Thank you all for coming, Deputy and General—you have so many titles. It's good to see you again, sir.
It's fair to say that Canadians have been very unhappy with the way veterans have been treated in Canada. One of the things that the new government promised was that there would be a change. I'm hoping that the answers we hear today indicate that there's going to be a change. That it's not good enough anymore to just say nice things and platitudes about veterans and then ignore them once they come home, especially if they're broken and need help. I'm hoping that we begin to turn the corner, and we hear that today from the answers that we're getting. Because quite frankly, it's been disgraceful. That change needs to happen.
Chair, before I move to my detailed question, in looking at the action plan, which is a key part of what we do, I've already suggested that maybe we need to also look at this in terms of our own self improvement. I know you're interested in keeping us state of the art, pushing the envelope. We do as good a job as possible. We've already talked about having a little more analysis of the action plans, even asking the AG for comments around time frames and such.
May I also suggest to our analysts when we're looking at this, that maybe we need a template. It would be a lot easier and more efficient for us to focus on what we need if all the action plans were always laid out the same, rather than our having to go through each one to figure out how they have been laid out and having to do that work. These are small things or details that the public is not all that interested in, but they are important to us, and I would hope that at some point we can refine our efforts in this area.
The Auditor General would know, and Deputy, I think you would know from your past role, that one of the things this committee takes incredibly seriously is the recommendations in previous audits, especially when the ministry has said, “We agree with the findings” and then the Auditor General goes back and finds out that what had been suggested didn't get done. Let me say to you, Deputy, we've had occasions where there have been multiple audits and the department is still saying they agree and all of the nice flowery things that we want to hear, but then nothing happens. This really launches us. It certainly launches me when I see that.
We have some elements of that here again today. I reference page 14 in the English document, paragraph 4.59 on pharmacy alerts, which states:
In response to observations from our 2004 audit, Veterans Affairs Canada strengthened its alerts for the potential overuse of narcotics and benzodiazepines, which are sedatives, so that alerts are issued regardless of where the veteran filled the prescription. The Department also partly addressed our recommendation to monitor instances in which pharmacists dispense drugs to veterans in spite of a pharmacy alert. These instances are monitored when they involve potential abuse or overuse of narcotics and benzodiazepines, or when a veteran tries to obtain the same prescription from the same pharmacy within a seven-day period. However, all other instances in which a pharmacist dispenses a drug in spite of an alert, such as those related to a potential drug interaction, were not monitored.
I can ask the AG to explain further, but it sounds relatively self-explanatory. Can you please give us an answer why something that was uncovered in 2004 and needed to be fixed was only partly fixed? There are some parts of that audit and the commitments this department made that have not been honoured. Please, it's time for accountability. Why is that?