National Defence Committee on Feb. 5th, 2024

[Chad Collins, Liberal, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

I'll take my next question.

I'm very surprised that on the supply side, we don't have stronger relationships with the private sector when it comes to building new supply on bases or wings where we're short of supply, and that more importantly, when we speak to the relocation issue, which you referenced earlier today, we don't have signed agreements in major urban markets with private sector landlords to assist with a more seamless integration of our members when they move from community to community.

I've asked questions of other witnesses, and we haven't received many recommendations along the lines of public-private partnerships. Can I ask for your thoughts on forging partnerships with landlords in major urban markets or, conversely, with the private sector in order to build more supply in rural and remote areas, where it can be a challenge at the best of times?

[Gregory A. Lick]

In terms of supply, we should be looking at all sorts of different innovative practices in gaining greater supply. That could be public-private partnerships with various landlords or organizations to build supply or supply that supply. I think that would be ideal.

I think the main issue is that we have to be a bit more innovative in our solutions. We can't just say that there's some Treasury Board policy that maybe disallows some of those P3s, as an example. We have to get over that. For me, the main thing and the ultimate objective here is that no member should ever go unhoused and worry about a roof over their head. If a policy is in place that doesn't allow certain things, let's get over it and start moving forward with different solutions. One of them is greater co-operation with the private sector, absolutely.

[Chad Collins, Liberal, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

I think part of solving the problem of our housing challenges across the country is working with our municipal partners and our provincial partners. You've done the cross-country tour to look at the condition of housing and the supply issues. In terms of solving the challenges we have, the federal government certainly can't do it alone. Our government, instead of demonizing municipal mayors and councillors, is working with them. We're incentivizing new supply to try to get at some of the issues you talked about.

In your travels, have you talked to municipalities and/or provincial representatives about how we play a key role in working with them—and not just the private sector, as I referenced earlier, but other levels of government—in order to get at some of these issues for our members?

[Gregory A. Lick]

Absolutely. In every base and wing we visit in different communities across the country, we always try to visit with the municipalities, whether that's the mayor or different representatives, to understand what they're doing to make sure there's supply for community members as well as military families and members.

It depends on the different communities across the country, but there's a lot being done. Whether that's reducing the bureaucracy of permitting or promoting the different partnerships with a hotel organization, with hotel corporations or with developers, there's a lot being done out there, but—

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

We'll have to leave it there, even if there is a lot being done.

Ms. Normandin, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for being here, Mr. Lick.

My questions are along the same lines as Mr. Bezan's questions. They concern the Department of National Defence's response to allegations that homeless military members in Nova Scotia use food banks.

I understand that pride may be a barrier. People don't necessarily want to talk about the fact that they're homeless or in a precarious situation. However, does the department's decision to brush aside these allegations constitute an additional barrier for military members who want to speak out about their predicament, since they may think that the department doesn't take their situation seriously?

[Gregory A. Lick]

The Canadian Armed Forces is taking it seriously, but do they have all the resources and different partners to really, more than anything, build that supply? Do they get the attention of the Treasury Board in making sure the different benefit packages and compensation packages allow for proper compensation and allow people to live? I think the main issue is that they may not be listened to or may not be able to get their points across in terms of what's needed. That's my role, in many ways. It's to get out into the public eye what they may not be hearing and maybe get a better understanding of what we're hearing on the ground.

Certainly, CAF members and CAF leadership do hear it, but as I said, a simple wellness check may not be getting the full understanding. I think more than anything, when I talk to leadership, particularly the leadership level on the base and wing, I hear they are trying to do everything possible to make sure their members and families are well supported.

Ultimately, it is a resource issue. I think more than anything, they simply do not have the resources in various areas, including the infrastructure on base. In many cases they have great relations with the community, working on various innovative ways of getting greater accommodation and so on, but ultimately it is a resource issue. They need more resources in order to have the infrastructure necessary to support military members and families.

The way I always look at it, as I've said to you many times here, is that if your family is not well supported and you're always worrying about them, you can't do your job. That's what I think is fundamental here as well.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

According to newspaper articles, the Department of National Defence didn't really confirm that there were homeless military members in need of food assistance. Instead, the department seems to want to sweep these allegations under the rug.

In this situation, is the department in the best position to ensure the well‑being of military members, or should another organization be carrying out this type of check and asking military members whether they're okay, whether they have a place to stay and whether they need food assistance?

You said that the ombudsman, because he ensures that his discussions remain confidential, found it easier to obtain this information. Should the wellness check be carried out by an entity outside the department?

[Gregory A. Lick]

I think wellness checks are something we would all do. If we had a family, we would do a wellness check, in a sense, of our smaller family. It is the right thing to do, but it is just one indicator.

You have to remember that groups like the chaplaincy—which is a confidential service like ours—and the military family resource centres and social workers there have a very good understanding of what's happening in the family and what's happening out in the communities. You can't simply rely on a wellness check. You have to rely on all your various sources of information, including our organization, which talks to members and talks to families. They have the opportunity to tell us various things that they may be too embarrassed or afraid to tell their leadership. They're probably embarrassed more than anything, because it's not a great situation, obviously. It's a very tragic situation.

Relying solely on a wellness check is not the right thing to do. You have to rely on all your sources of information.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you.

You spoke about the need for a global accommodation strategy for military members. We know that not all military members live in married quarters, single quarters or barracks. As you said, a number of them live in the community. In light of this, shouldn't there be further discussions with, for example, the Minister of Housing? Otherwise, is there a risk that National Defence and the housing department will work in silos on this issue?

[Gregory A. Lick]

That is my point. It is something they are working on. They are working on that global accommodation strategy.

When I ask their various members and various audiences across the country, everybody talks about one silo at a time. What is needed is a strategy that takes all of those various aspects together and is agile. Our economic environment across the country changes, and it is changing now across the country. The strategy has to take that into account.

If CFHD, in and of itself, is updated as it says it will be every year, that should go some way to making it more agile. PLD was not that at all.

I talk about an agile, global strategy that allows members to build equity if they want. Typically, most Canadians want to own a home. Their compensation package should allow for that. However—this is particularly for junior members—they're not generally going to be able to afford a house right off the bat. They should have access to housing on base or easy housing in the community—whatever it might be.

I think it's that total package that's necessary.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

We'll have to leave the answer there.

We'll go to Madam Mathyssen for six minutes.

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

I really appreciate your being here. You're providing great context for what's going on.

We know that the military is a microcosm of what's ultimately happening in the greater Canadian society. I certainly hear that from people trying to find housing in my own riding. Of course, we all do, but it is far more specific, complicated and required for the job.

In all of those responses that you think we need.... You just heard Mr. Bezan's motion to cancel the housing rent increase. Do you think that is a viable answer and part of the solution? What do you think about that? I'm interested to hear it.

[Gregory A. Lick]

I certainly think it's a viable solution. Anything that can help members and families afford housing is a great solution.

We have to remember that housing on base—if it's available, which is another issue—is capped at 25% of their gross salary, which is a good thing. At the same time, if rents rise but it's still capped at 25%, where is the money going to come from to maintain that infrastructure on base? I come back to this idea that whatever it is, more resources are required to support the infrastructure on base.

I think at this point in time, even though it is a policy governed by the Treasury Board, the policy that the rent charged is equated to the average local rent in the communities is a bit tone deaf given what we're seeing across Canada for all families being able to afford housing. We have to understand, as I said, that military families and members are disadvantaged because they have to move more often and they don't always have that choice. I'd say they rarely have that choice. Therefore, they have to go into a community and find housing, and it may not be available. Sometimes, they get pushed into housing that is not safe. Sometimes, it's unaffordable housing, despite—

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

It's not accessible housing.

[Gregory A. Lick]

It's not accessible housing for families with special needs or disabilities in the family. There's a whole range of issues there, but to be honest, I think it's a bit tone deaf right now.

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

Speaking of that, your team published in 2022 the “Service versus Self” report. There was a special investigation.

What have you heard since that report in terms of the findings? Has the government put forward any of the recommendations from that report? Could you table it with this committee so we can include it as a part of this study right now?

[Gregory A. Lick]

Well, certainly we can table it. Everything is published now.

I think one of the main issues related to housing in that particular report was the idea of how there is a need to modernize the definition of “family”. We all know that families are changing since we had our 2.5 children and mother-father type of thing. Right now, we are taking care of more elderly parents. Also, it seems to be that we have more families with special needs children. There are various issues like that, and we do not always have a mother and father. The definition has changed.

What we did say in our report is that you need to modernize the definition of family but maintain some flexibility for decision-makers to make a fair decision. Don't try to create that 100% perfect policy that governs every situation ad infinitum. Make sure you give decision-makers the ability to make a fair decision based on other circumstances you may not have foreseen, but absolutely, you need to modernize the definition of family and have policies, initiatives and so on that accommodate the different definition of family nowadays.

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

One of the things that Mr. Bezan touched on was a bit more vague. I'm hoping you can give us specifics. If you can't, I understand.

You talked about what members had sent you regarding the really deplorable, horrific living conditions. Can you be more specific with this committee? Are you allowed?

[Gregory A. Lick]

Certainly we're allowed because it was sent anonymously...or not so much anonymously.

I was sent pictures of different conditions in various barracks, whether it was in Trenton or other areas, that were horrid: toilet facilities not up to standard by any means, mould on various walls and ceilings and so on. There is more out there. Those were just a few pictures out there.

I have raised this with the deputy minister of national defence, and I will be having a conversation with the assistant deputy minister of infrastructure to speak about this particular issue. This was not my experience, as I've said, in the eighties. Yes, they are not five-star hotels, but at the same time, I don't expect that any member would live in those conditions.

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

I really appreciate that, even considering just mould and what impact it has on anybody but kids especially. Trying to live in a safe environment is very key.

I wanted to quickly ask about this, and I have very limited time left. You talked about spouses working on base and their ability to do so. Can you talk about the CFMWS being on strike and what that has done to families currently?

[Gregory A. Lick]

I can't speak specifically on the latter part of your question. The issue for us is primarily around families who are posted and move around the country. It leads to spouses or partners not being able to find appropriate employment, and we all know that nowadays you need two incomes to live appropriately.

As spouses and partners move with their military members, they may not be able to find any job, or they may have to go to the great organization Tim Hortons and work there. We call it underemployment. It's the idea that perhaps as a medical professional they don't have the qualifications according to another province or territory, and they are underemployed.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

We're now going on to the five-minute round.

Ms. Gallant, you have five minutes.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, through you to our witness, I have had calls from soldiers saying that they have had to leave the military because the rent or mortgage payments were outpacing their pay increases.

What has been your experience in talking to veteran soldiers who have had to leave?

[Gregory A. Lick]

Well, as I said, the largest reason members are leaving nowadays—and that's according to the CAF survey itself—is military family issues, part of which is the cost of living, cost of housing, being able to access child care, being able to access a doctor and other various reasons. Over the last year and a half, as mortgage rates have gone up in particular and the cost of living has gone up, those have become bigger parts of why members have been leaving nowadays, and that's what we're hearing too.