Veterans Affairs Committee on March 6th, 2014

[The Chair, Conservative, Greg Kerr]

Thank you for that clarification.

We now go to Mr. Gill, please, for six minutes.

[Parm Gill, Conservative, Brampton—Springdale, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank all the veterans in the room today for your service towards our country and also our witnesses, for appearing before the committee and helping us with this very important study.

Minister Fantino has asked our committee to conduct a comprehensive review of the new Veterans Charter as it evolved and as it's prescribed today.

Above and beyond the mandated review of the enactment, enhancement enacted by Bill C-55 in 2011, did your respective organizations call for a comprehensive review? Do you support the committee's comprehensive review of the charter as a whole?

[Brad White]

Going back to Mr. Stoffer's first question about what the recommendations were, if you look back all the way through, you've had the Gerontological Advisory Council, the New Veterans Charter Advisory Group. You've had this committee. You've had the Senate subcommittee. You've had input from all the various recommendations and organizations of veterans, as well as other medical people. You've had the ombudsman. We've had lots of recommendations put forward for enactment.

Do we support a full review of the new Veterans Charter? Yes, we do.

As comrade Gord said in his preamble, we'd like a review every two years. But in essence, the whole charter should be reviewed continuously, to make sure that the services provided to the veterans are in fact being provided to the veterans.

The reason we have difficulty, and we go back to the first question of Mr. Stoffer, is that there are lots of recommendations on the table right now. They've been there for quite a while. In 2011, when Bill C-55 came in, there was no movement to make this a living charter. The charter has to live. It has to breathe and it has to evolve. The circumstances we're putting our men and women of the Canadian Forces and the RCMP in—but the RCMP is not covered here—around the world is evolving, and we need to evolve that support for them as well, as we put those people in those circumstances.

[Parm Gill, Conservative, Brampton—Springdale, ON]

Mr. Jenkins or Mr. Price, do you have anything to add?

[Gordon Jenkins]

I think the time for intensive reviews is done. You've had reviews. You've had reports. Why have another one? Why not catch up on the ones already on the table because you have 200 now. What will come out of this committee? Another 10? Clean up the act first. Let's see some action. Enough with the reviews. Just stop the reviews. You can still have a review, once you get caught up on what you already have on the table. Then have one every two years.

Thank you.

[Parm Gill, Conservative, Brampton—Springdale, ON]

Thank you.

Can you tell us to what extent your organizations were involved in the consultation process for Bill C-55 if any?

[Gordon Jenkins]

In my speech I said that we have been around for four years, unlike ANAVETS, which has been around since 1890. So we're a new organization. We came in the middle of this. That might help a bit because we can see.... There is a saying en anglais, “you can't see the forest for the trees”. We can see the forest and when we came in and we looked at it, we said, “My gosh...”. As Brad has mentioned, listing off these reports and the recommendations, it's just incredible, and where do they go?

Did that answer your question? In other words, we were not involved. Three parties passed this new Veterans Charter, but we were not involved and we arrived in the middle, when there was a new Veterans Charter and we said, “Oh boy, wow, what's wrong here? Look at the recommendations they have, it's incredible”, and nothing is being done. Three of them in one amendment, if I'm not mistaken....

Thank you.

[Brad White]

Overall, I think you're asking a question about Bill C-55 and the involvement of stakeholders—I don't like that term—the organizations in the consultation process.

First off, I don't think the consultation process has been adequate over the years. It needs to be improved, overall. There was a bit, but little consultation involved with Bill C-55.

[Parm Gill, Conservative, Brampton—Springdale, ON]

Were there any recommendations put forward by your organizations that were adopted in Bill C-55?

[Gordon Moore]

At this point, if I remember, going back to that period there were recommendations from the Royal Canadian Legion and other veterans organizations but they were ignored at that time. Veterans Affairs had their own agenda.

I will tell you that I went to a couple of the stakeholders' meetings. Normally when you invite the stakeholders to a meeting you're asking for positive input on where we can move forward. At no point were the stakeholders asked to help set the agenda and the topics that needed to be discussed for the betterment of the veterans.

[The Chair, Conservative, Greg Kerr]

Thank you.

Yes?

[Gordon Jenkins]

I would like to support Gord on that one. NATO Veterans is on record to Veterans Affairs Canada, in our four years, asking that we please be consulted for the agenda for the stakeholders' meeting.

We were never, ever, consulted or asked. We were issued an agenda and we were told to send one person, period.

[The Chair, Conservative, Greg Kerr]

Okay, thank you very much.

We'll now move to Mr. Eyking, our guest.

It's good to have you here today. You have six minutes, please.

[Mark Eyking, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

Thank you, Chair.

It's great to be here and to see all the veterans here and to see their representatives here. It's truly an honour.

It was mentioned quite a few times that there are quite a few benefits out there that are available, but it's getting them delivered that's the key. As well, front-line staff were also mentioned.

You people are well aware of the closures, and you've mentioned the closure of these offices. Cape Breton has been closed. In Cape Breton we had 11 staff there and over 4,000 veterans were using that office.

We had two rallies down there and over 5,000 citizens showed up. It was quite emotional. At that rally one of the veterans who was organizing it stated that perhaps it was time for the Legion to stop doing all the services they're doing, which the government should be doing.

With the closures of these offices, what kind of impact is it going to have on your legions that are trying to help the veterans who come into your branches? Also, what is your comment on some of the members of these legions saying that maybe it's time they should stop trying to help these members?

[Gordon Moore]

Mr. Chairman, I hope and pray to God that no branch of the Royal Canadian Legion across this country would ever consider that. This organization was built by veterans for veterans. I'm a former serving member myself, but I never left Canada, so I fall under 21(2) of the act.

Having stated that, let me say that we of the Royal Canadian Legion and its 1,460 branches across the country will offer our support to all veterans and their families, whether they are aged 23 years or 105 years. We make sure that our branch service officers, who are volunteers just like me, are well-trained and have the knowledge to help a veteran and the veteran's family through the process of getting to one of our provincial service officers, who are professionals.

They have the capability of going on the CSDN. Because of the act to incorporate the Legion, we have that capability. Of course, our Dominion service officers working out of Ottawa at Legion House have the same capability as well. They're working with our veterans, as I mentioned in my report earlier.

We are urging our branches now through our provincial officers to get the branches well prepared for what is going to be happening. For example, in Sydney in Cape Breton the branch more than likely.... I'm not trying to make an assumption here, but I'm stating that we're going to be asking the branches in those particular areas—Sydney, Thunder Bay, Saskatoon—to have an office there if we know for a fact that Veterans Affairs is going to have a case manager coming out to visit. For example, in Sydney they are already there to look after the case-managed clients whom they already have on board. If there are other veterans within Cape Breton who need to see someone, then we are asking them to please supply a place or an office where we can have a confidential interview and go through the process. That's the process we're going through.

[Mark Eyking, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

Thank you.

[Brad White]

Just as an add-on, we've already seen a spike in the number of people who are coming forward looking for services. That's happening now. Our national bureau is well over its head. We have put a service officer into Valcartier from Quebec Command. He's inundated with people to serve.

The services we provide as an organization should be viewed as complementary. They should not be viewed as taking over the responsibility of the government.

[Mark Eyking, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

My last question may be to you, Mr. White.

You alluded to the United Kingdom and some of the things they are doing, and such other countries as Australia and New Zealand—countries that are similar to us in situation.

I note that only one recommendation was accepted out of 200. That's not a very good average. But what are you looking for in this charter, or what really stands out about how veterans affairs in other countries are doing better than we are?

[Brad White]

If you see a comparison with what other like-minded nations do for their veterans, the services we provide our veterans are pretty good comparatively across the world. What we're trying to do is evolve the system as we have it right now into the new dynamic of the kinds of situations we put our personnel into.

Every country across the world is trying to change and transform their dynamic as well to meet the needs of the new veterans. We continue to do that. We honestly believe that the new Veterans Charter is a good document. It's a new system to look after people. But we believe there are gaps that could and should be fixed, that we are obligated to fix, so that we can continue to provide this service to our veterans.

But we have a pretty good system in this country and we have pretty good people, by and large, delivering that service, through Veterans Affairs as well.

[The Chair, Conservative, Greg Kerr]

We're right at the bubble, Mr. Eyking. Thank you very much.

We now go to Mr. Galipeau, please, for six minutes.

[Royal Galipeau, Conservative, Ottawa—Orléans, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I want to thank the vice-chair for his kind words when he began.

I want to welcome the NATO Veterans Organization of Canada and also the Royal Canadian Legion and all the other groups that are here. I met many of you several times over the last eight years at a number of commemorative functions where we honour veterans. I myself belong to the friendliest Legion in the region, number 632. Of 308 members of Parliament, there's one who wears the Legion pin on every suit, and that's me.

Mr. Jenkins,

as a fellow Franco-Ontarian, welcome. That said,

you will understand that I will address Mr. Moore more than you because I haven't bought my membership in your association yet, so you know I have a conflict of interest.

At this table and elsewhere in the country, we hear many people talk about the Veterans Charter and the services provided by Veterans Affairs Canada. There are veterans' groups, advocacy groups, and individuals from all aspects of the veterans' community. We just heard a few minutes ago that, as imperfect as is the Department of Veterans Affairs, many countries are just trying to catch up to what we do for veterans.

In any event, many of these people who were involved in the process that led to the Veterans Charter had lengthy consultations with the government in office in 2005 and in years before when the charter was written. I wasn't here then. There may be people at this table who were. Certainly, the government that I support was not in office at that time. I'm not going to make a lengthy statement because I want to leave more time for answers.

Mr. Moore, could you tell the committee what the Legion's involvement was in the consultation with the government of the day prior to 2005?

[Gordon Moore]

I'll let Brad answer that—

[Royal Galipeau, Conservative, Ottawa—Orléans, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Moore.

[Gordon Moore]

—because I don't have the answer.

[Royal Galipeau, Conservative, Ottawa—Orléans, ON]

He was there. He's the permanent guy.