Veterans Affairs Committee on March 6th, 2014

[Brad White]

Yes, and I do have membership forms for each one of you if you want to join the organization, and you can also join online at www.legion.ca. That's my paid political announcement for all of you.

The Royal Canadian Legion, as well as other veterans' groups, as well as health professionals, the Canadian Forces, and Veterans Affairs were all involved. We were all involved, and I think it was the Canadian Forces and the Veterans Affairs advisory group that formulated basically the workings of the new Veterans Charter before it was presented. So all those groups were part of that consultation process at that time.

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

I thank you very much, Mr. White.

Mr. Jenkins, what was the position of your organization before 2005 on this charter and on its development?

[Gordon Jenkins]

As I mentioned, Mr. Galipeau, we did not have an organization before 2005.

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

It's a pretty simple answer.

Mr. Price wants to speak.

[Percy Price]

Yes, I'm sorry, but I was a member of the Veterans Review and Appeal Board for seven years, which was during that period, so indeed I had a conflict of interest and I wasn't involved.

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

Where does the NATO vets organization see itself in the future?

[Gordon Jenkins]

NATO Veterans primarily accept and welcome any veteran. Most of our membership is made up of post-Korean veterans up to and including Afghanistan veterans. You'll hear the term “traditional veterans”, who are the World War II and Korean veterans. It's an artificial definition, but it's one that's used quite commonly. Then you'll hear “the modern-day veterans”, who are from post-Korea up to and including Afghanistan.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Jenkins.

Does anyone else have any more comments?

I'm finished with statements and questions.

[Brad White]

Just to say that we tend to look at it holistically. A veteran is a veteran is a veteran, not just from a post- or pre-whatever. A veteran is a veteran is a veteran.

[The Chair, Conservative, Greg Kerr]

Thank you very much.

We'll now move to Mr. Chicoine for six minutes, please.

[Sylvain Chicoine, NDP, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I would also like to thank our witnesses for joining us today.

Let me go back to what you were saying about the fact that it is time to take action right away to improve the New Veterans Charter.

Since we are conducting a comprehensive study and we are going to produce a report in several months in the wake of which the minister will prepare a bill, would it not be desirable for the minister to start right away to improve the new charter given that everyone agrees with the ombudsman's recommendations?

Would it be in the minister's interests to start right now to improve the new charter based on the ombudsman's report, granted that it may involve other changes in a year after the comprehensive study?

[Gordon Jenkins]

I think the minister already has a list of recommendations and we cannot help but wonder why another series of recommendations is necessary.

[Sylvain Chicoine, NDP, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

Basically, he could already be working on a bill to improve the charter using the ombudsman's work?

[Gordon Jenkins]

Yes, he has enough recommendations right now.

[Sylvain Chicoine, NDP, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

Thank you.

Do our other witnesses feel the same?

[Brad White]

I am not francophone, but I am francophile. My wife is a Quebecker. I apologize, but I will speak in English to make sure I am using the right words.

We certainly believe that there are things that can be done now while this review is ongoing. Comrade Gordon has laid out three things that we believe can be done now, without having to push further in this review. All these things apply to probably the most serious at-risk personnel that we're looking at. So we're talking about the earnings loss benefit being improved, increasing the maximum disability award so it's consistent, and as well, trying to get rid of the discrepancies between class A and class B reserves and how we treat our reserves in comparison to our regular force.

We feel that those are the three elements that can be included in the legislation right now to improve it.

We believe we can do that.

[Gordon Moore]

I have just one thing I'd like to add.

I'm not sure if the committee is aware, but out of the 40,000-plus Canadian Armed Forces members who served in Afghanistan, 25% of that total force was reservists from right across the country, coming from small towns and hamlets in the provinces of Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and Alberta, right across the country.

You train those reservists alongside regular force members and you take them to Afghanistan for six or seven months, and side by side they do the job day in, day out, and get injured and then you bring them home. You're telling me—and this is what the government of the day is telling me—that we cannot give them any more than this pittance so that they can stay alive. That is sad. Now is the time to act, as Brad mentioned.

As I said earlier, we've listened to study after study after study. We've listened to recommendations that were supposed to have been put into place, but never happened. Now is the time to act to make sure that our men and women who are injured, who need our support, and who need the financial capability to keep their families together and to look after their kids, because a lot of these people have small children who are at the elementary stage. I'll tell you, we have enough families across the country outside of the military who are having trouble meeting their day-to-day needs. We shouldn't let our serving members do that. We have to look after them now. Please do that.

[Sylvain Chicoine, NDP, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

Thank you.

However, we do not have a lot of information and recommendations to improve family services. For instance, at a press conference this week, we heard from women with husbands suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder and they said that they felt completely helpless in dealing with this issue and that they did not receive any help.

What should we include in the charter to improve the lives of these women, who have to look after completely dysfunctional husbands and, in many cases, children as well?

[Percy Price]

Mr. Chair, and sir, I'm in touch with these widows and veterans with PTSD three or four times a week. In fact, recently I was in touch with a family that had a recent suicide in a certain province. The unfortunate part is that when DVA comes out to speak to the actual veteran, the spouse is never there and not really required. I think it is important that when a Veterans Affairs counsellor communicates with a veteran, in particular one with PTSD, that the spouse is there to get the full story. What's happening is that they're fading away from the spouse and the dependants. Oftentimes when we're in the business of pensions, as advocates or counsellors with DVA, we deal strictly with the veteran. That's where we're missing the boat. That's why these spouses or widows appeared this week.

I don't want to go into details, but I spoke to a recent widow. As a matter of fact her spouse's friend died about two weeks prior to that. He was a warrant officer and served with this last one who committed suicide. They served together in Afghanistan. Can you imagine how devastated that young 39-year-old sergeant must have felt? A red light should have come on somewhere with Veterans Affairs saying, “Uh oh, we have this one suicide. What about the effect of that on the others?” They're not communicating. DVA must communicate.

That's the problem. Because somebody lives not in Gagetown or Oromocto but over in the Miramichi or out in the bush, and it's too hard to get to—and they don't know where they live. Well I can tell you, gentlemen, marketing can find us better than DVA can find their veterans out in the wilderness. Something has to be done, and they must treat it as a priority.

[The Chair, Conservative, Greg Kerr]

Thank you very much, Mr. Price, for very clear points.

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

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm sorry I don't have my Legion pin on. I am an associate member of the Legion as a result of my father's 36-year career in the Royal Canadian Air Force.

We just introduced new legislation, as a government, to Bill C-27 and that legislation is the hiring veterans act. It basically stipulates that qualified veterans should be moved to the top of the line for posted federal public service jobs as they become available.

Are you in agreement with that legislation? I'll ask one representative from each group. I don't need all four of you to speak because I'd like to get a couple of more questions in.

[Brad White]

Yes, I'll be quick.

Frankly it's not a new bill. I have a friend who served on UN missions, had a heart attack in Central America, came back, was released from the military, and was immediately hired in the public service through the priority hiring. The issue on priority hiring is people meeting the qualifications, and it's always been that issue. Not all releasing members of the Canadian Forces meet the qualifications to come into the public service, so they languish on the waiting list. There's also that the public service is reducing as well. Although the military has now been pushed to the top of that list, there's still a whole bunch of people.

As well, if you look, RCMP members are second class. They're in tier two, not tier one. So we're concerned about the RCMP not being included in tier one as well. So will they get the jobs, are the jobs there, is the public service going to continue to decline—there are a lot of people on that waiting list—and do the people have the right qualifications?

These young people coming out of the Canadian Forces today have life experiences that we can't imagine. They have technical training that we've never had before. They're smart people. They deserve to be employed somewhere, whether it's in the government or somewhere else. They deserve to have a chance to be employed and be moving forward. They're very smart young people.

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

Mr. Price or Mr. Jenkins, just a brief comment, if you don't mind.

[Gordon Jenkins]

Okay, but would you repeat your question again for me?

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

Mr. Price, were you aware of the question? Would you like to answer it, please?