guidance to meet overall defence objectives. The military police, through the provost marshal also reports to the VCDS. As importantly, the VCDS acts for the CDS in his absence. Should Vice Admiral Norman’s removal be permanent, a replacement VCDS will need to be found soon. Under the current system, general rank and flag officers are all appointed on the sole and unique selection and recommendation of the chief of defence staff which submits his one and only nominee for approval to the minister of National Defence. The process is unilateral, closed, and not questioned. Now more than ever, this needs to change. For contrast, consider for instance what is happening in the U.S. The United States experience In the U.S., Congress has had a long-standing interest in the military officer corps in general, and has periodically focused additional attention on its most senior officers. Promotions to general or flag officer are determined by civilian authorities. For instance, all three-star and four-star positions must be designated as such by the president. Congress can review the rationale for this designation as part of its oversight function, and the Senate retains the power to confirm or reject the nomination of an individual to fill such a position. When a vacancy occurs, it is the president who nominates someone from this list (with the advice of the secretary of defence and with advice and consent of the Senate). Replacement of the VCDS The importance and prominence of the VCDS role in Canada makes obvious the need for his or her selection to be open and transparent. The selection of this senior office-holder should be made like any other key appointment in government via a true tested and proven impartial selection process which is not controlled by any one group or institution. Changes in selection procedures have been made recently for appointments of Senators, judges and governor-in-council appointments. The time has also come to establish new rules for the selection of general and flag officers starting with the appointment of the next VCDS, should that come about in the weeks ahead. Michel W. Drapeau and Joshua M. Juneau are administrative lawyers practising military law in Ottawa. The Hill Times