Veterans Affairs Committee on April 15th, 2010

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

I applaud your determination, and I hope that as a committee we are able to make recommendations to go forward that achieve what we all want, which is that level of respect and comfort.

We have 299 recommendations, though, that you had put forward. Has there been any implementation of any of those 299 recommendations, other than two or three?

[Sean Bruyea]

I'm sorry; for the record, I didn't put forward those 299 recommendations. Those are a combination of all the recommendations from both the special needs advisory group and the new Veterans Charter advisory group. Of those, about 200 are non-overlapping recommendations, so they're highly unique. The remaining ones partially overlap or overlap fully. It's safe to say that in total there are probably about 250 different recommendations in the reports.

Have they been implemented? That's an excellent question. No, they haven't, and I'd like to speak quickly about the reason I think they haven't. It's because these recommendations, first of all, are going to the very individuals, Darragh Mogan and Ken Miller, who brief Parliament and tell everyone that the charter is a wonderful piece of legislation and only needs tweaking. Well, making 250 recommendations is not tweaking. This is a disaster. Any legislation, after five years, that requires 250 recommendations from only two advisory groups, plus my 38 recommendations, needs a complete overhaul.

In addition to that, when the committee makes recommendations, I would hope it's more or less an order instead of a recommendation, because I think it's ethically unjust to ask bureaucrats in Veterans Affairs to implement recommendations when they are more loyal to Treasury Board processes than they are to actually fulfilling their mandate to take care of veterans. It's understandable that way, but if you order them to do it--if the PMO orders them to do it--then there's no excuse. They have to implement them, and we don't put them in the middle and squeeze them between Treasury Board and what you are asking them to do.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Mr. Chair, have we received the list of the 250 recommendations?

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

We've received them in the sense that we've had access to the reports, yes.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

They are in various reports. Could I ask that the clerk put those 250 recommendations together in a report and distribute the report to the committee so that we can look at those, in addition to your 38, as we move forward on trying to make a difference on this issue?

I suspect we will see you again after today and have you come back and work with us to try to make sure this charter is what we all want it to be.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Thanks, Madam Sgro.

Is this a point of order, Monsieur André?

[Guy André, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Mr. Chairman, I pointed out to our witness that the document currently circulating, which our colleagues now have in hand, was not translated in both official languages. I don't understand why that document is now in the hands of certain members, considering that it is not translated in both official languages.

I spoke about this with Mr. Bruyea, and we discussed the matter. I told him that his document had to be filed and translated in both official languages so that it could then be distributed, which is not currently the case.

I would ask you, Mr. Chairman, that these documents be handed over to you now so that we can have access to them only once they are translated in both official languages.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Thank you, Monsieur André.

The documents in question, I believe, are not the property of the committee and have not been distributed by me or by the clerk. They were independently obtained directly from Mr. Bruyea.

I believe Mr. Bruyea has agreed to table the document. We'll have it translated in both official languages, and then the chair and clerk will distribute it as far as our responsibility is concerned. But anybody who has possession of those documents right now is outside of the control of the chair or the clerk, Monsieur André.

[Guy André, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Mr. Chairman, I think this is a roundabout way of not respecting the two official languages. Documents that aren't translated in both official languages are sent to members' offices for them to use at committee meetings. I don't think that's the right way to do things.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Monsieur André, I will independently investigate your concerns; however, I do caution you that Mr. Bruyea is a citizen of Canada. He can e-mail, he can mail directly to MPs' offices as freely as he wants, and MPs can open their mail as freely as they like.

But I will look into this and make sure that there was no procedure of the committee with respect to both official languages that was breached, and I assure you that if there was, then you'll have the appropriate apology from the chair and we'll make sure that the practices are amended.

It's the same point of order, Monsieur Vincent?

[Robert Vincent, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Yes, it's on the same subject.

This is really unfortunate because this document could have been useful during this meeting. But the document hasn't been translated. As my colleague said, we see that our other colleagues have the document and are using it. We would have appreciated having it translated so that we too could ask questions as relevant as those of our colleagues. However, we don't have the document in our possession at this time. I believe the clerk was informed of the fact that we should not accept the document and share it with committee members. We see that is not the case this morning.

Earlier you talked about your investigation, Mr. Chairman. Yes, it's true, we received the document at our offices. Any Canadian can send us a document. I entirely agree with you. However, when it comes to taking the documents that Canadians send to our offices and using them during a committee meeting when other colleagues don't have that opportunity since those documents have not been translated, that's another matter.

First, for reasons of fairness among members, this document should be withdrawn. If we had this document translated in French, perhaps we could invite members to use the document again in another question period during the day. In that way, everyone could be on an equal footing.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Monsieur Vincent, again, I will review the procedures here. I don't profess to know the entire procedures manual, but I think it's beyond the scope of the chair to limit the documents that are brought into the room by individual members.

But let me look into the entire thing, and as I said, if there was any breach of protocol of the practices of the committee, I'll make sure they're amended.

Mr. Oliphant, on the same point of order?

[Rob Oliphant, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

Yes.

I just actually want to speak in support of the chair on this. I bring documents regularly to this committee that citizens send me. I bring letters. I bring all of that. I also speak in support of my colleagues. Now that Mr. Bruyea has sent a document out, it's absolutely appropriate that we receive it as a committee document, have it translated, and then distributed.

I receive things all the time, and I receive them in French sometimes so I bring them in French, not in English. I don't perceive there is a breach of protocol on this, but I hear it as a request to ensure this document is translated.

I'm supportive of you. You can continue to investigate, but I think you're doing a good job on this.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Thank you, Mr. Oliphant.

I think the comments have made it abundantly clear now to the clerk that he will do that as quickly as he possibly can and get the document distributed in both official languages.

[Robert Vincent, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

The first point, Mr. Chairman—

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Hang on just a moment, please. We have a list of speakers.

We've gone over this quite a bit, but, Mr. André, are you on the same point of order?

[Guy André, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

With regard to what Mr. Oliphant said, I disagree with him. I submit documents that are also in other various languages, even though they are often in French. This document that has been submitted is the witness's statement. That's very different from a working document. It is the witness's address that is in this document.

I suggest that committee members vote on whether this document should be immediately withdrawn from the meeting. I request on the subject.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

What document do you wish withdrawn, Monsieur André?

[Guy André, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

I'm talking about the document that was submitted by the witness. That document is not in both official languages. I'm talking about the document that people are using and that contains the witness's address.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

I can't call for a vote in a case that is beyond the scope of the authority of the chair. If people want to leave the room and shred their documents right now, I don't have any ability to stop them from doing that. I think it's a request that is beyond the scope of the chair.

We will now go to Madam Sgro, then Mr. Vincent, and then Mr. Casson.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

I think it's really important that all members of the committee have Mr. Bruyea's report. There's a lot of very significant information here.

The chair certainly hasn't done anything wrong, nor the clerk. These documents were submitted to our offices, and this is the language that I read them in. However, they're clearly at a disadvantage today in being able to ask Mr. Bruyea questions based on a report that we're looking at, so I think we'd be far better off to invite Mr. Bruyea to come back on Tuesday. By that time everyone will have the report in the language of their choice.

At this point it's not the clerk's fault, or yours, but this is an important document that we're looking at. Why don't we suspend our meeting today, reconvene on Tuesday, and ask Mr. Bruyea to come back? Then everyone will have a chance to ask questions without getting into motions and here and there.

That's my suggestion: that we adjourn the meeting until Tuesday, when all members will have this report in whatever language necessary.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Thank you, Madam Sgro.

Before I press that question to the committee, I'll just exhaust my list of speakers. Please go ahead, Monsieur Vincent.

[Robert Vincent, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

I agree with Ms. Sgro.

Mr. Oliphant and Mr. Chairman, I agree with you that, if documents are submitted by other people, the committee can use them to ask witnesses questions. Today, we're talking about the witness's document, and that very much changes matters. It's not someone else who has sent you something so that committee members can ask a witness questions. It's the witness who is here who is submitting a report. We can question the witness because he is here in committee. The dynamic is thus completely different from that prevailing when we receive a document. It's that point that's important.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Mr. Casson is next.

[Rick Casson, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Mr. Chair, I know I'm just subbed in at this committee today, but I'm thinking in terms of respect for our witnesses. We were well into this meeting when this objection was raised, and I think you've handled it fairly.

I agree somewhat with Judy that we should possibly bring these witnesses back anyway, because of the extent of their knowledge on this issue, but surely we can agree as a committee to continue today's session with these folks. We've brought them in here. They've taken time out of their personal lives to come and advocate for veterans across this country on very serious issues they've been raising. To stop it because a document distributed to our offices wasn't in the two official languages, a document that had nothing to do with the committee, would be wrong.

If there are questions outstanding that the members opposite cannot ask because they do not have the information in the other official language, then those questions can be asked when these witnesses come back.