Veterans Affairs Committee on April 29th, 2008

[Todd Russell, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

You still need a place.

[Darragh Mogan]

You need a place, but you also need the competence to do it. We increasingly will have staff visiting remote areas or have contacts in those areas for people who are experiencing trouble. We want to make it widely known that we can be called at any time, 24/7, with a problem, and we'll try to solve it right away. We can't perform miracles in remote areas, but not paying any attention to the problem is hardly the response either.

We'd certainly be open to suggestions. It's not a problem just for Veterans Affairs, but also for community service across the country, especially for older people or those with disabilities, or both. Add to that the multiplying effect of a psychological disability in a remote area and it's a real challenge. I understand that, and we're certainly open to ideas. I think the veterans health services review was trying to overcome complex eligibility, not where people choose to live, but we're certainly open to suggestions in that area.

I don't think there's any obstacle to asking veterans organizations to help out. The only challenge is that because of their advocacy role, they need to be at arm's length from government. We have partnership arrangements now with the Legion that don't violate or in any way put an obstacle in front of their arm's-length advocacy role. It seems to work out very well, principally in the area of looking at client satisfaction in all these institutions or facilities for veterans who are housed across the country--all 7,000 of them. I don't know that there's an obstacle there, except, of course, that they need to be able to advocate on the part of veterans to government and they don't want a relationship to government that impedes that, which is understandable.

We're certainly open to suggestions. It is a challenge.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

We're now going to the Conservative Party of Canada. Mr. Cannan, five minutes.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks to our witnesses. I appreciate the work that you and the rest of the department are doing.

We did have positive news in the most recent budget. I wonder if you could elaborate on those changes, specifically in the veterans independence program.

I represent the riding of Kelowna—Lake Country in the Okanagan Valley, which has a lot of seniors and veterans, specifically widows. I wonder how they could now qualify for the VIP program due to this expansion in the budget of 2008.

[Ken Miller]

As background to that, the veterans independence program was first created in 1981. We subsequently did create expanded eligibility for the continuation of the program for survivors of veterans when certain benefits were in place. However, as has been recognized, there was no potential to put those benefits in place for survivors of veterans who either died before the program was in place or who were not in receipt of benefits even though they may have died after 1981.

The focus of the change that was addressed in the last budget was to bring provisions in place so that such survivors could receive benefits. Specifically, the benefits that were put in place are the grounds maintenance and housekeeping. The focus of this was such that the veteran, had they been alive, would essentially need to have been eligible to receive the program had the program been in place before their death. That's a fairly simple determination for us.

It then becomes a matter of eligibility for the survivor. There are two routes to that eligibility. The eligibility is focused on those who are most needy. It focuses first on those who have a disability or have a low income. There are tests related to both of those. If one or the other of those criteria are met, then we can put grounds maintenance or housekeeping, or both, in place up to an annual maximum of $2,400.

Basically, that was the provision you referred to in Budget 2008.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

That's encouraging. I know surviving spouses of veterans, and one is receiving the benefit, but the one next door is not. One veteran had applied while he was alive and those benefits were carried on, but with the widow next door, her husband didn't apply and she didn't get any benefits.

What's the income? Is it based on a graduated scale, on a low income?

[Ken Miller]

Yes. It's linked to the guaranteed income supplement and their reference levels for minimal salary, and on the disability side it's linked to eligibility for the disability tax credit under CRA.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Okay. I'm moving on to the Last Post Fund. It provides financial assistance, you said, for funeral costs. Could you explain how veterans' families can take advantage of this program?

[Darragh Mogan]

There are two ways, sir.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

I understand from your PowerPoint deck that it's for “a service-related disability or when service eligibility requirements have been met and there are insufficient funds...”. Is it a monetary threshold calculation based on some sort of GIS calculation?

[Darragh Mogan]

There are two ways. One is where it's service-related, in which case the grant is made and the service is provided. The other is where there's a lack of means. There is an asset ceiling involved there. I don't have the exact detail for it, but I can certainly get it for you, and I will.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

And how many families have taken advantage of that program?

[Darragh Mogan]

I don't have it with me, sir, but it's quite old. This fund is a very old agency. It works on our behalf; it's been around for a while. Needless to say, with the age of the World War II veterans, it's an area that gets a lot of business lately.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

You also talked about best practices. Do you have a timeline, when a file is presented to your department, for the turnaround time for adjudicating the file?

[Darragh Mogan]

I can give you some examples of that now. For a rehabilitation program, and we're trying to get this down, it's 41 days. I think that's too long, and I think our colleagues think it's too long. A vocational rehabilitation plan is not something you do overnight, but we're trying to shorten that.

For an awarded disability pension, I think it's four months, which is down from eighteen months seven years ago. We've really been working on a continuous improvement there.

For VIP, I think it's thirty days. There are published standards on this, I think, so I'm just giving you examples that I can recall, off the top of my head.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

With regard to the new veterans charter, I was speaking with a member who used to be in the RCMP.

I have just one quick question, on the job replacement program. What's the success rate, or has there been much uptake on that program?

[Ken Miller]

Do you mean of the job placement program?

As I said in answer to an earlier question, the take-up on it has been relatively low, and I don't have numbers in terms of the success rate. I understand it's fairly high.

We could certainly share that with you, if you're interested in the specifics.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Thanks.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

Now we go over to the New Democratic Party and Mr. Stoffer for five minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Gentlemen, I say the following with the greatest of respect.

Mr. Mogan, you just said that one of the problems with DVA is the complexity of eligibility and the minefield that goes through it. Yet Mr. Miller just announced to Mr. Cannan the eligibility for the new VIP program. The reality is that 30% of widows who weren't covered before may be eligible. They have to have a CRA thing, a disability tax credit, or low income.

This drives me absolutely crazy. If you were in my area, and Bill Casey's riding in Truro, and said that to a bunch of widows, they'd be talking your ear off. Why are you basing it on low income? Wouldn't you consider a 90-year-old disabled enough, from old age, not to be pushing a lawnmower around or doing housekeeping?

It's absolutely unbelievable. You just mentioned the complexity of rules and eligibility and then added two more to a new program, when they were assured by government--this isn't to do with you, this is a political one that did it--that all of them would be covered. This is the problem that veterans and their spouses have. When they signed up and joined the war, nobody asked them how much money they had. So why are we asking how much money they make when they require benefits?

If you could change that in your health care review, that, sir, would go a long, long way. A veteran is a veteran is a veteran, and a spouse is a spouse is a spouse. You shouldn't be tacking on rules and regulations for people in their eighties. They simply don't understand it. They're just asking for help.

As you know, and as we've heard before, this is a generation of people who don't like to ask for help. It is a sign of utter weakness when they have to actually pick up the phone and call for assistance. For people in that generation, you can't just tell them, “Well, ma'am, you can't have it because you don't have a CRA credit.” I dealt with one lady who was told by DVA that she had to go and call the Canada Revenue Agency to see if she could get CRA eligibility before she could possibly apply for VIP.

So I just want to let you know that this is a problem.

The other concern I have is with regard to the forms. Mr. Sweet said a good thing on the PTSD forms, that filling out those forms--and I've seen them--can give you PTSD. You don't need to have it because filling out the forms will cause enough problems.

Again, if you can fix that problem, that would be really great.

The other one I have, sir, is that we've heard it from previous governments and the current minister that the benefit of the doubt will always apply when it comes to the veteran. But that's not true. DVA is one of the few departments around that will actually assign you a lawyer to help you go through the maze of eligibility, and the benefit of the doubt only applies if--if--the interpretation of the legislation applies to it. And that is one of the things they have. If you want to solve the problem with DVA....

You said in your report that 5,000 clients die every year. That's what you said. And that's true. But the reality is that 26,000 veterans die every year. So 21,000 veterans, including their spouses, are not your clients. We're losing on average 140 veterans a day, and their spouses, yet very few of them, really, are your clients.

Many of these people have never applied for programs because they didn't want to. They're not of that ilk. But when they do apply, I would hope that one of the changes you'll be able to impose and make it quicker will be to ask, “Did you serve?” If the answer is yes, then your answer should be, “How can we help you?” That really should be the criteria: “Did you serve?” Nothing else should have to apply.

Thank you.

[Darragh Mogan]

I'm not sure I heard a question there, but I'll assume the question was why the government picked this relatively small group of widows--

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

It's not just that; it's also the hearing aid problems, and VIP for Captain Earl Wagner. He is denied because he makes $250 more than the minimum, yet Mr. Brownlow, who's very wealthy, gets his hearing aids paid for by DVA. Explain that to those two veterans, because I can't.

[Darragh Mogan]

I can explain what would happen had successive governments since 1946 not added these eligibility groups; a whole bunch of people, more now, wouldn't be eligible than are. I'm sympathetic to the idea that when you have eligibility with all kinds of conditions on it, it gets rather difficult to navigate the system. I accept that. But I think the government has made an estimation that at least 12,000 more people are going to be helped now than were. It's a political judgment about whether it's 12,000 or 30,000.

With regard to forms, we're open to changing those. We don't want to put PTSD sufferers through the bureaucratic mill. That's not the intention at all. So we're certainly open to that.

If we look at why lawyers are being provided, if you ask the veterans organizations in the other four countries, they think it's first-rate that legal representation is provided to individual veterans. It has been provided since 1919; it's almost a birthright for a veteran.

So it may be that the system is complex, but at least it isn't complex to navigate for the individual who has a Bureau of Pensions Advocates representative.

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

On the Last Post Fund, by the way, I have a person in Maitland, Nova Scotia, who applied for the program, but on appeal he actually saw the same person who denied him the first time. What it is--

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

Done.