Evidence of meeting #11 for Veterans Affairs in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was ombudsman.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Anders
Now we're over to the Conservative side of the table.
Mr. Epp, it's good to see you again.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Ken Epp Conservative Edmonton—Sherwood Park, AB
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I'm of course substituting here today for Mrs. Hinton, but it's an honour to do so.
Mr. Chadderton, I thank you for being here. At the risk of using up too much of my time, I wonder whether you would mind giving me, for my personal interest, a 30-second summary of your military service just so that I get to know a little more about you.
4:15 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, The War Amps
Yes.
I joined the Royal Winnipeg Rifles in June of 1939. I took a commission in July of 1941. I was fully trained in commando tactics and was on one raid prior to D-Day. My batallion landed in D-Day on June 4, 1944. I at that time was a captain who was promoted to major, and I was wounded in the hand. Some of you saw me fumbling. And I also lost the sight in one eye. I lost a leg, and I have 13 gunshot wounds. I almost hate to say it, but that's the story. And finally I was wounded on the border of Belgium and Holland on October 10, 1944.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Ken Epp Conservative Edmonton—Sherwood Park, AB
Thank you.
I was afraid, seeing all those decorations on your lapel, that we wouldn't do this in 30 seconds, but that's good. I really appreciate that.
I must say that as a member of Parliament I had the privilege every year of laying a wreath on November 11 and seeing all the veterans going and marching past. They're getting slower these days. Their ages are going up. So I certainly commend you for your advocacy on their behalf.
I have a couple of questions. One is a really short-answer one. Throughout your presentation, speaking of an ombudsman, you kept using the personal pronoun “he”. Do you have any objection to perhaps it being a female?
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Ken Epp Conservative Edmonton—Sherwood Park, AB
I ask because I have an idea that a female might have a different perspective on it from the point of view of advocating for rights and so on. I don't know whether that's true, but--
4:20 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, The War Amps
No. Let me say this. In all the reading I've done, of which there has been a gargantuan amount, an ombudsman is always referred to in the masculine gender.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Ken Epp Conservative Edmonton—Sherwood Park, AB
Okay.
Then I have this next question. It's been my observation in my life--and I've observed a lot of things in my years--that there is some correctness in the old proverb that says, “There's wisdom in many counsellors.” In that sense, I think perhaps an argument could be made for having a committee--or as we have now, on the Veterans Review and Appeal Board, that you have three people instead of one or five instead of only one. I'm wondering why you would advocate so strongly for giving so much power to only one person and the position that he or she holds, as opposed to having a committee or a small group of people who can hear both sides of an issue and hopefully come up with a wise decision on how it should be handled.
4:20 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, The War Amps
Well, sir, when the Woods committee commenced its deliberations, that was exactly the system. There were tribunals of three people. There was a review board of five people, and simply put, it was not working. The decision of the House at the time was that they needed an independent report, and one of the mandates that we were given was to get something quicker and cheaper. Now, quicker and cheaper doesn't always work, but that certainly was the mandate that we were given, and we had to live by that.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Ken Epp Conservative Edmonton—Sherwood Park, AB
Okay. This is my next question, then. I don't really quite fully understand your perception of the mandate of the ombudsman or ombudsperson, whatever we're going to call that individual. In some of your talk in your presentation, you indicated that the decision of that ombudsman would be final and binding and not appealable, yet on the other hand this individual could make a mistake and it would be a good idea if there were some method of appeal. So I'm not sure whether you're advocating for final and binding and no further appeal, or whether you think.... Because in other statements you seem to say that yes, you could take it further.
I think that in all such cases in Canada, you can still involve the courts. Maybe your solicitor friend there could help with that. That's an impression I have, that you can go beyond the judgment of a single person or a tribunal by taking it to the courts. I wonder if that's accurate.
4:20 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, The War Amps
Yes, an unsuccessful applicant's case could go to the courts through the veterans bureau or through his own lawyer. We stayed away from that simply because it was one of the no-nos. We said don't plug the courts up with applications, because it's just going to slow the whole process.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Ken Epp Conservative Edmonton—Sherwood Park, AB
My last question is with respect to who this ombudsman would answer to. You really haven't answered the question of who should appoint. You talked about the fact that it will be an order in council appointment. I understand the mechanism of that. But where should the nomination come from? Should it come from the veterans? Should it come from the government? Should it come from the department? Who would actually nominate the person?
How do you view the ombudsman? Because I always think of an ombudsman.... We have an ombudsman in Alberta, for example, a provincial ombudsman. If our citizens have troubles with the government, they can go to the ombudsman. It's generally perceived that the individual is an advocate for the citizen versus the government. And yet it looks to me as if there's an ambiguity here in the role the ombudsman would serve in this capacity, because he would be, first of all, a spokesperson for the department, a defender of their policies and a defender of their decisions. How would that individual, at the same time, be able to advocate for a veteran or a veteran's family that was having a serious and unsolvable problem with respect to pensions or other issues?
4:25 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, The War Amps
Again, it came back to the mandate, and the mandate was to come up with a new system of adjudication or to tell us that the present one was okay. But there was no wiggle room left. The committee could not recommend a system in which the ombudsman was giving the final decision.
All I would say to you is that I wrote the report. It's poorly written, I would be the first to admit it, and it only really came to light again when the election campaign was on and the word was spread. But, no, not all the answers are here, sir.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Ken Epp Conservative Edmonton—Sherwood Park, AB
Good. Thank you very much, sir.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
October 2nd, 2006 / 4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Roger Valley Liberal Kenora, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chadderton. Thank you for your presentation today, and thank you for your service to the country. It was quite something to hear of your service and of the problems you had during your service.
I have a question, and maybe I'll read the bullet point on page 2. It goes back to the members of your council, and it says:
The reference in the Woods Committee Report, which was generally considered an alternative to the major recommendations of the committee, would be an indication that an Ombudsman had the support of Veterans Organizations.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Roger Valley Liberal Kenora, ON
Was that built over years of realizing that this was an office you needed to have to serve veterans? Has it been controversial to get to that point, considering the vast number of members you have serving veterans groups and so on? I'm just wondering how that was achieved. Was it easy or was it difficult, coming to the point where everyone in the veterans organizations supported the idea of an ombudsman?
4:25 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, The War Amps
Yes. The committee met with almost all of the viable veterans organizations at that time. One of the questions the committee threw out was, “This is what we're thinking of if we have to go the minority route.” I'm not saying it still applies, but at that time the veterans organizations said they would prefer an ombudsman rather than a system that had five or six different members on it. The word “political” came into the discussion quite often. I did not make that point particularly, except to say that the appointment of an ombudsman would be considered non-political.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Roger Valley Liberal Kenora, ON
Of the vast number of members on your council, would it be fair to say that the vast majority or just the majority support the ombudsman? Do they do it in entirety? I'm just trying to get a feel for how much support there is for it from your members.
4:25 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, The War Amps
We had a meeting of the National Council of Veterans Associations. I gave them a report on how an ombudsman would work. They seemed to think that was the way we should go, rather than being bogged down with more red tape, administrative horrors, and everything that could come up.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Roger Valley Liberal Kenora, ON
So the only current-day alternative we have is the ombudsman. Your group feels that's the way to go.
I think you mentioned that back in 1924 a bunch of high-bound commissions tried to do work on it and it got wrapped up in the red tape you're speaking of now.
4:25 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, The War Amps
Yes.
If it were put to the national veterans organizations today, I cannot say that they would agree. But I have a feeling that the ones for which I speak—I'm the chairman of a 55-member group—would certainly accept it. They'd say, “Get on with the job and make it quick.”
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Roger Valley Liberal Kenora, ON
Get on with the job because we've had difficulty working with the system we have right now.