Evidence of meeting #32 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 document.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Betty Hinton Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC
I just wanted to say that we don't have a problem.
Conservative
Liberal
Roger Valley Liberal Kenora, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The reason I put this in here is that we are entering into a big study. The first thing I'd like to say is that we all have our suitcases packed, but I've had mine packed here before, and I have had to unpack it for many months. So I think we should have a plan on what we're doing here. I know the government has a plan of what it would like to accomplish.
We've started something at the urging of our colleagues from the Bloc. I don't think any of us at the start realized we were going to get such compelling testimony and such conflicting testimony on how to serve our veterans and the people who are actually in the Canadian Forces who suffer from this.
We've started discussion. These people are going to be our responsibility, and I think we have to make sure that if there's anything we can do in the short term to make the situation better or to react better to the conditions that they have, we have to do it.
I'm concerned that all the information we have on PTSD will be lost due to the challenges of a minority government, whether it's next week or six months from now. I think we have an opportunity to say something to the House, to make a report to the minister, on something we've found, and I think it's our duty to do that as quickly as possible if it will impact the people we serve, the veterans.
So that's why I put this forward for discussion, to make sure that if there's something we can learn and something we can do in the short term, we do that as quickly as possible.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Anders
Fair enough.
I'm intrigued. You said there was conflicting testimony on PTSD. Were there things the witnesses said that you thought contradicted each other?
Liberal
Roger Valley Liberal Kenora, ON
Definitely. The last witness we had talked about whether there was any value at all to early intervention.
Liberal
Roger Valley Liberal Kenora, ON
Before that, we heard there was a lot. I mean, it was just his opinion, but if there are more like that out there, we should be looking into it.
Conservative
Betty Hinton Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC
Well, we don't have a problem with this motion. However, I'd like to put forth an amendment that we specify that study be limited to PTSD issues handled under VAC, under Veterans Affairs Canada. PTSD is handled by both DND and VAC, and I want to make sure this committee doesn't inadvertently derail the overall health care review that we have under way already.
There are many traditional veterans who are counting on this review. As a committee, we said that we would dedicate four meetings to PTSD, which we've done. If we're going to dedicate more meetings to PTSD, I'd like to make certain, first of all, that the overall health care review doesn't get derailed, and that we stick to the things that Veterans Affairs can actually handle, and not get into the Defence part, because that's a completely separate committee.
So that would be my amendment, if that's acceptable to the mover.
Liberal
Roger Valley Liberal Kenora, ON
On that point, I think there are more meetings needed. There might not be that many more, but we have some more questions to ask.
Liberal
Brent St. Denis Liberal Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'd like to support my colleague, and I agree with Betty's friendly amendment; yes, we want to stay within the parameters of our constituency, the veterans. To me, the exigencies of the Parliament we're in.... If we're in a minority, we have to adapt to a minority. If we knew we had three or four years in front of us....
It's to take the opportunity to put in front of Parliament the first chapter, as you might call it, a first section based on the testimony we've heard, plus that of maybe one or two more meetings, as Roger suggests, and with no intention but to continue the full health review. Hopefully the Parliament lasts until 2009 and we get the full thing done. Then we may have other little chapters in there, because we're dealing with a minority. Then when we come to the very end--I would suggest we can still call this first one a preliminary report, I don't think we have to say it's a final report--we're allowed to tweak and adjust, as the case may be.
To me, it's a process thing. Let's get something out there as our best effort, given the circumstances. I respect Betty's suggestion about how to go forward on this, in supporting my colleague Roger.
Conservative
Conservative
Conservative
Bev Shipley Conservative Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON
I don't think anybody is disagreeing about getting ahead. Let's just get ahead on it. And so we would like to put in there that the committee investigate the post-traumatic stress disorder of veterans—something like that.
The other part of it is that we should set a timetable. I really think the last person who was in was somewhat here for a purpose different from what we were after. We should try to decide whether we're going to have a couple of further meetings or one more meeting, or whatever. Let's fill it up with a good diversity of witnesses to come in and talk to us and see whether it's just one person right now or a couple of others. I would suggest, if we're going to have, say, two more meetings, that we get witnesses to come in for the two and bring it to an end. I think we could do that.
We've heard some really good ones. This last one was interesting. It sort of took away, actually, the one before it. I found that a little disturbing, actually, but there are comments on that.
If we could do this, Mr. Chairman, I think that would shut the gate for us.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Anders
To clarify for you, right now what I have from you is the suggestion that we do two more meetings, but there's no specific amendment on your part with regard to the motion. This can be a general understanding; that's fine. Is that what you wish?
Conservative
Bev Shipley Conservative Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON
Yes, no motion, just a direction of this committee to set a schedule.
Conservative
Bev Shipley Conservative Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON
For the amendment? I'm sorry, we'll move the amendment. I thought it had been done.
It's basically just to put “of veterans” in after “Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder”. Or, if Michel has a better way of doing it, it should be clear that it's only about veterans.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Anders
Right now, I just have that we add “of veterans” in there; that's right after “Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder”.
Then there's just a point of discussion, saying that you hope it's only two more meetings.
Conservative
Bev Shipley Conservative Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON
I think we can wrap up. Let's have a discussion. If we can't do it--and nobody thinks that we can't do it.... I'm not so sure we couldn't do it in one more meeting with about three witnesses.