Veterans Affairs Committee on May 13th, 2010

[Rick Casson, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

It was just the family aspect. I think you've addressed most of it.

It's going to be interesting to see the results of this survey you're taking on how this lump sum money is being handled and who's benefiting and in what way, because it is a number one issue. People just pick that and they don't like it. To see some of the other numbers that go along with that, that's interesting.

To wrap up—

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

You have to get to your question quickly, Mr. Casson.

[Rick Casson, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Okay.

Do you work with family resource centres, and how important are they to the whole issue?

[Janice Burke]

Absolutely, they are key. As a matter of fact, just in Mental Health Week,which we celebrated not too long ago, one of the things we did was to involve the family military centres in joining up with the district offices with their peer support program with DND around the mental health area. So we're very connected with the military family resource centres. Their primary role is to provide services to the military families, but really, they don't turn people away, so they are seeing our veteran families. They are absolutely key. It's a wonderful support to families, and they rally a lot of support in the communities. They educate communities around the needs of families too, so it's a fantastic organization for families.

[Rick Casson, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Thank you very much, Mr. Casson and Madam Burke.

We'll move to Mr. Stoffer, for five minutes.

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Folks, you had talked about the survey you are doing. I was wondering if you could ask the department if we could have a copy of that survey for our committee and what kinds of questions you're asking, so we can see how that's going on.

Also, you talked repeatedly about families. Of the four forms you have here, on two of the forms you ask the veterans if they are married, and on the other two you don't. On the application for earnings loss benefits and on the rehabilitation program and vocational assistance you don't ask the person if they're married, and yet you talked about families being very important. Why wouldn't you ask on these forms if that person is married with children?

[Brenda MacCormack]

That's a good observation. I will certainly take a look at that in terms of rehabilitation.

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

Yes, it doesn't say it anywhere on here.

The other one here....

First of all, Mr. McColeman talked about the benefit of doubt clause being applied in some cases. Of all the VRAB decisions that come on my desk that I have seen on veterans I've worked on for the last 12 years, I have yet to see the benefit of doubt clause applied to any VRAB decision that I have ever worked on. Where it happens I don't know, because they constantly ask. You have to have new medical information in order to do this. But that's not necessarily Veterans Charter stuff. That's a bone I have to pick with them.

But here we talk about the complication of the forms. Now just picture this: you're in a LAV and six of your buddies are killed, two are severely injured, and you're injured. You have PTSD like we couldn't comprehend. You're now asked to fill out this form within 120 days, it says. We've heard testimony that sometimes the forms sit on a table for months. They just can't touch it. They don't want to go near it.

The first question is, why the 120-day limit?

Secondly, a lot of veterans say that every single member of Parliament uses them for photo ops--and that includes us, too--and say they're the greatest Canadians, and everything else. Yet on the bottom of this declaration, and I don't even have to do this for my mortgage or a line of credit or anything else that I get to do, it says, “I declare that the information provided here is, to the best of my knowledge, true and complete and knowing that it has the same force and effect as if made under oath.”

The veterans I've talked to who have to fill out a form of this nature ask why they are being treated with suspicion. This is how they think because of their mental state. They're heroes of Canada, yet when they fill out a form seeking assistance it's like it's made under oath. It's like they're under suspicion. This is part of the problem these forms have.

And by the way, I can fill out these forms, but if I had a severe disability, as my friend Rick Casson had to fill out.... It says to fill out section D, F, G, or D, E, G. A person under mental strain is going to have great difficulty doing that. Plus, you say attach this form, attach that form, do this, do that. A guy's got to go through hoops to fill out this document. This is not simplistic enough, and I'm being frank and honest.

For a person who is mentally stable, this is not a problem. This is just a process and you do it and on you go. But for someone suffering, and their family is suffering, this is not helpful, even if someone is on the phone walking you through it. So as a suggestion to you, is there any way these forms can be looked at to simplify them and to put the trust back into the veteran? The veteran is not applying for something they don't think they deserve. They're applying because they believe they deserve this.

So if you could comment on that, it would be greatly appreciated. These two forms over here are fairly straightforward, but these two over here for the lost benefits and for the rehabilitation program, I would definitely include families and children on that. And also, there should be a form here asking if this information can be released to your family. It doesn't say that. But I'll just leave that with you.

Thank you.

[Brenda MacCormack]

Thank you for your comments on the form. I think they're very helpful.

Your point about how potential applicants might perceive some of the language that's there is an important one, in terms of certifying that it was made under oath. Essentially what that statement is about is that whatever is there is taken at face value, taken as the truth, and there's no additional looking to try to support it. But I think your comment in terms of how that's perceived is an important one.

The 120-day issue is in legislation. That's why that is there currently.

In terms of somebody experiencing some mental or psychological issues, these are exactly the clients we would expect to be helping with. If someone is transitioning out of the military, and if we look at what we have set up in the integrated personnel support centres where you have everyone there working together for the client, we should know about that client and about his psychological issues long before he has to fill out an application form. That would be part of the transition process. That would not be a form that we would be giving that person individually to take home. We would be filling it out with them, telling them they're eligible for the program, and putting those services in place before they leave the services.

There certainly are a lot of supports there to assist them. Maybe they're not as aware of those supports as they need to be and maybe we could do better in terms of reaching out and making sure they are.

[Jane Hicks]

In terms of the 120 days, certainly for someone who can't fill it out or is not well, there is flexibility to consider that application well beyond the 120 days.

[Brenda MacCormack]

Absolutely, that discretion is there.

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

Thank you very much.

[Janice Burke]

In response to your question, there is activity under way to streamline. That has been recognized, I think, even through our peer support coordinators who work with people who have PTSD. As you've indicated, it's a struggle sometimes to get up out of bed, never mind having to complete forms.

That is an area that's being looked at in terms of how we can streamline. There are certain legal requirements for forms in terms of accountabilities and authorities and that kind of thing. We're looking at ways in which it can be streamlined so that better support can be given to people who are not in the right place in terms of completing it and the assistance that can be provided.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Thank you.

Because it's germane to this very subject, I have a quick question, if the committee will indulge me.

When someone is catastrophically physically injured, there's an officer assigned to that person's case. Is that correct? If someone is catastrophically injured with post-traumatic stress disorder, is that the case as well?

[Jane Hicks]

Yes. For anyone with a severe injury, there would be an assisting officer from the military assigned, as well as a case manager from Veterans Affairs.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

I was speaking directly to Mr. Stoffer's point. In the case where it's obvious that the person is going to be severely affected, they would have somebody shadowing them right away.

[Jane Hicks]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Very good. Thank you.

We'll now go to Mr. Mayes and Mr. Tweed, who are going to share five minutes.

[Colin Mayes, Conservative, Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I was here when our government decided to go forward with the charter a number of years ago. It's good to be here now and hear that it has given you the tools to do your job better and provide that care.

I really do appreciate the deck that you provided. Obviously, those are the facts.

The one challenge that I see is the buy-in of the veteran. You have to have a willing client. I'd just like to hear a few words about that. There are people who unfortunately, maybe through their experiences, have a hard time fitting in and wanting to take that help. Could you give me an overview as to the number of clients to whom that happens and what you do to try to get them into the system?

[Janice Burke]

I could probably start.

In terms of particularly clients who have mental health conditions, who are transitioning out of the military, I think it's fair to say that most of these folks would prefer to remain in the military. It's partly perhaps because of their illness as well, but there is a lack of trust, maybe, in the system, that the system can work for them. That's why we have our peer support coordinators working with them.

That's very powerful, because it's people who have been through similar experiences that they have. It's people who have struggled, but they sought help and they got treatment. They got the services through perhaps the new Veterans Charter or through the counselling through the clinics, and they got the support for their family.

They work with them. They listen, they assess, they try to refer, and that's the objective, to get people into the programs that can help.

We are finding that it is significant and it is helping these folks. But there's no question that we have to recognize that there is sometimes anger in terms of leaving the military, and there is distrust.

So we need to work with them. It's a complex process to transition people from military to civilian life, and it takes time.

[Jane Hicks]

As Brenda mentioned earlier, it's a big cultural shift, a big change. The old system was about money and treatment and the new system is about wellness, outcomes, and quality of life. It's very different. So if you look at the single dimension of money, of course we'd all be happy with more money, but it doesn't necessarily mean better outcomes.

Certainly as a district director in Ottawa, the problem we often encounter is people who had lower percentages of chronic back pain, 10%, 15%, 20%, who couldn't work, and it was all about money. They needed more money. It wasn't intended to be a program to replace income. They didn't have enough money, but there were no other tools we could use to assist them and help deal with that pain and earnings loss. We would see it time and time again. So they would become focused on the pension system and other conditions they had and how they could get more money, as opposed to getting better and reintegrating and re-establishing in civilian life.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Mr. Tweed.

[Merv Tweed, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Thank you very much.

I represent Brandon, which has Shilo in my community. I want to start by thanking you. We get great service out of the office there and the people we deal with.

I want to comment on the form. I'm not being critical of Mr. Stoffer's position, because I think we want to make it as easy and as accessible as possible. I believe the scrutiny you provide is to make sure you are providing services in an orderly fashion to the people who have most need.

One of the challenges I hear is with regard to family counselling. I have veterans and soldiers who have returned from service saying they don't have access, there's not enough of them, there's some hesitancy to deal with them in certain situations in public facilities. In small communities a lot of people know what other people's business is.

Is there a process to provide more of those family counsellors? I've had representations made to me from family counsellors who tell me they've been asked but can't provide the services because they can't get paid for them, and the veterans have to go through a process that directs them to the counsellor who is providing the service. Could you address that?

[Janice Burke]

I could start. Certainly there's a recognition that this is very important to the veterans and the family to have access to the counselling. We have a vast provider network, certainly for mental health supports: social workers, psychologists, and that kind of counselling. We have over 2,000, and it's even greater than that when you look at all providers.

Marriage and family therapists--I had met with that group as well, and they offer a tremendous service. We are probably the first department to do this, but we have added them to our provider registry in Quebec, where they are regulated now. And I think they're moving into Ontario, and there's movement across the country to get registered in their province, because that is the key challenge for that particular group. Fantastic services, and they really offer a lot to families that are struggling.