Veterans Affairs Committee on Nov. 6th, 2006

[Col Don Ethell]

I feel like you've pinned me against the wall here.

[Gilles-A. Perron, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

No, no, I am only asking—

[Col Don Ethell]

You're asking for a political answer from an old soldier, and I don't know what the answer is, other than that I still believe--my opinion only--that the ombudsman should respond to the minister, whatever party is in power.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

You still have a minute, Monsieur Perron.

[Gilles-A. Perron, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

I have another concern. How long should the ombudsman be under contract? Five years? Six years? Is this a renewable mandate, or non renewable? There has to be a mechanism for removing the ombudsman from his position if he isn’t doing his job properly. Should it be a two-, five-, six- or ten-year mandate, renewable or not? Do you have an opinion on this?

[Col Don Ethell]

Once again, I think it would be up to the minister, if not a committee formed specifically for that. I think one year would be way too short, because he's probably still learning his or her job in that timeframe; two years, three years at a minimum, if not five years. Ten years, in my opinion, is too long.

Renewable--I think that would once again be up to the minister of the day or whatever committee is the governing committee, if you want to use that term. There has to be a check and balance. By the same token, the minister and/or committee, if you're going the committee route, should have the capability of removing the ombudsman, because, heaven forbid, regardless of all the honesty, integrity, loyalty, and so forth, sometimes people make a mistake or get into a position where the mistake is not palatable for the veterans.

I mentioned veterans specifically because they're the ones who are going to be served by this individual. They and their families are the ones who will be served by this individual, and to be quite frank, if he or she is not doing the job.... There are many mechanisms other than committees here; the veterans associations are going to come aboard him or her, pointing out the problems in regard to any ombudsman.

[Gilles-A. Perron, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

In closing, I would like to say that we, the politicians, have the opportunity to be relieved of our duties every three or four years depending on the frequency of elections. I have no further comments.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

His time is over, Mr. Ethell, not yours.

[Col Don Ethell]

No, that's all right. I found that stimulating.

Thank you, sir.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

You can respond, if you wish.

[Col Don Ethell]

Oh, was that a question? The translation was very slow, I'm sorry.

[Gilles-A. Perron, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Could you give just a final comment?

[Col Don Ethell]

Should he or she be removed after three or four years? With just cause, they can be removed anytime. But what you're saying is they're going to do a three- or four-year term and then he or she is going to be replaced.

[Gilles-A. Perron, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

I was referring to the fact that we could be thrown out of office every three or four years when there are elections.

[Col Don Ethell]

That's a political question.

In my personal opinion, I don't think that should be the case. If you're going to remove the ombudsman, for whatever reason, who suffers? The veterans, the things that are on his or her plate. I'm not saying to put the ombudsman above Parliament--heaven forbid, you're the governing authority in this country. But you have to hit a happy balance. If the government is going to change every year for the next five years—don't read anything into that, but I use that as an example—that means we're going to have five different ombudsmen. That is not going to work. And who suffers? The veterans--if not the system.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

Fair enough, Colonel.

Mr. Stoffer, for five minutes.

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Sir, you said you were honoured to be in front of us. I think, actually, we have the honour of being in front of you and your colleague, because you're the ones who actually serve. We thank you for taking the time out to be with us.

[Col Don Ethell]

Thank you.

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

Sir, how many people are in your organization?

[Col Don Ethell]

Well, that's a good question, and it's going to be a long answer.

Our organization has a membership of just over a thousand. There are six organizations. The Legion has approximately 450,000; the ANAVETS, 36,000 to 38,000; the NCVA, I don't know--that's a composite of various organizations. We have a thousand; CPVA, the peacekeepers, have a thousand; the Gulf War vets, just under a thousand.

But it's not a thousand, because I'm a legionnaire. I'm a member of the ANAVETS. I belong to three different regimental associations. I belong to the airborne association. It's a lot of osmosis and a lot of contacts out there, and they know that the six representatives are on these various committees and we're representing their interests.

We would love to have a membership of 15,000. We don't have that. It's not a big problem to us. But we'd like to think we represent all of those who have served on peace support operations—and I used that term intentionally instead of “peacekeeping”—throughout the years, be it 150,000.... If somebody has a problem, they're going to come to us.

There are only six of us on these various committees, and somebody has to represent their interests.

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

Thank you, sir.

One of the interesting things about a committee and asking questions is that we learn things, the different nuances. Look, for example, at the situation in Afghanistan. Those in the regular force can come back to Borden, Gagetown, Petawawa, and they'll be surrounded by people 24/7; it's their discussion all the time. But a reservist comes back and goes to Home Hardware, goes to Canada Post, and that person really doesn't have anybody else to rebound to in terms of discussing some of the situations they've gone through that may not be very nice to talk about. There's a peer group at a base, yet a reservist may not have that opportunity. So an ombudsman, or something of that nature, may be something that individual would go to.

You've worked with reservists. From your dealings with them, how difficult would you say it is for them to access services, or even just to find someone to talk with regarding their episodes in theatre?

[Col Don Ethell]

At one time, reservists did not go overseas. I think when we mounted the operation in Central America, we broke the logjam. If we needed a specific individual, a Spanish speaker, a pilot, and so forth--I was the director of peacekeeping ops--they made an exception to send this class B pilot down there, and that kind of broke the logjam. So today, with what we've gone through in the last few years, there are a tremendous number of reservists out there.

One of the problems with reservists, even before any of this began, is that sometimes they will just walk away. The uniform is gone and so forth. It's difficult to track them. Technically, they can be found and charged, whatever, but that's not the case. They just want to get the equipment back, if possible.

Second, some of the people coming back from overseas, be it in a contentious area or even in a non-contentious area--in a benign situation--come back and say, “That's it. I don't want anything to do with the GD army. I've had my fill. I'm out of here”. And they disappear over the horizon. That can't happen with a regular force individual because they're tied to a contract.

When reservists are employed overseas, they are usually part of an existing regimental system, the artillery or the RCDs or the PPCLI, or so forth. In my time they were always treated as part of the family. Sure, when they went home they went back to their respective units, but because of workload, in some cases, that unit has difficulty tracking them.

Second, from a legal point of view, when that individual goes back to his unit and his own CO and his own regimental sergeant major and so forth, the unit that employed him overseas really doesn't have the right to direct anything to this individual because he is not under its command.

It was a problem we addressed during a Canadian Forces advisory council in regard to reserves and employment in the reserves--guaranteed employment--which is a festering sore across this country. Unlike the United States with the National Guard, our people are not guaranteed employment. In some cases, they are, on a volunteer basis, but some of them are left hanging.

As much as people try, because of the tremendous workload that's imposed on the existing units, particularly when they're coming back and going through decompression and so forth, sooner or later that reservist is going to move back to his own organization.

Having said that, when that person has gone back to his militia unit, say the Governor General's guards or whatever, one would like to think that the unit says, “We have Bloggins or Smith back, Sergeant Jones, and he has been over there and we need somebody to monitor this individual.” Does the person have any medical problems? Was that properly checked out? Was the person in action? Was the person there when some people got wounded? Does the person need some advice and counselling?

You don't like to use the term “mental health”. It's a dirty word in the military. That's why we've gone to operational stress injuries. “Do you need somebody to talk to? If you don't want to talk to somebody in a uniform, then go talk to one of these peer support coordinators who are in civvies.” They are usually master warrant officers, right down to corporals, who are specifically chosen to talk to that individual, not to listen to the war story, heaven forbid, and not to have a beer, but just to try to channel that individual to the right place, be it the operational stress injury clinics put up by Veterans Affairs, or the OTSSC, as they are called, the equivalent, that are put up by DND.

There's a monumental number, as I've indicated, out there. In the case of the reservists, it's more difficult to track.

I don't know if that answered your question or not.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

Mr. Stoffer, you're a minute and 53 seconds over. I apologize.

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

No worries, I'll come back. Thank you.

[Col Don Ethell]

Did I cut into your question time?