Article was shared from: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-canadas-military-colleges-must-set-high-standards-to-develop-our-next/
Lawrence Stevenson is the managing partner at Clearspring Capital, the founder and former CEO of Chapters, and a member of the RMC Class of 1978.
The students at Canada’s two Canadian Military Colleges (CMCs) have embarked on careers that may require them to protect our country and way of life by putting their lives at risk. Given the high level of performance expected of them, it is essential that their training is more demanding than what is expected of other university graduates.
A recent report examining the culture and structure of military colleges has missed the target, forgetting that military leadership is not meant to be easy.
The Report of the Canadian Military Colleges Review Board, published in April, said that “What Canada does not need from the CMCs is for them to be civilian university equivalents that simply add fitness, language and military training requirements into packed academic schedules that have little specific nexus to the Canadian Armed Forces.” But that is exactly what we do need: A demanding academic program that will challenge a student at any university, plus fitness, and second-language and military training. It is meant to be difficult and we should be setting the highest possible training and performance standards to identify and develop our next set of military leaders.
They need to be battle-tested, developing the skills and experience required to lead our military into the future. The report goes on to say that “no matter how smart, developed or capable they might be as individuals, naval and officer cadets are still too immature and too inexperienced to be in positions of power over one another.” This is dead wrong, but perhaps this is what should have been expected when you compose a review board made up of six civilians with no military experience and one military officer. The military colleges have provided outstanding leaders for more than a century and a half. What nation would ever ask civilians to design a military academy?
Do you want our officers learning leadership skills for the first time on the job, when their lives and those of their soldiers could be at risk? If they are old enough to die for us, then we have a duty to teach them how to lead in the stress of combat, which our CMCs can provide by placing senior cadets in leadership roles, under the right supervision and coaching. These extraordinary leadership skills are exactly what has helped build the character and capabilities of the graduates over decades.
The board also recommends lowering the physical fitness standards, which makes no sense given the physical demands of modern warfare. They also want the officer cadets to get more sleep. Military leaders are expected to carry more than the minimum load, both physically and mentally, and often to do it without having more than a few hours of sleep. They also recommend that the first year at military college include no military-specific components, yet the graduates themselves told the review board that they have not received enough military training.
The review board also recommends ending the grueling recruit camp that cadets attend before first year starts. The first-year orientation program is a core part of the introduction to the military world when recruits first arrive at military colleges. The report admits that the first-year orientation program is “deeply ingrained in the culture” and “stands as a cornerstone of the military training regimen,” and yet, they would axe it.
In my experience, most military academies around the world have some form of this recruit camp. It is critical to team-building and is a great source of pride to the first years once they have completed this training. I am reminded of my own Maroon Beret course, a grueling rite of passage involving intense training under harsh conditions with limited sleep, which I had to pass before I could join the airborne regiment.
The Canadian Military Colleges Review Board’s report solidly supports the continued existence of our two Canadian military colleges. They write that the colleges “should be a source of pride for Canadians, and should be better leveraged as a source of national power for the country.” I wholeheartedly agree with this sentiment.
The report points out several key statistics that highlight the tremendous value of our military colleges. Graduates of the colleges represent 33 per cent of the Canadian officer corps and yet account for 58 per cent of our colonels and 67 per cent of our general officers. Additionally, military college graduates have better retention rates and they also have higher percentages of women and visible minorities than the officer corps overall.
In fact, the last six chiefs of the defence staff have all been military college graduates, including Jennie Carignan, the first-ever woman to hold the role. Two of the six last chiefs of the defence staff, Tom Lawson and Walt Natynczyk, graduated a year after me at the Royal Military College of Canada. The military colleges have indeed produced generals, but they have also produced many “captains of industry” – the cover headline in a Canadian Business magazine decades ago, which included great Canadian business leaders such as former CAE Inc. head Robert Brown, former Ontario Teachers’Pension Plan head Jim Leech, former Cognos CEO Michael Potter and current Canso CEO John Carswell.
The report’s final words send an important message: “Canadians from across the country … must rally behind their military colleges, demanding excellence, yes, but also celebrating what they stand for, what they contribute and what they can achieve.”
Canada has significantly underinvested in our armed forces, including our military colleges, for decades. Today, with a land war in Europe, we face tremendous pressure to raise the amount of money that we invest in our forces. Our men and women in uniform are outstanding but they have not been given the tools or the funding to ensure that they can fulfill Canada’s and NATO’s commitments. The military colleges are a very important part of these commitments and they must remain rigorous and strong.
Editors note: Below is a copy of the CMCRB Report from January 2025 for reference.
Report of the Canadian Military Colleges Review Board January 2025 – https://www.canada.ca/en/department-national-defence/corporate/reports-publications/report-cmcrb.html
Executive Summary:
In her 2022 Independent External Comprehensive Review, which examined sexual misconduct in the Canadian Armed Forces, The Honourable Louise Arbour raised concerns about a culture of misogyny and sexual misconduct in Canada’s two Military Colleges. She posited that sexual misconduct in the Canadian Armed Forces finds its origins, in part, in the culture of the Canadian Military Colleges and she questioned whether the situation at the Colleges was remediable.
Pursuant to Madame Arbour’s report, the Canadian Military Colleges Review Board was established to examine and make recommendations about whether the Royal Military College of Canada in Kingston (RMC) and the Royal Military College Saint-Jean (RMC Saint-Jean) – collectively “the Colleges”, “the Military Colleges” or “the CMCs” – should continue to exist and, if so, to what extent and how they should be reformed.
The question of whether misogyny and sexual misconduct are so ingrained in the culture of the Military Colleges as to render them irremediable was a threshold issue for the Board. We therefore began our work with a multifaceted examination of the state of the CMCs. The Board undertook three visits to each of the Colleges, studied multiple information sources, reviewed input from approximately 400 Canadians from across the country and met in-person and virtually with several hundred stakeholders, including current and former Naval and Officer Cadets, military and academic leaders, professors and staff.
Through these extensive engagements, alongside a detailed analysis of a large quantity of qualitative and quantitative data which focused on systemic and structural issues, the Board was able to develop a rich picture regarding the history, evolution, design, dynamics, programs and living conditions of and at the CMCs. This yielded, in turn, a deep understanding of the state of culture and conduct at these institutions.
The Board is acutely aware that over the decades the Military Colleges have been the sites of deeply harmful and traumatizing experiences for some individuals, resulting from a range of harmful attitudes and behaviours. While the instances of such events are not prevalent, they continue to be present and to create harm. Moreover, despite the largely positive experiences of many who have attended the CMCs, we also know that there remain significant differences in the experiences and perceptions of women and men who are enrolled at the Colleges.
The Board acknowledges that robust policies, procedures and practices have been adopted at the Colleges to prevent sexual misconduct and to respond to it when it occurs. We believe that these top-down and grassroots efforts must continue to be pursued and given time to yield results.
However, in light of the time constraints of its mandate, as well as the fact that some of these mechanisms and tools have only been implemented recently, the Board was not able to fully assess their effectiveness. The Board has consequently recommended that, as has been done at several civilian universities, the Colleges be required to mandate and publish a comprehensive analysis of the impact and effectiveness of their policies, procedures and practices with respect to preventing sexual misconduct and supporting those who experience it.
We have also recommended that Health, Safety and Wellbeing Resource Centres be established at each College to help prevent and respond to all forms of harmful behaviour through a mix of education, intervention, response and advocacy. We have further recommended that the percentage of female Naval and Officer Cadets be increased from 25% (which was reached in 2024) to 33% by 2035, as a greater presence of women at the CMCs would have a positive impact on the culture of the Colleges and would be beneficial for the Canadian Armed Forces.
Finally, the Board has determined that a restructuring of the Cadet Chain of Responsibility (CCOR) is required to fully address issues of culture and conduct at the CMCs. This peer leadership model, which has for decades featured as a signature element of the Regular Officer Training Plan at the Military Colleges, was called into question by Madame Arbour, who recommended its elimination. The Board agrees with the concerns she raised but believes that key changes to the CCOR can mitigate harm and return value to the model. In particular, the CCOR should revert to its original purpose of providing practical opportunities for the Naval and Officer Cadets to acquire hands-on leadership experience, and any authority – real or perceived – for discipline over their peers should be removed from the Cadets.
In sum, the Board witnessed a profound commitment at all levels and within all constituencies at the Military Colleges to ensure that they are safe, healthy and respectful places in which each Naval and Officer Cadet is enabled to achieve their full potential. As such, we believe that although instances of misconduct continue to exist at the Colleges, significant progress has been made towards diminishing negative and unhealthy attitudes and behaviours, and we are confident that there is a collective determination to do more. It is this determination that has allowed the Board to conclude that Canada’s Military Colleges should remain degree-granting institutions, with a mandate to educate and train Naval and Officer Cadets to join the Profession of Arms and become officers in the Canadian Armed Forces.
However, this conclusion rests on another assumption: that there is, prima facie, inherent value in the Canadian Military Colleges. The Board did not take this for granted; we dedicated significant time and energy to identifying and evaluating the value proposition of the Colleges. The results of these efforts led us to conclude that the Military Colleges are indeed critical national institutions of significant import to Canada, that play a distinctive role in advancing the defence and security interests of our country. They are unique establishments that cannot be replicated by civilian universities or other military units within the Canadian Armed Forces. They should be sources of pride for Canadians and should reflect Canada’s ability to project national power. As currently organized and run, however, they have failed to demonstrate a distinct value proposition, to prove their value in relation to escalating costs or to assert their relevance vis-à-vis the needs of the Canadian Armed Forces or the country.
Through a process that included studying discrete thematic issues and undertaking comparative analyses (including an examination of the varied approaches to pre-commissioning military education in fifteen countries), we have concluded that while the current structural model of the Military Colleges remains the right fit for our country’s distinct needs and characteristics, major reforms are required vis-à-vis many aspects of the Colleges’ operations. To this end, in addition to our recommendations with respect to conduct, culture, health, wellbeing and peer leadership, we have also crafted a series of recommendations related to identity, governance, program design, and infrastructure, operations and support, all with a view to refocus, restructure, rebalance and rejuvenate the CMCs.
Refocus (Identity)
The Board believes that the Military Colleges must conceive of themselves and be understood to be military units. Although they grant university degrees, they are not the same as civilian universities. Rather, they are military academies whose primary purpose is to prepare officers to be leaders in the Profession of Arms for Canada, only one element of which is the delivery of an undergraduate university education. Their governance structures, authorities, activities, programs, training curricula, names, branding and public affairs/communications materials should all be revised and realigned in service of this distinct identity.
Restructure (Governance)
The Colleges have a dispersed, complex and inefficient leadership and governance model. The Board has recommended several changes in order to clarify and simplify structures, responsibilities and authorities. These include a proposal to designate the Commandants as the Presidents and Vice-Chancellors of their respective Colleges, vested with the authority to lead all aspects, military and academic, of the institutions.
We have also recommended changes to more effectively select and support the Commandants and Directors of Cadets, and to lengthen their tenures in order to give them greater time to be able to: understand the Colleges (which are unique even within the Canadian Armed Forces); provide greater organizational stability; build trust with the Naval and Officer Cadets and other key stakeholders; and establish the buy-in needed to lead the Canadian Military Colleges through significant change.
Rebalance (Program Elements)
The Colleges have long pointed to the 4-Pillar Program, which incorporates academics, military training, bilingualism and fitness, as manifesting the CMCs’ relevance to the Canadian Armed Forces. However, over decades the utility and viability of the program as currently configured has come into greater question.
Academics
The Colleges have talented professors who deliver a high-quality academic program, but as the curriculum has grown it has become less and less connected to the principal mission of the CMCs. Moreover, the demands the academic program places on the limited time of the Naval and Officer Cadets has negatively impacted the Cadets’ ability to dedicate attention to the other Pillars. Additionally, the very low ratio of students to professors has resulted in the Colleges’ academic programs being much more expensive to operate than those of the universities against which we compared the CMCs. (It should be noted that the Board used cost as only one of several comparators upon which it assessed the value of the CMCs, in acknowledgement of the fact that the unique nature of the Military Colleges impacts the overall cost-benefit calculus).
Military Training
The Military Training program at the Military Colleges is a source of deep dissatisfaction for the Naval and Officer Cadets due to a variety of weaknesses. It remains inferior vis-à-vis the breadth, depth, structure and quality of the training and development offered by Canada’s allies and partners around the world, and the time allotted to it is insufficient. This is troubling given that military training should be a primary purpose of the Military Colleges and a fundamental differentiator between the Colleges and civilian universities.
Bilingualism
The value of second language training is well understood by the CMCs, and the Board fully endorses the importance of a bilingual military for Canada in terms of identity, inclusivity and operational advantage. The current program design does not place sufficient value on this Pillar, however, as reflected by the limited time and lack of credit afforded to it.
Fitness
A high level of physical fitness is understandably a requirement for all members of the Canadian Armed Forces, including its officers. Achieving a high level of physical fitness should remain an important component of the Naval and Officer Cadets’ curriculum. However, a narrow conception of health and wellbeing, that is overly focused on physical fitness and is tied to testing and standards that do not exist elsewhere in the Canadian Armed Forces, has undermined the impact and value of the Fitness Pillar at the CMCs. This is exacerbated by the limited time afforded to physical activities, which are often jammed into early morning and late-night schedules, and the lack of credit given to them.
In light of this suite of issues, the Board has proposed a wide variety of interconnected recommendations. These include a reduction and redesign of the academic programs and the proposal to achieve, within five years, a minimum ratio of 15 students per professor – to be accomplished by both increasing the number of Naval and Officer Cadets and by reducing the number of professors.
We have also recommended that RMC Saint-Jean no longer offer a General and Professional College (CÉGEP) program and instead direct its resources towards its university-level programs, which should be expanded beyond the single degree that it offers. Concurrently, a number of other recommendations seek to elevate the standing and stature of RMC Saint-Jean as one of two equal Military Colleges in Canada, alongside the Royal Military College of Canada in Kingston.
We have further recommended that a new Integrated Officer Development Program be introduced, composed of academic study, second language training, military skills and leadership development, and fitness, health and wellbeing courses. Academic credit should be granted for satisfying requirements related to each of these elements, to better recognize their importance and to ensure they are allocated appropriate time within the schedules of the Naval and Officer Cadets. Within this, ongoing second language training should be offered for those who wish to achieve a higher level of proficiency beyond the minimum requirements.
Additionally, a new three-year Military Skills and Leadership program should be developed that provides standardized, sequenced and substantive military training and is much more focused on character development, personal growth, experiential learning and hands-on practical experience.
Finally, the approach to fitness should be expanded to a broader health and wellbeing construct that includes education about a much wider range of issues such as nutrition, sleep, substance abuse, addictions and stress and anger management, so that the Naval and Officer Cadets have the understanding and tools to address these issues not only in relation to themselves but also in support of the members of the Canadian Armed Forces they will be commissioned to lead.
Rejuvenate (Infrastructure, Operations & Support)
The Military Colleges should be symbols of national pride and prestige which help project a positive image of the Canadian Armed Forces to Canadians and to the world. Attractive buildings, well-maintained grounds, modern facilities and secure sites should reflect the historic and ongoing significance of the Colleges and a high standard of respect for the Naval and Officer Cadets.
Unfortunately, given that infrastructure projects at the Military Colleges compete for funding with all other infrastructure projects in the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces, much of the campuses, particularly in Kingston, are in a state of disrepair. Funding requests for dormitories, libraries or athletic facilities must contend against aircraft hangars, jetties and barracks for prioritization. It is therefore not surprising that the Colleges do not generally fare well in these competitions. Moreover, while RMC Saint-Jean benefits from having a dedicated facilities management contract with an organization that is deeply invested in the overall success of the College, RMC has no such arrangement in place, which creates short and long-term negative impacts.
More broadly, mindsets and attitudes need to change, to place greater value on architectural excellence, quality design and high caliber workmanship, alongside a genuine commitment to respect the historical look and feel of the campuses and to maintain beautiful and inspiring environments.
The Board has consequently recommended that as Canada moves towards fulfilling its commitments towards greater defence spending, a dedicated funding framework should be established for
- major capital projects,
- minor construction, and
- maintenance and repair
to support training and education establishments in the Canadian Armed Forces, including the Canadian Military Colleges. Baseline funding should be increased for all three as well. A dedicated facilities management contract should also be established at RMC in Kingston.
- The Minister of National Defence provide a written response to this Report within 60 days of its receipt to provide clarity regarding the Government’s intent and expectations;
- An Implementation Team be established to oversee the development and execution of a sequenced, time-bound and measurable Implementation Plan; and
- The Minister of National Defence provide an annual report on the progress of implementation until all of the recommendations have been addressed.
The world is experiencing its most significant shifts since the end of the Cold War. Canada is no longer protected by geography, with threats coming from cyber space and outer space, from growing national emergencies including floods and fires and from foreign influence/interference in our systems and institutions.
More than ever, Canada will need an effective military led by a strong cadre of officers who are well-prepared to navigate this increasingly complex environment. The Military Colleges are uniquely equipped to develop the outstanding leaders required by the Canadian Armed Forces and they can serve as a major source for positive change both within the armed forces, and within society at large.
Although issues of negative conduct and culture remain at the Colleges, the Board believes that closing them is not the solution; exporting those challenges to other institutions would merely avoid addressing the very issues that the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces are seeking to solve.
Instead, Canada should continue to invest in and support the Military Colleges. They should be held to attaining and maintaining the highest standards, but must also be equipped with the leadership and resources required to do so.
Once refocused, restructured, rebalanced and rejuvenated, the Military Colleges will offer great value and be uniquely positioned to meet the needs and expectations of Canadians as our country takes on the critical challenges of the coming decades.