Evidence of meeting #57 for National Defence in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was forces.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:40 p.m.
RAdm Andrew Smith
Consistent with any compensation and benefit issue, that authority to expend public funds for that ultimately rests with the ministers of Treasury Board. That's consistent throughout government.
4:40 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
We have you, as head of military personnel, saying that it should be changed, and we have the minister apparently saying that it should be changed. Therefore, the blockage appears to be at Treasury Board.
4:40 p.m.
RAdm Andrew Smith
No, Mr. Chair, I did not say there's a blockage at Treasury Board. I said it will go forward for consideration with any number of other issues that will go before the Treasury Board.
4:40 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
We've had four years to resolve this issue. What I don't understand is why this....
4:40 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Bezan
I'll interject. As you know, pages 1068-69 in chapter 20 of O'Brien and Bosc state clearly that public servants and advisers to the minister aren't obligated nor should they feel compelled to share information they believe would jeopardize the relationship with the minister.
4:40 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
Would you adopt the statement of the ombudsman who said:
Notwithstanding the Minister's support for this recommendation in 2008 and the communication between the Chief of Military Personnel and Treasury Board Secretariat, the Department's efforts have yielded no changes to the Accidental Dismemberment Insurance Plan.
Is that correct?
4:45 p.m.
RAdm Andrew Smith
Mr. Chair, an allusion was made earlier that this would be a fairly straightforward administrative change. A significant amount of work and analysis goes forward with staffing something of this nature, and that has been going on apace, consistent with my priorities related to the ill and the injured. We're trying to make the best progress we can on that.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
I'm not going to play junior lawyer here with you, but I think the ombudsman makes a pretty significant point. He says, “As such the office is of the opinion that this issue requires ministerial intervention in order to right this unacceptable unfairness”. I'll leave it there.
The second issue has to do with periodic health assessments. Apparently there's differential treatment between regulars and primary reservists. It's a little confusing as to why a reservist on deployment should receive differential treatment for immunization from the regular forces.
I'm sure you're familiar with the ombudsman's inquiry here. I'll be interested in your views.
4:45 p.m.
RAdm Andrew Smith
Certainly. In the first instance, reservists who deploy on international expeditionary operations receive the same training, administration, and health care benefits as regular force people do prior to and during deployment.
When reservists come home from an international operation, and many of them do and then revert to part-time service, one has to remember those part-time reservists' health care needs are the primary responsibility of the provinces. Where there is a service-related need the Canadian Forces will provide those health care services.
In relation to the periodic health assessments, a trial was done in November 2010 in one location on what that would mean in order to provide periodic health assessments. A second trial is now ongoing in four locations to capture the total resource requirements for implementation for all primary reservists, some 30,000.
The office of the ombudsman was advised in 2009 that periodic health assessments would be provided to all members of the primary reserves in a phased approach, and that phased approach would be subject to approval at various stages in full view of the costs associated with it.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
That strikes me as saying we're doing this program of immunizing and vaccinating, yet when the reserves get back, it's really the province's problem.
I thought the issue here should be a similarity or equivalency of treatment for a deployed reservist. Again, the ombudsman says “the office senses a lack of willingness on the part of the department to fully implement these recommendations”.
I'm not quite sure of the basis for the reservation.
4:45 p.m.
RAdm Andrew Smith
Maybe I'll come at it a different way.
The periodic health assessments are not required for deployed operations, and then it becomes a question of making sure reservists are ready. It becomes a readiness issue to deploy for operations as may be required in Canada.
The Canadian Forces fully acknowledge their responsibility to provide medical care for those reservists who come back from deployed operations who subsequently present with a mental or physical illness or injury that was related to their operational service, but the standard health care for reservists on a part-time basis rests with the provincial authorities.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Bezan
Thank you. Time has expired.
The bells are ringing. We have 20 minutes to get to the House.
My duty as chair is to suspend the meeting. I don't think we're going to get back before 5:30, by the time the votes are finished, so I'm going to ask for a motion to adjourn.
Before I do that, Admiral Smith and Colonel Blais, thank you for coming in. I apologize for not allowing a fulsome discussion on your presentation today. We want to thank you for your commitment to our ill and injured who serve. We want to make sure that we put together a great report and help provide direction to the government on how to move forward with the ill and injured of the Canadian Forces.
With that, the meeting is adjourned.