Veterans Affairs Committee on Feb. 20th, 2007

[Greg Thompson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Thank you again, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Sweet has a good point. In terms of the backlog at the Veterans Review and Appeal Board, the backlog looked almost insurmountable when we took office.

The board was short a number of members. We've filled those vacancies—let's put it that way—to catch up and to get up to speed with the process. At the end of the day, it is important to veterans, because you're basically arbitrating.

As you well know, Mr. Chairman, this is a quasi-judicial body that is at arm's length from the minister. They're appointed, and the minister does not interfere. In fact, even when I meet these people at the airport, I sometimes don't want to say hello. You do not interfere in the process. It is a judicial process, and they have a very important role to play.

The truth is we are catching up. At one point, I believe we were behind several thousand cases, if you will. The number would probably shock you, but the fact is we've made 11 appointments to the board. The board is almost up to a full contingent, and we can move through those cases more efficiently. “Expeditiously” is the term we often use.

I'm very confident we'll catch up. In terms of the contingency of the board or the makeup of the board, we're pretty well up to speed there as well.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

Good.

I mentioned the number of veterans we have, and I've interviewed a number of them. I've had cases of very seriously wounded veterans, which you've helped me with, as well as those who have come back physically whole. Surprisingly, in between those two spectra, one of the things I've noticed is there has been a difference this time in psychological health.

In the last interview, I asked a number of questions. They told me about the interaction Veterans Affairs has on the ground with DND, making sure that as they come to the end of their action in Afghanistan, in this case, they're aware of a number of options to, in my words, “psychologically decompress”.

Can you share with the committee the options that some of the soldiers have, as they come to the end of their tour, so they come out with the least occurrences of any kind of stress-related inabilities afterwards?

[Greg Thompson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Again, Mr. Chairman, thank you.

That's an important issue and one that we have spoken a little bit about this morning.

Just as background, Mr. Chairman, one of the interesting Canadians I have met on this job, who is very supportive of me personally and is many times supportive of the government, is Senator Dallaire. He is one of these rare individuals who speaks openly and honestly about his challenges and how he has had to deal with those challenges. As the minister, one can learn a lot by talking to people like General Dallaire. It's not that we're going to agree on everything, but we do agree on this particular issue and the approach to it. I'm very confident that the department has taken extraordinary steps to recognize the situation early, Mr. Sweet, because it's real and it's occurring.

How you really deal with it effectively is to see the early warning signs of members who are presently serving, so that when they do leave the military, it has been identified, hopefully, properly dealt with, and that counselling can be ongoing. When members do leave the services, whether by injury or by choice or by retirement, counselling is made available to them immediately and in fact in a lead-up to their retirement.

That was one of the weaknesses prior to the new charter. As we mentioned, it had to be updated to recognize some of these realities today. Some of those realities are present in the everyday workforce, if you will. There are mental issues, mental strain. Maybe it's the pace we find ourselves running at in the 21st century.

One of the points that some military people--Canadian Forces members now serving or veterans--have made to me over the years is that it's not just the bullets and bombs that we worry about. Sometimes a physical injury is easier to repair than a mental injury.

I am absolutely confident that we're moving in the right direction. We monitor those programs very carefully. We are always there to serve the veterans in those very special need areas. That's definitely one of them, no question at all; there would actually be no debate on that.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

I have one question about the bill of rights and your thoughts on it.

It seems to me that in the veterans community--and this would go right across the entire spectrum now--there is a feeling that Veterans Affairs may not be the only one, but certainly that it should be a significant player in being the champion in remembering the sacrifice of those who have served for Canada.

What is your opinion, Mr. Minister, about including in the bill of rights that a veteran would have the right to rely on Veterans Affairs to be the stewards of the memories of the sacrifice of those who have served?

[Greg Thompson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

That, again, is a powerful message--hearing it from you, Mr. Sweet--because that is one of the things that I think we have to constantly remind ourselves of the great sacrifice made by so many Canadians and of the act of remembrance.

I know in the speech I gave last week, when we were talking about the Juno Beach Centre—and it is sometimes hard to articulate this within 30 seconds or a minute and a half. One of the things that really troubles veterans who came back from these areas of conflict, and still come back, is why they safely returned home and their friend didn't: why did he die or she die and I'm still here? Sometimes there are these psychological issues that veterans deal with effectively internally, and for others, because the circumstances are more poignant, they're more real, more horrific, if you will, the internal processes they use to deal with that are not enough to get them through it.

One thing that every veteran wants, and more important, almost, at some levels than anything else, is this sense of remembrance—remembering the sacrifices made by their colleagues who never returned home. On this idea of remembrance, the department does a much better job today than they did many years ago when I was a student. They're doing a better job with the schools, in terms of that educational process, so that we as Canadians will always remember the sacrifices of those who came before and not take any of this for granted.

We sometimes maybe worry that we take democracy for granted, that we forget about the sacrifices that those young men and women have made in the past and are still making today. So that act of remembrance is something that I think the department does very well, and we never want to lose that. We have to continue to reinforce that sense of remembrance in the greater community, because, as you well know, none of us can do it ourselves. There has to be a sense that this is what we do as Canadians.

I think we're doing a much better job of that within Veterans Affairs than we did even that many, many years ago when I taught school, and even those more years ago, if you will, when I was a student. And of course, in today's international climate, I think it's even more important.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

I will just let everybody know that we allowed for about 10 minutes on that side because normally we would have gone Conservative, NDP, Conservative, but such is the way of life today.

Now we're going over to Monsieur Perron for five minutes.

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

Minister, I have two questions to ask you, and I'd like your answers to be brief enough to fit into the five minutes available.

Let's start with the backlog at the Appeal Tribunal. In my view, you're not going to solve the problem by adding staff, but rather by improving this service within your department. I spoke to you about the case of Armand Pilon. I don't understand how you can tell that man and his wife that you believe their testimony without changing the decision rendered. These people deal with this kind of case every day. Mr. Pilon has been fighting since 1987. The only and dirty solution remaining for him is to take his case to the civil courts and to fight your department, simply because, at the Appeal Board, they can't or don't want to give him the benefit of the doubt.

I believe in Mr. Pilon. I believe in what he, his family and his children tell me. He came to ask me for help because he couldn't get any from the Department of Veterans Affairs. The problem stemmed from the Appeal Board. That's where the problems arise in the majority of cases, and that's why this department has such a backlog. Now I'd like to hear your comments.

[Greg Thompson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Mr. Chairman, that is one I have spoken to the member on, and of course, as you well know, I'm not going to talk about individual cases this morning. I cannot do that.

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

That's an example.

[Greg Thompson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

There are privacy laws. We know that, and the member knows it as well. We respectfully agree on that show.

One thing we have in Canada is an exhaustive process, which many jurisdictions don't, whereby we have an internal process of review. Eventually it can reach the Veterans Review and Appeal Board, where we actually provide legal advice to and support for the client. No other jurisdiction, no other country in the world, does what we do in terms of attempting to get a favourable resolution for the veteran. In many of these cases I would like to see a different outcome, but it is quasi-judicial, and we have to go by the act as it is written. Sometimes it would be a matter of changing the act to make the outcome different.

At the end of the day, you're dealing with thousands of cases, and most of us know full well, because we're all human beings, that we'd love to see a yes to every one of them. I would, personally. But in the real world we know that's not possible. What I can take a level of satisfaction in is knowing that we have a process that works, that it's exhaustive, and that it's better than that of any other jurisdiction in the world.

Every one of us in this room is a human being, and we're not perfect. And the system will never be perfect. That's what we have to work hard to achieve. In some of those individual cases where members of Parliament have intervened, there's still a possibility that they can be changed or the outcomes altered, depending on what stage they're at, because of new evidence that comes forward. That's one of the things we're often reminded of, that sometimes in cases that go to the Veterans Appeal and Review Board, if particular evidence had been present during the initial application, the outcome could have been and would have been favourable.

That's what happens when you work on individual cases. I know the level of frustration the member is experiencing. He's human, he represents these people, and he cares about them.

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

Minister...

[Greg Thompson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Yes?

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

Pierre Allard, of the Royal Canadian Legion, is in the audience. He's from my riding. I'd like Pierre to confirm for us that, at the legion, 80 percent of the problems of service officers are associated with the Appeal Board. We simply want to tell you that things aren't going very well at that board.

As regards post-traumatic stress, I agree with you that it is often easier to repair a severed arm than psychological damage. I can see that point. However, new clients recently seem to have appeared. These are individuals who fought in the First or Second World War and who suffered shellshock. That's like post-traumatic stress. These people have always treated themselves with gin. Some of them see that Veterans Affairs Canada is specializing in these matters, because of the young people, and are asking me whether they can seek assistance from the department. People 80 years old ask me that, and I tell them yes.

We're going to have to start reorganizing. I invite my friend Suzanne to think about people 70, 75 or 80 years of age who have been drinking since they came back from the war and are dealing with alcoholism. That's because we never solved the problem in their heads.

I wouldn't want the same thing to happen to our young people, our sons who are 34 and 35, and for them to deal with that problem until they die.

[Greg Thompson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

No. I agree, Mr. Chairman. We can't and we're not. We're really focused on that issue. There's no doubt in my mind that we are. Again, we've opened up a number of centres across the country, and we continue to focus on that issue, knowing that it's real and it's not going to go away. We have to work, as the member said.

I can remember one of the most interesting talks I heard with regard to this was General Dallaire--who I've mentioned. He talked about the importance of going to the Legion on the east side of Montreal with his father when he was a kid, about the camaraderie, where one minute they'd be laughing and the next minute they'd be crying and hugging each other, and sharing that kind of information. That was the only help they had. He said that the Royal Canadian Legion probably saved more members than you can imagine, and other veterans organizations were.... I think we're better at dealing with that as a department at a human level. Early intervention truly is the key to it, and professional counsellors who are the best in the world.

St. Anne's, which is less than half an hour's drive from your riding, Mr. Parent, is a world-class facility that's almost, in a sense, leading the rest of the world in terms of what they're doing at that facility, right in your home town, if you will. A lot of what they do at St. Anne's is disbursed, if you will, in terms of training and techniques across the country to those other centres. That is like the centre of the universe, if you will, in terms of what we're doing on that particular issue, which is such a concern of yours. I do know that it is a concern of yours because you've sincerely approached me on these issues a number of times. I just want to convey to you that we understand your concern.

On the VRAB, just to pick up on your previous question, and to emphasize this as well, the people who are going on that board today are highly qualified. We want competent people on that board, and we've gone to elaborate lengths to make sure that competent people are on that board. In fact, some of the recent appointments would indicate we're doing exactly that. I think the appointments have been generally well received. The individuals who have been placed on that board are well received in their communities, with professional backgrounds that will add a level of professionalism to the board, which I think all of us at the end of the day will appreciate.

Just so you know, when we're talking about those World War II traditional veterans, we're losing 23,000 of them a year now, succumbing to old age and sickness, dying, if you will--a word we don't like to use. We're bringing about 4,000 new CF veterans into the system, with an average age of 36. So we're losing 23,000 and bringing in 4,000 new veterans a year into the system.

The needs of those veterans have changed over the years. That's why we responded with a new veterans charter, and some of the issues that you've identified are the very ones we're responding to.

At the end of the day, which is kind of sad when you think about it, as we're sitting here we only have three remaining World War I veterans. In fact, I think I'm travelling to Toronto on Saturday to see one of them on his birthday, just to go down and say hello. I guess you're entitled to a visit by the Minister of Veterans Affairs when you turn 106. I've met all three of them. All you have to do is the math--20 years between World War I and World War II, or thereabouts. Twenty years from now, other members of Parliament--you may still be here, Mr. Parent, but I'm not sure if I will--will be sitting here talking about the last three or four remaining World War II veterans. We've got 20 years. They have 20 years left. Most of them would have five to ten years in terms of statistical evidence and the actuary charts we know so very well.

We have a very few short years to get it right for those who are remaining, so that's what we have to focus on. You're absolutely right. Some of these people have suffered in silence for many years and we don't want to forget about them. You're absolutely right.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

Thank you very much, Mr. Minister.

Now, on to Mr. St. Denis for five minutes.

[Brent St. Denis, Liberal, Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'll officially thank you, not only for your presentation earlier today but for that of Ms. Tining, and I offer best wishes on your time in the department, which I hope will be lengthy and fruitful.

Before I go to my question, I'll ask for a quick clarification. If I heard correctly, the minister mentioned that this government had picked April 1 as the implementation date for the Veterans Charter. In fact, it was under the previous government's watch, and I believe the information is well established that April 1, 2006, was always the date. That date had been determined in the previous year as the implementation date. That's just to correct the record, if indeed I heard the minister say that.

On the question of the bill of rights, you mentioned in your opening remarks that you're looking forward to this committee's reporting on the ombudsman. We'll be looking forward to a thorough but expeditious consultation by the department to implement--first of all, to get a bill in place so there won't be a long delay in the implementation of an ombudsman. Do you see the business of studying a bill of rights as in any way delaying work on an ombudsman? In my mind, yes, you can find a relationship, but they are still mutually independent in terms of initiative. In your mind, is there any reason to delay the work towards an ombudsman because work on a bill of rights is still going on?

[Greg Thompson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

No, Mr. Chair, I don't see any delay or impediment to delivery of either of those. As you well know, we're waiting for the report of your committee, and in terms of the work that has already been done with veterans organizations, input from various members of Parliament, and input from others, I think we're well on the way in terms of a bill of rights as well. I don't think any of those, you might say, intellectual debates is going to impede in any way the implementation of either of those. We have hived off part of the department--or a team, rather--to work very closely with veterans organizations.

I know Mr. Perron indicated who's behind me here in terms of some of the veterans in the room, but they were definitely consulted, as I mentioned in my remarks. A lot of that work, in a sense, has been done for us by veterans organizations and some of the people around here as individual members, regardless of what side of the House they sit on, in terms of what they'd like to see.

We've listened and we've consulted, and I think we're going to act wisely in the sense that we're going to act on the recommendations that the very people in this room and others have made.

[Brent St. Denis, Liberal, Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON]

Thank you.

Related to this, some members in the House, including me, have had the honour and the sad duty to be involved in the funeral and memorial services for a couple of soldiers killed in action recently in Afghanistan. It was a very unsettling, sad experience for me.

I'm wondering if the bill of rights shouldn't include families who have had a loved one killed in action. When was that soldier ever a veteran? They didn't become veterans; they were killed in action. Are the families to be treated as the families of veterans? Consider the debate we held about a year ago on what to do when a soldier is returned to Canada--the flag issue, the return ceremony, and how to treat the families. I was very impressed, by the way, with the support the families had in the community around the services. I was very impressed with that.

In your opinion, should this bill of rights include issues in that nebulous grey zone around the death of a soldier, the return, and the eventual settlement by the family of whatever benefits are available to them, or do we wait until some time well after that before we treat them as a veteran's family?

[Greg Thompson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

You're talking about the transition between the active duty of a soldier and the death of a soldier, male or female--because we never know. We have a lot of young men who have lost spouses in conflict zones. At the end of the day, you never know, do you?

But all the families are included in that. I know the transition period is one that is handled very well between DND and Veterans Affairs, Mr. St. Denis, because a veteran is a veteran is a veteran.

Of course, when we're talking veterans, we're talking about their spouses and we're talking about their families. That will be, actually, part of the bill of rights: recognition of the veteran and his family. That will very much be part of the bill of rights.

[Brent St. Denis, Liberal, Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON]

Do I have a few seconds left?

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

You're at six minutes eight, six minutes nine.

[Brent St. Denis, Liberal, Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON]

Just very quickly, then, much has been made by you, here and elsewhere, of the $350 million to be spent on veterans. We would say much of that was committed under the previous government's watch, including about $250 million for the Veterans Charter.

How much of that $350 million is new money that could be genuinely attributable to initiatives of this government?

[Greg Thompson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

All the moneys that are apportioned, as you well know, are voted upon by individual members of Parliament--either yes or no--but the truth is those are moneys being delivered by this government today and not by the previous government. Governments have a choice about whether to spend money or not, and we've chosen to spend $352 million on veterans, over and above what the previous government spent. There was a deliberate decision by our government to do that, and we have done it. Over $200 million of that, as you've indicated, goes to the Veterans Charter.

It was spent under our watch, and that was a deliberate choice on our part.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

Now we'll go to Mrs. Hinton for five minutes.

[Betty Hinton, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Minister, there are so many things I could touch on. You've raised a number of issues today, but one of the issues that was raised, aside from post-traumatic stress, which is a very difficult thing for all of us to handle.... I always call it “invisible wounds”. It's quite easy to identify someone who's lost an arm or a hand from war, but it's quite a different matter to actually judge by looking at someone what's happened to their psyche from being in war. So I'm very pleased with what we're doing to try to make things better for those with post-traumatic stress.

You also gave some statistics that showed we're losing 23,000 World War II veterans a year. That's a very depressing figure. It seems such a shame. But since the subject of remembrance was raised, I wonder if you'd like to make a few comments regarding a few things that have happened in the last couple of weeks and about something that's going to happen in the next month or so.

I was able to participate in a program that was called Valentines for Veterans, which had young schoolchildren creating valentines and giving them to veterans one to one. I watched the faces of the veterans who were receiving the valentines: they broke into grins from ear to ear. And I watched the children, who now had a better understanding of what it was these people sacrificed and what it is that they enjoy today because of those sacrifices. I found that very heartening.

I also had the opportunity to attend a tea with the nursing sisters, which was, again, another real eye-opener. These are ladies--I'm sure they wouldn't mind my saying so--who are in their eighties, incredibly feisty, and excellent examples of the kind of care that veterans have received from back then up to today.

Those are all positives, but what I really would like to talk about is something I don't understand. It's something that has been bothering me for a number of years, and that is that when we make these pilgrimages, as a government, we bring in a number of administrative people--I have no problem with that, but we are not bringing in enough students. I think if you're going to have remembrance and you're going to have an appreciation, students are a very important component of that.

I understand, Mr. Minister, that we're going to be bringing 5,000 students to Vimy this time, and I wonder if you could elaborate on that. I've witnessed a couple of ceremonies in preparation for which students actually had to do research on one of the veterans and then tell their stories. It was probably the most moving thing I've ever seen.

We've now got 5,000 coming. Could you please elaborate?