Evidence of meeting #32 for Veterans Affairs in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was document.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Michel Rossignol  Committee Researcher

9 a.m.

Liberal

The Vice-Chair Liberal Brent St. Denis

Good morning, colleagues.

Good day everyone.

I am pleased to call to order this Tuesday, March 27, 2007, meeting of the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs. The main order of business is a study on a veterans bill of rights.

We don't have witnesses. I think it's a discussion of where we're going with this, eventually leading to a report. So I'm going to open the floor. Does anybody want to kick off the discussion?

Betty, as parliamentary secretary, do you want to set the tone as you see it on behalf of the government?

9 a.m.

Conservative

Betty Hinton Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC

Certainly I'm happy to speak to this.

I think we've made a concerted effort as a committee to listen to as many groups as we possibly could, to get input on this very important matter. There was a draft presented to us just for perusal. We can move whatever way we want on it. I think we're all in agreement, though, that the content we have heard from witnesses makes it very clear what the goals are, which is that they want to make certain that they are treated with respect, that it is done quickly, that the tremendous contributions they have made are recognized, and that we salute and honour a special group of heroes and their families for all time.

I think that pretty much covers what we intend to do. The bill of rights doesn't have to be complicated; it just has to be legislated, so that we have something we can give to our veterans and it's more than a promise, it's actually something written.

That's all I really have to say. I'd be more interested in hearing what everyone else has to say.

9 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Anders

I don't have anybody else on the speaking list.

Monsieur Perron.

9 a.m.

Bloc

Gilles-A. Perron Bloc Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC

Good day, Mr. Chairman.

I too am a little tired this morning. Last evening was rather long and tiring, but our presence is required on such occasions.

I'm in favour of a veterans' bill of rights. The committee is set to begin studying this matter. I do, however, have one concern. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms does not state clearly that citizens have duties and obligations. In drafting a veterans' bill of rights, we need to bear in mind that in addition to rights, veterans have obligations as well. In other words, the document that we are devising together shouldn't give veterans too much latitude.

I'm speaking from the heart and allowing my emotions and feelings to shine through. Certainly veterans must have rights, but they must have certain obligations as well.

That's all I wanted to say, Mr. Chairman.

9:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Anders

Is there anybody else who would like to comment?

Ms. Hinton.

9:05 a.m.

Conservative

Betty Hinton Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC

It's just a comment again. I agree with everything my colleague has said, but if we go through this, if we have a look at some of the comments that have come from some of the witnesses, the one I found the most interesting is that it should be kept short and sweet and it should fit into a veteran's wallet. That came from the Legion.

There are a number of other comments contained in this that I think also make good sense. The one that stands out the most for me is that the bill of rights should concentrate on rights rather than on service delivery or standards. It's something that we want to make certain veterans have access to at all times, that they are respected at all times.

I think that's the aim and purpose of this entire committee, so I'm hoping we can put something together rather quickly and deliver on what we've promised the veterans in this country.

9:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Anders

Mr. Stoffer.

9:05 a.m.

NDP

Peter Stoffer NDP Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS

Just as critical is to get a legal opinion on this bill of rights to see if it has any legal weight, because a lot of veterans, as you know, are battling DVA every day on issues from hearing loss, to back problems, to SISIP, to whatever. So if they believe they have a particular right, then we should enshrine that that right is ironclad, and not just something they put in their wallets that feels good.

So it would be nice, if we're going through this procedure, to get legal opinion to see what weight a veterans bill of rights would have on legislation and on the government of the day.

9:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Anders

Monsieur St. Denis.

9:05 a.m.

Liberal

Brent St. Denis Liberal Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON

Thank you, Chair.

We're working off this document with a huge “Draft” written through it. I've never seen that before. I take it, based on my question to Alex, that it was an attempt by the department to keep the draft secure. It is certainly pretty secure. It is difficult to read, and I find it difficult to concentrate on. I'm sure it's a wonderful piece of work, so I'm trying at the same time to reconcile that.

I'll be honest. I can't work with this, and I think the department has to trust the committee, that we can receive a draft copy without “Draft” written through it. I'm sure it's a wonderful piece of work, but I was getting eye strain--

9:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Anders

Yes, I agree. I'm the same way.

9:05 a.m.

Liberal

Brent St. Denis Liberal Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON

Again, this is not meant to be criticism; this is just an observation. I hope we can get a copy to work from that doesn't have this, and we'll just treat it as we do confidential documents. We'll turn it back to the clerk after the meeting, or whatever is appropriate.

Now, I didn't quite understand, in regard to this document with the comments on the side, whose comments are those on the side. For example, I read here: “This is an overblown sentence that lacks dignity.” I don't know whose comment that is.

9:05 a.m.

A voice

It's the minister's, isn't it?

9:05 a.m.

Liberal

Brent St. Denis Liberal Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON

Maybe, and that's fine.

I think this is important enough. I agree with the sentiments of Betty and Peter and the others--and our witnesses--that it needs to be simple and it needs to be respectful of veterans. At the same time, especially if it's short, we need to read it word for word. I'm sure we can struggle through this meeting, but is there a way we can get a copy of this without the big “Draft” written through it?

Again, I would like to know, these deletions in the formatting, which precedes which? I can't make out which comes first and which comes second.

9:10 a.m.

Conservative

Betty Hinton Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC

I can't help you on that, because I don't have anything that says what you just said.

9:10 a.m.

Liberal

Brent St. Denis Liberal Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON

Well, this is what I was just handed this morning.

9:10 a.m.

Conservative

Betty Hinton Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC

The comment that says there's an overblown sentence--

9:10 a.m.

Liberal

Brent St. Denis Liberal Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON

It's on Veterans Affairs letterhead. Go down to the bottom, second last...maybe that's just an editor's comment. You know, it's an internal document. I have no problem with that; somebody's just commenting. But I don't know if it's somebody in the department or if it's a fellow committee member or the chair. Maybe I don't need to know, but what is that, as a document?

9:10 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Anders

It's very obviously a draft.

9:10 a.m.

Liberal

Brent St. Denis Liberal Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON

There might be two drafts. We may have two drafts here.

9:10 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Anders

I think our researcher has some answers to these questions.

9:10 a.m.

Michel Rossignol Committee Researcher

Yes, this is a draft that was examined by veterans groups, I believe, around June of last year--

9:10 a.m.

Liberal

Brent St. Denis Liberal Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON

Which one are you pointing to?

9:10 a.m.

Committee Researcher

Michel Rossignol

They're the same document. That's why it has “Draft” written on it. It was the original, and I believe it was in Word, so it's embedded in the text. This is a document that was looked at and examined by somebody in Mr. Tom Hoppe's group, the Canadian Peacekeeping Veterans Association, or one of the...I don't remember exactly the association's name, sorry. But somebody called A.J., I believe, made some comments, as well as somebody else. These are veterans from that group who made comments, and when Mr. Hoppe came before the committee he made this document available to committee.

So it's an indirect route. That's how we got the document, and that explains why it's a draft. It's not for the committee. That was the original draft document that was looked at by veterans groups, so it's not something to prevent the committee from--

9:10 a.m.

Liberal

Brent St. Denis Liberal Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON

So it was for stakeholder comments.