Veterans Affairs Committee on June 1st, 2009

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Bienvenue à tous.

This is the 19th meeting of the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs. We have the great pleasure today of having Mr. Keith Hillier with us. Of course he's been before this committee many times and this is the second time in the 40th Parliament.

Before we get to Mr. Hillier's opening remarks he's going to be responding to the interview we had with the ombudsman. Mr. Hillier is going to give you an idea of his schedule. He'll be back with us on Wednesday. He's going to be returning to New Brunswick and then coming back. He may actually share a bit about that before his opening remarks. I think he has some interesting things the committee would like to hear about on what his schedule will be like when he goes back and returns again.

Prior to that, with your indulgence, Mr. Kerr has asked for a moment before we begin, and I think it's appropriate.

Mr. Kerr.

[Greg Kerr, Conservative, West Nova, NS]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

We should probably acknowledge as well that we're playing havoc with Mr. Hillier's gardening attempts right now, because he's never home to look after it.

On the bill that was just introduced, I did have a chance to talk to Judy about it and then to Peter. We're very pleased we're at this stage and it obviously has good support. The House leaders have agreed, and I think Judy was helpful there, to proceed as expeditiously as we can. At the same time, though, I think we should be afforded the opportunity. There are things you want to get on the record in the House. When it comes back, just be aware that I don't know whether it's going to go quickly through at second reading or right into third reading, or what they're going to do. That's going to be their decision.

I think it's really important that we do get this through quickly with good support. There's been a waiting period on it. I want to say that I appreciate the cooperation that's been shown by the other parties and I think it's probably going to work out well. I just want to put that on the record. The minister appreciated the effort as well.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Madam Sgro.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

I think it's an appropriate time this week to deal with it. Given this special time we're in, I think we all would think that it would be a real tribute if we could get it through. From our end, it's the technical amendment that we need to see, but I'm sure the content is something we all will be supportive of. We will be working on our end to get that through as fast as possible, but it would be good to have an opportunity to get a few comments on the record. Some of us may not be here when that happens, though.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Okay, thank you, Madam Sgro.

Mr. Stoffer, do you want an interjection on this?

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

Yes. I thank the government for finally putting it together, and I appreciate it.

I have a question for the minister to take back to the appropriate department. It says on the backgrounder that the implementation is expected in January 2010. Why the delay on that? Why can't it be done sooner? You don't have to answer it now.

[Greg Kerr, Conservative, West Nova, NS]

I'm not going to answer it now, but we'll urge that the question is reported.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Thank you very much, Mr. Kerr.

Thank you for the interventions, Mr. Stoffer and Madam Sgro.

Now we'll go to Mr. Hillier. I think you know the way we work. We try to keep the comments within 10 to 15 minutes, but we've always given a little latitude to the witnesses. And then we'll continue on with our usual traditional rotation between parties.

Mr. Hillier, please go ahead.

[Keith Hillier, Assistant Deputy Minister, Service Delivery and Commemoration, Department of Veterans Affairs]

Thank you for the invitation to come and meet with you.

Last week, the minister had the honour of hosting several of you in Charlottetown.

We found your visit to be enormously valuable. It allowed us to meet face to face to talk about our mutual concerns and explore opportunities as we move forward.

On a personal level, I came away with a renewed sense that we all share one thing in common, that being our deep interest in making sure that Canada's veterans and their families have access to the best possible care and support.

For those of you who could not join us in Charlottetown, I should properly introduce myself and provide you with a bit of context as to my role in the establishment of and ongoing liaison with the Office of the Veterans Ombudsman.

A little over a year ago I assumed the responsibility for the newly established Service Delivery and Commemoration Branch. This is the branch that delivers services and benefits to our 220,000 clients. We also have responsibility for delivering remembrance programming so that all Canadians can learn about the sacrifices and achievements of our traditional and modern-day veterans.

Nationally, we deliver benefits through some 60 points of service. These include our district and satellite offices, as well as our growing presence on Canadian Forces bases and wings. The branch employs about 2,100 people, or about 50% of the department's employees. Many are the front-line workers who, as the minister would say, are VAC's boots on the ground.

Prior to heading up this branch, however, I was the assistant deputy minister of the Corporate Services Branch. As such, I was honoured to be the executive officer who had the responsibility of laying the foundation for both the Veterans Bill of Rights and the Office of the Veterans Ombudsman. Their creation represents a significant milestone in the history of Canada's veterans. Veterans organizations have lobbied for both of them for some time, and all remain fully supportive of a meaningful bill of rights and a strong ombudsman's office.

What I'd like to do over the next few minutes is address the issues and concerns that have been raised by the ombudsman over the past few weeks.

Today, we will discuss the working relationship between Veterans Affairs Canada and the Office of the Ombudsman, as well as the procedures we have put in place to ensure that his office has the resources it needs to carry out its mandate.

It is fair to say that both sides have experienced some growing pains, but I can assure you that the department is 100% supportive of providing veterans and their families with both a bill of rights and an ombudsman who can champion the rights of individual veterans as well as identify any systemic issues that challenge us.

Let's address some of the issues that were raised last week when the ombudsman appeared before this committee.

First, the ombudsman expressed concern that his office does not have full access to VAC documents and information. It is correct that we are not in the position to share information related to cabinet confidence or client-solicitor privilege. However, we do share all other information in our possession to allow the ombudsman to do his job.

The ombudsman and his staff have full access to the department's electronic client tracking database. This same database contains all of the pieces of information on any given client, and is used by VAC staff to assist our 220,000 clients. This database is also used to post entitlement rulings by the Veterans Review and Appeal Board. I would note that even the minister himself does not have access to this database.

The ombudsman and his office can contact any VAC staff member, anywhere, anytime. They have full access to the department's e-mail system and electronic staff directory.

We've also provided the ombudsman's staff with a full list of subject-matter experts within the department. This means that anyone within the department is only an e-mail or a phone call away.

Information sharing is also facilitated through regularly scheduled meetings with the office of the ombudsman. To date, VAC's senior management has met 16 times with the ombudsman and representatives from the ombudsman's office. We schedule meetings on a quarterly basis, but senior management has extended an open invitation to the ombudsman and his staff that we will meet with them anytime they wish.

Staff in human resources meet with the ombudsman's office on a monthly basis. To date, 20 meetings have taken place.

Staff within the program, policy, and partnership branches also meet and talk regularly. I'll come back to this, but on the issue of homeless veterans alone, the policy folks have shared information with the ombudsman's office on at least 20 separate occasions.

So far, we have also arranged for the ombudsman's staff to visit about 25 of our offices across the country to meet face to face with our staff, including at our atrium for the Charlottetown-based staff.

In terms of VAC's attitude towards the office of the ombudsman, the ombudsman has said that the department is ambivalent towards his office, treating it as nothing more than a complaints department. Well, I can assure you that the department believes in the value of an ombudsman and how they can help veterans in a way that the department cannot. We appreciate the observations and recommendations that the ombudsman has been able to offer for consideration.

To date, the office of the ombudsman has provided us with four discussion and observation papers and one report on the funeral and burial program. We have welcomed the recommendations put forward, and we have responded to all those items that are within our current authorities.

We also appreciate the client referrals that have been received from the office of the ombudsman. To date, our head office has received about 375 requests. We've been able to resolve each and every one of them.

I'll now turn to the ombudsman's authorities.

The ombudsman said that the department did not give him the tools he needed to do his work.

To put this in perspective, the office of the ombudsman was created under an order in council, and thus reflects the wishes of parliamentarians. Treasury Board allocated a budget of $6.3 million for the ombudsman's office, of which $1.3 million is managed by VAC.

To help support and respond to the office of the ombudsman, Treasury Board approved ten positions within VAC. These resources are deployed in various areas of the department. Some of the positions are statistical and tracking, while others are program area experts who are tasked with responding to inquiries from the office of the ombudsman within reasonable timeframes.

The workload is sufficient to justify these ten FTEs. They are 100% necessary if we are to work together to build and maintain the office of the ombudsman.

Our department has signed four memoranda of understanding with the office of the ombudsman. These memoranda help to define the services we provide to the office and our working relationship with respect to key functions such as operations, information technology, information management, and finance. An MOU governing human resources is ready to be signed.

With regard to the hiring and management of staff, the ombudsman has expressed concerns about his ability to staff his office.

I assure you that the department is working hard on many levels to help the ombudsman create a sustainable infrastructure in terms of human resources.

Establishing a new organization is not easy. Roles and responsibilities have to be defined. Accountability mechanisms need to be put in place. Staffing qualifications have to be determined. It's important that fair and equitable access to jobs is ensured. The hiring process must be fair, open, and transparent.

To facilitate this, the ombudsman has been granted sub-delegation staffing authority equivalent to that of an assistant deputy minister. Our executives are managed as a corporate resource. The deputy minister is accountable for all staffing at the EX level and has retained this authority. As of last month, the department had facilitated 67 separate staffing actions on behalf of the ombudsman's office.

The individuals who work in his office are valued members of the public service. They have access to the same job postings and career opportunities as any other federal public servant. In fact, some members of his staff have already returned to the department.

On homeless veterans, the ombudsman states that the department has all but ignored his advice about homeless veterans. He feels that he has been personally maligned by the department because of his efforts to raise the awareness of homeless veterans.

On the contrary, we share the ombudsman's commitment to help veterans who are homeless or at risk of becoming homeless. I think both our organizations would agree that the primary goal is to prevent veterans from becoming homeless. To this end, VAC has many programs in place, including access to income support, disability benefits, rehabilitation programs, and health care.

Sometimes, despite our best efforts, veterans do become homeless. Anyone, including the ombudsman, who knows of a veteran who is either homeless or at risk of becoming of homeless is urged to call us.

When we learn of a homeless veteran, we assess their needs and set in motion the programs and services that are needed to provide them with safe housing, meals, access to health professionals, and emergency funds if needed. They can be either VAC programs or programs in partnership with community-based organizations.

The ombudsman is concerned that VAC is not visible enough in shelters, but as the minister has confirmed, we have made contact with more than 75 homeless shelters and agencies across the country that support the homeless. We encourage intake officers at shelters and other agencies to ask one simple question: do you have military service?

With regard to the VAC national strategy on homelessness, there's been much discussion about the ombudsman's access to a departmental strategy on homelessness. I want to stress that the ombudsman's office was fully engaged in the discussions leading up to and during the development of this document.

But I also want to stress the point that the department has been active in many parts of the country and our interventions have been customized to reflect the particular geographic area and the particular needs of that area. Every month for the past 18 months, VAC and the ombudsman's office have met or corresponded on issues directly or indirectly related to homelessness. Our two organizations continue to work together on this file. In May, VAC briefed the ombudsman's office on our progress.

In conclusion, the ombudsman's pledge to leave nobody behind is commendable. It has raised media awareness of the issue of homelessness and it has helped to encourage and support the ongoing work of the department. We know that the office has now launched its first systemic investigation concerning red tape. We look forward to recommendations that may come from that study.

We promise to resolve, to the best of our ability, any individual client inquiries that are brought to our attention.

From a corporate standpoint, we will continue to honour all memoranda of understanding and we will work diligently to make sure his office has the resources and infrastructure it needs to carry out its mandate.

When and if members of the ombudsman's staff wish to seek other federal career opportunities, their efforts will be supported to the same extent as any other public servant's.

Finally, we remain one hundred percent committed to a meaningful bill of rights and a strong Office of the Veterans Ombudsman. Veterans and their families need both organizations to work on their behalf. Is VAC prepared to do that? Yes.

Are we willing to do more? Yes.

Will we succeed? Yes, we will. As the chairman mentioned, I will be back here again on Wednesday afternoon before this committee. In the meantime, I will be going to Canadian Forces Base Gagetown to spend some time at the base tomorrow. As you know, we're setting up integrated personnel support centres on the Canadian Forces base. So I'm actually going out to meet with the base commander tomorrow, just to get a sense of how things are going on the ground, and what types of issues the base commander is hearing from the men and women who are serving at Base Gagetown.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Thank you, Mr. Hillier.

Thank you for repeating that last part. We had talked about that previously, and I think it's good for the committee to know that officials at your level are actually meeting where the rubber meets the road, with base commanders making sure that your services are well integrated into the Canadian Forces.

Now we'll go to our rotation of questions. The first member will be Madam Sgro, for seven minutes.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

It's great to see you again, Mr. Hillier. I didn't expect to see you quite so soon after Charlottetown. Too bad we didn't have a bunch of questions ready. We could have covered off a few other issues while we were down there without you having to travel so much of the time. Glad to see that you're here.

After the announcement of the establishment of the ombudsman office, what was the feeling in the department?

[Keith Hillier]

I think the department was very positive, from my standpoint, and of course I was very close to the file. Hopefully, Mr. Chair, your members would have seen this in Charlottetown. The employees of the department are very committed to veterans. I've been a public servant for a long time, working in many cities and a number of departments. Certainly I see that they're very committed. I think anybody who can do something to help veterans would be very positively received. I don't necessarily see it as adversarial. I see it as somebody who is there to help. I would put the veterans staff sort of in the same category as my own staff. As I go out and have town halls with my staff on and off Canadian Forces bases, I say that if you didn't come to work today to do something for a veteran then you're probably not working for the right organization.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

I can certainly tell you that it was very impressive meeting the staff. You could tell that they cared very much about their jobs and the veterans they were there to serve. I don't think there was any question about that in my mind. I found it unfortunate that there seems to be this bit of tension between the ombudsman's office and Veterans Canada. The ombudsman is a very knowledgeable and capable man. I just find it disheartening that there is that kind of conflict now. That's probably very normal in most departments.

Is anything being done? You counteracted many of the things that he mentioned in his report. I'd like to know if there is some ongoing work being done to try to make sure that the lines of communication between the ombudsman and the department are cleared away with some of these issues so that you have a better understanding of each other's role and you're working for the same objective, which is to try to increase the support for veterans.

[Keith Hillier]

I would classify that as a work in progress. The meetings at the staff level continue, notwithstanding some discussions that have been out in the media. Our regularly scheduled meetings on a quarterly basis will continue.

I would like to characterize that while there have obviously been some differences of opinion on this particular issue, there are many more issues that we need to focus on. I would probably classify this as sort of being one pebble on a beach. We need to maybe learn some lessons from this one, but I think we have to stay focused and continue on and work for veterans. We can't let that important work be sidetracked by what one might characterize as a difference of opinion on a particular part of veterans services and programs.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

You mentioned several times that individuals who had been working for the ombudsman's office had returned to the department. Did they return to the department because they were dissatisfied with the work they were doing in the ombudsman's office, or were there other issues there?

[Keith Hillier]

I couldn't speak for those particular individuals because I didn't ask them. I certainly support and promote an open moving back and forth between staff at the department and the ombudsman. It's nice to walk in the other person's shoes, as it were. In fact many of the people that would be moving back and forth would be in my branch. So I certainly encourage that. I know of a couple of individuals who have returned. That's fine. I think that movement back and forth will maybe help break down some of the maybe misconceptions that may be there.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

It's been two years, has it not, since the announcement of the ombudsman? We're finally to a point where the veterans ombudsman's staff indicated when we were there last week that he had just now received a full complement and that it had been very difficult over these two years trying to deal with so many demands and that they weren't fully staffed.

I would think there must be some problem there of people staying and working in that area if they're going back when they're still trying to get a full complement of staff. Or am I misunderstanding?

[Keith Hillier]

No. Let me come at it in two ways.

First, a lot of people haven't been coming back--maybe a handful or fewer. There are only about 27 to 30 people there. I think one of the challenges the office is facing is that as you move forward in an organization from ground zero, you have things such as job descriptions, classifications, etc. It is a split operation. Some of the positions are in Ottawa, while some of the positions are in Charlottetown.

I can tell you that we have been involved with 67 separate staffing actions for the office of the ombudsman. In terms of how he's organized, he's better equipped to answer those questions than I may be. I just want to assure you that the human resources services he gets are not second-class or inferior to anybody else's in the department.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

In the annual report the ombudsman was in the process of preparing, you referred to discussion papers. Are we talking about the same thing?

[Keith Hillier]

No, we're not.

Essentially the ombudsman will be filing an annual report. The report will be with the minister, and the minister will table it. On an ongoing basis, when the office of the ombudsman sees some issues they send us a report. On funerals and burials, for example, they had some issues there. They do these on a systemic basis. As they get involved in various issues, they send the report or position paper. The department will respond to that. Whether or not they find their way into the ombudsman's final report that will be tabled in Parliament will be a decision of the ombudsman.

In terms of what I will call openness and transparency, he posts many of these documents on his website, I understand, so those who are interested can go to the ombudsman's website and see the types of things they're working on and the types of issues they're raising.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Thank you, Mr. Hillier. Thank you, Madam Sgro.

Now we're on to the Bloc Québécois. Monsieur André, you have seven minutes.

[Guy André, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Good afternoon, Mr. Hillier. I am happy to see you again. We saw each other in Charlottetown. During that very pleasant trip, we had an opportunity to take a good look at all of the programs for veterans.

What do you think should be the biggest difference between the role of the ombudsman and that of the public service, meaning the deputy minister or the public servants in his department?

[Keith Hillier]

One of the differences lies with the responsibilities. As public servants, we are responsible for the government's programs and procedures. I believe that we also have a responsibility to make suggestions to the minister.

On the other hand, the ombudsman can be critical of systemic issues. If you look at some of the items the ombudsman has been involved with, which are clearly in his mandate, it's to say yes, the department is doing everything in its regulations and the department is following the law, but he as the ombudsman feels that in some cases it isn't having the right outcome for veterans, or more could be done.

It's our responsibility in the department to ensure we do everything we can for veterans within the law and within the regulations, whereas the ombudsman is a step removed from that. Based on the files the ombudsman sees, he might say, as he did if you look at the paper he wrote on funerals and burials, that we are following the legislation. He has the view that the legislation should be expanded, and I think that's part of his role, to make those suggestions.

[Guy André, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Do you think it is ideal to have the ombudsman report to the Department of Veterans Affairs? I would like to hear your thoughts on that. When you look at what you said and what has been said in the past, it is clear that there are two fairly different positions. Is it the ideal situation? If so, what are the real challenges? How can you find a way to improve the situation if you believe that the ombudsman should report directly to the Department of Veterans Affairs?