Veterans Affairs Committee on Dec. 13th, 2007

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

Thank you very much, Mr. Sweet.

Now we're back over to the Liberal Party of Canada and Mr. St. Denis.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for being here, Mr. Griffis. I'll also add my thanks for your service and as you continue your service in support of the veterans.

One of the issues we want to make very clear—and we have discussed it here on many occasions. As one of my colleagues has already said, a veteran is a veteran is a veteran. Even though, in the minds of the public, there might—I say might—be some distinction between somebody who was in the Second World War or the Korean War versus those who maybe served at home in Canada in very important jobs, as mechanics, for example, at Petawawa, which is very important, or as a peacekeeper--many of those peacekeeping missions were in tougher circumstances than some of the war circumstances.

That said, have you ever experienced any difference in the level of service or the response of the department because one was a peacekeeper versus a person who was a World War II veteran, for example? Were you always treated equally, or was there ever a difference in approach?

[Ronald Griffis]

To the best of my knowledge, we've always been treated equally. There's been no difficulty.

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

In my own riding, I'm thinking of a Mr. Meier and another gentleman, Mr. Morrissette, one of whom was a Second World War veteran and the other was a peacetime veteran. He may have been a peacekeeper; he was in Germany, so he may not have been a peacekeeper per se, but it was post-war service. In both cases, their injuries were undocumented. They were young and possibly in the early stages of their service, and they may have tried, in the event of an injury—in one case it was a knee, and in the other case a gentleman fell off a truck because it moved while he was on the back of it—and there was a lack of support, as they would say, in terms of documenting the incident. Later on, when these injuries manifested themselves as they got older, they couldn't go back. There was no file, or there was an insufficient file to support their cases.

Is there a way around that? Is the notion of benefit of the doubt appropriate? What level of proof does a veteran have to provide, without a file or a complete file, in order to access services? It would seem to me that if somebody swore an affidavit, that might be sufficient.

Could you talk about the documentation? Maybe it applies to your veterans and maybe it doesn't.

[Ronald Griffis]

I find if there is a lack of documentation with respect to an injury or with respect to a claim, if that claim is examined by a person with knowledge of the particular employment of the claimant, that could assist the claimant.

I'll give you an example. If a person spent a great many years in a ceremonial unit and had occasion to fire the older weapons, the FNC1 and the .303, at shoulder height, and explained this, a young person today, although they're very well educated, would say he was just firing a gun, but in those days no hearing aids or noise aids were provided. If a person who had that type of experience could examine the claim and address it from that point of view.... It's like going to an orthopedic surgeon. If you go there with a bone problem, he'll help you out; if you go there with a blood pressure problem, perhaps he would send you to another specialist.

As I've indicated, for instance, if a person is always doing the 21-gun salutes on Parliament Hill, or whatever number of gun salutes they have, and we had a person who had knowledge of that particular activity and could identify with it, then certainly that would be a way to go.

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

In your experience, how much has the disability itself, whether it was hearing, whether it was a physical injury, or even an issue of literacy...? We presume there's a reasonable level of education going into the military regardless, and as we look at veterans of more modern times, it may be less of an issue, but is literacy an issue itself? You talked about the gentleman who didn't even want you to bring his name forward. Maybe he had anxiety over having to deal with the government.

What are some of the social barriers that you see for veterans? Are they literacy or anxiety? I think you get the point of my question.

I think you're allowed to respond to that, Mr. Griffis, if you can.

[Ronald Griffis]

I agree with your submission. When a veteran experiences difficulty, I find they withdraw. They withdraw from social activities; they withdraw from the community; they withdraw from normal activities that you and I perhaps do every day without thinking twice about. They just withdraw, and that's a sad situation, bearing in mind that if they had, for instance, a hearing aid--although a hearing aid is quite expensive--a lot of their problems could be addressed.

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

Thank you, Mr. Griffis.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

Thank you.

We'll now go over to Mr. Shipley.

Just before Mr. Shipley begins, Mr. Griffis, you are our witness today and our guest. As you can see, some of us are having lunch. If you wish, we can have the staff of the committee bring you some lunch.

[Ronald Griffis]

No, it's okay. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

Okay.

Oh, I see, we're going over to Mr. Cannan, are we? Okay, fair enough.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have just a quick question, and then I'll pass it to my colleague, Mr. Shipley.

Thank you very much for your presentation. I didn't hear your preamble, but I did read your website and the information that was provided.

I also would like to thank you and your organization for the work you do.

I know you represent a broad perspective of individuals. Looking at the website, you represent “retired and serving Canadian military (Regular and Reserve), RCMP and civilian personnel who have served on United Nations Peacekeeping Missions”. So thinking of the diversity of individuals, men and women, that you have to address, do you find much of a difference between the RCMP needs and those of the Canadian military?

[Ronald Griffis]

I find the RCMP have much better benefits than the military do. I feel the military benefits could be addressed, increased.

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

There's a bit of a disparity then?

[Ronald Griffis]

It's not much, but these are things that are negotiated on contracts and things of that nature.

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

Hopefully, this review will address that.

Regarding the issue of hearing aids, I know it's a big issue in my constituency. My wife actually works for an otolaryngologist--ear, nose, and throat doctor--working with the technology. What's changed so much now with the hearing aids, how quickly the technology.... It costs $5,000 for a little hearing aid now, and you can barely even see it in your ear. There are devices available for veterans. I'm hoping that our new system and the benefit program will address those needs to give our veterans the services they require.

Thank you, again, for your services.

I'd like to also wish all the members and the staff the best of the season. Merry Christmas.

Thank you.

[Ronald Griffis]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

Mr. Shipley.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

I have just one question, and in fact I know you've sort of touched on it. We've had the Gerontological Advisory Council's report Keeping the Promise--and you've talked about it. Could you suggest some recommendations for change that would be advantageous? Do you have some that you could talk to us about?

[Ronald Griffis]

I find that the recommendations and the changes that are being proposed and prepared by Veterans Affairs Canada--at least by the people that I talk with and that I'm in committees with--are reasonable under the circumstances, and they are moving forward. The difficulty I see is that, as Mr. Stoffer mentioned before, we have veterans dying every day. I think we lose 20,000 veterans a year, and that's just terrible.

We have to move ahead faster than we are doing, but by the same token, I appreciate that we can't hire people left, right, and centre to address something that's going to be over a period of five years, or perhaps less or perhaps more.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

I would think there will be movement ahead on this, hopefully. As we've come through this committee and had reports, it's certainly been the desire of our government to move ahead with the VIP. We recognize the significance of it.

I think sometimes we tend to think it's all about cutting the lawn and removing the snow. And that's a portion of it, but it reaches much more into the health care aspects of individuals and keeping them in their local communities, in their surroundings, and in their homes as long as we can.

Again, I want to thank you, Mr. Griffis, for coming back out today. I wish you and your family and everyone a merry Christmas and a happy new year.

[Ronald Griffis]

Thank you, sir.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

Now we'll go over to the New Democratic Party. Mr. Stoffer, you have five minutes.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and Mr. Griffis, again.

Sir, the other day, at an air force reception, I met a gentleman who had served in Afghanistan. He said something to me I hadn't thought of before. He said that the mission in Afghanistan will not be finished until the last person who serves in that mission dies. Basically, what he was referring to was that assistance for some of these individuals who come back will be lifelong. If they come back with PTSD or physical or mental injuries of some kind, for them and their families, the care from the government will probably be for the rest of their natural lives. I thought that was extremely poignant.

Would you agree with the statement that a mission is not completed until the last person who served in that mission is gone? In other words, he was saying that care for the veteran should go from the time they're in the service right to their headstone.

[Ronald Griffis]

A qualified answer to that is yes, I agree. A great many veterans are going to come back, and they're going to be receiving care of some nature from Veterans Affairs Canada. It's only reasonable, as I understand it.

I understand that when the service personnel leave Afghanistan, they stop in Cypress. In Cypress they're interviewed with respect to any problems. Some of the problems that have been identified have been PTSD.

I was talking with a district officer from Veterans Affairs Canada, and they indicate, if memory serves me correctly, that 27% of the persons interviewed in Cypress have indicated that they require assistance with respect to PTSD. Now that may be higher as some return to Canada and leave the service.

That is particularly interesting with respect to the member of the militia or the reserves who goes on a nine-month contract, six months being in Afghanistan. Then he comes back to his unit and fails to attend any parades with the militia unit--they parade two nights a week--and they lose contact with him for whatever reason. And then he requires assistance. So there's a difficulty in that particular respect. But I feel that if a person has experienced the terrible difficulties in Afghanistan, he or she will require assistance for a great many years.