Veterans Affairs Committee on Dec. 13th, 2007

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

Thank you, sir.

Along with my colleague Mr. Sweet, it's the first I've heard of the Royal Canadian Legion and other groups getting together to form at least some form of alliance. On the surface, that is something I think should be pursued with great vigour, because I think it's a wonderful suggestion to put everything under one tent and at the same time to maintain your own identity.

Sir, just as a sidebar, I received a call the other day from some guys who were on the HMCS Bonnie during the Cuban missile crisis. One thing they mentioned was that they were never formally recognized with a medal for the so-called Cold War effort. They were wondering if it's at all possible if one could be struck.

It's the first time I've heard of that request. I'm just wondering what you think of that. Would it be feasible, advisable, or even possible for the government now to recognize the so-called Cold War veterans who served, especially during the Cuban missile crisis?

I know it's an off-the-topic question, but I figured, while you're here, you might be able to help me out on this.

[Ronald Griffis]

I think it would be an extremely difficult endeavour, bearing in mind that during that particular crisis, armed forces personnel from right across Canada were sent to various locations, just in case something did take place. Those in Montreal were sent up to Saint-Jérôme, Quebec. Those in Ottawa were sent to Carp, and it keeps going like that. So it would be difficult to identify those persons.

It would be difficult to identify the difficulties they encountered, if in fact they did encounter any difficulties, with respect to the Cuban missile crisis. Or was it just another exercise by the Canadian Forces?

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

Thank you very much, and thanks again for your service. Have a great one.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

Thank you, Mr. Stoffer.

Now we'll go to Monsieur Perron for five minutes.

[Gilles-A. Perron, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

I was stunned when you said that 27% of people who have been debriefed upon returning from Afghanistan have psychological injuries as a result of their service.

That leads me to ask you a question that is a great concern to me. I'd like to hear your comments on whether, in light of past and present experience, that would have been useful to you. I hear that the army spends millions of dollars—and I agree with that—to provide good training to young members who are sent to the United States and across Canada to be trained in combat and the mission in Afghanistan. However, only two and a half hours are devoted to preparing them psychologically for the atrocities that they may perhaps survive. Perhaps we could help them diagnose themselves in order to determine whether they have problems when things don't go well during the mission.

Should we do proactive training, in other words try to prepare our young soldiers as much as possible to face the possibility of psychological injuries that they might suffer in a theatre of operations? Would it have been helpful for you to have a kind of prevention course on the possibility of such injuries?

[Ronald Griffis]

Yes, I think a lot more can be done for the young men and women who are serving overseas.

I don't know what else I can say on that. I agree with your comments that more could be done and should be done. Being the nice people we are in that we're Canadians, and to see the things that take place in a foreign land, it's extremely difficult.

[Gilles-A. Perron, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Unfortunately, there were psychological injuries during World War I, trauma as a result of artillery fire. They were given electric shock treatments to the brain in an attempt to get them back on track. They were so painful they said they were cured.

I think a number of veterans, those who fought in World War II and the Korean War, still today feel psychological injuries that they suffered at that time.

In fact, when I see veterans lay wreaths on November 11, a grandfather 84, 86 or 87 years old crying and trembling like a leaf, not because it's cold, but because he feels a lot of emotion, I say to myself that there's something there that they have yet gotten over. How many World War II and Korean War veterans have unfortunately had Beefeater gin as their only medication, which they start drinking very early in the morning and stop very late in the evening and who start to cry when you talk to them about the Armed Forces? When I see these people in the field and I think that we can't help them as human beings, that distresses me.

I'd like to know the humanitarian side of your views on psychological injuries past and future.

[Ronald Griffis]

They're absolutely terrible, what has taken place, with respect to the scars that have been engraved on the veterans, the veterans from World War II and Korea, and from other conflicts. Some persons are stronger than others. That's not to say they're any better than anybody else, but some are stronger than others and they could grasp these particular difficulties and move forward. But by the same token, I feel that nowadays there is more we can do as a society to prepare our soldiers, sailors, and airmen and women to deal with these psychological difficulties. There is much more that we can do, and it has to be addressed.

[Gilles-A. Perron, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Thank you very much, and I wish you happy holidays.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

Now we go to Mr. Valley of the Liberal Party for five minutes.

And I'll just note that so far, according to our list, that appears to be our last person. There is something I'd like to address, and then we do have to get to the votes.

Thank you.

[Roger Valley, Liberal, Kenora, ON]

Thank you very much.

I have just a quick comment. It has come up a number of times today. Communication is a problem for all of us. Well, not for me, but for the rest of my colleagues.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Roger Valley, Liberal, Kenora, ON]

I want to be serious for a moment. You mentioned the tragedy that happened a few weeks ago with the young individual who had his foot blown off. There are a number of us around this table who believe a veteran becomes a veteran the day he signs up, the day he starts. We've had our difficulty, and some people at this table have even commented that they're not our responsibility when they're in active forces. A lot of us don't believe that. We believe they're our responsibility because they're going to be a veteran the minute they finish. So even in that circumstance somebody let that individual down. Somebody, somewhere, didn't get to him. So we take our responsibility very seriously on that issue.

But it's communication. Whether it's through the people who are still serving...communication for us is the barrier we face.

I want to ask you a quick question, because you mentioned Cyprus. You served in Cyprus. When active members go now, they go to be debriefed in Cyprus. What happens to somebody who has either a minor injury or a serious injury? Do they get that debriefing where they are in the hospital or where they're taken, because they probably don't get sent through Cyprus when they're injured?

[Ronald Griffis]

I don't know the answer to your question. I appreciate that those who are interviewed, as I understand it, are walking. Of course, if you were injured seriously, you would be in the hospital in Germany. So I don't know the answer to your question, sir.

[Roger Valley, Liberal, Kenora, ON]

Well, as a future question for this committee, I think if debriefing is as important as we've all heard, we should make sure everyone has it properly done. We're assuming that and we probably shouldn't assume that. So that's a question for us in the future.

And lastly, Mr. Chairman, since I do get to be the last speaker today, everybody has said it, but I want to wish everybody merry Christmas, but especially from this committee, from all of us, to all the veterans who serve us and the ones who will see this transcript or hear it today: merry Christmas, and thank you, thank you, thank you.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear!

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

At that, I'd also like to reiterate and thank our witness very much for his presentation. You're welcome to sit in, sir, while I discuss a couple of other issues.

I mentioned at one of the previous meetings--I think I did anyhow, and if I didn't, now I am--that this flow chart, as it were, which I know was distributed at a meeting some months ago, is an eligibility profile table. It highlights what we're really attempting to do or get at. I don't know if all of you have seen this. We were able to dig up a copy from times previous. It has nine categories on one side and then a number of other characteristics on the other. It's an X and Y axis diagram, and it shows all the various benefits that people qualify for or don't. I'll look to have this circulated or copied.

But I hope that when we come back to the revised report that Michel has spent some time doing, we'll keep this in mind with regard to maybe simplifying it, because looking at it, I have a tough time deciphering what it all means, and I imagine it's even more difficult for some of our veterans out there and maybe even for officials inside Veterans Affairs to make sense of it.

That's part of what we're trying to do here, sir, to simplify that.

So that's that. I'll leave that for your consideration, probably not so much over the holidays as it will be for when we return.

I also want to update the committee with regard to my presentation at the liaison committee for our trip to the various military installations, hopefully when we return in late January or early February. How will I put it? Of the three motions that we put forward, the one to Petawawa was approved, no problem. The one to Val Cartier was approved, no problem. On the one for the four bases, it was a very interesting scenario. I will be honest when I say it was Mr. Merrifield of my party and Ms. Ratansi of the Liberal Party who seemed to vivisect that more so than anybody else. But anyhow, what they wound up doing was restricting it so that it was six members for each side of the country. In other words, six members could go west to Cold Lake and to Comox and six members could go east to Shearwater and I think it was Goose Bay. That is what they determined. I tried my best. As I say, if you have issues, you can take it up with either Mr. Merrifield or Ms. Ratansi.

[Roger Valley, Liberal, Kenora, ON]

You are the chairman. We'll take it up with you.

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

I tried.

Could we strangle Mr. Merrifield?

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

Consider it done--more of a kick in the shins, really, for Mr. Merrifield.

Anyhow, that's what they came up with, so we'll have to think about that and when we come back figure out a way through it.

Mr. Valley.

[Roger Valley, Liberal, Kenora, ON]

I have a couple of questions.

We have a budget. We're supposed to be masters of our own destiny here. We're not over budget in any way. In fact, we spent very little.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

I understand.

[Roger Valley, Liberal, Kenora, ON]

We made a decision to do some travel. Is this normal? You sit at this committee. Is this normal that they take apart every--

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

It's very haphazard. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't. Honestly, Ms. Ratansi was actually the most vociferous about it. She was of the opinion that sometimes if you split up the committee you are able to get a more diverse opinion; in other words, that everybody wasn't indoctrinated by the same visit. Don't ask me to get inside her head because I obviously wasn't agreeing with her, but that's where she was coming from. Mr. Merrifield was concentrating more on the idea of cost-effectiveness.

[Roger Valley, Liberal, Kenora, ON]

Mr. Chairman, my question was, do they do this to other trips?