Thank you, and have a cookie before you go.
First of all, Mr. Griffis, thank you very much for coming. I had the privilege of speaking to one of your organizations in Greenwood a few weeks ago.
Sir, you had indicated how the VIP is working, and you're absolutely correct; it works for those who receive it. But for those who have been denied it because of the principles and policies that are in place, it can be a very frustrating experience, as I'm sure you're aware.
I'll give you the example of Chris Beattie. She is a woman whose husband was exposed to Chalk River. He was very ill. DVA came to his home and said, “Sir, you are entitled to VIP. We are going to give it to you.” He died before he actually received it. Because he died before he actually received it, she is not entitled to VIP services.
As you know, sir, by the time we go to bed tonight, we will lose another 120 veterans and/or their spouses due to old age and sickness. And we're losing an awful lot of them very, very quickly.
We had a previous assurance by a former opposition leader, and now Prime Minister, that VIP would be extended immediately, and it hasn't happened yet. I understand there is a health care review, which is very important, not just for VIP but for other aspects of it.
Do you not believe, sir, that something like VIP, which does save the taxpayers money, should be extended immediately to people who call in? I have a very straightforward view. As you know, many of the older veterans find it very difficult to fill out forms. If they didn't get a hearing test during the war, they may be denied hearing aids or pensions for that, because there is no so-called medical evidence that they can link their need to their service.
We had a gentleman in Windsor, Nova Scotia, the other day who was denied by VRAB. He was a firefighter with DND for many years and was denied compensation or a pension benefit because they couldn't prove that his cancer and his heart problems were caused by smoke inhalation, because he didn't have all the medical evidence behind him.
The government, and other people, have said, sir, that the benefit of the doubt should always fall upon the veterans. If an 84-year-old veteran calls up looking for help, shouldn't the answer be, “we'll be there to help you, and what do you need?” instead of “well, you didn't have this particular medical form”, or “you may be making too much money, we're not able to help you”, or “you don't qualify for this particular benefit”?
We hear the good stories, but we hear an awful lot of the most unfortunate ones of people who have been denied.
What advice could you give us?