Proceedings of the Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs
Standing Senate
Committee on
Social Affairs, Science and Technology
Issue 2 - Evidence
OTTAWA, Monday, April 21, 1997
The Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs of the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology, to which was referred Bill C-300, respecting the establishment and award of a Canadian Volunteer Service Medal and Clasp for United Nations Peacekeeping to Canadians serving with a United Nations peacekeeping force, met this day at 6:05 p.m. to give consideration to the bill.
Senator Orville H. Phillips (Chairman) in the Chair.
[English]
The Chairman: Our first witness this evening was to be Mr. Cliff Chadderton, who is very well known to this group. However, he had an unfortunate mishap and Ms Faye Lavell will present the brief to us and answer any questions we may have.
Ms Lavell, please proceed.
Ms Faye Lavell, Director, National Service Bureau, National Council of Veteran Associations in Canada: First, I should like to extend Mr. Chadderton's apologies for not being here. As many of you know, Mr. Chadderton has an artificial limb. Unfortunately, late this afternoon he slipped on the steps at the back of our office and snapped his artificial leg, and a bolt broke. I am here to present his brief on his behalf.
The National Council of Veteran Associations in Canada supports Bill C-300, which provides for the awarding of a medal by Canada for service with a peacekeeping force under the United Nations command or another international force.
Mr. Chadderton has asked me to add that this would depend, of course, on the costs and on the willingness of the government to deal with our other requests.
It is our contention that before giving assent to this bill, the Canadian government should consider awarding additional medals for service in World War II or in Korea.
In previous submissions to the subcommittee, we have asked for consideration in regard to a number of obvious oversights. Consideration should certainly be given to such awards.
Such approval was given by the NCVA on the understanding that if the authority of Her Majesty the Queen and/or the British government is required and such authority could not be obtained without unconscionable delay, the Canadian government should proceed to strike a medal or campaign star, as the case may be, to recognize the service of those in the Canadian forces.
To this end, we have long advocated the establishment of a study committee. We suggest that your subcommittee give consideration to the views of a committee of this nature at the earliest possible time.
In presenting this submission, we are aware that there may be prohibitions under the British awards system, which were agreed to by all Commonwealth nations. We are aware, as well, that in 1950, the King decreed a moratorium on all awards emanating from World War II or any revamping of the rules governing such awards. Notwithstanding, we sincerely believe that it is possible for the Canadian government to award medals and decorations of and by its own volition. Therefore, medals and other decorations should be considered as follows.
First, for persons who were stationed in the United Kingdom or other areas considered as a war zone not now recognized. This would include RCAF ground crew, military garrison troops and members of the naval and merchant navy forces. We mention in particular the situation in regard to RCAF ground crew serving in the United Kingdom, which was not considered an operational area. Such personnel underwent constant danger and would appear to meet the general criteria of having fought in the cause of freedom under conditions which required courage and dedication. It seems obvious that without the support of ground crew personnel, the contribution of air crew, including those who served in Fighter Command and Bomber Command, would have been seriously jeopardized.
Second, for all persons who were prisoners of war or evaders and are in receipt of a pension under section 72 of the Pension Act. There seems to be strong justification for the award of a special medal for such persons. The fact that they were imprisoned or evaded capture has already been recognized by the award of special compensation under the Pension Act.
Third, for members of the airborne forces who were engaged in at least one military operation. There seems ample justification for members of the airborne forces who were required, in addition to facing the ordinary dangers of combat, to undertake dangerous landings by parachute or glider.
Fourth, for members of the First Canadian Special Services Force who went ashore at the island of Kiska in the Aleutian chain of islands. Members of the 13th Canadian Infantry Brigade also took part in this operation. Theoretically, all the participants were entitled to the award of the Pacific Star. The British ministry of defence decreed, however, that operational service for the Pacific Star qualifies in all islands south of latitude 40 degrees north in the central Pacific in the South China Sea. The Aleutian Islands lie north of that latitude.
The Kiska Medal raises particular circumstances for those Canadians who served in the First Special Services Force and in the 13th Canadian Infantry Brigade. The First Special Services Force was comprised of both American and Canadian military personnel. The American personnel where awarded the Pacific Star, which means that Canadians who participated in the same operation are being deprived of recognition.
Service in Rhodesia-Zimbabwe included 68 air crew and three Buffalo aircraft which participated in Operation Oxide. It seems that the failure to award a campaign medal for Rhodesia-Zimbabwe is an oversight in that the Canadian government has already recognized many similar operations.
In all instances where applicable, the recommendations involve not only members of the military forces but also members of the merchant navy. It is our understanding that in 1967, Canada decided to create its own honours and awards and to administer them apart from the British Commonwealth. On June 1, 1972, by Order in Council, the protocol for wearing the insignia of Canadian orders and decorations separately or together with senior British orders and decorations was established.
It is entirely possible that a knowledgeable committee established for the purpose of studying honours and awards could accept submissions which might well lead to other recommendations.
We have, on previous occasions, been informed that Canada either cannot or is reluctant to change the ground rules under which medals were previously awarded. Thus, we probably must accept that Canada cannot unilaterally change the terms of an award. Notwithstanding, it is our view that under the existing system, should it be willing to do so, Canada could strike new awards and medals as required.
Should it be the view of the committee, the National Council of Veteran Associations would be pleased to produce extensive documentation which could be studied by the Senate subcommittee or by a special medals committee to be established by the Canadian government.
Senator Jessiman: In presenting this brief, you say you are aware that there may be prohibitions. How would one find out if there are prohibitions? Is there not a central agency?
Ms Lavell: I am here at the last moment to present this brief on behalf of Mr. Chadderton. I am sorry, but I really cannot answer your question. I would prefer to have Mr. Chadderton respond.
Senator Jessiman: Perhaps you can let us know at a later date, or maybe our next witness can answer my question.
Do you have a list of the medals we now give to veterans?
Ms Lavell: We do have a list at national headquarters. Unfortunately, I do not have that with me.
Senator Jessiman: We should get that at some point to see what has been issued and to identify medals that the committee might consider.
Senator Bonnell: What we are considering is this bill.
Senator Jessiman: I understand that, but there is a recommendation here about a committee. I should like to know what medals have been issued. There is a request that these people recognized, and I think they should be recognized.
The Chairman: In the past, this committee, particularly in our report entitled "Keeping Faith: Into the Future", has made certain recommendations on medals. Those recommendations are on the record. I believe that the next witnesses will be able to answer questions concerning the medals that have been issued.
Senator Bonnell: Perhaps this witness could extend our best wishes Mr. Chadderton.
Ms Lavell: I would be happy to do so.
Senator Bonnell: I hope that he will be able to travel and get around soon, because an important date is coming up and we will want him in attendance.
Ms Lavell: I will pass that message on to him.
The Chairman: One thing that is missing from the bill is the length of time to be served to qualify for the medal. For example, in the defence of Britain, it was six months in an area subject to any attack. This bill makes no reference to any length of time. You could be in and out in 20 days and still qualify for a medal.
Do you have any comment on that?
Ms Lavell: Again, I would ask Mr. Chadderton to respond to you personally on that question.
Senator Jessiman: Will someone from the Governor in Council be here?
The Chairman: No. This is a private bill.
Senator Jessiman: The Governor in Council will make the regulations. They could put in the regulations what the qualifications should be.
The Chairman: Thank you very much, Ms Lavell. We all join in relation to Senator Bonnell's expression of good wishes for Mr. Chadderton.
Ms Lavell: Thank you.
The Chairman: Our next witness is Lieutenant General J. C. Gervais. Perhaps he and his fellow witnesses could come to the table.
Please proceed, Mr. Gervais.
Lieutenant General J. C. Gervais, Deputy Secretary of the Chancellery, Government House: I am a retired officer, having retired over four years ago. Technically, I am not part of the forces. General Dallaire, however, is involved in the Honours Program in the forces. He is assisted by Major Bev Brown, who is an expert in the area of honours in the military forces.
Senator Bonnell: Were either of them in Somalia?
Mr. Gervais: No.
The Chairman: Do you have a brief?
Mr. Gervais: Yes. My position is the Deputy Secretary of the Chancellery. I work for the Governor General. My primary responsibility is the management of the Canadian honours system. I have a secretariat responsibility to a committee called the Honours Policy Committee, where we work for them through Privy Council Office for the approval of honours. The repository of knowledge with respect to the Canadian Honours System is the Chancellery.
I have some information on the number of awards that have been issued since 1967, and I will provide the committee with that. I have a copy of a recent Order in Council which speaks to them, but it is being amended now. A new one is coming out, and I will ensure that the committee receives the complete list of honours and awards that have been approved since 1967.
Senator Jessiman: Can you explain to me why the year is 1967? Is that when it was brought up-to-date from earlier years?
Mr. Gervais: Prior to 1967, we were part of the Commonwealth system of honours and we did not have a unique system of our own. We depended on the U.K. with respect to any decorations, war decorations, et cetera. In 1967, with the creation of the Order of Canada, we instituted the Canadian Honour System.
Since that time, the system has developed in an evolutionary manner. For example, we have the order of Military Merit, which was created in 1972; the set of bravery decorations, which were struck that year also; and a number of medals such as the Exemplary Service medals in the 1980s, which recognized long, good-conduct service in the fire, police, Coast Guard, corrections, and emergency ambulance services. As well, in the latter part of the early 1900s, we created the Military Valour decorations so that the Canadian government now has a set of Military Valour decorations that it can use if the Canadian forces go to war. Provincial orders such as the Order of Ontario are part of the national system, and they are included in the order of precedence.
With respect to the creation of honours and the policy, an honour is created by Her Majesty the Queen on the recommendation of the Prime Minister, who has the prerogative powers, and the minister who has responsibility for the Canadian system of honours. The Governor General is responsible for the administration of the award of honours on behalf of Her Majesty the Queen on the advice of duly constituted councils and committees.
In 1980, the Prime Minister of the day instituted the Honours Policy Committee to assist him in establishing the policy governing the system of honours in Canada. The main duties of the committee are to undertake studies and make recommendations on any subject concerning honours which may be referred to it; to advise departments and agencies wishing to make recommendations to cabinet on matters concerning honours; and to prepare advice for the Prime Minister on any recommendations to cabinet concerning honours. They are also responsible for establishing the regulations regarding the precedence of orders, decorations, medals, and the correct way of wearing them. The committee consists of the deputy heads of the Privy Council Office, the Department of Canadian Heritage, Foreign Affairs and International Trade, National Defence, and the office of the Secretary to the Governor General.
A new honour may come from a number of sources: the Prime Minister himself, members of Parliament, the chief of defence staff, provincial officials, or established organizations providing federal, provincial, or general public services. In that context, I should mention that military honours are created in the same manner as civilian honours, and they follow the same approval process.
Requests for new honours are directed to the Honours Policy Committee, which determines whether further study is required before approval in principle is obtained. Extensive consultation with respect to the creation of a new honour takes place with the principle people concerned. We analyze the costs, we develop draft regulations, et cetera, and we present this to the Honours Policy Committee for final approval.
Once it is approved, it goes through the machinery of the government section. Orders in Council are prepared, and the letters patent are prepared creating the honour. Over the Prime Minister's signature, these are them sent to the palace by the Governor General with a drawing of the honour -- by that time it has been decided what it will took like -- with a recommendation to Her Majesty.
On approval, it comes back, and we go through the final phases of developing the communications plan if it has not been developed already and manufacturing of the insignia. This whole process can take six to eight months depending upon the complexity of the honour. That, in a nutshell, is how a new honour is created from initiation to the end point.
The manner in which the honour is given to people depends on the type of honour it is. For example, the Order of Canada is presented by the Governor General. If it is a campaign medal, perhaps the initial number of medals could be given by the Governor General or some other official; if it is a military campaign medal, obviously the Chief of the Defence Staff will decide how it is distributed throughout the military.
Senator Jessiman: Have we been on our own since 1967 or are we also part of the British awards system?
Mr. Gervais: We have been on our own since 1967. Since many Canadians have decorations from wartime which they wear, we coordinate, in a sense, with the British policy people concerning the changes with respect to new decorations. Basically, we are on our own. The only thing we must do is go to the Queen of Canada for the creation of a new honour. The management of the honour, et cetera, is all Canadian.
Senator Bonnell: If I wish to recommend six World War I veterans who were at Vimy Ridge last week for an honour or an award -- and, one was 104, one was 102 and the youngest was 98 -- how would I proceed to do so? Do I phone the Governor General up and say, "These people should get an award?" Should I phone the Prime Minister and say, "Look, I want you to consider these people for an award." They certainly added dignity to the Second World War veterans, to the military, and to all those people who watched them at Vimy Ridge, 80 years after they fought over there. These people deserve some kind of recognition. Perhaps they could be given the Order of Canada or some other kind of award, for example, a Vimy Ridge award. Something is needed for them and I should like to know to whom I recommend that type of recognition.
Mr. Gervais: The short answer is that you either write to the Governor General or to a member of Parliament, for example.
Senator Bonnell: I am a member of Parliament.
Mr. Gervais: Yes, you are, but you would do that if you were not a member of Parliament. It would probably come to the chancellery, where I work, for review.
Senator Bonnell: Why can I not write to the chancellery?
Mr. Gervais: You could do that. I get a lot of mail from Canadians regarding honours.
Senator Bonnell: What do you do? Do you pursue that type of request?
Mr. Gervais: Depending upon the accomplishment or what the person has done, we look at the number of orders or decorations that we have and we try to see if the criteria will fit for the particular individual who is being recommended. We then marry up the person with the suitable criteria.
A good example of that is the Order of Canada. We have people who are recommended to the council for the Order of Canada. If they do not meet the criteria, they may be considered for another decoration such as the Meritorious Service decoration or the Caring Canadian award, which is the Governor General's special award.
In the case of these veterans, the Order of Canada is one award that is available, but it would have to go before the council and be considered by them. Apart from that, there is no specific award available to recognize them in a special way.
Senator Bonnell: What about the Meritorious Service award?
Mr. Gervais: The Meritorious Service award -- and, this is part of the consideration when we develop regulations for an award -- was created in 1984. Normally, we do not go back beyond the date of the creation of the award. Otherwise, it would become unmanageable. Your thoughts are worth pursuing. I have not given it much thought right now, but there may be something that could be done.
Senator Cools: I am hearing Senator Bonnell say that these men who are left might appreciate some sort of token or statement of appreciation. I do not know how you go about giving them a medal, but since we have this young man here from the chancellery, perhaps we could recommend that you return with the idea that perhaps a nice letter from either the Queen or the Governor General could be sent to them.
These fellows are quite elderly. There are not a lot of them left. Senator Bonnell would like some sort of gesture, which might just as easily be achieved by a nice letter under the hand of Her Majesty or Her Majesty's representative. Would that be all right, Senator Bonnell?
Senator Bonnell: That would be better than nothing, but we should do it soon. They are 104 and 102 now and they will not be here too many more years. We cannot wait until two or three elections are over and three or four new cabinets and perhaps a new Governor General is appointed to get this done. It should be done almost instantaneously. We have the Chancellor here now. If the Chancellor would take it under his advisement without me writing any letters, I would be grateful.
Mr. Gervais: I have the issue at hand. I know for a fact that there is no problem with respect to a letter. Perhaps there may be something more that we can do. I will look at it and discuss it with my colleagues and we will get some form of recognition for them.
Senator Cools: That is right. Consider his suggestion, seconded by me and carried by us, basically to do something, namely, a gesture for these men.
Mr. Gervais: Yes.
Senator Bonnell: Some years ago, the Chief of the Defence Staff appeared before the committee that I was chairing at the time. I suggested to him that we should have a medal for the Korean war veterans. He tried to tell me that we already have a medal for the Korean war veterans. I said, "You are wrong. We have a United Nations medal for the Korean war veterans but we have no medal in Canada for the Canadians who fought other than that United Nations medal." He said that I was wrong. I finally said, "That is great. I cannot argue with you. You know it all." Some time after that, the Minister of Veterans Affairs, the Honourable George Hees, came out with a little pin. He gave a pin to those who had served in the Korean war. The idea was good and the pin was all right. I guess that is all that George Hees could do as Minister of Veterans Affairs. However, he made one mistake. He then proceeded to have the medal mailed to them. Was that not a great thing to pick up in the mail? It was not even presented to them. There was no publicity with it, the pin just came in the mail.
If you have anything to do with these awards, please ensure that that never happens with any of these awards. If you cannot give it to them in person or have some other government official present it to them, do not have someone just send it in the mail. These people do not understand what it is for. These men were prepared to give their lives so that we would have freedom in this country yet that is how they were treated -- that is, their pins were just thrown in the mail.
Mr. Gervais: I think those days are over. We take great care -- that is, with the ones that we control -- in the way that we handle our presentations for most decorations medals. The logistics of it are a bit more complicated because of the numbers involved, but the principle that you are espousing is one that we follow.
I think your intervention had some success because there are now three medals for Korean veterans.
Senator Bonnell: I know that. I scared him, though.
Are you in favour of this bill?
Mr. Gervais: Yes, I am.
Senator Bonnell: Do you support the bill?
Mr. Gervais: Being part of the secretariat, I do not have a vote on this bill but I have looked at it. It is a Canadian initiative.
The concern that some people have had and I have had is duplication. We must be careful that we do not have too many honours duplicating the same service or the same achievement because it does not mean anything. That is the concern that we would have at the chancellery with respect to the creation of this honour.
Senator Jessiman: Is there one now?
Mr. Gervais: The United Nations medal for service on United Nations operations has been taken into the Canadian honours system. That recognizes the service of the soldier in that sense. We are now creating the Canadian Peacekeeping Service Medal, so the Department of National Defence in particular will have to consider how this is presented to the soldiers so that it has meaning and so that two medals are not given for the same service.
Perhaps there is another way around it. We have discussed this with my colleagues at the Department of National Defence. We do not want to call it a commemorative medal but in a sense it does have some commemorative value. We are recognizing the service of people who have served since the beginning of the United Nations operations in 1954. We are talking about quite a large number, over 100,000, which will make this a sizeable program. In that sense, the veterans will have received recognition for their service. We are putting a Canadian context on it through the creation of this medal.
Senator Bonnell: One veteran to whom I spoke suggested that there is nothing wrong with this bill but wondered if we will have to pass a new act of Parliament every time there is another peacekeeping force in order to get a medal. Will this one take all of them into account?
Mr. Gervais: We do not normally pass acts of Parliament to create honours. I described the process. We will try to adapt this private member's bill to the normal process. For example, we must create the honour and get the insignia approved, et cetera. We will use the normal process. Any time you create a new honour, you must go through this process. For example, the United Nations medals are created by the United Nations. When the Canadian government decides to send troops on a mission, we are not involved in the process that I have described here except that, when they return, they return with the medal and we add it in the order of precedence. If you look at the order of precedence, which I will send to you, you will see that there are approximately 26 United Nations medals recognizing their service.
To answer your question, we normally have to go through a process every time -- orders in council, letters patent -- to create a new honour.
Senator Bonnell: Not an act of Parliament?
Mr. Gervais: No, not an act of Parliament.
Senator Bonnell: I will read to you something that I will propose later this evening <#0107> that is, if it fits into the system we have now -- to see if it will be an agreeable addition to your present awards.
I will suggest that this subcommittee recommend that the Government of Canada establish an honours and awards committee that includes in its membership representatives of the major veterans associations in Canada; that the subcommittee endorse the recommendations of the National Council of Veteran Associations as contained in the subcommittee's report, "Keeping the Faith: Into the Future", and briefs submitted to the subcommittee on January 21, 1997 and April 20, 1997 respectively, regarding the creation of new awards and medals; and that this reflect a timely completion of awards and medals commemorating the end of the Second World War.
If I made that motion here tonight, would that fit in with your Chancellery process?
Mr. Gervais: I would not object to it because I would have to study the detail of it. I listened to it, but I should add something to clarify it. I mentioned the Honours Policy Committee and the membership in the committee. Veterans are not excluded from it. For example, I have seen representatives of Veterans Affairs there to present a particular case in the past. The committee is open to invitation of others.
Senator Bonnell: No vote?
Mr. Gervais: We would have to review the membership and get an approval to add new members to it on a permanent basis, but that could be done.
The Chairman: Lieutenant General Gervais, you said you have seen veterans on the committee. I think Senator Bonnell was thinking more of veterans organizations such as NCVA, the Legion, and so on, and that these organizations be represented on the committee rather than an individual who happens to be a veteran turning up on the committee.
Mr. Gervais: I will give you my experience. I have had to deal with several changes to the honours system since I have been there. I have dealt with veterans associations through the Deputy Minister of Veterans Affairs. I have met with the association presidents to discuss their concerns. Rather than inviting the various associations who write to me and also to the Department of Veterans Affairs, I would recommend that we work through the Veterans Affairs Department and have a representative of that department represent their interests on the committee.
Senator Jessiman: Is there not a member from Veterans Affairs there?
Mr. Gervais: There is not a permanent member from Veterans Affairs. However, there is a member from National Defence. Veterans Affairs interests are looked after through that member from National Defence, but if you want to put more weight on it, it may be appropriate to consider my recommendation.
Senator Jessiman: How many members are there on the committee?
Mr. Gervais: There is the member from the Privy Council, a member from the Department of Canadian Heritage, a member from Foreign Affairs, a member from National Defence, and then one from the Office of the Secretary to the Governor General.
Senator Jessiman: There are five, then.
Senator Bonnell: Right now the representative for National Defence and Veterans Affairs is the same person, so it works out fairly well. After June 2, that might be different. There might be one Minister of National Defence and another one of Veterans Affairs and Health or vice versa. We do not know what will happen in the future.
The Chairman: This question follows up on Senator Bonnell's suggestion concerning Vimy Ridge veterans.
As I understand it, your office is satisfied that this bill has followed the necessary procedure. Am I correct in that regard?
Mr. Gervais: It has not followed the normal procedures because when it came through as a legislative bill, while we had input into it, we have not had time to do the normal input as I described in my presentation.
For example, because of the concern we had initially about duplication, we had to discuss that, as well as the cost.
The Chairman: I am speaking only of the procedure of a private member's bill in Parliament. Are you satisfied with that aspect of it?
Senator Jessiman: May I ask a question? If this is passed, are you then bound to issue a medal and fit it in? For example, what if you come to the conclusion that this is a duplication? Do you have the power not to issue it?
Mr. Gervais: I do not have the power.
Senator Jessiman: Does anyone have the power once this is passed?
Mr. Gervais: We would have to seek advice from the Privy Council Office to ensure that the prerogative powers of the Prime Minister and the Queen have not been abrogated in this sense. I have discussed this with them. I have not had a final answer. Perhaps this is one of the areas that should be investigated.
Senator Jessiman: We may push this through and find that these people are in a bind if there is duplication.
The Chairman: In reply to a question, you stated that perhaps these medals should become commemorative medals. The thought occurred to me that that might be a nice way to remember the surviving veterans of Vimy Ridge. There are more veterans of Vimy Ridge than the six who made the pilgrimage there about 10 days ago. We could honour all the veterans by making it a commemorative medal.
Mr. Gervais: I suggest that the Vimy Ridge veterans not be considered as part of this bill. They are a different set of recipients and we must look at recognizing them differently.
Senator Jessiman: Hopefully, you can do it quickly.
The Chairman: Does a commemorative medal require the same procedure as other medals?
Mr. Gervais: I use the word "commemorative" to explain to people that this is not duplication. We considered it but felt it was not necessary to call it "commemorative" in the bill. It is remembering people who served. I am thinking of people with peacekeeping service as defined by United Nations peacekeeping. I do not believe that it would be appropriate to go back beyond the beginning of Canada's involvement in peacekeeping, which was in the 1950s.
We should also bear in mind that this medal will be given in the future as well.
Senator Jessiman: This bill does not apply to Vimy veterans.
Senator Cools: The bill cannot apply to them because this medal cannot be given retroactively.
Senator Bonnell: There is something in this bill which may clear the Privy Council and everyone else of any responsibility. Clause 9 states:
Nothing in this Act limits the right of the Governor General to exercise all powers and authorities of Her Majesty in respect of the Canadian Peacekeeping Service Medal.
The Governor General retains all his powers.
Mr. Gervais: That is true.
The Chairman: Thank you very much for appearing here tonight.
Major-General Roméo Dallaire, Chief of Staff to Assistant Deputy Minister (Personnel), Department of National Defence: The Department of National Defence fully supports the amended Bill C-300.
We should also like to bring to your attention that this bill has one component which is most unusual that we have not seen with regard to other awards or presentations. It will change the nature of how awards or honours are presented. The bill prescribes that these medals be presented and not simply sent. There have been many cases, as Senator Bonnell described, of sending medals in the mail. This bill has opened a whole new dimension. As a result of this bill, we will never send another medal by mail. A representative of the government will make the formal presentation of these and future medals. That is very positive.
This bill will help us deal with situations where individuals have not met certain criteria, although they have been involved in many missions. For example, some pilots do not spend more than a month at a time in theatre operations before being withdrawn. Advance parties go in, often in the most dangerous times, to help set the mission up and then are pulled out. They do not do the regular three-month term in a theatre of operations, so they do not get the UN medal.
This medal will permit us to recognize their participation in a peacekeeping mission. We believe that is a very progressive option that has been presented to us to recognize many who have not been recognized in the past.
This also opens the door to people with non-governmental organizations who are volunteering and risking their lives in humanitarian missions to receive recognition of their service.
In conclusion, this is a very progressive and positive step. We hope to take maximum advantage of the provisions of this bill to recognize many who have served and risked their lives and have not received commensurate recognition for their efforts.
Major B. Brown, Directorate of History and Heritage, Honours and Medals, Department of National Defence: I head up the Honours and Awards Program for the Canadian Armed Forces and will be charged with issuing the medals, assuming this bill meets approval.
Roughly 100,000 Canadians will be entitled to this award, approximately 30,000 of whom are still in the forces. The other 70,000 are retired.
The concept was changed from "United Nations peacekeeping" to only "peacekeeping", because Canadian forces have been involved in five international missions which were not part of the UN. We had two missions to Indo-China and Vietnam. We currently have a multinational force observers mission ongoing in the Sinai, as well as the NATO-led mission in Yugoslavia. We have been part of the European Community monitoring mission. We wanted to have the medal for the people involved in those missions as well as the United Nations missions.
As the general stated, those people who were not in a theatre long enough to claim the UN medal, will be entitled to this one.
Although this means extra work for my staff and myself, it is very enjoyable and worthwhile work. We certainly endorse this bill.
Senator Jessiman: You said that this medal will be presented and not sent. I read the bill rather quickly, but the only reference I see to presenting it is with regard to next of kin. Everywhere else it says that it will be awarded. It never says that it must be presented except to the next of kin, unless I have missed it somewhere.
Mr. Dallaire: In fact, we should look at the amendments of March 12.
Senator Jessiman: Is there an amendment which I did not receive? This was passed on March 19.
Mr. Dallaire: In the proposal for the amendments of March 12, it was reinforced in committee, as recorded in Hansard, that we would extrapolate that interpretation to be one of "to recipients" versus simply "to next of kin."
Senator Jessiman: It says it will be "presented" to next of kin. Everywhere else, in talking about those who are still alive, it says it will be "awarded." I assume that is the word that has been used before. You say it will be presented, but unless you have put it in somewhere else, it certainly does not appear there.
Mr. Dallaire: We are using the Hansard transcripts from the committee meeting. We will be using that to amplify the terminology "awarded" and use that as a DND policy point versus an actual bill. If it was limited to the bill, then it would mean only this medal. We are saying that this is the policy we want to apply throughout the Canadian forces and future medals or presentations.
Senator Bonnell: What is said in a Senate committee or in a Commons committee has no weight in law. The wording must be found in the legislation. Otherwise, all the testimony in committees is just garbage.
Senator Jessiman: No, they will institute a policy. It could be changed but it could also get lost.
Senator Cools: The general's point is very well taken. He is saying that they have taken some guidance from what they view to be wishes of members and that they are implementing a general policy across the board that when they "award" medals, the medals will be "presented." We should take that as a victory and run with it and leave it.
Senator Bonnell: That is all right. I hope this fellow does better than the chief of military services, who lied to me. Hopefully, you will carry out this policy accurately.
Mr. Dallaire: I am taking it for granted that he did not lie. There must have been some kind of misinterpretation. However, rest assured that, because it is not written in law, it will not be applied. On the contrary, this is one of those common-sense or make-sense proposals. To overtly say we will not do it means that we are losing a human touch to our actions. This is not about throwing a medal at someone. There are a number of MPs, senators, senior officers and officials at different levels of local government who could be presenting that, versus simply having a postman carry it around. That is a change of attitude that will become policy.
Senator Cools: I should like to move that Bill C-300 be reported without amendment.
Senator Bonnell: Both our witnesses here have these high titles as far as awards are concerned.
Will you both support my philosophy about these World War I veterans who made Canada a nation at Vimy Ridge 80 years ago? They crawled back there in wheelchairs this year. When they got to the Vimy Ridge monument, they crawled out of the wheelchairs and paraded up those stairs as if it was 1917 again, keeping in time to the music and laying a wreath. Should they not receive some kind of award?
Mr. Dallaire: It was clearly identified by your colleague that to mix something, in any way, shape or form, with Bill C-300 is to mix apples and oranges. Remember, while at Vimy, we were at war. We are talking here about a country at peace that is providing peacekeeping and humanitarian relief. On that side, we think a very appropriate decision has been taken.
However, your proposal is an indication of how we have lost the human touch or the human concern that such effort has not already been taken. Someone, be it the Chief of the Defence Staff or our Commander-in-Chief or the Governor General, should perhaps have made some special effort to recognize these gentlemen who were on parade with the couple of hundred troops who were also there.
Having visited Vimy Ridge myself for memorial ceremonies, I have seen our magnificent and courageous veterans. We lost some of our veterans during the 50th anniversary in Holland of the Second World War. They could have lost their lives there through the strain and stress of it all.
General Gervais and I have just exchanged a note saying that we will follow up on that, he on his side and I on the ministry side. If we have not done something, then mea culpa; there is a real lack of that human dimension.
Senator Cools: All of us on this committee support you as a senior in the military because we all seriously believe that anything that can be done to uplift your men and women is well intentioned and well deserved.
If you are saying that no one employed that policy before and that, from now on, that will be a matter of policy for the department, we laud it. The military of this country certainly needs some uplift in morale. We commend you for that.
I will re-state my motion. I move that we report Bill C-300 without amendment.
The Chairman: Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried.
Senator Cools: I also suggest that our report of the committee include the recommendations as suggested by Senator Bonnell.
The Chairman: Instead of a suggestion, perhaps we should have it read as a formal motion so that the reporters will know what it involves.
Senator Bonnell: I would agree with Senator Cools' motion that we report the bill without amendment.
Senator Jessiman: We have done that. We are now talking about recommendations.
Senator Bonnell: We should attach to our report a recommendation which states:
The Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs recommends that the Government of Canada establish an honours and awards committee that includes in its membership representation from the major Veterans Associations in Canada.
Senator Cools: We should add that we commend the department for the new policy and initiative which they have adopted in respect of making presentations to members of the military, in other words, to present it in person wherever possible basically.
It is threefold: We are reporting the bill, the report will contain Senator Bonnell's suggestion and the report will also contain an commendation to the department for the initiatives they have taken.
Senator Jessiman: Will you not mention something about the Vimy people in your recommendation as well?
Senator Bonnell: No, that is a different subject altogether.
Senator Cools: This gentleman from the Chancellery has taken into consideration the gesture for the gentlemen of Vimy.
The Chairman: Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
Senator Bonnell: I move that we should pass the bill without amendment with attached recommendations that:
The Subcommittee of Veterans Affairs of the Senate recommends that the Government of Canada include on its awards committee, representatives of major veterans associations in Canada and the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Senator Cools: The department is already included.
Senator Bonnell: No, National Defence is mentioned, but nothing to do with veterans.
The Chairman: Go ahead.
Senator Bonnell: That is all. We could stop right there.
The clerk has the whole thing in his hands. Do we need the rest of it?
The Chairman: I should like to see it because we refer back to other reports of this committee.
Senator Bonnell: To continue:
and that;
the subcommittee endorses the recommendations of the National Council of Veterans Associations (as contained in the Subcommittee's report Keeping the Faith: Into the Future, and briefs submitted to the subcommittee...
I do not know what these briefs say. What do they say?
Senator Cools: That does not matter. We must put this in for the report. We could put this in as three recommendations, for example, the subcommittee recommends one, two and three.
Basically, the subcommittee affirms the recommendations to that point. These two paragraphs go together. The second one would be that "the Subcommittee recommends that the Government of Canada establish an honours and awards committee that includes in its membership representatives of the major Veterans Associations."
Senator Bonnell: Did you not say we already have a committee and that the Minister of National Defence is included on that committee but not the Minister of Veterans Affairs?
Senator Cools: Are you saying that you recommend the establishment of a committee and then you are changing your mind as you make the motion?
Senator Bonnell: I am changing my mind because no one told us that they now have a committee.
Senator Cools: It recommends that it includes in it. All right. I am sure that the clerk can sort that out.
The Chairman: All in favour of the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried.
Tomorrow we will have a opportunity to present this report and the report of the committee.
Senator Bonnell: I move that we report tomorrow to the full committee, the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology, our report on Bill C-300.
The Chairman: There was some question concerning whether or not that meeting will be changed to Wednesday, but we will find out later.
Senator Bonnell: To the earliest possible date, then.
The committee adjourned.