Veterans Affairs Committee on March 5th, 2013

[Mary Chaput]

There are a couple of technological advancements that are actually changing the way employees do their work in a very fundamental fashion. You've probably heard about case managers who we are now equipping, on a pilot basis, with mobile technology. That would allow a case manager to meet veterans at any point, be it in their home or in a Tim Hortons, and to work with them as to what benefits they are getting, what benefits they might need. They would be able to open the veterans' files electronically and track where an application might be. That is one example of how a case manager's work is changing.

Other elements of the technological epiphany in Veterans Affairs have to do with how we are securing records from both DND, from which we secure service records, and Library and Archives, the organization that holds the records after a veteran has left the government. In both cases we used to get paper copies of these documents and move them around within the department on a need-to-know basis, in a physical way. At this stage of the game we secure, not completely, but increasingly those records in an electronic fashion, which would allow more than one employee to work on the same record in close succession.

The important thing about securing electronic records and working more digitally, if we can say that, is that at the same time the organization has to be very careful to ensure that only those who should have access, do have access. That brings us to yet another group of employees who, by virtue of the transformation, are doing a different type of work. Those would be the employees in our information technology and information management sector, who are continually monitoring our systems to ensure that access privileges are as they should be, that an employee who needs access to records gets access by virtue of passwords, etc., and that employees who do not need access to records are not allowed entry into systems.

There is a very pervasive change in the department at many, many levels as we move into this electronic world.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Peter Stoffer]

Thank you very much, Madam, and Mr. Lobb.

Now we will go to Ms. Mathyssen, for four minutes, please.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for being here.

I want to begin by saying I am very aware of the Standing Orders and the fact that estimates are tabled on March 1, but those same Standing Orders also indicate that we have until the end of June to take a look at the budgetary priorities of departments. I must say I'm also concerned about the fact that we've heard from various actuaries, the Auditor General, and the perhaps somewhat maligned Parliamentary Budget Officer that estimates never receive the attention they need. They're rushed through. There needs to be greater scrutiny if we're to do the job that MPs are intended to do in regard to careful examination.

I come right back to my concern about passing these main estimates and the supplementary estimates today, because I have so many questions.

First and foremost, we usually see a breakdown in regard to costs. In this particular main estimates publication, they're not included. I'm wondering if it's possible that you could provide us with the expenditure details for each of the elements combined in the operating costs that make up vote 1 of the 2013-14 estimates. That would be in regard to the salaries, long-term care, etc.

[Mary Chaput]

We'd certainly be happy to provide you with those kinds of details if they are helpful to you. It is true that the shape and form of the estimates this year, for all government departments, was adjusted by the Treasury Board Secretariat to relate more to strategic outcomes than to areas of operation. My understanding is the idea was that by linking estimates to outcomes, Canadians and parliamentarians would be able to see the depth of investment in a certain objective or intended outcome, as distinct from the depth of investment in a certain area of activity within a department, and it would be more meaningful from that point of view.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Thank you. I appreciate that extra detail, but of course, it doesn't help if we're going to vote on the main estimates today. It's sort of putting the cart before the horse.

I'm also wondering, in regard to the main estimates, about the funding related to the government's decision to end the offset of disability benefits. You may have touched on it before, but I would just like some clarity in regard to what that decision refers to.

[Mary Chaput]

Well, certainly I can clarify. You'll know of what's called the Manuge decision, whereby the court made a decision related to a class of recipients who received benefits from the Department of National Defence. The government made a decision to go beyond the court order and apply the spirit and intent of the court decision to those programs that we offer from Veterans Affairs. What we have therefore done, consistent with that decision, is ceased the deduction of disability benefits from two programs, earnings loss and Canadian Forces income supplement, these being programs offered by Veterans Affairs. As the minister was noting, he's also pursuing legislative change to allow him to cease those same offsets as they relate to the War Veterans Allowance Act.

You will see in the main estimates a net increase of $70 million, but in fact there is an $85-million increase offset by a $15-million decrease elsewhere, and that $85 million relates in part to the cessation of offsets in the earnings loss program.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Peter Stoffer]

Thank you very much, Madam.

Now we go to Mr. Lizon, please, for four minutes.

[Wladyslaw Lizon, Conservative, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I'll start with a very general question. In your opinion, is the funding provided in the main estimates enough for the proper care and treatment of Canada's veterans?

[Mary Chaput]

Yes, sir. I'm quite confident that the funding provided is sufficient for the appropriate care of veterans. My confidence stems from the fact that our programs are what are called quasi-statutory, meaning that, if and when it's determined that we need more funding to deal with the needs of veterans, then we can go back to the government for supplementary estimates whereby we can table renewed forecasts and associated financial requirements. So for our department, there is always an avenue to come back to the table, so to speak, to get any additional funding that may be required.

That said, we make every effort at the juncture of main estimates to get our forecasts as precise as we can to avoid the need for supplementary estimates. But that precision depends on things such as release rates, mortality rates, and take-up rates within programs, and to a certain degree, you're trying to predict human behaviour. As I said, while we try to get our forecasts very tight, we do have that safety valve that supplementary estimates offer and quasi-stat funding allows.

[Wladyslaw Lizon, Conservative, Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON]

Would you agree that the changes in funding for certain grants and benefits are due to a forecasted decrease in access to the benefits by veterans? Can you give some examples?

[Mary Chaput]

I will start and then I'll have Charlotte fill in the blanks for you.

Certainly the changes in our programs are twofold. They're related to the style of delivery, be they grants or contributions. Grants always cause an upfront payment versus an after-the-fact payment, so it changes the timing of the expenditure and causes them to, as I said, hit the balance sheet sooner. As well, there is always an ebb and flow of the number of people who are partaking in a program, and so that causes the programs to go up and go down.

One would expect that, and what we have seen is that the new Veterans Charter programs are typically increasing in costs as people come to those programs in greater numbers. The more traditional programs, such as VIP, one would expect to see fall, the fact of the matter is that many of what we call modern-day veterans are getting to the age that they are now also availing themselves of VIP.

And I should note that I don't mean to imply that VIP is only for the elderly. It's for any veteran who has the need for that kind of household support by virtue of—it could be very definitely by virtue of—a service-related injury at a young age.

Charlotte, do you want to add to that?

[Charlotte Stewart]

I think the deputy minister has outlined the complexity of our forecasts and how it's not necessarily a straightforward matter to say that if a program is increasing it's related to one particular cause. But just quickly, our disability pensions, which is our largest program in the department, has been in place for many years. While Canadian armed forces members can have a disability pension, it's predominantly used by the traditional war veterans. As our largest program, we are seeing a decline in that area, driven by the declining numbers. On the new Veterans Charter side, we're seeing a 20% increase year to year in this program. That's a good sign. That's the number of people who are getting access to this program, coming into it and availing themselves of it.

I'll mention one area that's increasing quite rapidly, and that's in the earnings loss area. I mention this because it goes back to several factors. One is the enhancements to the new Veterans Charter, where there is a minimum pre-tax base for assessment. This allowed more veterans to avail themselves of it, but also increase the amount that they received. In addition to that, we have an increase in the numbers who are using the program. The third change is related to the recent decision to not offset disability pensions. So within one program, which two years ago was quite small, we've seen three major changes affect over 50% of the participants in that program.

To your question, our forecasts and our management of these programs is very precise, as precise as can be, but to the deputy minister's point, we have to always be prepared for variables.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Peter Stoffer]

Thank you.

Now we go to Mr. Hayes, please, for four minutes. Thank you.

[Bryan Hayes, Conservative, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

If we did not pass the main estimates today, do you feel they would change if we waited six weeks from now? An awful lot of time and effort and a lot of forecasting, a lot of work, went into presenting the supplementary estimates, preparing those and the main estimates. If you came here six weeks from now, I would anticipate we'd probably see the same numbers, wouldn't we?

[Mary Chaput]

You would see the same numbers. The preparation of our main estimates actually begins way back in about May, when we begin to update our forecasts on the take-up of our main programs and run mathematical models as to what the costs of those programs would be. Over the course of the summer we work on those calculations, and we vet them with parties like DND, but outside parties as well. Hired actuarial experts look at our costing assumptions to confirm or correct that they're within the realm of the reasonable. That whole process of updating the estimates takes close to six months, so a six-week period at this stage of the game would not change our estimates.

[Bryan Hayes, Conservative, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Thank you.

Since 2005, there's been an $800-million increase in your budget, and directly into the pockets of veterans, I might add. I'm on public accounts as well. We're having an Auditor General's report today and we're looking at the long-term fiscal sustainability. So I want to get a sense of where you see your budget five years down the road. We've had a significant gain. What do you do in terms of planning for down the road? I'm looking specifically at what will the demands be, and how you are factoring in the modern veterans, and what considerations you look at in terms of long-term fiscal sustainability.

[Mary Chaput]

Certainly we attempt to look five years out. As you know, we're not funded five years out, but we always try to have an eye towards the rolling calculus. In that degree, we would rely to a certain extent on our research and statistical division, which would tell us what the trends are in things like release rates and program participation. We would attempt, based on things like the average age of a veteran, to extrapolate on use of programs today and into the future.

We'd also, though, from a sustainability point of view, look at program design and whether the needs of the veterans are evolving in a different way that would require us to change programs and change costing. For example, we're in the early stages of looking at mental health issues, because we anticipate, as we do with the Canadian health system writ large, challenges as we move forward. The physical issues that veterans face are treatable, and the costs are known. The mental impacts are tougher to quantify and therefore we're always looking at our program design from that point of view.

From the perspective of sustainability, we are always trying to attend to the needs of the veteran but up front to be more proactive around mitigating them or preventing them entirely through good things like appropriate rehabilitation and other psychosocial programs we have.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Peter Stoffer]

Thank you very much.

Now we will go to Ms. Papillon, please.

[Annick Papillon, NDP, Québec, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to support my colleague's statement to the effect that transparency is sometimes lacking when we want to access certain information. That prevents us, as parliamentarians, from doing a better job, going beyond information and determining—even on the opposition side—whether we agree with what is happening within the government.

The estimates set out departmental priorities for 2013-2014, such as improving service delivery and advancing the fair treatment of the veteran community. The goal is commendable, but what kind of concrete plans does the department have to improve the situation with regard to those important issues? I would like to know what the new programs and investments are, since I am being told that more will be done with less despite those cutbacks to the department's operating costs. It is difficult for us to find out what changes will be made to programs, services and investments.

[Mary Chaput]

Okay. In large part those improvements you're talking about have to do with the manner in which we're delivering our programs. As I've made reference to, the movement is towards more electronic service delivery. There are new e-tools that we're just rolling out now. An example would be what we call the post-traumatic stress disorder app or coach, which allows a veteran using a mobile device to assess how they are doing from a mental health point of view.

Other improvements would be things like increased functionality on already existing tools such as the My VAC Account, which is like a bank account, but it's a program and services account that veterans can avail themselves of to track their applications, to track where their application is in the system and whether it has been approved yet, and to track when payment will be received.

What's interesting about the My VAC Account is that in the course of the last 18 months, subscriptions to that have gone up by almost 200%. Even more interesting is that among those subscriptions, over 1,300 are by veterans who are over 60 years old, and over 100 are by veterans over 90 years old. We are seeing veterans subscribe to these processes much more broadly.

[Annick Papillon, NDP, Québec, QC]

Unfortunately, I have very little time. It is great that you are moving towards more electronic service delivery. However, I am not sure that would help everyone. The minister said he was planning to hire more case managers, probably at the expense of other types of jobs. What jobs within the department were affected the most?

Jobs are being cut—that is very clear—but the minister is saying that recruitment and hiring is in full swing within the department. So in what area exactly will the transfer be made? According to the minister, case managers are being hired, but what positions will be cut within the department?

[Mary Chaput]

It is true that we're hiring case managers in those offices where the veteran demographics require further case managers. The minister made reference to Quebec, I believe. What we find is that anywhere where we are operating near a base or a wing, veterans tend to settle, even after their military careers.

[Annick Papillon, NDP, Québec, QC]

But the positions of people who will be....

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Peter Stoffer]

I'm sorry, Madam Papillon. That's it.

We now need to move to Mr. O'Toole, please.

Thank you.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Ms. Chaput and Ms. Stewart.

I think, like many Canadians, that people are starting to recognize the shift within Veterans Affairs, and I admire the department's moves in regard to making sure that we care for what I might call our traditional veterans. When people think of their local cenotaph, they think of World War II or Korean War vets. I had the honour of participating in a Remembrance Day ceremony years ago with Bowmanville's last World War I veteran, Fred West. They're recognizing there's a new generation of veterans, the new veterans.

I note in the estimates that disability awards and other benefits have seen an increase of 72%, so we're starting to see disability related to Afghanistan, but I have a more general question. If we wanted to categorize new veterans as 50 years of age and under—or maybe the department does it in a certain way—I'm wondering how much of an increase for overall services of Veterans Affairs Canada are these new veterans.... How much is that increasing each year, on all services? Are you studying a rate of uptake of services among that new cohort of veterans?