Veterans Affairs Committee on May 17th, 2007

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

Mr. St. Denis.

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

Just to be clear, why don't we call the interim report chapter 1, volume 1, or section 1? We're talking about the PTSD piece of it, which could be rolled into or somehow knitted together with the subsequent volume or volumes. Somehow, though, it has to be the introduction to the PTSD, but it has to be a little bit broader than PTSD, so that you have the context for this first volume. It might be 22 pages, meaning that it will have to set up the whole piece a little bit.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

I think we get the idea.

Carry on, if there's any other stuff you're looking for.

[Michel Rossignol]

I'll just try to put in all of that information.

Actually, there is also the question of whether or not you wanted detailed recommendations. Mr. St. Denis had raised the issue of our maybe keeping them general, and making more specific recommendations in the final report on the study. Or there could be recommendations on the issues that members of the committee raised.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

Well, I always think when you crank out reports that you probably should have recommendations; otherwise, what's the point? That being said, we haven't really discussed what recommendations to come together on.

[Michel Rossignol]

Some of the members have—

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

Yes.

[Albina Guarnieri, Liberal, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

Mr. Chair, perhaps we can submit some in writing to assist in this. This way you can digest and synthesize them, as there might be overlap.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

That's a good idea; I'll make a note of that.

Mr. Shipley.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Are we dealing with this one?

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

I think so.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

I was going to ask a question about where we're going with the next part of our round table. I apologize, but I need a refresher, quite honestly, on the VIP. So if we're done with the discussion on PTSD for Michel.... As Albina said, if we have some ideas for recommendations, we could forward them.

I am just wondering where we're at now on the VIP. If somebody could give me a status report on this, it would be helpful.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

The way I see this, first off, the next thing I'll bring up here in committee, depending on our time—though we still have half an hour—is the letter to the minister and see if there's any discussion on that, or concerns, or whatever. We've now dealt with the PTSD aspect of this health care review, and we'll be carrying on with some of the other people we wanted to bring in, and that type of thing.

The analyst—

[Michel Rossignol]

There was also the informal meeting.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

Oh, that's right, if we can get an update on that in terms of how we're going to structure the informal meeting on PTSD with the survivors or victims.

[The Clerk]

The issue is that if we have an informal meeting with the PTSD victims on the 30th—which is scheduled right now—do we want this to be part of the report? If we do, then the production of the report goes into June, and I don't know if we'll have time to report it to the House in time for the end of this session.

The other issue is that the victims are coming before the committee so that MPs can speak with them and get acquainted with them and learn from them. At the same time, I'm not sure if they want their thoughts to be made public. That's a point I'm putting forward to the committee.

My initial feeling from the committee was that it was just something you wanted to do informally and not have public; therefore, anything that was said in those informal meetings was not going to be in the report and not be cited at all. That's why it's an informal meeting.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

I have a follow-up question on this for the clerk. We originally were hoping to do this yesterday, but because they felt uncomfortable doing it in that short timeframe, and given the negotiations with Mr. Bruyea, and what not, what is the timeframe we're looking at for this meeting?

[The Clerk]

It's going to be on May 30.

Again, it depends on how many people there will be. Right now, I don't have a lot of names. Either they all come or they not come at all. They're requesting that their families come with them; they're requesting that therapists come with them, because it makes them very anxious. This is something Mr. Bruyea told me, and it takes him a long time to make those kinds of decisions, and understandably so. That's why I thought it was going to be realistic to give him a week and a half; obviously that was a judgment call on my part, and it's why I cancelled the meeting for this week. That's why I'm putting it two weeks from now, on May 30, on the Wednesday of the week the House comes back.

[Betty Hinton, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

I think everybody at this table would agree that it's imperative that we accommodate the PTSD people we're going to meet with, and that we also protect their privacy.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

I'm comfortable with the timeframe of May 30. One of the questions the committee will have to deal with then is whether we want recommendations or a report prepared before we've heard from those victims. These are things to consider.

Mr. St. Denis.

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

On that very question, from what I've heard from the front table, I think it would make sense that if Michel proceeds, this meeting on the 30th absolutely should be confidential or in camera—and I'm sure they'll know that.

There may be some general insights given. Nothing says we won't find or learn something that we could.... We may be talking about a few paragraphs.

We're not going to have a translated document by May 30 anyway.

[The Clerk]

That remains to be seen.

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

But if it just involves incorporating some general insights that hopefully we may have, I think that's a fairly minor thing.

So I would agree with you that Michel should go ahead.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

All right. That sounds fine to me.

Mr. Shipley.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Just to verbalize my thoughts, clearly, we don't want to have any quotes. So this won't be like it is with any other witness. But there may be some general observations that will come from that day.

I agree. I think Michel should move ahead on this, and if there are some general observations that we would have, then maybe they can be submitted as an addendum, or whatever, to the report.