Arbour Report Update, August 2025: ‘Intent’ and Ticked Boxes Risk Hiding Slow Progress on Tackling Military Sexual Violence in the Canadian Armed Forces
The 2021 Independent External Comprehensive Review (IECR), led by Louise Arbour, exposed deep institutional failures within the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) that have allowed a culture of sexual violence to persist. In December 2022, the CAF committed to implementing all 48 of Arbour’s recommendations. More than three years later, we continue to track their progress to maintain pressure and accountability.
The release of the 5th External Monitor’s Report (EMR)*, by Jocelyn Therrien, is a critical moment to take stock. On paper, eight more recommendations have been “implemented.” But closer scrutiny shows that many of these successes amount to little more than starting processes, launching new reviews, or re-issuing calls for further reforms. Meanwhile, core issues—including poor data practices and weak accountability in handling sexual misconduct—remain unresolved.
A Familiar Reliance on ‘Intent’
The government’s response only reinforces concern. New Defence Minister David McGuinty echoed his predecessor Anita Anand almost word for word, claiming the CAF is “on track to meeting the intent of all 48 recommendations by the end of 2025.” This vague phrasing mirrors Anand’s 2022 promise of “intent to implement.” Nearly three years later, identical language signals not progress but paralysis.
Signs of Progress
Eight new recommendations have been marked as implemented since December 2024. Among the most significant:
Probationary periods for new recruits (#20, #22, #25). Trialled in 2024 and fully rolled out at year’s end, these periods improve efficiency and allow swift dismissal of recruits with problematic attitudes. While positive, probation alone will not address harmful behaviours that often develop through military socialization. Cultural change takes more than screening at the door.
Adoption of the Canadian Labour Code definition of harassment (#3). This crucial shift removes the CAF’s burdensome six-criteria test and allows members to bypass the chain of command when reporting harassment or sexual misconduct. It is a long-overdue alignment with civilian workplace standards.
Full details are in the Arbour Report Card.
Reviews That Risk Becoming Checkmarks
Several “completed” recommendations consist only of finished reviews:
Administrative reviews of sexual misconduct (#6)
Instructor roles for leadership culture (#24)
Costs/benefits of the Royal Military College model (#29)
Universality of service review through GBA+ (#37)
The outcomes are mixed: some dismissed changes (#24), some sparked new recommendations (#29), and others demanded yet more reform (#6). Reviews are only a first step. Labeling them “implemented” without ensuring follow-through risks turning the Arbour process into a box-ticking exercise—a pathway to the same policy graveyard the CAF has fallen into before (MacKenzie & Wong 2024).
Persistent Weak Spots: Data and Accountability
The EMR highlights two major problem areas that remain:
Data Gaps – Therrien confirms that it is “impossible to know how well complaints are being addressed” because data on sexual misconduct is scattered across 28 separate holdings (Wong 2025). As Caleigh Wong argues, the CAF has the capacity to manage complex intelligence systems but lacks the will to treat sexual violence data as critical to national security and operational effectiveness. Good data should drive cultural change—not lag behind it.
Administrative Reviews – The review of #6 exposed that members are often “retained without restrictions” despite findings of misconduct. Therrien stresses the CAF must align with civilian case law, where even first instances of unwanted sexual touching increasingly result in dismissal. Military exceptionalism can no longer excuse outdated, permissive approaches. Civilian standards now demand zero tolerance, and the CAF must catch up.
Still Stuck on ‘Intent’
The central problem persists: the CAF remains stuck at the “intent to meet” stage for many recommendations, the same position as in December 2022. Three years on, “intent” without timelines or tangible results is meaningless. Worse, some recommendations are marked as complete even when they generate whole new sets of reforms still left unaddressed.
Until the CAF moves beyond vague assurances, the risk is clear: progress will stall, accountability will fade, and reforms will join the long list of promises buried in Canada’s policy graveyard.
*The External Monitor’s Status Report is released out biannual by the Madame Jocelyn Therrien, the external monitor appointed by the Department of National Defence, to provide update on the status of the 48 IECR recommendations.
Citations
Wong, Caleigh. "The Military’s Crisis of Analytics: Modernizing Misconduct Data." Artificial Intelligence. (2025). https://www.cigionline.org/publications/the-militarys-crisis-of-analytics-modernizing-misconduct-data/
Wong, Caleigh and Megan MacKenzie. “Rhetoric and Reform: The Australian andCanadian Defence Forces Strategic Use of Language in Commitments to Culture Change.” Paper presented at Inter-University Seminar on Armed Forces and Society. Carleton University, Ottawa, ON. (2024).
