;

HAFF Committee Meeting

Notices of Meeting include information about the subject matter to be examined by the committee and date, time and place of the meeting, as well as a list of any witnesses scheduled to appear. The Evidence is the edited and revised transcript of what is said before a committee. The Minutes of Proceedings are the official record of the business conducted by the committee at a sitting.

For an advanced search, use Publication Search tool.

If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.

Previous day publication Next day publication

37th PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION

Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs

COMMITTEE EVIDENCE

CONTENTS

Tuesday, February 26, 2002

1935

The Chair (Mr. Peter Adams (Peterborough, Lib.))

Mr. Joe Jordan (Leeds--Grenville, Lib.)

The Chair

General Raymond Henault (Chief of the Defence Staff, Department of National Defence)

Gen Raymond Henault

1940

The Chair

Mr. Toews

Gen Raymond Henault

1945

Mr. Toews

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Toews

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Toews

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Toews

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Toews

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Toews

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Toews

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Toews

Gen Raymond Henault

1950

Mr. Toews

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Toews

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Toews

Gen Raymond Henault

The Chair

Mr. Toews

The Chair

Mr. Geoff Regan (Halifax West, Lib.)

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Geoff Regan

Gen Raymond Henault

1955

Mr. Geoff Regan

Gen Raymond Henault

The Chair

Mr. Geoff Regan

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Geoff Regan

Gen Raymond Henault

The Chair

Mr. Joe Jordan

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Joe Jordan

2000

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Joe Jordan

The Chair

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Joe Jordan

Gen Raymond Henault

The Chair

Mr. Pierre Brien (Témiscamingue, BQ)

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Pierre Brien

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Pierre Brien

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Pierre Brien

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Pierre Brien

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Pierre Brien

2005

The Chair

Mr. Pierre Brien

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Pierre Brien

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Pierre Brien

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Pierre Brien

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Pierre Brien

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Pierre Brien

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Pierre Brien

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Pierre Brien

The Chair

Gén Raymond Henault

2010

The Chair

Mr. St. Denis

The Chair

Mr. St. Denis

The Chair

Mr. St. Denis

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. St. Denis

Gen Raymond Henault

2015

The Chair

Ms. Marlene Catterall (Ottawa West--Nepean, Lib.)

Gen Raymond Henault

Ms. Marlene Catterall

Gen Raymond Henault

Ms. Marlene Catterall

Gen Raymond Henault

Ms. Marlene Catterall

Gen Raymond Henault

The Chair

Ms. Marlene Catterall

The Chair

Gen Raymond Henault

2020

Ms. Catterall

The Chair

Mr. Yvon Godin (Acadie--Bathurst, NDP)

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Yvon Godin

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Yvon Godin

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Yvon Godin

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Yvon Godin

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Yvon Godin

Gen Raymond Henault

2025

Mr. Yvon Godin

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Yvon Godin

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Yvon Godin

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Yvon Godin

Gen Raymond Henault

The Chair

Yvon Godin

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Yvon Godin

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Yvon Godin

The Chair

2030

Mr. Tony Tirabassi (Niagara Centre, Lib.)

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Tony Tirabassi

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Tony Tirabassi

The Chair

Mr. Geoff Regan

Gen Raymond Henault

2035

Mr. Geoff Regan

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Geoff Regan

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Geoff Regan

The Chair

Mr. Jay Hill (Prince George--Peace River, PC/DR)

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Jay Hill

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Jay Hill

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Jay Hill

2040

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Jay Hill

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Jay Hill

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Jay Hill

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Jay Hill

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Jay Hill

The Chair

Mr. Jay Hill

The Chair

Mr. Jay Hill

Gen Raymond Henault

2045

Mr. Jay Hill

Gen Raymond Henault

The Chair

Mr. Jay Hill

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Jay Hill

Gen Raymond Henault

The Chair

Mr. Jay Hill

The Chair

Mr. Jay Hill

The Chair

Mr. Joe Jordan

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Joe Jordan

Gen Raymond Henault

2050

Mr. Joe Jordan

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Joe Jordan

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Joe Jordan

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Joe Jordan

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Joe Jordan

The Chair

2055

Ms. Cheryl Gallant (Renfrew--Nipissing--Pembroke, Canadian Alliance)

Gen Raymond Henault

Ms. Cheryl Gallant

Gen Raymond Henault

Ms. Cheryl Gallant

Gen Raymond Henault

Ms. Cheryl Gallant

Gen Raymond Henault

Ms. Cheryl Gallant

Gen Raymond Henault

Ms. Cheryl Gallant

Gen Raymond Henault

Ms. Cheryl Gallant

Gen Raymond Henault

Ms. Cheryl Gallant

Gen Raymond Henault

2100

The Chair

Ms. Marlene Catterall

Gen Raymond Henault

Ms. Marlene Catterall

Gen Raymond Henault

Ms. Marlene Catterall

Gen Raymond Henault

Ms. Marlene Catterall

Gen Raymond Henault

Ms. Catterall

The Chair

Mr. Michel Guimond (Beauport--Montmorency--Côte-de-Beaupré--Île-d'Orléans, BQ)

2105

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Michel Guimond

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Michel Guimond

The Chair

Gén Raymond Henault

The Chair

Mr. Lee

Gen Raymond Henault

2110

Mr. Lee

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Lee

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Lee

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Lee

Gen Raymond Henault

The Chair

Mr. Lee

The Chair

Gen Raymond Henault

The Chair

Mr. Yvon Godin

2115

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Yvon Godin

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Yvon Godin

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Yvon Godin

Gen Raymond Henault

M. Godin

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Yvon Godin

The Chair

Mr. Yvon Godin

The Chair

Mr. Yvon Godin

The Chair

Gén Raymond Henault

The Chair

M. Bélanger

2120

Gen Raymond Henault

M. Bélanger

Gen Raymond Henault

M. Bélanger

Gen Raymond Henault

M. Bélanger

Gen Raymond Henault

M. Bélanger

Gén Raymond Henault

The Chair

Mr. Jay Hill

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Jay Hill

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Jay Hill

2125

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Jay Hill

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Jay Hill

Gen Raymond Henault

The Chair

Mr. Jay Hill

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Jay Hill

The Chair

Gen Raymond Henault

The Chair

Mr. Benoit

Gen Raymond Henault

2130

Mr. Benoit

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Benoit

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Benoit

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Benoit

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Benoit

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Benoit

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Benoit

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Benoit

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Benoit

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Benoit

The Chair

Mr. Benoit

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Benoit

The Chair

Ms. Marlene Catterall

The Chair

Mr. Pierre Brien

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Pierre Brien

Gen Raymond Henault

2135

Mr. Pierre Brien

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Pierre Brien

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Pierre Brien

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Pierre Brien

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Pierre Brien

Gen Raymond Henault

Mr. Pierre Brien

The Chair

Gen Raymond Henault

The Chair

Gen Raymond Henault

The Chair

Mr. Yvon Godin

The Chair

Mr. Yvon Godin

2140

The Chair

Mr. Yvon Godin

The Chair

Mr. Yvon Godin

The Chair

Mr. Jay Hill

The Chair

Mr. Jay Hill

The Chair

Mr. Hill

The Chair

Mr. Benoit

The Chair

CANADA

Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs

NUMBER 049

1st SESSION

37th PARLIAMENT

COMMITTEE EVIDENCE

Tuesday, February 26, 2002

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

½ (1935)

[English]

The Chair (Mr. Peter Adams (Peterborough, Lib.)): Order. Colleagues, let's begin.

I need to ask the regular cameras to leave. This meeting, like all our other meetings, is going to be fully televised on CPAC. In fact, my understanding is that this evening it's going to go out live, as the House of Commons is closed.

I have two or three items of business. First of all, the order of the day, pursuant to the order of reference from the House of Thursday, February 7, is consideration of the question of privilege raised on January 31 by the member for Portage--Lisgar concerning the charge against the Minister of National Defence of making misleading statements in the House.

Our witness, whom I'll introduce in a moment, is the Chief of the Defence Staff, General Henault.

Before I do that, just to bring us up to date, this is our third meeting today, and we have two more meetings tomorrow, and two meetings the day after to complete the preliminary list of witnesses.

The information we requested from the Clerk of the House of Commons, who was our early witness, has been circulated.

The written information we requested from the minister has been circulated.

You'll recall that we sent written questions to Commodore Thiffault, because he was unable to be here. Those written replies to members' questions are here and are being circulated to members of the committee as they come in.

The request we had from Brian Pallister, our first witness, is almost ready for distribution. You'll recall we received it, but we had to get it translated and so on. There's one more thing to come, and then we will circulate that.

Jay Hill requested a series of documents. Again, as I said this morning, they're working on those, and we'll have those as soon as we possibly can.

Outstanding are the requests from the Deputy Minister of National Defence, who of course only appeared before the committee earlier today. Those will be on their way.

I think, colleagues, looking around, that's everything in the way of outstanding requests, is it not? Okay.

I'd like to introduce now, if I may, and welcome, colleagues, on your behalf...

Yes, Mr. Jordan.

Mr. Joe Jordan (Leeds--Grenville, Lib.): I have a point of order, Mr. Chair--and bear with me as I explain why I think it's a point of order. I realize you're pretty stern on these things.

I'm getting increasingly concerned about the extracurricular activities of this committee. Initially, I was concerned... The steering committee met and we agreed on a list of witnesses. We agreed that additional witnesses could be called, or witnesses could be recalled, at the approval of the committee.

Mr. Pallister, who invoked this process, felt it was necessary to have a press conference to demand that the minister come back. I would argue that this is showing contempt for this committee.

And then today I see a press release from the Canadian Alliance that starts off by saying “It is clear that Minister of Defence Art Eggleton deliberately misled the House of Commons”. And then it gets worse.

I just want to say that we are trying to deal with this issue as individual MPs in a non-partisan way, and this type of parallel political communication stream... The fact that they're issuing press releases in the middle of this committee doing its work is, I would argue, an absolute affront to the dignity of this committee.

The Chair: Is the press release, Joe, in English and in French?

Mr. Joe Jordan: I have it in English only.

The Chair: Does anyone have a French version?

Then it's not something we can circulate at the committee. I note your comments, as do all members of the committee.

I'd now like to introduce General Raymond Henault, the Chief of the Defence Staff.

General, we greatly appreciate your being here. I apologize for this slight delay in beginning our committee. I think all members have notes of your opening remarks, so we're in your hands.

General Raymond Henault (Chief of the Defence Staff, Department of National Defence): Mr. Chair, members of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, good evening.

[Translation]

As you already know, I am General Raymond Henault, Chief of the Defence Staff.

[English]

I'm pleased to be here before you this evening to tell you how well the men and women of the Canadian Forces are performing in the prosecution of our country's coalition efforts in the campaign against terrorism. As of today, approximately 2,500 members of the Canadian Forces are deployed to southwest Asia to provide naval, air, and land force support to this very important coalition effort.

This is, as I know the committee understands very well, Mr. Chair, a very dangerous and risky mission, and I believe it's important that this not be lost on any Canadian.

Approximately 2,000 other members of the Canadian Forces are deployed on 12 other missions around the world, as described for you very broadly by the Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff earlier today, for a total of more than 4,500 men and women currently serving abroad. We also continue to provide enhanced security here at home in a variety of ways, including air sovereignty and enhanced security of installations.

As Chief of the Defence Staff under the direction of the Minister of National Defence, I am responsible, as you well know, for the command, control, and administration of the Canadian Forces. The National Defence Act stipulates that unless the Governor in Council otherwise directs, all orders and instructions to the Canadian Forces to carry out the directions of the Government of Canada, or the minister, are issued by or through me.

[Translation]

Therefore, government policy with respect to CF operations in enacted in the Canadian Forces through orders issued by me or on my behalf, where I have delegated the authority.

[English]

Again, as you heard earlier from the Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff, the responsibility for coordinating strategic-level operational planning and for providing operational direction to the commanders in the field rests with him, as delegated by me.

[Translation]

As such, military control over the conduct of military operations is always exercised through the military chain of command.

[English]

Similarly, the chain for reporting back on military operations and affairs through a variety of reports and returns also rests with the military chain of command. In turn, I'm responsible, of course, for informing the minister of significant issues regarding military operations of all kinds.

The specific issue that I know you are concerned with in this committee is the reporting of the operations of our Joint Task Force 2, more commonly called JTF-2. JTF-2 in fact provides the Government of Canada with a unique and very highly specialized capability in responding to terrorist threats to our national security at home, primarily, and now also abroad.

In terms of its mission in Afghanistan, the unit reports through the DCDS to me, and I in turn report its activities to the Minister of National Defence.

[Translation]

Gen Raymond Henault: In that regard, there are standard procedures used to report its activities that are designed to ensure timely and accurate information reporting.

½ (1940)

[English]

Although these procedures are similar for all missions and operations, and they don't apply specifically to JTF-2, there are some slight differences with respect to the reporting and operations of the unit, particularly regarding the degree to which we share the information. That process regarding operations in Afghanistan specifically has already been described to you, I think, in fair detail.

The reasons for that additional security with respect to JTF-2 are threefold.

First, as I'm sure you would agree, Mr. Chair, the information is strictly controlled to ensure the utmost security of their missions and the soldiers themselves, and by extension, of course, the safety of their families. Of course, the more people the information is shared with in these circumstances, the greater the risk of information being compromised.

Second, we do not want to give any advantage to our adversaries with respect to how JTF-2 operates, or certainly how it is organized, whether it be here at home or in deployed operations, as it is in Afghanistan.

[Translation]

Lastly, JTF-2 must operate with our allies as part of the overall campaign against terrorism and it is our responsibility to minimize the risk of compromising not only our operational security but also that of our allies.

[English]

Operational security, specifically ours and our allies, is always at the top of our agenda.

For the above reasons, I trust that you will appreciate--and I know you have demonstrated that, Mr. Chair, in the previous proceedings--that many aspects of JTF-2 can't be talked about publicly. While the secrecy of JTF-2 operations and the operational security that we apply to those operations may appear to some to be excessive, I can certainly assure you that it is necessary for the preservation of operational security and is broadly similar to that being observed by other coalition allies.

[Translation]

In conclusion, I know that the work of this committee is important and I am pleased to be here to be of assistance where I can.

[English]

I am here to answer any questions you may have, Mr. Chairman.

[Translation]

The Chair: Thank you, General

[English]

Just to explain to you the procedure we've agreed on for these committee hearings, we allocate, in the first round, which is most of the meeting, ten minutes to each party, and it proceeds from opposition to government side in turn. The parties can use the ten minutes for one questioner or for more than one questioner. You'll get an idea of that. When we conclude that, we go to our normal practice in this committee, which is five minutes each, also alternating.

The other point I've been making to the witnesses is that, in my view as the chair, the time is the members'. For example, if you're giving an answer--and I'm not suggesting, General, that your answers may be long--and I get a sense that the member wants to move on, I'll try to let you get to some reasonable point, but I will tend then to favour the member in order that he or she can use the ten minutes appropriately.

We're going to begin with Vic Toews of the Canadian Alliance, and then move to Geoff Regan and Pierre Brien.

Mr. Vic Toews (Provencher, Canadian Alliance): Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank the general for being here this evening. I certainly take to heart his caution regarding the need for the security and safety of our armed forces and their families, and I want to thank him for again specifically drawing that to our attention.

General, we heard today from Vice-Admiral Maddison that on January 20, 2002, the general was briefed on the JTF-2 participation in the capture of prisoners in Afghanistan. I'm wondering if the general can advise us whether prior to the briefing on January 20, 2002, he was involved in any briefings with the minister regarding the development of this operation and the participation of Canadians--insofar as he is free to disclose that.

Gen Raymond Henault: Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, while I can't discuss operational issues and the lead-up surrounding this mission, I can tell you that the minister was kept fully aware of operations, not only for JTF-2 but also other operations that were being conducted in the campaign against terrorism and other operations around the world as they were developing.

½ (1945)

Mr. Vic Toews: Including, then, Mr. Chair, the development of this operation that occurred sometime around January 20 of this year.

Gen Raymond Henault: Yes.

Mr. Vic Toews: And would the general have briefed the minister, then, on the development of this operation?

Gen Raymond Henault: I can say that the minister was aware of the developing operation as it was evolving, with some detail but not all of the detail of the mission.

Mr. Vic Toews: Would that have involved the development of the potential that prisoners may have been taken in the course of this operation?

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chair, that would be speculative, given that the missions have their own specific flavour. The taking of detainees or the capturing of al-Qaeda, or suspected al-Qaeda, terrorists is always a possibility during these missions. There was no way for us to know prior to the mission having evolved whether or not terrorists would be captured in this case.

Mr. Vic Toews: But that would have been a likelihood that all parties to the briefing could well have anticipated.

Gen Raymond Henault: I would say that is a possibility, although it would be speculative on my part.

Mr. Vic Toews: Thank you.

We heard also from the vice-admiral today that on January 21, January 25, and January 29, the vice-admiral provided the following five points of information in respect of the operation, if I can quickly summarize them: one, that the troops were safe; two, that the mission was successful; three, that it was in accordance with government policy and the rules of engagement; four, that Canadians were involved in the taking of detainees; and five, that Canadians turned the detainees over to the Americans.

Now, did you at any time personally provide the minister with a similar briefing, or a briefing that covered the same ground, regarding that operation?

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, I did not. I was aware of the actual mission having been completed. The description of the success of the mission and the five points that were just outlined by Mr. Toews were generally those that were provided to me on the evening of the 20th. Those are fairly accurate in terms of my recollection of what was passed to me.

Mr. Vic Toews: All right.

And you wouldn't have any concern that the briefing that was provided to you was in fact fully conveyed then to the minister insofar as the military was concerned. You haven't learned that there was any problem with the communication of that information, that you have heard of, during the time period of, let's say, January 21 to January 25.

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, the information we've just discussed was briefed to me in its broadest terms on the evening of the 20th. I was departing the country the next morning and had confirmation of the success and the completion of the mission as just described and, given that the DCDS was going to be briefing the minister on my behalf, assured that this information was to be passed to the minister.

Mr. Vic Toews: To the general, through the chair, would it be correct that the briefings then conducted on the 21st and the 25th were in fact then authorized by you and consistent with any instructions you may have provided to the vice-admiral?

Gen Raymond Henault: Yes, they were, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Vic Toews: On January 29 , I understand, you briefed the minister on the issue personally, along with the vice-admiral, and covering the same issue. I also understand that this briefing took place after question period. My question to the general is, who was present, and why was there another briefing in respect of the same issue again?

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chair, my recollection of that meeting was that the DCDS and I visited the minister to clarify some of the points and the facts that were made public on this mission. It also was an opportunity for me, having returned to Ottawa on the evening of the 28th and coming back into the briefing cycle again on the 29th, to bring myself up to speed on the full scope of matters and facts as they were known to the minister.

½ (1950)

Mr. Vic Toews: In the course of that briefing, were there any additional significant facts provided to the minister that may not have been provided in the course of the briefings on January 21 and 25 and that related specifically to the engagement of Canadians in that operation and the taking of prisoners in Afghanistan?

Gen Raymond Henault: Although I was not present for the briefings to the minister on January 21 and 25, I would assess that the facts portrayed by the DCDS to the minister in this case were merely a confirmation of the facts that had been provided to him earlier and the sequencing of those passages of information.

Mr. Vic Toews: Mr. Chair, I'm wondering whether the general made it clear to the minister that in fact this was a confirmation of the facts previously provided to him.

Gen Raymond Henault: That is my recollection.

Mr. Vic Toews: Now, on January 30 there was again some discussion of this issue in the media and elsewhere. At that time the minister gave an explanation of what in fact happened. Do you agree, if you're familiar with the minister's explanation on January 30, that in fact the final explanation specifically in answer to the question raised by MP Elsie Wayne was a correct explanation of the facts as you understood them?

Gen Raymond Henault: Although I don't recall seeing question period and the specific question posed to the minister on that particular day, I think the clarification that was provided by the minister, in my understanding of the sequence of events and the sequence of information that was passed to the minister, was accurate.

The Chair: You have one minute left.

Mr. Vic Toews: I think I'll leave it at that.

The Chair: General, the next 10 minutes will be split between Geoff Regan and Joe Jordan. Then it will be Pierre Brien and Brent St. Denis.

Mr. Geoff Regan (Halifax West, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, General, for coming before us today.

First of all, I want to ask you about your focus and the focus of your department around the JTF-2 mission. What were the priorities, from your perspective, in relation to that mission, and what was the focus of the department?

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chair, our focus was the safety and security of the members who were involved in this very unique operation; the success of the mission and their observance of the rules of engagement; to ensure that the mission had been undertaken and executed in accordance with the guidance provided to them by the Government of Canada; and to ensure that any handover of detainees had been done in conjunction with and in accordance with the guidance and operational orders that had been issued.

That was our primary objective, and we were assured that all of those things were done correctly.

Mr. Geoff Regan: And what was your sense, in terms of the... You're aware, of course, that a lot of this is centred around the issue of the taking of prisoners, obviously, and the controversy in the media about the taking of prisoners.

We heard earlier today from the deputy minister tha , during the week of the 21st and 25th he felt that the issue of taking prisoners was subsiding after the American Red Cross had indicated their satisfaction with treatment of prisoners and after the U.S. government had confirmed that it was going to follow the Geneva Convention in the treatment, and reassured our government of that.

I guess what I'm looking for is your sense of where the prisoner issue was at that time. To what degree was it a focused issue, a priority issue, as compared with the other things you've just mentioned?

Gen Raymond Henault: Thank you, Mr. Regan.

Mr. Chair, certainly I was aware of the controversy surrounding detainees and the issue of detention and the handover, the determination of status and so on. I had participated with the minister in a committee appearance before SCONDVA, and SCFAIT the week previous. My concern and my main objective was to ensure that the orders I had given to the JTF-2 in the handling of detainees, if detainees were to be taken, were clear; that the orders I had been given by the Government of Canada, and had relayed to JTF-2 through the task force commander, were clear; and that their parameters were well understood by both me and the task force commander and those troops under his operational command.

I was assured by those comments that have been made, and certainly by the assurances of the minister to committee, that the orders, regulations, procedures, and rules of engagement that we had issued to JTF-2 in respect to operations were clear and were well understood.

½ (1955)

Mr. Geoff Regan: Let me take you, General, through the chair, to January 29. Did you watch question period that day, do you recall?

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chair, I did not watch question period. I was involved in a business planning activity, I'm sorry to say.

The Chair: We've been very disappointed with the answers to that question.

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

Mr. Geoff Regan: General, I wonder if you were present at the meeting after question period, on the afternoon of the 29th, at which the minister and the Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff were present.

Gen Raymond Henault: Yes, I was.

Mr. Geoff Regan: Can you describe to us what happened?

Gen Raymond Henault: There were a couple of reasons for me being involved in that meeting. One was that I had been away for a week, out of the country, and it was an opportunity for me to reacquaint myself with the full scope of operational activity going on. Although I had been briefed during the week while I was absent, this was an opportunity to confirm the facts again from my point of view and to re-engage with the minister, because I do commonly brief the minister on a daily basis on the full extent of Canadian Forces operations, including those of JTF-2.

The reason I was in the room, therefore, was to, again, reacquaint myself with those facts and also to ensure that the issues surrounding the discussions--the facts about the passage of information to the minister on the 21st and the 25th on my behalf by the Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff--were clearly understood.

The Chair: That's about five minutes, Geoff.

Joe Jordan.

Mr. Joe Jordan: Thank you, Mr. Chair, and welcome, General.

General, I spoke with the deputy minister this afternoon, and I think the committee has an understanding now of the fact that JTF-2 is different. There's a different communication channel than would normally exist, and that's for security reasons.

I'm interested, though, when decisions are made to give the public information about JTF-2, I would assume that those decisions are not made lightly, that under normal circumstances you don't go public with that information. Is that correct, or is that a fair assessment?

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chair, I would say that's a very accurate assessment. We do not take the divulgence of information on JTF-2 activities lightly at all.

The unit has a very unique and specialized mission that deals with counter-terrorism. They operate in a world of individuals, of terrorists, who are those, or could be those, who have perpetrated the acts of September 11. We therefore guard their identity and the operations and the way in which they do operations very carefully to ensure that there is no compromise on their part, on the part of their identity, and by extension, as I mentioned a little bit earlier, to their families.

So when we talk about the operations of JTF-2, we are very careful in selecting the information that we release for those very specific reasons.

In the context of operations abroad, this is the first time that JTF-2, or components or elements of JTF-2, have been involved in international operations, and that because of the very specialized capability they have and of course the mandate of our coalition against terrorism, or the campaign against terrorism, which seeks to eradicate the al-Qaeda and Taliban networks of the terrorist networks to bring to justice those who were involved with the tragedies of September 11 and so on.

So the world they operation in is a very difficult world. It's a very dangerous one, and it's one in which we guard the security of their operations very carefully and very sincerely.

Mr. Joe Jordan: So when you say “we” take this seriously, and don't release this information lightly, am I to assume from this that if the minister feels that something should be released, there is a formal process whereby he talks to you about it first?

¾ (2000)

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chair, there is a consultation done with me by the minister before he releases information on JTF-2. I carefully assess with the DCDS,who is interacting on a regular basis with JTF-2, to determine the validity of that information. If there is an operational security compromise in the event that this information is transmitted publicly, it's weighed very carefully against the operational security requirements and the need to know of the public. In that context we make a decision on whether or not information will be released.

Mr. Joe Jordan: Understood. So it's not solely to the minister's discretion that he decides that in the interest of transparency he should make public; there's actually a process for that. He consults with you, and there's sort of a joint decision, and things are balanced and a decision is made. Is that an accurate assessment?

The Chair: This should be a short reply.

Gen Raymond Henault: That's an accurate assessment.

Mr. Joe Jordan: One last question. You were out of the country until January 28?

Gen Raymond Henault: Yes, I was.

Mr. Joe Jordan: Thank you.

[Translation]

The Chair: Pierre Brien, Yvon Godin, Marlene Catterall and Jay Hill.

Mr. Pierre Brien (Témiscamingue, BQ): Welcome, General. I would like to clarify this. Between the 20th and the 28th, you were out of the country, but can you tell us where you were, without getting into details that you cannot divulge? Were you informed of what was happening during this period?

Gen Raymond Henault: I was away. I was in Phoenix, in the United States. I was of course kept informed of the activities of January 20. I had been briefed by the Deputy Chief of Defence Staff. I had been briefed on the activities of the 20th, that is the mission itself, by the Deputy Chief of Defence staff that same evening and he confirmed in the morning of January 21 the success of the mission and all the details that Mr. Toews described earlier.

So, in my opinion, it was important that the minister be informed in a general way about this operation, but it needed to be done over a secure telephone line. I was going to be in an air plane at the time the minister was to be briefed over a secure telephone line. This is why I asked the Deputy Chief of Defence staff to provide the briefing on my behalf. I should point out that the Deputy Chief of Defence staff is responsible, most of the time, for briefing the minister when I am away.

Mr. Pierre Brien: And on the other days, between the 22nd and the 28th, did you take part in those briefing sessions?

Gen Raymond Henault: No. The Deputy Chief of Defence staff gave himself the briefings to the minister, on my behalf. I was briefed on the developments of the mission on Friday, the 25th, and again on Monday, the 28th.

Mr. Pierre Brien: Mr. Maddison, the Deputy Chief of Staff, told us earlier today, speaking about the members of the Force, that they accomplished what was expected of them, that is capture terrorists belonging to the Al-Qaida group. They took them to Kandahar and handed them over to American authorities. They did what they were supposed to do, in accordance with their mandate.

At what point in time were the troops in Afghanistan given clear directives to hand over their prisoners to American authorities?

Has it always been clear to them, ever since their deployment over there?

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, I would say that it was very clear to members of JTF-2 that the procedure to follow in the event they captured terrorists was to hand them over to the leader of the coalition, the Americans in Kandahar.

Mr. Pierre Brien: And since what time has this been clear? At what point in time did they receive clear instructions in this regard?

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, it was clearly spelled out in the directives we received from the government before the departure of JTF-2.

Mr. Pierre Brien: I imagine you have an information or feedback service in your organization that keeps you abreast of what is being talked about in the media generally, or that reports to you on the contents of the news. Is that so?

Gen Raymond Henault: I would say, Mr. Chairman, this is correct. We are kept informed, on a daily basis of media reports.

Mr. Pierre Brien: Fine.

On Monday January 28, the Prime Minister made a statement to the effect that no prisoners had been taken and told the media: “When we have any, we will let you know”.

At what point in time were you made aware of the Prime Minister's statement where he said he was not aware of any prisoners taken by Canadians, while in real fact there already had been?

¾ (2005)

The Chair: Please address the Chair.

Mr. Pierre Brien: Well, yes. I was getting a sore neck.

The Chair: Yes, I can understand.

Gen Raymond Henault : Mr. Chairman, on the 28th I was in the air en route to Canada. So I was not aware of the Prime Minister's statement before the 29th, sometime during the day.

Mr. Pierre Brien: Normally, under those conditions, when you are away, I imagine your information service reports to someone a statement like that of the Prime Minister. Who gets this report when you are away?

Gen Raymond Henault : Mr. Chairman, when I am out of the country, the Vice-Chief of Defence Staff, the lieutenant-general Macdonald, represents me or takes over my responsibilities. There is a hierarchy of delegation of responsibilities that is well established by the National Defence Act and my responsibilities, when I am away, are taken over by the Vice-chief and, next in line, by the Deputy Chief and then the Chief of Land Staff.

Mr. Pierre Brien: Would it be possible to know what happened when this information reached National Defence on the 28th? I am talking about the information about the Prime Minister having made an incorrect statement that was at odds with what you knew? What was done with that piece of information that day?

Gen Raymond Henault: I do not remember at all having discussed this upon my return. It was only during my discussion with the Minister, later in the afternoon, that I really became aware of what happened the days before. This was after several meetings I had during the day, as you can imagine, about business planning and other subjects.

Mr. Pierre Brien: Generally, when this type of information is brought to your attention and you are away, it should be relayed either to the minister, to be passed along to the Prime Minister, or to Privy Council, or else directly to the Prime Minister's Office?

The Prime Minister just made an incorrect statement and in all likelihood your headquarters are aware of it. Is there a process in place to advise him that his statement was incorrect? What would the normal process be in such an event?

Gen Raymond Henault: If I understood correctly, Mr. Chairman, the question is what path a piece of information about a news report or issues arising from public statements follow within the Department. Is that the question?

Mr. Pierre Brien: Yes. And I wonder if this path leads to the minister, in order for him to advise the Prime Minister or to contact Privy Council or the Office of the Prime Minister.

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, my responsibility is to notify the minister and that is the process I follow as far as possible.

Mr. Pierre Brien: As far as you know, in this instance, was the minister informed by you of the Prime Minister's statement or did he find out some other way? Was he informed by you or by your staff?

Gen Raymond Henault: I can say, Mr. Chairman, that he was not informed by me and that the sequence of events became clear to me only at that meeting in the afternoon with the Vice-Chief of Staff.

Mr. Pierre Brien: During that meeting, was the issue of communicating this information to the Prime Minister or to Privy Council discussed?

Gen Raymond Henault: Not to my knowledge, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Pierre Brien: This is my last question. In order to justify his mission to inform Cabinet before January 29, the minister stated he was trying to get clarification or supplementary information. Without going into details, what type of information could the minister have needed that had not been given to him at those briefings held on January 21 or 25?

[English]

The Chair: Could you make this a short reply, General.

[Translation]

Gén Raymond Henault: As I already mentioned, Mr. Chairman, I was not present at those briefings on January 21 and 25. I would think those clarifications had already been given to the minister by the Vice-Chief of Staff. I believe the information path that was followed was one of the main aspects discussed during the January 29 meeting.

¾ (2010)

[English]

The Chair: Thank you, General.

Brent St. Denis and Marlene Catterall are going to split the next 10 minutes. Then we go to Yvon Godin, and then Tirabassi and Regan are going to split the next 10 minutes. Then we go to Jay Hill.

Brent St. Denis.

Mr. Brent St. Denis (Algoma--Manitoulin, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you for being here, General.

I'm not sure how long I'll last with this voice, Mr. Chair.

The Chair: I wish we had more members like you.

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

Mr. Brent St. Denis: If I might be allowed to tell you, at a legion event last Saturday...

The Chair: No, we don't have time for things like that; get on with it.

Mr. Brent St. Denis: I just thought it was important to tell you. Joe wants to know.

The Chair: Let's go.

Mr. Brent St. Denis: Again, welcome, General.

All members of Parliament around this table can relate to the early days in the election campaign. And even though preparing the military for an effort such as we have in Afghanistan is thousands of times more complicated, we could all at least relate to the first days and week of a campaign. As well organized as we might be going into it, still things go wrong. I suspect that after day five of a campaign I wouldn't be able to tell you what I was doing on day three unless one of my volunteers reminded me, or I had my notes available to tell me, to remind myself.

So I wonder if you could, General, characterize as best you can what it's like in the early days of getting in theatre. We have Princess Patricia's Light Infantry preparing for deployment. We have JTF-2 over there doing what we expect and hope they do on behalf of all Canadians. Perhaps you could characterize the atmosphere, the “organized confusion”, if I can use that term.

And could you add, if it's appropriate, is there a difference in the way you communicate to the chain of command during the early days as opposed to, say, the steady state of operations weeks or months into a campaign?

Thank you, sir.

Gen Raymond Henault: Thank you, Mr. St. Denis. That's a very broad question. I would only correct one part of your statement, sir, and that is, it is not organized confusion, it's deliberate military planning, thank you.

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

Mr. Brent St. Denis: Thank you for correcting that.

Gen Raymond Henault: I would say to you that the tragic events of 11 September will mark each and every one of us for as long as we live, I would suspect. It's something that's very indelibly imprinted in my memory. The aftermath of September 11 is one is which there was a considerable amount of coordination and consultation, not only amongst government and other departments in Canada, as a result of the requirements to respond in a number of different ways. Those ways included the immediate response of the Canadian Forces, which was to provide support to those aircraft that had been diverted to many areas in Canada, most of them very remote, but also the requirements to very quickly energize our air defence activity, our air sovereignty operations, and provide F-18 support internally to protect the country, as opposed to what had traditionally been, during the Cold War, external support.

We did all of that, and at the same time we very clearly planned, from our point of view, what type of support could be offered to any coalition that would be developed or stood up in a response to these activities. As we started to get more clarity over the coalition-based activity that was going on, and as we saw the declaration of article 5, on the part of NATO, for example, the declarations of the UN and so on, it became very clear to us that there was going to be coalition activity in which many nations would be involved.

Of course, Canada, with its continental affiliation with the U.S., would obviously be involved, especially with Canadians having been killed during the events of September 11 and so on, and the solidarity that was shown between us and the United States, and, I would say, with the international community, quite frankly.

We went through a very deliberate planning process, and these are the types of processes in which you dig deep to ensure that you can provide a very meaningful contribution to something of this nature because of the atrocities we all witnessed. We developed what we considered to be sustainable force offerings to the coalition, at least in the initial parts of the campaign. We consulted with government to determine whether or not those force offerings could be made to our coalition allies. Government agreed with the force offerings that were recommended and presented to it as part of an option development that we did.

As a result of that, we started deploying troops in a sequential fashion. As many of you may remember, we redirected the HMCS Halifax from its operations in the Standing Naval Force Atlantic to the coalition naval effort as soon as possible after the decision to commit forces to the operation. We then developed a series of force options that allowed us to deploy sequentially different elements of our Canadian Forces, culminating with the deployment of the land force, the PPCLI battle group, in the last instance, if you like, in the January timeframe.

So the planning for this has been very deliberate. It's one in which we have developed a rolling 24-month sustainment plan to determine how and for what length of time we can support the campaign. It's one in which we feel very committed to standing shoulder to shoulder with our allies to ensure that the objectives of the Government of Canada and also the objectives of the coalition are met in the fullness of this campaign.

¾ (2015)

The Chair: Marlene Catterall, you have about four minutes.

Ms. Marlene Catterall (Ottawa West--Nepean, Lib.): We heard earlier from the Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff that the minister was briefed on January 21 and 25 with respect to this particular thing. I presume there were also briefings on January 22, 23, and 24, and possibly more than one on one of those dates. Would you have given those briefings or would your Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff have given those briefings?

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, those briefings would have been given by the Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff, given my absence from Canada.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: Would you have been informed of the content of those briefings?

Gen Raymond Henault: I was made aware of the evolution of activity on the briefings I received on the Friday of that week. I did not get the specific content of either one of those briefings, on the 22nd and--

Ms. Marlene Catterall: Would you be aware of whether the specific information about the involvement of Canadians taking prisoners, that was conveyed on January 21, would have been repeated in briefings on subsequent days?

I'm sorry, if I'm asking you to speculate, please say so.

Gen Raymond Henault: Yes, I'm afraid I would be speculating in this case, because I was not made aware of the specifics of the briefings. I know for a fact that on January 21 the information that had been outlined earlier was provided. Whether that was updated on January 25 or not, I could not categorically state as affirmative.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: During that week, and including on the Monday, and I think through until the Thursday, the minister was involved in meetings in Mexico with defence counterparts. Were you aware of those meetings? Were you involved at all in planning the program of those meetings and the subjects that would be discussed?

Gen Raymond Henault: No, I was not involved in the actual planning for those meetings, but I was certainly aware of the minister being on his way to Mexico and the significance of the Minister of National Defence making the first trip, as a defence minister, to Mexico in this case, or the first Canadian minister to go to Mexico.

Now, I was with the minister on the previous Friday in Edmonton to say farewell to the PPCLI battle group. We did that together. I returned to Ottawa on the 19th and the minister proceeded on to Mexico on the same day.

The Chair: You have a minute and a half.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: I understand--and I may want to come back to this, Mr. Chair--that those meetings covered some fairly significant topics. As you know, it was the first visit ever by a Canadian defence minister to Mexico. I understand they covered a number of fairly important topics in terms of our defence relationship with the Mexicans.

Can you indicate, even briefly, what some of those subjects might have been?

The Chair: You have about 60 seconds.

Gen Raymond Henault: I did not participate in the meetings, so I'm not aware of all of the specifics of the meetings, but I certainly have seen some of the reports that resulted from the meeting. They resulted in a broad-based discussion of a number of defence-related and binational issues that related to the Mexican defence force and the Mexican defence ministry and so on.

They also discussed a number of perhaps bilateral cooperations we could undertake in terms of rendering more close our relationship with the Mexican authorities.

¾ (2020)

Ms. Marlene Catterall: Thank you.

[Translation]

The Chair: Yvon Godin.

Mr. Yvon Godin (Acadie--Bathurst, NDP): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to express my welcome to the General.

Gen Raymond Henault: Thank you.

Mr. Yvon Godin: And also, I am sure the comment you made at the beginning, that the men and women of the Canadian Forces are performing well, is true. They make our country proud. I want to add this part to what you said.

Mr. Chairman, could the witness tell us if it is normal practice for the Vice-Chief of Defence Staff or the Chief of Staff to brief the Deputy Minister of National Defence?

Gen Raymond Henault : It is normal practise, Mr. Chairman, to share information on various activities with the Deputy Minister. We do not necessarily discuss operations with the Deputy Minister since his responsibilities lie in another area. His responsibilities lie more on the civilian side, on the fiscal management of the Department.

However, we keep the Deputy Minister abreast of the major lines of operation of the Canadian Forces in order for him to be informed, as Deputy Minister and in the absence of the minister, of the general activities of our Forces. This is especially true for conflict operations like those we are engaged in now. However, it is not normal practice for us to share with him the operations of JTF-2 and to discuss with him the procedure in place in order for the minister and Prime Minister to be briefed directly in this regard.

Mr. Yvon Godin: Mr. Maddison told us this morning that he met with the Deputy Minister on the 22nd to discuss this particular photograph, the one showing soldiers who are possibly Canadian and which were confirmed to be Canadian later in the afternoon.

So, if we look at this picture, it shows the JTF-2 team.

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, I cannot know what goes on in Admiral Maddison's mind, but if I understand the sequence of events correctly, Mr. Maddison, during their first meeting that morning, advised the Deputy Minister that the soldiers in the picture might be Canadians. And when this was confirmed, he relayed that information to the Deputy Minister later in the day. However, to my knowledge, he did not discuss with the Deputy Minister the details of this mission.

Mr. Yvon Godin: But the photo showed Canadians with prisoners, Mr. Chairman.

Gen Raymond Henault: That is true.

Mr. Yvon Godin: So there must have been a discussion about prisoners. The Canadian soldiers were not alone in that picture. It was not only a matter of their clothing, otherwise they could have been soldiers with white fatigues in Northern Canada. These were Canadian soldiers with prisoners. So there might have been at least a discussion of the fact these were prisoners.

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Godin is probably right, but I have not been briefed on the precise discussion between Admiral Maddison and the Deputy Minister at that time. But it seems reasonable to believe they discussed the fact these were prisoners taken by Canadians.

Mr. Yvon Godin: As far as you know, since Mr. Maddison seems to be a very conscientious person, as far as we could determine this morning, if I may pay him this compliment, was he worried when he saw the picture? This is why he went to see the Deputy Minister, especially since the Minister was in Mexico. When he saw the photo, he wanted to brief the minister of Defence.

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, Admiral Maddison is a man of the highest integrity. This is beyond any doubt. I think he felt it was his responsibility to pass on to the Deputy Minister information as to the identity of the people shown in the picture, since the minister was abroad.

¾ (2025)

Mr. Yvon Godin: But, Mr. Chairman, under some circumstances, when the minister is not around, the Deputy Minister, who is the right hand of the minister, just as the Deputy Chief of Staff takes over from you when you are away... there are occasions where you are required to brief the Deputy Minister.

Gen Raymond Henault: Yes, that is true, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Yvon Godin: So the comment the minister made in the House when he said that the only civilian to have been briefed on the operations of JTF-2, was incorrect in this specific case.

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, let us not forget that in this instance the minister was daily in contact with the Department and had been briefed on the 21st on the activities in question. Therefore, our responsibility to pass on information on the picture, in this instance to the Deputy Minister, but also about the whole range of activities of JTF-2 has nevertheless been fulfilled.

Mr. Yvon Godin: Mr. Chairman, my question is this. The minister stated in the House that he was the only civilian to have been briefed on the full range of activities of JTF-2 and that this was standard procedure. He was the only civilian to have been briefed, but now we know that other civilians have received a briefing in the morning or afternoon of the 22nd.

Gen Raymond Henault: Yes, I would say this is true, Mr. Chairman. The Deputy Minister was briefed on the fact that these were Canadians in the picture. This briefing did not cover details of the operation undertaken by JTF-2, it was rather to communicate the fact that these were Canadians on the picture, and not Americans or other international troops.

Mr. Yvon Godin: You were aware of the meeting on the 17th, where not only Liberals but also the leader of the NDP expressed deep concern about what Canada would do with any prisoners. That was an important meeting where parliamentarians were asking questions of the minister of Defence. Were you aware of all these concerns in Parliament?

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, I was certainly aware of the events and the discussion surrounding prisoners. Indeed, I was at the SCONDVA meeting with the minister, the previous week, when that issue was discussed.

However, my interest was mainly to ensure we had given precise orders and directions to the members of the Canadian Forces, including JTF-2 members, regarding the transfer of prisoners to other members of the coalition. We had confirmation the previous week that the procedure was still in place and this is what I was focussing on at that time. I wanted to ensure we followed the directions given to us by the Government of Canada. And this was indeed the case, Mr. Chairman.

The Chair: [Editor's Note: inaudible]

Yvon Godin: This will be my last question, I think, Mr. Chairman.

You expressed full confidence in your Deputy Chief of Staff who stated this morning that he had fully informed the minister of National Defence about the actions taken by the Canadian Forces regarding detainees. In your view, did Mr. Maddison tell the truth this morning and was the minister fully briefed on January 21?

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, I am fully confident that Mr. Maddison, which is a man of great integrity and perfect honesty, spoke the truth.

Mr. Yvon Godin: And who has a good memory.

Gen Raymond Henault: He has an excellent memory. I would say that what he told you is exactly what he remembers.

Mr. Yvon Godin: Thank you.

[English]

The Chair: General, Tony Tirabassi and Geoff Regan are going to split the next 10 minutes. Then it's Jay Hill and Joe Jordan.

¾ (2030)

Mr. Tony Tirabassi (Niagara Centre, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I also would like to thank the general for appearing here this evening before the committee.

Through you, Mr. Chair, to the general, according to what you previously stated, the briefing that took place by secure phone between the DCDS and the minister was done while you were in-flight, while you were travelling, correct? Did you know previously that this briefing was going to take place?

Gen Raymond Henault: I certainly knew that, because I was briefed on the broad details of the mission the night before. I had agreed with the DCDS that we needed to confirm that the mission had been completed and that all members of JTF-2, or those who were to return to Kandahar, had done so, and that the mission had been ultimately completed with the handover of detainees prior to declaring the mission complete.

I was aware, on the evening of January 20, of, again, the broad details of the mission. It was confirmed to me on the morning of the 21st, prior to my departure from Ottawa, that the mission had been successfully completed and had the details described by Mr. Toews at the outset of the meeting tonight, and I asked the DCDS on my behalf to brief the minister by secure phone at the appointed time for the briefing that had been set with him in Mexico City.

Mr. Tony Tirabassi: Now, no doubt, as you've mentioned, you have all the confidence, as I'm sure we all do, in the DCDS and his ability carry on his duties, but I'm just wondering, knowing full well what the contents of the briefing were going to be between Mr. Maddison and the minister--having had 24 hours, and you're in flight, and then you landed--did it ever occur to you that maybe, perhaps, there needed to be a follow-up with the minister or the DCDS as to how that particular briefing went once you had landed, or shortly thereafter? Or were you quite satisfied at that point that no red flags went up to indicate that anything required further attention?

Gen Raymond Henault: I would say that I had full confidence in the ability of the DCDS to provide the details of the mission to the minister. I had no reason to believe there was any requirement for me to add any details to that briefing.

Given that I have been involved in briefings to the minister on a regular basis, almost a daily basis for some months now, those briefings that I have done have often been done in conjunction with the DCDS, or else I have been present where the DCDS has in fact briefed the minister on this type of issue or other issues of that nature.

I have that total confidence in the DCDS that I must have, when I'm absent from Ottawa, to undertake the activities that he does on my behalf on a continuous basis, especially during a condition or a situation that we're in now.

So I had absolutely no reason to believe there was any requirement for specific follow-up, especially given that everything had been done in accordance with the direction that had been given to JTF-2. The mission had been successfully completed in accordance with the guidelines. The mission had been conducted in accordance with the rules of engagement. There had been no injuries, and ultimately, the detainees, as directed, had been handed over to the coalition lead, which is the American forces in Kandahar.

Mr. Tony Tirabassi: That's all, Mr. Chair.

The Chair: Geoff Regan.

[Translation]

Mr. Geoff Regan: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to take the General back to January 29 and to the meeting that took place after question period, when the Deputy Chief of Staff told the minister he had erred, that it was not on January 25 but on the 21st he learned that the Canadians took prisoners.

How did the minister react?

Gen Raymond Henault : During the briefing given to the Minister by the SCEMD in order to clarify the facts regarding the statements and the sequence of events, it was clear the minister understood at that point in time there had been some confusion in his description of the sequence of events.

I believe he was surprised at that time to find out he confused the dates of January 21 and 25, Mr. Chairman.

¾ (2035)

Mr. Geoff Regan: Thank you very much. General, would the Deputy Minister normally be informed about JTF-2?

Gen Raymond Henault : The Deputy Minister would not be routinely briefed about JTF-2. However, he sometimes is present when briefings are given about JTF-2 when decisions are being made that have fiscal repercussions or require resources, such as increasing the strength of the unit.

As you know, in the wake of September 11 and under recent legislation, JTF-2 will have to be deployed or strengthened in order to increase its capacity to respond to terrorist acts in Canada as well as abroad.

The Deputy Minister would be involved when dealing with matters such as these. However, with respect to operations, especially operations on deployment such as we are conducting presently, he is not routinely invited to briefings, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Geoff Regan: Mr. Chairman, the Deputy Minister told us today that when he told the minister it was on January 21 and not 25, a light came on and the minister agreed this was true.

Does this agree with your memory of this event?

Gen Raymond Henault : I would say, Mr. Chairman, that on the minister's part, it was like if a light went on. I exactly felt at that time that the minister just realized that there had been some confusion about the dates of events. This is what his body language clearly signalled.

Mr. Geoff Regan: Thank you very much.

[English]

The Chair: It's Jay Hill and then Joe Jordan.

Mr. Jay Hill (Prince George--Peace River, PC/DR): Thank you, General.

My first question is just following up on the previous questions.

Was there anybody present at that meeting on January 29, then, when the light went on, who suggested that the minister return to the House, or at the first opportunity the next day clarify his position rather than wait until it was dragged out of him during question period? Did anybody make that suggestion?

Gen Raymond Henault: It's not our position to advise the minister. Even if I did, I would not be able to tell you that, necessarily, because of ministerial confidences. But I think it was the minister himself who determined that there was a confusion in the facts, and it was his own decision that this was done.

Mr. Jay Hill: What time of day was that, the meeting on January 29, to your recollection?

Gen Raymond Henault: I would surmise that it was around 4:30 in the aftenoon.

Mr. Jay Hill: Thank you.

Through you, Mr. Chair, in response to a question by my colleague from the NDP, Mr. Godin, I think you said--I was listening carefully, but it was in the other official language--that you report to both the defence minister and the Prime Minister. Could you explain that further? Do you mean that you report to the defence minister and then he reports to the Prime Minister, or is there any time that you report directly to the Prime Minister?

Gen Raymond Henault: In the sequence of events for reporting activities on JTF-2, in the context of the campaign against terrorism in Afghanistan, the clearly defined procedure is for me to report on activities, especially activities of significance to the minister, and for him to report to the Prime Minister.

Mr. Jay Hill: So there's never any time when you report directly to the Prime Minister on the activities of JTF-2?

¾ (2040)

Gen Raymond Henault: No, there isn't, unless the Prime Minister calls me specifically. And that's at his call, of course.

Mr. Jay Hill: So that would lead me to believe there was no contact between yourself and the PMO, or the PCO, on this issue of taking of prisoners.

Gen Raymond Henault: That is correct.

Mr. Jay Hill: You answered in reply to a question--I'm not sure which of my colleagues directed it to you--that you weren't made aware of the specifics of briefings that would have taken place on a daily basis between January 21 and 28, when you were out of the country.

How do you know that the briefings were complete if you don't know what they specifically dealt with?

Gen Raymond Henault: I've been involved in briefings to the minister in conjunction with my deputy chief, and in some cases with the vice-chief, on a daily basis for some months now. Previous to that we also provided periodic briefings to the minister, but of course in a much different security environment that we are now, in the aftermath of the events of September 11.

I am, on occasion, absent from Ottawa, and that happens for a variety of reasons. On those occasions the briefings to the minister are provided either by the deputy chief or the vice-chief. In most cases it is by the Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff.

My experience with the deputy chief, and also with the vice-chief, by the way, in the context of the details provided to the minister on operational activity, is exceedingly high. I am normally back-briefed on any issues of significance when I make contact--on a daily basis, in some cases, although not always--and I am routinely provided with any information that might be specific to the briefings to the minister if there were questions raised or feedback that required clarification on my part, perhaps.

So although I don't get the exact details of every briefing they provide to the minister, I get the generalities. The confidence I have in those individuals who are under my command is high, to the degree that I have no reason to believe that the information they're providing him is not entirely accurate in all cases, Mr. Hill.

Mr. Jay Hill: Okay, thank you. It's great to have that kind of confidence in your staff.

General, did you have any conversations, either face-to-face or by telephone, with the minister between January 21 and your participation, along with Vice-Admiral Maddison, in the briefing of January 29, so between January 21 and 29?

Gen Raymond Henault: I did not.

Mr. Jay Hill: Well, I want to draw to your attention the statement the minister made here with regard to getting more information. I'm going to quote from it:

So I began a series of meetings and conversations by telephone with everybody from the Chief of Defence Staff to the Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff to the deputy minister and the Judge Advocate General...

And he was referring to that period of time.

Since we already know that the deputy minister, from his testimony earlier today, didn't confer with the minister during that period of time, why would you think the minister would say that he conferred, had “a series of meetings and conversations by telephone” with everybody from yourself to these other individuals?

Gen Raymond Henault: I can confirm for you that I did not talk to the minister between January 21 and 29, when I met him in the afternoon with the Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff. I can't necessarily tell you why he would have said that, because I can confirm for you here that this was not the case on my part.

Mr. Jay Hill: I appreciate that.

How much time do I have left, Mr. Chairman?

The Chair: Four minutes.

Mr. Jay Hill: Perfect. I'm not used to having that much time.

The Chair: That's right.

Mr. Jay Hill: Do you have, or know of, any specific information that the minister received after his briefing of January 25, in which, as Vice-Admiral Maddison told us earlier today, he reiterated that prisoners had indeed been taken by JTF-2 on January 25, which provided the clarification...? Again, what I understood you to say in your reply to an earlier question...I think you used the phrase regarding the “passage of information”. Could you explain what you meant by that term, “passage of information”?

Gen Raymond Henault: What I would refer to as “passage of information” is the provision of details on military activity or military operations. “Passage of information” is, for us, a description of the process by which we transmit information to the minister, he asks questions back to us, and so on. It's really just a military term for talking to the minister, quite frankly, Mr. Hill.

Again, although I was not involved, and nor do I have any specifics of the briefing that was provided to the minister on January 25, it is my understanding, on discussion with Admiral Maddison, that this was the point at which the minister was provided with additional detail--again, without going into the specifics of the mission--on the location, times, dates, transport mechanisms, and so on. The specific detail that the minister referred to was provided to him as an update on January 25.

¾ (2045)

Mr. Jay Hill: Okay. I just would assume that the passage of information with regard to the procedure was all taken care of when the new process was brought in, how JTF-2 would report, through you, direct to the minister, and only orally. That's why I wanted some clarification on that.

Do you or your staff provide a type of military update briefing book for question period for the minister? I've already asked the deputy minister if the bureaucratic side of his portfolio provides that, and what specific information may have been in those briefing books for January 28 and January 29. Does the military provide him with something similar?

Gen Raymond Henault: There is information provided to the minister, which I won't go into the specifics of, obviously. It is provided through our parliamentary affairs staff and coordinated, as required, through either the military or civilian side of the department.

The Chair: Less than a minute, Jay.

Mr. Jay Hill: Would there have been information and briefing notes for the minister for January 28 and January 29, that once again brought back his attention to the fact, as he was told on January 21 and on January 25, that prisoners had been taken by JTF-2?

Gen Raymond Henault: I have not reviewed the notes to the minister for those two days, but information on JTF-2 is very closely guarded and would not be in those notes, necessarily. In fact, it should not be in those notes.

Mr. Jay Hill: But the broader question about whether our forces had taken prisoners would maybe be in there, or maybe not? You haven't checked? Could you check?

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, I would have to check and get back to you. I don't know for sure.

The Chair: Is there any objection to that?

Then, General, we'd be grateful if you would provide that information to the committee at some appropriate time.

Mr. Jay Hill: Can I have one final question?

The Chair: No, you can't. Sorry about that.

Mr. Jay Hill: I thought you had taken up some of my time here, asking the committee--

The Chair: I already gave you that extra few minutes, Jay.

General, the next questioner is Joe Jordan, the last in the 10-minute round.

Mr. Joe Jordan: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Through you to the general, is it a fair statement to say that, given the scope of potential JTF-2 operations, the reporting procedures are mission-specific?

Gen Raymond Henault: I would have to ask for a clarification of that question, because I'm not entirely sure I understand what you're asking me, Mr. Jordan.

Mr. Joe Jordan: Is there one set of rules, a default set of rules, concerning JTF-2? Or when JTF-2 is deployed, is the reporting structure always something that is discussed and agreed to based on the specifics of that mission and the requirements of that mission?

Gen Raymond Henault: Thank you for that clarification, Mr. Jordan.

The reporting structure for JTF-2 is a very specific one. In terms of operations of JTF-2 domestically, that reporting relationship is governed by the national counter-terrorism plan. In fact JTF-2 operates in an operational context in Canada domestically, under, and at the request of, the Solicitor General. So there is a very specific reporting relationship, which I won't go into the details of. That reporting relationship was modified somewhat for the operation in Afghanistan, given that this is a purely military operation in Afghanistan that is utilizing the skills and the skill sets developed by JTF-2 and its counter-terrorism training that it has done over the years, to allow it to deploy in support of the campaign against terrorism. So it's a very specialized and very unique capability.

Therefore, that reporting relationship was discussed among departmental authorities, discussed with government, and approved, as described by the minister, as one in which the reporting relationship, rather than going through the national counter-terrorism mechanism--which would include PCO and the interdepartmental committee on security and intelligence, for example--is specific to the minister and the Prime Minister.

¾ (2050)

Mr. Joe Jordan: Thank you, General.

Again, through the chair, the witness this morning in his preamble talked about the ice storm. Certainly that's in my riding. The reason I bring that up now... and first of all, we're very thankful to the military. I attended a military briefing during the ice storm. It lasted about an hour and a half, and they allowed me to attend through courtesy. When it was finished, the commanding officer of the reserve unit made a point of coming over and going over the rules in terms of what I could or couldn't say. Essentially, I was not allowed to say anything about what I had heard at that briefing.

At that time I mentioned to him that this information was very secure, because I hadn't understood a thing they'd said. So I want to compliment you, because you have stayed away from acronyms and you've stayed away from what I would call the norms of intermilitary conversation.

Mr. Geoff Regan: Except SCONDVA and SCFAIT, which we're familiar with.

Mr. Joe Jordan: Yes.

I guess what I'm asking is, when you're briefing a civilian, is there a conscious effort made to present the material in a way that civilians can understand?

Gen Raymond Henault: Thank you for that, Mr. Jordan.

I would say that, yes, you're absolutely correct, we endeavour as much as possible when we're briefing a non-military audience, and in some cases when we're briefing a military audience, to reduce the number of acronyms and to keep away from the jargon that comes along with military operations, because it makes it difficult for everyone to understand. Even in a written form, abbreviations can sometimes confuse even the best of military strategists if there are too many of them and if they're too frequently used in different correspondence.

So I would say to you that, yes, our objective ultimately is to pass a clear message and a message that's clearly understandable, and in so doing our every objective is to make it as clear and straightforward as possible.

Mr. Joe Jordan: Thank you.

Now, as someone who is very experienced at briefings--and certainly I don't think anyone is calling into question the testimony of the Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff--in a process of transferring information, you're in a position, as the briefer, to state, as a point of fact, that you clearly stated the information. Is that correct?

Gen Raymond Henault: I would say yes, Mr. Jordan.

Mr. Joe Jordan: Are you also in a position, as a point of fact, to say that the “briefee” fully understood that information? Or is that entering into a speculative realm?

Gen Raymond Henault: I would say that is perhaps speculative, but I would add that in my experience in briefing this particular minister, Minister Eggleton, he is always very quick to ask for clarifications where required. He's very inquisitive and he does not stop questioning, or at least finish his questioning of statements of fact or of details, until, in my experience, he clearly understands the issues at hand.

Mr. Joe Jordan: So based on that analysis of this particular minister, whom you brief a lot, the fact that he perhaps didn't seek further clarification by way of question on the issue of Canadians taking possession of these prisoners, as opposed to being an indication that he understood, given the politics of this, which is not your concern but certainly his, might very well indicate that he didn't fully understand or catch that thread, or that piece of information, from that briefing.

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, that would be entirely speculative on my part.

Mr. Joe Jordan: Thank you.

The Chair: Colleagues, that's the end of the 10-minute round.

I got into a little bit of trouble this afternoon by trying to go member to member, so what I propose--and General, this is for your information too--is that I'm going to go five-minute rounds, but I'm going to follow the parties. But if anyone feels they want to decline, that's fine with me.

At the moment I have Cheryl Gallant, Marlene Catterall, Michel Guimond, Derek Lee, Yvon Godin, Mauril Bélanger, Jay Hill, Geoff Regan, and Leon Benoit.

Cheryl Gallant.

¾ (2055)

Ms. Cheryl Gallant (Renfrew--Nipissing--Pembroke, Canadian Alliance): Mr. Chairman, let me preface my questions by stating categorically that the Canadian Alliance supports the capture of unlawful combatants and their subsequent turnover to the Americans.

Through the chair to the general, you stated that the minister releases information only after you have given authorization to do so. During the January 29 briefing, prior to cabinet, or any other time before that, did you authorize the release of information concerning the identification of the troops in the January 22 photo in the Globe and Mail as being Canadian?

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, I had no part in deciding whether the identity of the troops was to be discussed or not, and I made no recommendation on that part to the minister. I was not present when the clarification of that photograph and the contents--that is, the Canadians being in the photograph--was discussed with the minister.

Ms. Cheryl Gallant: So you did not authorize the release of that information--you, specifically.

Gen Raymond Henault: No, I did not, and it would not necessarily be my place to do so.

Ms. Cheryl Gallant: Okay.

We heard testimony from the deputy minister today that in the meeting with the Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff, the photograph of the JTF-2 personnel was characterized as a serious breach of security. So why would the Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff not brief the Minister of Defence on what was characterized as a serious breach of JTF-2 security?

Gen Raymond Henault: I would characterize the serious breach of security as one in which the photograph, having been taken contrary to regulations in Kandahar, represented a serious breach of security for a number of reasons.

One is that the photograph, again, was taken without authorization, and the cameraman or photographer who took the photograph was subsequently denied his continued access to the Kandahar airfield for that reason. Second, it's contrary to the Geneva Conventions to actually display detainees in a public manner. So those were the reasons why the photograph itself had constituted a serious breach of security.

Ms. Cheryl Gallant: Was there any question of the safety and security of our armed forces personnel, the JTF-2 troops?

Gen Raymond Henault: In this instance, the safety and security of those troops would have been compromised had they in fact not been wearing balaclavas on that particular day. Their faces would have been obvious. That would have compromised the identity of the individuals, which would have compromised their ability to continue doing the jobs they're asked to do by the people of Canada in Afghanistan, and could ultimately compromise their ability to continue doing operations in support of domestic counter-terrorism here in Canada, and could ultimately affect the safety and security of their families. That would be the breach itself.

Ms. Cheryl Gallant: Thank you.

Did you brief Claude Laverdure, the foreign affairs policy adviser and assistant secretary to cabinet, and/or Brigadier-General Ross, who has been seconded from the defence department to the PCO? If you did brief them on the operation, when was it?

Gen Raymond Henault: I did not brief either one of those individuals on the operation.

Ms. Cheryl Gallant: So how was it determined that the operation was consistent with Canadian foreign policy? Was Claude Laverdure consulted at any time?

Gen Raymond Henault: We have clear and distinct authorization from the Government of Canada to carry out operations in Afghanistan. We're very clear on that distinction and the guidance that is offered to us.

The guidance that was given was the result of consultation with the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, our minister, and ultimately the Prime Minister. So there is no reason for us, given the guidance that we have received, not to believe that we were doing things in accordance with Canadian law.

Ms. Cheryl Gallant: Thank you.

On January 22, at the briefing you gave the minister, did you remind him that he was briefed on January 21 on the capture of the prisoners?

Gen Raymond Henault: I was not in Canada on January 22. I was in the U.S.

Ms. Cheryl Gallant: But on January 29, at the briefing, when you gave the minister the briefing, did you remind him about the briefing he was given on January 21?

Gen Raymond Henault: In the briefing that was provided to the minister on January 29, there was a clarification of the sequence of events and the sequence of passage of information, as Mr. Hill has referred to, to the minister. At that time, he was reminded of the contents of the briefings provided to him by the Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff on both occasions.

¿ (2100)

The Chair: Marlene Catterall.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: One quick follow-up question on the Mexico trip. I gathered from your earlier answers that this was not a pro forma or courtesy kind of visit but in fact a rather serious and packed tour with some serious issues discussed, just from what you mentioned about the briefing papers following.

Is it safe to say that those meetings, or the reports that were prepared on those meetings, will have implications for the Canadian Forces and their relationship with Mexico, as well as at the political level defence-wise?

Gen Raymond Henault: I would say that, yes, the minister was involved in a consistent and continuous series of briefings and meetings with Mexican officials, both defence and ministry officials, and the president. As a result of his discussions with the Mexicans, there are intentions on our part to broaden our relationship with the Mexican authorities, and from our point of view with Mexican military authorities, and perhaps to enter into bilateral arrangements that will further strengthen our relations with the Mexicans.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: Thank you, General.

Prior to January 21, in any previous briefing, most of which the Chief of the Defence Staff would have given personally, was the issue raised of Canadian Forces having been involved in any operation in which detainees were taken, or the possibility of them being involved in that situation? Would that have been raised at any briefings prior to the January 21 briefings with the minister?

Gen Raymond Henault: Yes. In fact, I personally briefed the minister on a previous mission in which detainees were taken, but not by Canadian Forces.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: So when this was mentioned in the briefing to him on January 21, this was not the first time that Canadians being involved in an operation where detainees were taken had been mentioned.

Gen Raymond Henault: That's correct, it was not the first time, although it was the first time that detainees had been taken by, in this case, Canadians.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: Understood.

I want to ask about the briefing on the photo. As you mentioned, that was a fairly serious breach of security. Would that have been part of the minister's daily briefing, the fact that this breach of security had taken place, or was the chain of command even aware at the time that it took place?

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, to my recollection, we were not aware that the picture had been taken at the time. The picture showed up in a number of newspapers published by an American newspaper, as I remember it. I in fact saw the picture down in the United States, but saw the caption describing the military members as U.S. forces. The recognition that those forces were perhaps not American, but rather Canadian, was as a result of people back here in Ottawa, a number of individuals in the staff, in the joint staff and so on, having recognized the uniforms because of the distinctiveness of the new CADPAT, or the new Canadian disruptive pattern uniform.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: The green relish, yes.

Gen Raymond Henault: Thank you.

Mr. Chair, that was when investigations were done as to whether or not these in fact were Canadians.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: Thank you.

[Translation]

The Chair: Michel Guimond.

Mr. Michel Guimond (Beauport--Montmorency--Côte-de-Beaupré--Île-d'Orléans, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I hope my questions will agree with the government's chief censor, Mr. Bélanger, who considers it his duty to dissect every single word. So I will ask my first question without delay, General Henault.

Did I understand correctly your answer to a question of my colleague, Mrs. Gallant, when you said there is no direct process for the military to provide regular briefings to the Department of Foreign Affairs? That department seems to play in an entirely different rink, cut off from the information loop.

I trust the committee will agree to have Mr. Laverdure appearing before us. If so, we will be able to put the question directly to him. But I would like to know what the military's position is vis-à-vis Foreign Affairs?

¿ (2105)

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, we are regularly in contact with Foreign Affairs regarding the conventional operations of Canadian Forces in Afghanistan and elsewhere. Indeed our relationship and our coordination with Foreign Affairs is very close and ongoing. Foreign Affairs are very well informed about the activities of Canadian Forces in Afghanistan. In fact, Foreign Affairs have a representative in Tampa, in Florida, who ensures continuous liaison with Foreign Affairs regarding all conventional operations we carry out.

However, in so far as JTF-2 is concerned, consultations between our Department and the Department of Foreign Affairs are at the discretion of the minister of Defence?

Mr. Michel Guimond: Does it mean that Commodore Thiffault, who serves at the operations centre in Tampa Bay, reports directly to you?

Gen Raymond Henault: That is correct, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Michel Guimond: You have not seen this, but we just received a 17-page document. All members of the committee were invited to put questions to Commodore Thiffault. There were 85 questions in all and to 44 he gave exactly the same answer: “JTF-2 is not part of my chain of command; therefore, I cannot provide any information regarding its reporting process”.

He is using a device which used to be called, when I studied industrial psychology, the broken record technique. You remember the vinyl records we used to have in the 1970s? The needle always got stuck in the same groove. The phrase “I cannot provide information, I cannot provide information” is a psychological device that people use when they want to cover up something. At any rate, we can make what we want of these answers, but this is what he answered 44 times. So, out of the 25 questions put by Mr. Regan, he answered 20 times: “I cannot provide any information...”. Maybe this is an indication of the quality of questions asked by Mr. Regan, but we will look into this later.

So I am going back to my question. How come Commodore Thiffault is unable... What exactly does he do in Tampa in terms of JTF-2? Does JTF-2 operate in a completely autonomous fashion from Tampa? It gets no orders from Tampa and does not report back. Is that correct?

[English]

The Chair: You have about a minute left.

[Translation]

Gén Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, Commodore Thiffault is a highly competent commander. He is not covering up anything, I can assure you of that. Commodore Thiffault is not part of the chain of command of JTF-2. The chain of command for JTF-2 is totally separate from Tampa. Commodore Thiffault himself is responsible for all activities of conventional Canadian Forces. He is the task force commander for those operations.

In the case of JTF-2, we have a separate task force commander who reports directly to me through DCDS. Therefore, the answers of Commodore Thiffault are indeed true.

[English]

The Chair: Derek Lee, Yvon Godin, Mauril Bélanger, and Jay Hill.

Mr. Derek Lee (Scarborough--Rouge River, Lib.): Thank you.

These briefings that the minister would receive daily, or with whatever frequency; can I clarify that the briefings would involve a number of matters, not just Afghanistan, not just A, B and C, but would include things like Bosnia and wherever Canadian Forces are operational and where there are matters that should be brought to the attention of the minister?

Gen Raymond Henault: Let me answer that with a certain amount of detail, because I think it's important, Mr. Lee. The information we provide to the minister on a daily basis, and the operational activity I report on, is very broad-based and very wide-ranging. We have 13 operations in the world at this point in time, involving some 4,500 members of the Canadian Forces, and that does not include the operations that we have currently ongoing in the United States with our NATO airborne warning and control system, the enhanced security that we have with F-18s, and the other operational activity we undertake in the NORAD context.

When I brief the minister, I brief him on a wide range--including Afghanistan, including JTF-2, including intelligence matters or evolving trends that I may have detected through the full range of intelligence activity we are made aware of, and other things that might in fact involve the Canadian Forces or require the Government of Canada to provide support to whatever it may be.

For example, we keep track of things that are going on in the African theatre of operations. We brief the minister regularly on things that may be occurring in South America, and we give him regular updates on other activities around the world, including the Middle East and others. So the range and the scope of information that's provided to the minister is quite broad-ranged.

¿ (2110)

Mr. Derek Lee: That's a very good answer. Thank you.

I also wanted to clarify that in fact you've had to establish internally at least two streams of information. The stream of information that would relate to JTF-2 would be very specific, and would be subject to the security concerns you've articulated earlier, whereas with a lot of the other stuff, some of it may well go to your communications department for dissemination, etc.

Is that a fair way to put it?

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, there is a much broader distribution of information on operational activity as concerns conventional forces, and that is exactly correct.

Mr. Derek Lee: I was just trying to make the point that information that came to the minister on JTF-2 would be assimilated and then filed away somewhere in the back of the brain and not disclosed publicly. Isn't that the normal course?

Gen Raymond Henault: That is correct. That information is stored. There are written reports on JTF-2 activities, which are provided and stored away as well. So we do have follow-up to the verbal information that's provided back to us in the form of written reports from our contingent commanders and from our task force commanders. That goes not only for JTF-2 but also for all of the other operations that are doing their business around the world. We get regular reports on a number of issues, including operational and administrative issues.

Mr. Derek Lee: Let's go back to when this photograph, this unauthorized photograph, was published by the media. My recollection is that there was virtually no public knowledge of the operations of JTF-2 at that time, at least leading up to that point in time. I can't recall anything. Can you?

Gen Raymond Henault: There was certainly no knowledge of the operational activity as concerns JTF-2 and where it might be operating in Afghanistan or in the theatre of operations, but it certainly had been made aware to the public that JTF-2 had ben deployed to Afghanistan.

Mr. Derek Lee: True. Now, when JTF-2 was deployed, they were just as likely, on any given day, to go out and wound or kill as to take prisoners. Isn't that a fair assumption for any given day, when they're operational?

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, JTF-2 has been deployed to Afghanistan to undertake the full scope and the full range of operational activity, which includes combat.

The Chair: You have less than a minute left.

Mr. Derek Lee: When the photo was published, can you recall when you were informed about the photograph, and can you tell us what your top-of-mind issue was when informed about the photograph? Was it the unauthorized disclosure? Was it the presence of Canadians in the photograph? Or was it this other issue of prisoners?

The Chair: Brief reply, please.

Gen Raymond Henault: I was made aware of the picture on January 25 in a telephone update I had from the U.S. with the vice-chief and the DCDS. My concern at that point in time was to ensure that we had not compromised operational security for the individuals involved. I was already aware that the mission had been completed successfully, that the detainees had been handed over, and so on, so my concern was really for operational security overall.

[Translation]

The Chair: Yvon Gaudin and Mauril Bélanger.

Mr. Yvon Godin: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

On the 29th, on your way to the meeting with the minister and the Vice-Chief of Staff, did you discuss with Mr. Maddison the whole issue of this picture and the timing of the briefing given to the minister? Was there a discussion between the two of you or did you just go there without knowing what might be said?

¿ (2115)

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, of the top of my mind, I would say that this was for me the first opportunity to get abreast of all of the issues that were raised during my week of absence. I remember having discussed the photograph with the Deputy Chief of Staff and also the details of the mission, by way of an update on all activities, those of other operations as well as those of JTF-2. So we did have a preliminary discussion before meeting with the minister.

Mr. Yvon Godin: A previous discussion.

Furthermore, Mr. Chairman, the witness said that when the minister asked the question, he showed surprise, and that the witness had the feeling the minister was surprised. I believe he even mentioned twice that he felt he was surprised.

How did he react for you to get that impression? Was it a movement of his head, or his eyes...

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, as I described earlier, it was as if a lightbulb went on and the minister suddenly remembered the sequence of events or the sequence of the passage of information on the events regarding the taking of prisoners.

Mr. Yvon Godin: General, in my case, when the light comes on and my lightbulb goes to red, my reaction manifests itself in some way. What was it that allowed you to see the lightbulb coming on? I do not believe the minister has a light switch on his body. So the light came on. I would like to know how it manifested itself. Was it his face? Did his eyes light up? What was the light?

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, without describing the minister=s demeanor in detail, I would say it was a facial expression which reflected, as far as I can remember, the fact that he now understood exactly the sequence of events.

Mr. Yvon Godin: Mr. Maddison, for his part, said that is was something like “You got it”. It seemed like he made a hand gesture. He said “click”. Yes, that is it, “click”. Was it a gesture, “click”, or was it a light?

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, I do not know exactly how to describe it but it was clear from the minister's body language that he had become aware of the fact that...

M. Yvon Godin: ...there had been a briefing. All of a sudden he became aware that there had been a briefing.

Gen Raymond Henault: I would not describe the events in this way, Mr. Chairman. I would say that it was an awareness of the sequence of the transmission of information.

Mr. Yvon Godin: I have another question, Mr. Chairman.

The Chair: You have one minute and a half.

Mr. Yvon Godin: Mr. Chairman, among the questions directed to Mr. Thiffault, there was one I asked... He answered a larger number of mine, which might mean that they were quite good. This one asked:

When did you find out that the photograph that appeared on the front page of The Globe and Mail of January 22, 2002 showed members of JTF-2?

He answered:

As far as I remember, it was my public affairs officer who drew my attention to the picture and the articles on or around January 25. It was at this point in time that I realized that the soldiers in the photograph appeared to be Canadian and that these Canadian soldiers appeared to have taken prisoners

Very quickly, for the record, he added...

The Chair: Yes, yes, very quickly.

Mr. Yvon Godin: ...that:

The detainees are in Kandahar and are treated according to the standards applicable to prisoners of war and in accordance with the Geneva Convention.

But you stated earlier that he does not have anything to do with JTF-2. He is not responsible for JTF-2, but he knows a lot about JTF-2.

[English]

The Chair: General, that's a long question, but it'll have to be a very short answer.

[Translation]

Gén Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, I cannot comment on the statements of Commodore Thiffault, but from what I understand he was aware of the facts related to the events on January 25 and I have no reason to doubt his truthfulness.

[English]

The Chair: Mauril Bélanger, Jay Hill, Joe Jordan, Leon Benoit, and Marlene Catterall.

[Translation]

M. Mauril Bélanger (Ottawa--Vanier, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to ask two questions of a general nature. Under normal circumstances, what is the policy of the Department of Defence regarding the information released when JTF-2 takes prisoners? Would you release the fact that prisoners were taken and in the present case, for example, handed over to US authorities?

¿ (2120)

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, this is in fact the first time that JTF-2 has been deployed abroad. It was the first time that we took prisoners during an operation. It is my responsibility to have a briefing as soon as possible after the event and to pass information to the minister as soon as it is confirmed, and then it is up to him to transmit that information to the Prime Minister or to make it public, according to his wishes or judgment.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Before making this information public, would he consult with you?

Gen Raymond Henault: I would say that this consultation would certainly take place, but before making the information public, he would consult with me, with the Prime Minister, in all likelihood, and with other authorities which might include the minister for Foreign Affairs.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: So you are not in a position to tell us whether any more prisoners have been taken since. Is that right?

Gen Raymond Henault: I can tell you that there were no prisoners taken before the event in question. For security reasons I would rather not discuss what happened since, but if any more prisoners had been taken, I am quite sure that we would have released this information.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Thank you.

When the opposition calls me the chief censor, it means that the level of frustration on the other side is rising. I can understand that. When you keep asking the same questions, like a broken record, you keep getting the same answers. Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I am going to ask the General one last question.

The order of reference to this committee from the House was to determine if the minister misled the House deliberately, knowingly. Can you tell us if, in your opinion, the minister knowingly misled the House?

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, in my view, it is the committee's responsibility to make that determination.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: What is your opinion?

Gén Raymond Henault: I do not think I should be making comments on that question, Mr. Chairman.

[English]

The Chair: Jay Hill, Leon Benoit, and then Marlene Catterall.

Jay.

Mr. Jay Hill: I have a number of questions, Mr. Chairman, through you.

I asked this question earlier of the deputy minister. Can you tell us who was with the minister in Mexico?

Gen Raymond Henault: I'm not absolutely sure who was with the minister in Mexico, although I would assume he was with his military staff officer and other members of his cabinet, if you like, or his entourage. But I couldn't tell you specifically who was with him, Mr. Hill.

Mr. Jay Hill: So you wouldn't know if a military officer accompanying him actually listened in or sat in on the oral briefing he received from the DCDS on the 21st?

Gen Raymond Henault: I could not tell you. I don't know one way or the other.

Mr. Jay Hill: Okay. I have a request in to find that out. I just thought perhaps you could clear that up, if you had that knowledge, here tonight.

You stated very clearly in your opening statement and listed off three reasons as to why it's so necessary to have secrecy surrounding the operations of our special forces. Certainly I think all of us agree with that. And I think you've made the statement that you do not take the divulgence of information about them lightly. I think that was the way you phrased it.

Why, then, would the minister divulge that the soldiers in the photograph were Canadians? Because he did that, no one else. He divulged that. Did he talk to you before he pointed that out to the media? You stated tonight that the proper procedure is for you to be consulted, if you will, before any information about our special forces is divulged.

¿ (2125)

Gen Raymond Henault: Thank you, Mr. Hill.

Mr. Chairman, I did not discuss the release of that information with the minister, and I cannot speculate on the reasons why he would have released that information. I was absent at the time.

Mr. Jay Hill: Would you view that as a serious breach? I mean, if the process is supposed to be that he consults with you--it came up through questions from Mr. Jordan, I think--before any information is divulged publicly, would it be considered a pretty serious breach that he didn't follow the protocol and ask you before he went out in front of a television camera and said “Hey, guess what; these guys are actually Canadian in this picture”?

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, even though the minister does consult with me on these issues, it's certainly his prerogative to release the information ultimately as he sees fit.

Mr. Jay Hill: So it's not a serious breach of protocol. Okay.

When you said earlier that you understand that the procedure is that you brief the minister and then he briefs the Prime Minister, is there an expectation on the part of the armed forces that when something occurs as serious as our forces overseas taking prisoners and potentially turning them over to a nation, where's there are a lot of questions being asked as to whether that nation is going to adhere to the Geneva Conventions or not and the possible ramifications for our own soldiers, our own men and women serving overseas... Something like that strikes me as pretty serious business. Is there an expectation on the part of the armed forces that the minister would brief the Prime Minister, since you're not allowed to?

Gen Raymond Henault: Again, I would consider that to be a ministerial prerogative and his judgment as to when, how, and what type of information is released to the Prime Minister or to the public.

The Chair: You have about a minute and a half, Jay.

Mr. Jay Hill: But when you say that you understand the procedure is that you brief the minister, and then he briefs the Prime Minister, are you saying that there is no expectation that on something serious he would do that, without waiting for a week to go by?

Gen Raymond Henault: My expectation is that he will exercise his best judgment in this case and decide, on his part, when and how he will release that information.

Mr. Jay Hill: Thank you.

A final question, Mr. Chairman.

I just pose this. If these briefings are always only oral, as per this new secret document about the reporting procedure, when a situation like this arises, how do you or the DCDS, Vice-Admiral Maddison, check your memories? If there are no notes taken, no recordings taken... I mean, none of us, or at least I don't, have a photographic memory.

The Chair: Briefly, please.

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, as I described earlier, we do have written reports provided by contingent commanders. The briefings we provide to the minister specifically are oral briefings. We do have written reports that are followed up by the commanders of the task forces, whether it's the conventional task forces, JTF-2, or indeed other forces that are that are deployed around the world.

When briefings are given to the minister, those briefings are developed from the various reports and returns that we get back from contingents that are deployed. We use that information to synthesize it and provide the highlights and the most important information forward to the minister.

In my case, when I am briefed by the DCDS, I do take notes to jog my memory, and I use those notes to brief the minister. But those are the only notes that are taken, to my knowledge.

The Chair: Leon Benoit, Marlene Catterall, and then Pierre Brien. Then, colleagues, I intend to cut it off, if I can.

Leon.

Mr. Leon Benoit (Lakeland, Canadian Alliance): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and thank you, General, for being here tonight.

I have several questions, and I hope we can get through them in five minutes.

First, I'd like to follow up on the issue of the briefing where the lights just went on. You have stressed the high quality of briefings that the Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff gives, and you've explained it: The minister asks questions, and when he leaves a briefing you're convinced that he understands what's going on.

The minister had two briefings, at least two, with the Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff before that meeting on the 29th where the light just went on. What was the issue that became clear to the minister when the light went on?

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chair, I would be speculating on what the minister was thinking at the time. I can't necessarily comment on that, but my impression was that it was an acknowledgment and a recognition of the fact that some of the sequencing of information, as he understood them, had been confused and certainly had been relayed perhaps inaccurately in the House. That's really what I would surmise as the acknowledgement on the part of the minister, or his visual acknowledgement, of the information we were passing to him.

¿ (2130)

Mr. Leon Benoit: But if he had these thorough briefings and he understood clearly that Canadian JTF-2 had captured detainees in Afghanistan, I mean, that's something that should be pretty difficult to confuse, and that's the real issue. So on that issue, you're convinced that the minister had it clear all along. That wasn't part of the confusion, if there was confusion.

Gen Raymond Henault: I think the minister has stated, in fact, that he did know that prisoners had been taken on January 21, and he acknowledged that. I can only assume that the clarification of the sequencing is what made that light bulb come on, as I talked about.

Mr. Leon Benoit: But if he'd had these two thorough briefings, and he'd asked the questions, why would that confusion be there? It's difficult to understand.

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, I can't speculate on that.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Okay.

The second issue is that you said that you didn't brief the minister on the photo of the JTF-2 that was on the front page of the paper. Why would the Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff not brief the Minister of Defence on what was characterized as a serious breach of JTF-2 security?

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, I do not know exactly which day the minister was provided with that information or the clarification. My understanding is that it was on the Friday, when he returned from Mexico and a visit to Tampa.

I can't comment on that, quite frankly, Mr. Benoit, because I'm not sure why he would not have been briefed specifically on that photo.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Yes, difficult to understand when the Americans felt it was important enough for them to brief him on it. It's very difficult to understand, in fact.

You said, though, in your earlier testimony, that it's not your place to brief him on that. Could you just explain that? I don't understand what you're getting at there.

Gen Raymond Henault: I'm not sure I understand what the context of that was other than the fact that I was not present in Ottawa when all of this was transpiring. In fact, my knowledge of the photograph and the contents did not come clear until the 25th, either, so--

Mr. Leon Benoit: It normally would be your place, then, to brief the minister.

Gen Raymond Henault: Absolutely.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Okay. I just wanted to clarify that.

Third, in terms of the briefings to the Prime Minister, you said that you wouldn't attend that unless the Prime Minister asked you. Did the Prime Minister ask you, in that January-February period, to attend a briefing with him?

Gen Raymond Henault: Just to clarify that, did the Prime Minister ask me to attend a briefing on JTF-2 with the minister?

Mr. Leon Benoit: Yes.

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chair, I can't recall an occasion when I was asked to go to the Prime Minister's office in that time period.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Of January-February.

Gen Raymond Henault: Right.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Is that a no?

Gen Raymond Henault: That's a no, to my recollection--yes.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Can I ask you, if, on going through your notes and schedules, you find some different...?

The Chair: You have about fifteen seconds.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Could you give us a clear answer on that?

Gen Raymond Henault: I will clarify that, Mr. Chairman. I honestly cannot recall.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Thank you.

Did the minister ever--

The Chair: Marlene Catterall.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: Mr. Chair, through you to the general, and not only to the general but also to the people under his command, I take very seriously the work this committee is doing. It is a serious issue that's been referred to us.

However, as I've been sitting here this evening, after six full hours of this a day, and many more in preceding days, I can't help but think that if it was my son or daughter, or my hysband or wife, or my brother or sister who was in Afghanistan tonight, I would wonder what the heck 16 members of Parliament, and the man who's responsible for their safety, are doing here.

I just wanted to put that on the record.

Our best wishes to them.

The Chair: Pierre Brien.

[Translation]

Mr. Pierre Brien: General, did I understand you to say earlier that this is the first time JTF-2 has been deployed abroad? That is what you seemed to say. Did you say it is the first time it took prisoners abroad, or did you say it is the first time it has been deployed abroad?

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, it was the first time JTF-2 was deployed abroad in operations.

Mr. Pierre Brien: What does “in operations” mean?

Gen Raymond Henault: It means that in the past JTF-2 was destined to carry out only domestic operations. Any travel abroad was only for training purposes, exercises or consultations with other similar forces. This is the first time the unit or parts of the unit are used in operations abroad.

¿ (2135)

Mr. Pierre Brien: So it's members never went to Haiti or to Nepal to protect the Prime Minister in his foreign travels?

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, in the context of personal protection, JTF-2 has been employed abroad to protect VIPs and similar people, but it is the first time JTF-2 is used in the context of operations like those taking place in Afghanistan.

Mr. Pierre Brien: Is it reasonable to conclude today that if there never had been any photographs, it is quite possible the public would never have known that the JTF-2 group had taken prisoners?

Gen Raymond Henault: I would not want to speculate on this. I do not know whether this information would otherwise have been made public or not.

Mr. Pierre Brien: But even at this stage it is possible that it would not have been made public.

Gen Raymond Henault: In my view, this is speculation.

Mr. Pierre Brien: Is it possible it would not have been?

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, this would be speculating.

Mr. Pierre Brien: This will be one of my last questions. This morning, in his testimony, Mr. Maddison used the words “crystal clear” to describe the information he relayed on January 21. He said the information related to the taking of prisoners was evident.

You, yourself, said you had full confidence. Therefore, you support the notion that the information passed onto the minister at the briefing of January 21 was unequivocal.

Gen Raymond Henault: Mr. Chairman, I have full confidence in the truthfulness and the content of the briefing given by Vice-Admiral Maddison.

Mr. Pierre Brien: Very well. Thank you.

The Chair: That is all.

[English]

General Henault, before I thank you, I just want to remind you that there were two requests for information. I know you know what those are. If you have any problems, please contact us and we'll advise you on what they are. We would be grateful for your responses on those matters.

Gen Raymond Henault: Absolutely.

The Chair: On behalf of my colleagues from all parties, I want to thank you for being here and taking this time. I know it's been a very long day for you, and we do appreciate your patience and your courtesy.

I said to Admiral Maddison this morning, on behalf of the committee, which is representative of all sides of the House of Commons, how much we appreciate what you and your colleagues are doing and what you and your colleagues have done. The ice storm was mentioned again. There were the floods and other domestic situations. And we know you have people, from the northernmost point to the southernmost point, in all three oceans, and on all our coasts. We appreciate that.

You mentioned the 13 major operations overseas, but we know you have people in 30 or 40 countries in addition to that. We also know in particular at this time that there is the war in Afghanistan and people on the ocean, people in the air, and people on the land. We want you to convey the thanks of the members here, on behalf of the House of Commons, to all your troops for what they're doing.

Some hon. members: Hear, hear!

Gen Raymond Henault: Thank you.

The Chair: And we thank you for being here.

We now have some routine business. You're more than welcome to sit there, if you like, but I would advise you to take your leave.

Colleagues, I have at least two points of order, and perhaps three.

An hon. member: It's a question.

The Chair: Yvon Godin first.

[Translation]

Mr. Yvon Godin: Mr. Chairman, I have a point of order to begin and a comment.

Marlene Catterall made a comment to the effect that the General was wasting his time. At the end of his opening statement he clearly said: “In conclusion, I know that the work of this committee is important and I am pleased to be here to be of assistance where I can”. I want to thank the General who, at least, understands that this committee is important, while Marlene Catterall does not.

[English]

The Chair: Is that your point of order?

Mr. Yvon Godin: No. My point of order--

¿ (2140)

The Chair: But I'm sure your point of order is not a point of order...yes, actually, I think in this case it might be. Go ahead.

[Translation]

Mr. Yvon Godin: Mr. Chairman, I tabled a motion in this committee regarding Mr. Claude Laverdure and was told this would be dealt with later. I cannot be here tomorrow for family reasons, so if I can have assurance the motion will be discussed only on Thursday, I will leave it at that, and if not I would like it to be dealt with now.

[English]

The Chair: Okay.

Colleagues, remember, the motion is to call Mr. Laverdure. And Yvon's request, really, is that the tabled motion be left on the table until Thursday.

Do we have agreement on that?

Some hon. members: Agreed.

The Chair: We have agreement.

Yvon, you will be away tomorrow. We would be glad to return to that matter at one of Thursday's meetings. We have two meetings Thursday.

Mr. Yvon Godin: Yes. Thank you.

The Chair: Jay Hill.

Mr. Jay Hill: Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, I believe that we, the committee, have a very serious issue in front of us that flows from the testimony of our three witnesses today. As I pointed out in questions to the general, we have a major discrepancy between the minister's statement that he made to this committee and what our three witnesses today remember. Specifically, I would draw to the attention of my colleagues on both sides the statement he made:

So I began a series of meetings and conversations by telephone with everybody from the Chief of the Defence Staff to the Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff to the deputy minister and the Judge Advocate General...

Clearly, Mr. Chairman, at least two of these gentlemen, the deputy minister and now, tonight, the Chief of the Defence Staff, have said that they did not have any conversations during the time period that this refers to.

The Chair: Okay, Jay, I understand what you're saying. This is debate--

Mr. Jay Hill: I think, Mr. Chairman, that we have to deal with recalling the minister immediately to explain himself, why this serious discrepancy.

The Chair: And your motion is...

Mr. Jay Hill: I move that we recall the minister immediately to explain himself, why there's this serious discrepancy between his statement that he made to this committee and the testimony of at least two of the witnesses today.

The Chair: Okay. That's a legitimate motion, but by “immediately” I assume you mean that the motion is immediate, but we don't call the minister right now.

Mr. Jay Hill: Put the motion immediately.

The Chair: Okay. That's fine.

That's a debatable motion. Any discussion?

(Motion negatived)

Mr. Jay Hill: But this is non-partisan, right, Mr. Chairman?

The Chair: I have a question from Leon Benoit.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Mr. Chair, I'd just like to check whether one of the things the Chief of the Defence Staff was to follow up on was my question as to whether he met with the Prime Minister in January or February.

The Chair: My understanding is that there were two. One was the question of briefing notes and the other was the question of the Prime Minister.

Mr. Leon Benoit: Thank you.

The Chair: Colleagues, are there any other points?

Our next meeting, as you know, is tomorrow in this room. Our witness is Richard Fadden, Deputy Clerk of the Privy Council. The meeting after that is 7:30 tomorrow in this room, when our witness is Mel Cappe, the head of the public service, I guess.

The meeting is adjourned until 3:30 tomorrow.