Evidence of meeting #7 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 rights.
4 p.m.
Bloc
Gilles-A. Perron Bloc Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
You described what an ombudsman should be.
That's what you described. You state all his duties, but you don't say who he reports to. Does he report to a House of Commons committee, the Minister of Veterans Affairs, the Pope or the Prime Minister? Who's his superior?
4 p.m.
As an Individual
I think the veterans who have gone overseas and gone to war for more than a century have fought for Canada. We don't go and fight for an individual or for a political party--in spite of the good work of the parties. I think an ombudsman who's going to ensure that this sacrifice is honoured and upheld should report to all Canadians, to Parliament. I believe it should not be filtered by a political party or by a minister.
There are also practical reasons for that. The Veterans Review and Appeal Board does need to have some oversight. There is very little accountability. That has been noted through multiple presentations over the past decade. The ombudsman would offer that accountability.
VRAB reports through the minister to the Governor in Council, so the ombudsman would have to report to either the Governor in Council or Parliament in order to ensure the effective operation and oversight of VRAB.
4 p.m.
Bloc
4 p.m.
As an Individual
I don't think an ombudsman would have the same sweeping powers of an Auditor General.
We're talking about the sacrifice of some very noble and important Canadian citizens. After years of difficulty in dealing with predecessors of the Veterans Review and Appeal Board and dealing with previous organizations and forms of the department, I think there have to be some powers. We have to get someone who can get to the bottom of this.
It's a very complex bureaucracy at Veterans Affairs. I think merely reporting to the minister will not allow the timelines and effectiveness of an ombudsman's office to be optimized. So I think it's very important that--
4 p.m.
Bloc
Gilles-A. Perron Bloc Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
On page 3 of your report, you ask: “Who would have access to the Ombudsman's Office?” You put the present armed forces and veterans in the same boat. When veterans were a matter for the Standing Committee on Defence, there was an ombudsman. But you criticized them because it was too concerned with National Defence and not enough with the armed forces. If we create this ombudsman position, will the armed forces be opposed to it? Shouldn't it be completely separated?
4 p.m.
As an Individual
That's an excellent point, Monsieur Perron. I'm confused enough, and I've been through this system for years. Yes, we have to minimize the confusion for the soldiers and the veterans.
I think they should all have access. The ombudsmen's power will come in the skilled training of its employees, who will be able to vet and do triage at the initial intake of those complaints. They would be able to say immediately whether it's a mandate of the DND ombudsman or whether it's the mandate of Veterans Affairs.
This has to be of great concern. That's why we put in the recommendations that there should be skilled and highly trained people, not only to do the investigations but also at the public level, with the intake workers.
4 p.m.
Bloc
Gilles-A. Perron Bloc Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
I'll ask you to shorten your answers because I'd like to ask you as many questions as possible.
Is that your report? Did you send it to the people who are preparing the job description for an ombudsman? Did you send it to all the committee members? Did the Department of Veterans Affairs, located in Prince Edward Island, ask you for your opinion on an ombudsman? Did you have the opportunity to express your opinion? If you work alone in your corner, it's not worth the trouble, but if you work with us, it'll work out well.
4 p.m.
As an Individual
This is the first time we've had the honour of tabling a report to committee members, and we're hoping it will be of value to you in your work.
I have submitted copies of the report to the six major organizations. I have no idea what they think of it or what they're going to do with it. I've also submitted it to the minister, as well as the deputy minister, for distribution within the department, for those people concerned. I've had no word back on any of it. This is the only feedback I've received on the report, in terms of an official capacity, right here today.
4 p.m.
Conservative
4 p.m.
Bloc
4 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Anders
That was brief.
We don't have our NDP member today, so Mrs. Hinton, are you interested in asking questions?
June 13th, 2006 / 4 p.m.
Conservative
Betty Hinton Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC
Yes, I am. Thank you.
There was one comment from Mr. Perron that I might be able to help clear up.
It is my understanding that the ombudsman for defence...once you have been discharged from the army and finished your service, you don't have access to that ombudsman any more. So that's the rationale behind this ombudsman--
4 p.m.
Conservative
Betty Hinton Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC
Is that not correct? That was certainly my understanding.
I'll let you answer that later on, but there are a few things I want to say.
It feels like I've known Mr. Bruyea for a long, long time, and Louise Richard as well. They have been very instrumental. I probably will never get another chance to say this and have it on the public record, so I'm going to say it today.
Having talked with Mr. Bruyea and with Louise Richard and with many other veterans across this country, I learned there were a lot of obstacles they faced that I was completely unaware of. Because of the discussions we've had over this pretty extended period of time, I went forward to the leader of my party, who was leader of the opposition at the time, and expressed all of the concerns that were told to me across the country. I was told by my leader, who is now the Prime Minister, to put forward a piece of legislation to go to the conference for the Conservative Party of Canada. I did that. Two of the seven things in those pieces of legislation are:
A Conservative Government will treat all veterans with respect and will create a Veterans' Bill of Rights to ensure that all disputes involving veterans are treated quickly, fairly and with the presumption in favour of the rights of the veteran.
The second one is:
The Conservative Party would immediately enlist the services of an Ombudsman with a mandate similar to that of the National Defence Ombudsman
I say that for one purpose and one purpose only. I know you feel that sometimes you have been beating your head against the wall and no one is hearing you. I'm here to assure you that you have been heard; that those concerns you have brought forward as a modern-day veteran have been echoed by traditional veterans. The example I give you is Lieutenant-Colonel Al Trotter, who went through the same kinds of problems you went through. We finally resolved his after a year and a half.
This ombudsman position is being brought into existence because of people like you and Al Trotter, who told us what their needs were.
I will have a question for you, but I want to tell you that from my perspective, you, Louise, Perry, Tom, and all the people like you who've talked to us over the years, you leave a living legacy that will go on long after you will. There will be an ombudsman in place.
Today's discussions are for us to hear from you again what you think that position should be about, what you think the power should be.
It will be this committee that will discuss these issues, and we will try to come up with the best alternative for all veterans concerned. The value you bring to this table when you give us your opinion and your experience is tremendous. I know that sometimes it feels like you're not being heard, but I want to tell you that you are being heard and that your legacy is tremendous.
I'll give you an opportunity, if you like, to maybe put a bit more detail into some of the things you raised in your opening comments, because I know it's a limited amount of time and the field is open. Go for it.
4:05 p.m.
As an Individual
Wow. Thank you very much, Mrs. Hinton. I appreciate your comments. I will pass on your comments to other veterans I know who have been fighting. I'm sure it will mean just as much to them, if not more.
In the attachment that I provided, there are a number of considerations, the minimum considerations, for creating that ombudsman. I'd like the committee to consider those seriously in order that the ombudsman truly be something that represents and respects the dignity and legacy that veterans have provided to Canada and the sacrifices they've endured.
On a more focused level in terms of the ombudsman, there's going to be a lot of fear within the bureaucracy. There's no doubt that there will be fear. However, I would like to emphasize that the ombudsman is there for the bureaucracy too. It's not only for the employees who perhaps feel that they're not being managed properly or they have some sort of grievance; it's also for the managers. It's an effective tool.
When I was in the military as a manager and a leader, I wanted to know the truth. I wanted to know what was really going on with the men so that I could ensure that the team was the most effective possible for carrying out that job. I would hope that the same philosophy exists within the Department of Veterans Affairs, that those managers, whether it be the DM, the ADM, or all the way down to district supervisors, would want to know what the truth is out there in terms of the effectiveness of their services and programs. Are they really dealing with their client service base?
One of the most ironic things about the Department of Veterans Affairs is that you have a department that I believe is unique--and please correct me if I'm wrong--in that it is 99.9% dedicated to providing client service. Yet there's no client service response cell, no mechanisms for monitoring whether veterans services are being carried out effectively. Yes, they have internal mechanisms, but we certainly don't see how those measurements are carried out.
If I walk into a Staples or a Home Depot, I don't walk by the cash register--what they can get out of me--first. I walk by the customer service counter--how can they help me? How can they encourage the relationship of trust?
That has to be the key factor. We have to re-instil trust between the department that provides this service and the veterans, who are all about trust. That's what going into battle is all about: trusting the man beside you, trusting your leaders, and trusting your subordinates.
The Department of Veterans Affairs has to have a mindset change in terms of what it means to be in the military. Probably indicative of the fact that Veterans Affairs doesn't understand that is that they've advocated, under the new charter, priority hiring. Yet Veterans Affairs has, from what recent statistics show--and I can show this on my hand--fewer than five employees who were previously in the military.
So if Veterans Affairs wants to live up to the fact that they want to employ veterans and understand the culture, they have to step forward and listen to people, veterans like us, and have an ombudsman that can be a more powerful and articulate representative of veterans like us.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
4:10 p.m.
As an Individual
Ms. Hinton, I'd also like to remind the committee of what the minister said last week, and this echoes what Sean was talking about.
The minister said last week that time is on our side, that there is a 29- or 30-year period to fix the glitches within the new Veterans Charter.
I vehemently disagree with that. I also disagree with his statement that the glitches will be fixed in the new Veterans Charter if this government or a future government decides to do it.
You rightly said that everything that is in your election statement, which I have here, has to be done in a context that's meaningful, which means that “immediate” is not translated as 29 or 30 years from now, or sometime during the next 10 years. Immediacy has a different meaning to those of us who sit on this side of the table.
Also, reflecting on some of the shortcomings that were discussed at the last committee meeting, it has been over 50 years and we're still waiting for the Agent Orange problem to be resolved. We've had veterans from World War II who have not had their cases resolved. It has to be a question of timeliness--not eventually.
Thank you.
4:10 p.m.
As an Individual
I just want to add a quick comment. It's a compliment—I want to compliment the committee.
Perhaps we didn't make it clear; we'll also be willing to speak, if you have questions, about the bill of rights, and we can give you a limited response on VIP.
I wanted to compliment the committee and echo what Member of Parliament Betty Hinton has said about this committee; that the previous members were very important in bringing about changes to VIP.
I wanted to pass on that compliment to you. We're not just here to complain.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Anders
Just to let you know, some people have had ten minutes, but it's not because the questioners were taking more than seven minutes; it's our witnesses.
Now we're over to the Liberals again.
Mr. Valley, you're up.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Roger Valley Liberal Kenora, ON
Okay.
Thank you for coming today.
I'd like to refer to page 2 of your comments. You say, halfway down the page, “...it is important that the office be powerful, independent and impartial”. You go on in the next paragraph to explain that the ombudsman position created for DND and CF did not, at the start, have that ability. It appears from your statements a little later on that this was corrected through a major effort and that it didn't take too long. So it's working for the armed forces right now. You need an independent set-up for the veterans, and you go down farther to talk about how this is being set up.
My first question, a brief question, is this. An assistant deputy minister of Veterans Affairs has been appointed to set this process up, and you take issue with that. Can you tell me when that person was appointed and how it came about? Is it very recent? We know the election was on January 23. We know there have been five months since. Can you tell me when it happened?